Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout31 Russell Ave_PB Report_2012_0814TOWN OF WATERTOWN Department of Community Development and Planning PLANNING BOARD Administration Building 149 Main Street Watertown, MA 02472 Phone: 617-972-6417 Fax: 6I 7-972-6484 www watertown-ma.gov PLANNING BOARD REPORT Board Members: John B. Hawes, Jr., Chairman Linda Tuttle -Barletta Jeffrey W. Brown Fergal Brennock Neal Corbett On August 8, 2012 with four (4) members of the Planning Board (the Board) present, case number ZBA-2012-18 SP was considered for a Special Permit to be heard by the Zoning Board of Appeals on August 22, 2012. The Board submits the following report, as requested, to aid the Zoning Board of Appeals in deciding the application before it. CASE #: SUBJECT PROPERTY: Parcel ID # ZONING DISTRICT: PETITIONER & OWNER: ZONING RELIEF SOUGHT: SPECIAL PERMIT GRANTING AUTHORITY: DATE OF STAFF REPORT: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: DATE OF PLANNING BOARD HEARING: PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATION: DATE OF PLANNING BOARD REPORT: DATE OF ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS: ZBA-2012-18 SP 31 Russell Ave, Watertown, MA 1103 18 0 S (Single Family) Zone Carrie/David L Van Brunt, 31 Russell Av, Watertown Special Permit §5.02(d) Home Occupation as defined in §2.35 Home Occupation Zoning Board of Appeals August 1, 2012 Conditional Approval August 8, 2012 Denial (Vote: 4-0) August 14, 2012 Scheduled: August 22, 2012 Page 1 of 7 31 Russell Avenue August 14, 2012 ZBA 2012-18 SP Planning Board Report I. PUBLIC NOTICE (M.G.L. c. 40A, §11) A. Procedural Summary Petition PB-2012-18 SP was heard by the Planning Board on August 8, 2012 with a vote to recommend denial. The case is scheduled to be heard by the Zoning Board of Appeals on August 22, 2012. As required by M.G.L. c. 40A, sec.11 and the Watertown Zoning Ordinance, notice was given as follows: • Published in the newspaper of record (Watertown Tab & Press) on 8/3/2012 and 8/10/2012; • Posted at the Town Administration Building and on the Town Website on 7/25/2012; and, • Mailed to Parties in Interest on 7/25/2012. B. Legal Notice "31 Russell Avenue — Special Permit -- Carrie L. VanBrunt herein requests the Zoning Board of Appeals to grant a Special Permit in accordance with §2.35, Home Occupation, Zoning Ordinance, so as to allow for a Pilates Studio in an existing detached garage. S-10 (Single Family) Zoning District." II. DESCRIPTION View of house and driveway from street A. Site Characteristics Garage and parking area at rear of property The subject property, located one-half block from the corner of Mt Auburn St. and Russell Ave., is 9,786 square feet with a 2.5 story gable roofed house and a 2 -car hip roofed garage. The driveway and parking are located along the northerly side yard. There is a smaller fenced rear yard with lawn and a play structure. B. Surrounding Land Use The site is within the S (Single -Family) Zoning District. Reflective of the underlying zoning, the property is surrounded by a mix of single and two-family homes. Directly to the east, the zone changes to SC (Single -Family Conversion) which has a mix of housing styles. To the north along Russell Ave. there are many historic single-family homes and to the south along Mt Auburn Page 2 of 7 31 Russell Avenue August 14, 2012 ZBA 2012-18 SP Planning Board Report Street there is more of a mix of uses with larger apai luent buildings, historic homes, and small offices. A historic commercial neighborhood business district is located at the end of the block to the southwest along Mt. Auburn St. C. Nature of the Request The Petitioner proposes to convert an existing unfinished garage into a finished studio space to be used for Pilates sessions with only minor changes to the exterior of the structure. The conversion is allowed by right with a building permit, while the use requires a Special Permit for a Home Occupation. The proposed use for private instruction would be limited to no more than two clients at one time although the majority of the time there would only be a single client, with proposed hours of operation no later than 8 PM. III. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were eight neighbors/abutters present at the Planning Board who testified and all but one raised concerns about the proposed use. The testimony included: concerns about potential use of on -street parking; traffic congestion from existing uses (including Church of the Good Sheppard and the High School) in the neighborhood; the location and conversion of the garage/outbuilding; existing cut -through traffic; how to monitor the use; the ability of others to ask for similar special permit approvals; and, the appropriateness of evening and weekend use. There was also concerns about the driveway and backing out along the long narrow drive without a turn -around. Four letters were received raising concerns about the project and one letter was received in support. IV. FINDINGS &9.05 Conditions for approval of a Special Permit 1. Is the specific site an appropriate location for such a use? Staff Finding - Met with