Loading...
2008 ZBA minutes (2)Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes of Meeting Thursday, January I 0, 2008 Council Chambers, Wallace J. Puchalski Municipal Building, 212 Main Street, Northampton, MA. Members Present: Time 0 Chair, Sara Northrup 5:30-6:00 pm 0 Vice Chair, David Bloomberg, 5:30-6:00 pm Assoc. Member, Bob Riddle - 0 Malcolm B. "Barry" Smith 5:30-6:00 pm Assoc. Member,Roisin Quinn - Staff Present: Time 0 Senior Planner, Carolyn Misch 5:30-6:00 pm 0 Michael Cote, Intern 5:30-6:00 pm 5:30 pm Sara Northrup opened the ZBA meeting and public hearing for the previously postponed request by Helen Kahn for a Special Permit to erect a second wall sign at 1 North Main St., Florence, Map ID 17-224. David Bloomberg -noted that he represents the owner's of the building in which applicant holds a lease. Helen Kahn, of Cup and Top, described her application to the board. The board discussed the application details. Sara Northrup opened the floor to the public. No public present. 5:40 pm Upon motion by David Bloomberg and second by Barry Smith, the board voted unanimously to close the hearing. 5:40 pm Upon motion by David Bloomberg and second by Barry Smith, the board voted unanimously to approve special permit. Upon motion by David Bloomberg, second by Barry Smith, the board voted unanimously to accept minutes as presented of the November 8, 2007 meeting. 5:45 pm Sara Northrup opened public hearing to review request by UMassFive College Federal Credit Union for a special permit to install additional signage for the ATM canopy at 243 King St, Northampton, Map ID 24B-66. Ann Pinkerton, UMass College Federal Credit Union, described the application to the board. The board discussed application details, which showed two versions of the proposed sign. Sara Northrup opened the floor to the public. A Credit Union employee thanked the board for hearing the application and voiced his support for the application. 21.ii. iw.ilCt Upon motion by Barry Smith and second by David Bloomberg, the board voted unanimously to close the hearing. Upon motion by Barry Smith and second by David Bloomberg, the board voted unanimously to approve the 8' x 3' version of the sign in the application. No other business. 6 pm Upon motion by David Bloomberg and second by Barry Smith the board voted unanimously to adjourn. Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals, Zoning Administrator Meeting Minutes of January 10, 2008 Hearing Room 18, 210 Main Street, Northampton, MA. Members Present: Time 0 Chair, Sara Northrup 5:30- 6:20p.m. 0 Vice Chair, David Bloomberg 5:30- 6:20p.m. 0 Malcolm B. "Barry" Smith 5:30- 6:20p.m. 0 Bob Riddle Assoc. Member 5:30- 6:20p.m. , Assoc. Member Staff Present: Time Planning Director Wayne Feiden 0 Senior Planner, Carolyn Misch 5:30- 6:20p.m. 0 Intern, Michael Cote 5:30- 6:20p.m. 5:30p.m. Sara Northrup opened the ZBA meeting with the request by Robert Andrews for a Variance to install an emergency egress in the side-yard setback at 300 Elm St., Northampton, Map ID 31A-82. Andrews presents his application to the board. Northrup opens for public comment. Resident homeowner and abutter, Map ID 31A-083, objects to the staircase over concern that it interferes with her winter driveway snow removal. Also concerned that the location of the new staircase would negatively affect her property's value. Andrew responded that the position of the staircase is designed specifically to avoid and accommodate his neighbor's snow removal procedure. He demonstrated that the staircase would be several feet away from her property as well as from potential plow-blade intrusion. Andrews reiterated that the city requires a secondary egress in order for his property to be sold. 6 p.m. Upon motion by Barry Smith and second by David Bloomberg the board voted unanimously to close the hearing. Board discusses whether there are viable alternatives for the egress location. Carolyn Misch advised that an alternatives are possible. Upon motion by David Bloomberg and second by Barry Smith the board voted 2-1, Northrup in favor, Riddle abstain, to deny the application. iw.ilCt 6:20 p.m. Upon motion by Barry Smith and second by David Bloomberg the board voted unanimously to approve the minutes from October 11, 2007 and January 10, 2008. Upon motion by David Bloomberg and second by Bob Riddle the board voted unanimously to adjourn. PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT • CITY OF NORTHAMPTON planning • conservaH011 ·• zoning·• hotising parh1ership • redevelopment• 110.rthampfon GTS economic development• community development• historic • community preservation • ccntrnl business architecture ( Carolyn Misch, AlCP, Senior Lane! Use Planner • CMisch@NorthamptonMA.gov • 413-587-1287 .The Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes of Meeting February 28, 2008 City of Northampton Council Chambers, 220 Main St., Northampton, MA Members Present: Time 0 Chair, Sara Northrup 5:30 -7:00 pm 0 Vice Chair, David Bloomberg 5:30 -7:00 pm 0 Malcolm B. "Barry" Smith ,5:30 -7:00 pm 0 Bob Riddle, Assoc. Member 5:30 -7:00 pm Staff: 0 Planner, Peg Keller 5:30 -7:00 pm 0 Planner, J 01111 Frey 5:30 -7:00 pm 5:30 P.M. Sara N01ihrup opened the public hearing on the request by Appleton Corporation for a Special Pennit to install a new, non-illuminated, 48 square foot wooden sign, larger and higher than allowed, at Michael's House, 71 State Street (Map ID 31B-310). John Lemanski of Sign Technologies on behalf of Appleton Corporation described the application to the board. Sara N01ilm1p submitted a letter :from Depaiiment of Public Works stating they have no concerns with the project. There was no. public present to c01mnent. The Board discussed issues and proposed conditions. Upon motion by David Bloomberg, second by BaiTy Smith, the board voted m1animously to close the public hearing. Upon motion by David Bloomberg and second by Barry Smith, the board voted m1animously to accept special pennit with condition that the sign include a 15' setback and not be ilhuninated. 6:00 P.M. Sara Northrup opened the public hearing on the request by Claudia Cook, 211 Spring Grove Ave., Florence for a Special Pennit for a pet grooming home occupation in an existing garage with new signage (Map ID 17 A-16). Claudia Cook, 211 Spring Grove Ave., Florence described the application to the board. --·-·c1t?Hai1 • 216 Main Sh·eet, Room 11 ; Northai.npton, MA 01060 • www'.No1:thai11ptoi1Ma.gov • Pax 413-587-1264 origim1I printed on recycled paper .... ···-···--····-···· ···- Sara No1ihrup submitted a letter from Department of Public Works stating they have no concerns with the project. Sara Northrup opened the meeting to public c01m11ent. Ramona Martin, Spring Grove Ave spoke in full support of Special Permit. Al Leroux, 23 Leeno Terr., Florence stated his concern regarding wastewater run off. However, applicant confirn1ed all cleaning will utilize approved sinks and therefore all wastewater will be contained to the sewer system. David Premo, 25 5 Sylvester Rd. and 213 Spring Grove ( owner of abutting prope1iy) stated his opposition to the Special Pennit because of lack of setbacks from his property, all day animal crating, lack of parking, and animal noise. Joseph Zidik, 15 Leeno Te1T., Florence is concerned about animal noise in the residential neighborhood, especially from ctment neighborhood dogs that will bark because of the disturbance caused by co1istant dogs aniving to and depmiing from the prope1iy. David McKutcheon, 263 Sylvester Rd. stated h~s concern of induced traffic from the proposed business. Also, he stated when he uses the cmTent business located on Maple St. he often does not pick up his dogs within the hour, thereby leaving them onsite for some time. He is concerned this will be the case with the new location as well. Bm-ry Smith expressed his concern that paragraph 350-10.12 section 'I' may apply in this case ... "If said home occupation takes place in m~ accessory structure: (1) Constructed prior to the date of the adoption of this chapter, then said structure must confonn to the setback requirements for accessory structures in that district." Bany wonders if the garage has always been pen11m1ently connected to the house. He would like to receive an opinion from the Building Co1m11issioner. Upon motion by Barry Smith, second by David Bloomberg, the board voted unanimously to request input from the Building Co1m11issioner regarding the above issue. Upon motion by David Bloomberg, second by BmTy Smith, the boai·d voted m1animously to close the meeting and continue the public hearing to March 13, 2008 at 