conditions - The proposed use is allowed by special permit in this Zoning District so long as it meets the requirements/criteria for Home Occupation as defined in §2.35. The findings for the criteria are as follows: a) Is incidental and secondary to the residential use of the building (the use is limited in hours and is in an existing accessory structure) b) Does not change the essential residential character of the use with no exterior alterations/buildings not customary with residential use (there will be an addition of a door in the garage but it is customary to have a door and it will be required to face south into the rear yard) c) Is carried on solely by the residents of the dwelling except no more than two employees may be allowed (will be limited to instruction by the resident/property owner) d) Is no more than 25% of the total floor area of the dwelling e) Is not visible from any other residential structure/with no outside storage of equipment/materials (the use is within the structure and is not visible) f) Does not produce offensive noise, odor, smoke, dust, heat, glare, excessive traffic, or other objectionable effects (this project would not create any of these nuisances as proposed) g) With conditions, will not increase the average daily trips generated by the residence (ADT for a single-family residence is 10 trips per day but different families would create different actual trips. ) h) This use is not one of the specifically identified uses identified as not allowed (This use Page 3 of 7 31 Russell Avenue August 14, 2012 ZBA 2012-18 SP Planning Board Report is for single and two client sessions/trainings which would not be considered a group) The proposal would remove two parking spaces within the garage for the conversion of the accessory structure but there is room for at least two cars to be parked side by side in front of the garage and for several more cars to be parked stacked along the remaining approximate 100 feet of driveway. Additionally, there is parking on the street for two-hour increments and the house is within a few hundred feet of a bus stop. The existing accessory structure, although non- conforming regarding setback, would work well as an office/studio and has only minor external modifications proposed. The Board discussed that the parking and entrance would be visible from the neighboring yards and houses. They thought those impacts could be lessened by tall vegetative screening and/or fencing at the studio entrance/door into the rear yard and between the driveway and the neighboring property to the north. The Board discussed limiting the evening hours and weekend hours as one option for allowing a use like this. There was also some discussion about the impacts of one versus two clients coming for a session and the differences in traffic impacts. One suggestion was that there would be less impact if the use were limited to one client per session. 2. Will the use as developed adversely affect the neighborhood? Staff Finding - Met with conditions/PB Finding - Not Met — Staff found that with conditions, the use will not adversely affect the neighborhood. Currently, the proposed door is facing the property line and should be relocated to the southern side of the structure to reduce impacts on the neighboring property and to meet building code requirements. The driveway as indicated on the plot plan will have ample space to accommodate any clients along the side and rear of the house. The number of trips generated from the proposed use could potentially have adverse effects on the neighborhood unless specific conditions limiting the number of clients/sessions are added to the approval of the Special Permit. With single-family uses, the average trips per day is approximately 10 (all trips including visits). The proposed use has requested 20-25 sessions over 6 days with one to two clients per session. This could generate 40-100 trips/week or an average of 6 to 16 per day. These numbers depend on the mix of single or paired clients and the number of clients who choose alternative means of transportation. Based on this analysis, the number of sessions should be limited to reduce the timing of trips and the number of potential trips made per day (Condition # 7). The Board discussed that the driveway is very long with no turn around and there is little screening along the driveway and the property to the north. The Board discussed that the hours of operation were not appropriate and that weekend and evening hours should be reconsidered for this use and location. 3. Will there be a nuisance or serious hazard to vehicles or pedestrians? Staff Finding - Met with conditions/PB Finding - Not Met —As proposed, there should be no nuisance or hazards to pedestrians walking on the sidewalk or vehicles passing by. The use is within the structure and no noise or odors should be associated with the use. Vehicles arriving and departing could increase the amount of noise and should be carefully managed so as not to create a nuisance. There are no other indications of nuisances. The Board discussed the lack of a turnaround in the driveway, the length of the driveway, and the closeness of the garage to the property line. They had concerns about the layout and there was discussion that it might be difficult to maneuver within the site for clients. Page 4 of 7 31 Russell Avenue August 14, 2012 ZBA 2012-18 SP Planning Board Report 4. Are adequate and appropriate facilities provided for the proper operation of the proposed use? Staff Finding - Met/PB Finding - Not Met - The remodel of the interior of the structure as proposed appears to be adequate for the operation of the accessory use. The door will need to be relocated from the northern side yard property line to the interior side of the structure. The Board discussed that there was no screening between the driveway and the adjoining property and that the entrance to the studio would not be screened from the residence to the south. V. RECOMMENDATION: Planning Staff recommends Conditional Approval. Based on the information provided and the additional testimony received, and based on the project as proposed, the Planning Board voted to recommend Denial (vote 4-0 against) of the requested Special Permit as it does not meet the criteria set forth in the Watertown Zoning Ordinance. VI. CONDITIONS The following conditions were recommended as part of the initial review for a conditional approval. # Condition Timeframe for Com liance To be Verified b 1. The Control Plans shall be: 1) Certified Plot Plan, 31 Russell Avenue, June, 27, 2012 by Christopher Charlton, PLSContinental land Survey 2) Van Brunt Residence, Existing Garage Floor Plan, June 21, 2012 by Synnott Architects, Inc. 3) Van Brunt Residence Studio Floor Plans, June 21, 2012 by Synnott Architects, Inc. The plans shall be updated with the door relocated from the north side to the south side of the structure. BP, Perpetual ZEO/ISD 2. Neither the Petitioner nor any present or future owner of any interest in the project shall change or modify either the control plans referenced in this decision, or the project itself, without first filing a formal request with the DCD&P, Zoning Enforcement Officer, and Building Inspector, for an opinion as to whether or not such change or modification requires further review from the Granting Authority. Minor modifications, which are found to be consistent with the project approval granted by the Granting Authority, may be considered and approved by DCD&P Director. CO ZEO/ISD 3. Upon application for a Building Permit, the Petitioner shall provide evidence to the Zoning Enforcement Officer that this entire decision has been filed with the Registry of Deeds. BP ZEO Page 5 of 7 31 Russell Avenue ZBA 2012-18 SP August 14, 2012 Planning Board Report # Condition Timeframe for Compliance To be Verified by 4. A copy of the Building Permit with final approval signatures from all relevant inspectors must be submitted to the Zoning Enforcement Officer upon completion of the project. CO ZEO 5. The Petitioner shall comply with all other applicable local, state, and federal requirements, ordinances, and statutes. CO ZEO/ISD 6. In accordance with WZO §9.13, a special permit granted under §9.04 shall lapse one year from the date of grant thereof if substantial use thereof has not sooner commenced except for good cause, or, in the case of a permit for construction, if the construction has not begun by such date except for good cause, or as allowed by applicable State or Federal law. Perpetual ZEO 7. Specifically, the accessory use (Pilates Studio) shall: • Have no employees/staff other than the petitioner/property owner • Have a maximum of 4 sessions in any one day with at least a 15 minute break between sessions to ensure that clients do not overlap, and no more than 20 sessions in a week. Sessions shall have no more than two clients. • The proposed schedule to be submitted for review with any revision requiring review and approval by the ZEO, including marketing materials for the classes. • Only be allowed to operate: Monday -Friday 7 AM -8 PM and Sunday 8 AM -Noon • There shall be a one year review to consider any impacts on the neighborhood of the home occupation • Any signage shall comply with the WZO and be applied for through a separate sign application. Perpetual ZEO 8. This permit shall expire upon abandonment of the use or when the intent of the owner to discontinue the use is apparent, and/or when the petitioner vacates the property. Perpetual ZEO Page 6 of 7 0 210 a20 ft #16 #20 #14 Th e dedu sha ven an this mile ere prow en rar Irlrcrnlati anal ann planning purp oses only . The Town and it6 can6uttanie are not rempansibit farthe rniause or rnlsrepresenhatlon rat Me data. j TONlEcts dirt' Ph.rhtng Toone Bri Idngs try C stegnry Lardmak PuizlicEkilding 111. Sdxal Etildings Open Weter Pacels Padds yith Orlhxe (V rladrs R OW Properly Line Zoning 0 Cluster R otiderrtisi - CR 0 Resid erliel-R.75 Reddertiel-R1.2 0 Industrid -11 0 Industrid -12 Indufirld -12 0 CF3 CFftra Business �rnted 9uelnes -L9 El NeigiterhoedR usin me -NE J Sinsi eFerri ly_ S10 jJ 5injsFerri ly-SB 0 sinyeFerri lyCorxension -s TxaFisrniy-T 0 Op en Speceironservmcy - 0 Plead St corridor Did - P' 31 Russell Street dS 8T-ZTOZ WIZ 2nu2AV TTassng -LE