6:00 PM. 6:58 PM Board adj0tm1ed. PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT • CITY OF NORTHAMPTON plannii1g • conservation • :i.611ing • housii'tg j5,il'ff1ershij5 • redevel6pi'fii!f:it • 11tll'tfai1ilpt61tC1S ec011omic development • community development• historic • community preservation • centrnl business architecture Carolyn Misch, AlCP, Senior Land Use' Planner • CMisch@NorthamptonMA.gov • 413-587-1287 The Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes of Meeting March 13, 2008 City of Northampton Council Chambers, 220 Main St., Northampton, MA Members Present: Time 0 Chair, Sara Northrup 6:00 -6:30 pm 0 Vice Chair, David Bloomberg 6:00 -6:30 pm 0 Malcolm B. "Barry" Smith 6:00 -6:30 pm 0 Bob Riddle, Assoc. Member 6:00 -6:30 pm Staff 0 Planner, Peg Keller 6:00 -6:30 pm 0 Planner, John Frey 6:00 -6:30 pm 6:00 P.M. Sara Northrup re-opened the public hearing (continued from February 28, 2008) on the request by Claudia Cook, 211 Spring Grove Ave., Florence for a Special Pennit for a pet grooming home occupation in an existing garage with new signage (Map ID 17 A-16). Sara N01ihrup submitted the respo1ise from Anthony Patillo, Building Commissioner regarding the applicability of paragraph 350-10.12 section 'I'. Anthony Patillo stated that if the garage is in fact connected to the home by a breezeway then it is paii of the primary structme. That is true 111 this case. Also, the applicant stated side setback from prope1iy liiie is 16'. Barry Smith stated he is satisfied with this response and is no longer concerned with this aspect of the permit consideration. David Premo, 255 Sylvester Rd. and 213 Spring Grove (owner of abutting property) stated he measured the setback as only 14.3'. Therefore, the setback threshold should apply in this case. Barry Smith stated he still believes this point to be irrelevant since the home occupancy would be located in the primary structure. Bob Riddle stated he disagrees ai1d believes a variance would be needed. David Bloomberg suggested the Board first discuss the merits of the application then re-visit setbacks if needed. He stated the definition of home occupation does not specifically prohibit clients from visiting but does shed some light on what is excessive. The definition states the orjginal printt:?d on recycled pnper ·--. ·--·· home occupation cannot cause outward manifestation of noise or traffic. In his opinion this would exceed the threshold in relation to the cunent quiet nature of the neighborhood. Claudia Cook, 211 Spring Grove Ave., Florence stated the neighborhood is not as quiet as believed because of JFK. school traffic utilizing Spring Grove. Also, her business hours would be limited to the time between pick up and drop off from school. David Premo, 25 5 Sylvester Rd. and 213 Spring Grove ( owner of abutting property) disagreed and stated school traffic is no longer pennitted to utilize Spring Grove. Karen Schiaffo, 211 Spring Grove Ave., stated even teachers still use Spring Grove for parking. Upon motion by Barry Smith; second by David Bloomberg, the board voted unanimously to close the public hearing p01iion of the meeting. Barry Smith stated he believed the conditions for the special pem1it have not been met. Sara N01ihrup stated she believed the applicant has taken into sufficient consideration the neighborhood concerns. Also, in her opinion this would not be a major contributor to traffic and noise as the munbei" of clients would be limited and the animals would remain indoors. David Bloomberg stated he would feel differently if the houses were spaced fmiher apart. Upon motion to deny the special pennit by David Bloomberg, second by BaiTy Smith, the boai·d voted 2-1 in favor of denying the special pem1it. David Bloomberg ai1d Bany Smith voted in favor of denial, while Sara Northrup voted in opposition. The special pennit application is denied. 6:25 P.M. Sara No1ih111p presented the minutes of the February 28, 2008 meeting for approval. Upon motion by David Bloomberg, second by Barry Smith, the boai·d voted 1mai1imously to approve the minutes of the February 28, 2008 meeting. 6:30 P.M. Upon motion by David Bloomberg, second by Barry Smith, the board voted mmnimously to close the meeting. 6:30 P.M. Board adj01m1ed. PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT • CITY OF NORTHAMPTON planning• conservation• zoning • housing parlnersl,ip • reaevelopri,ent• norfhamplon GTS economic development• community development• historic • community preservation • cenh·al business architecture Carolyn Misch, AlCP, Senior Land Use Planner • CMisch@NorthamptonMA.gov • 41.3-587-1287 The Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes of Meeting March 27, 2008 City of Northampton Council Chambers, 220 Main St., Northampton, MA Members Present: Time Chair, Sara Nortlm1p 0 Vice Chair, David Bloomberg 5:30-6:15 pm 0 Malcolm B. "Barry" Smith 5:30-6:15 pm 0 Bob Riddle, Assoc. Member 5:30-6:15 pm Staff: 0 Planner, Peg Keller 5:30 -6:15 pm 0 Plaimer, John Frey 5:30 -6:15 pm 5:30 P.M. David Bloomberg opened the public hearing on the request by Mary Crane and Jane Bogan for a Variance to reduce the lot-size of an undersized lot and adjust two non-conforming lot lines at 35-37 Willow Street (Map ID 23C-73 & 74). David Bloomberg recognized attorney Pat Mehnck on behalf of the owners, Mary Crane and Jm1e Bogm1. He stated that Jane Bogan currently owns a very small lot in which the house virtually consumes the entire footprint. Jane Bogan uses a p01iion of the Crane lot for parking. Mm·y Crane wishes to transfer that p01iion of the property to Jane Bogan and therefore is requesting this varim1ce to re-draw the lot lines. The re-drawn lots would confom1 to cm-tent zoning but not to the watershed overlay ordinm1ce. He m·gued that the variance would not chm1ge the allowable use of the two lots m1d therefore not compromise the intent of the watershed overlay ordinm1ce. Finally, he stated the owners could pmsue m1 adverse possession proceeding or easement agreement in order to remedy the situation (though easement interpretation could create problems with a new owner of the Crane lot). David Bloomberg opened the floor for public comment. Elizabeth Silver, 67 Willow St., stated she has no objection. She is simply interested in the plm1s for futme use of the lots. The owner stated the Crane lot is to be sold and developed as a housing lot. This will happen regardless of the variance. Joe Kennedy, 25 Willow St., stated he has no objection to the issuance of a vm·im1ce. City Hall • 210 Mai~1 Street, Roon~ ff ;-Nortl1a1nptoi1, NIA-ofoiio ~w,~rw.Northamp tonMa.gov-;-Fa;:_ 413·.::ssi.::i264- . --... ~l_rj~f~~ _p~·.int~d on r~~x:~ed_p_ap~ Upon motion by Barry Smith, seconded by Bob Riddle, the Board voted m1animously to close the public hearing portion of the meeting. After much discussion, David Bloomberg summarized his position in opposition of the varim1ce. He stated the case law for a variance is very clear, it is only for extraordinary cases and is to be rarely granted. He also believes the variance would m1dem1ine the watershed overlay ordinm1ce instituted by the City Cmmcil. In smmnarizing the criteria needed for approving a variance he stated 1.) the applicm1ts would not be denied use of their own prope1iy, 2.) no extraordinary hardship would be created, 3.) in principle this would undem1ine the intent of the ordinm1ce, and 4.) this would not be the smallest relief possible as an easenient could be created. He felt this would be spot zoning. Finally, if the neighborhood disagrees with the ordinance they should bring the issue to City Com1cil. Bob Riddle disagreed and summarized his reasons for approval of the variance. He stated his belief that this would not be spot zoning. Rather, since the issuance of a variance would not affect the intent of the watershed overlay ordinance (since the Crane lot could be developed by right either way) it is within the purview of the Board to grm1t the vm·im1ce. Barry Smith smmnarized his position as being between those of David Bloomberg and Bob Riddle. He would be inclined to grant the vm·im1ce if there were no other remedy, but given the fully legal means of an easement or adverse possession taking he is opposed to the variance. Upon motion by Ba1Ty Smith, seconded by Bob Riddle, the Board voted 2-1 to deny the Variance. David Bloomberg m1d Barry Smith voted to deny the Varim1ce, while Bob Riddle voted to oppose the denial. 6:10 P.M. David Bloomberg presented the minutes of the March 13, 2008 meeting for approval. Upon motion by Bob Riddle, seconded by Bany Smith, the board voted unanimously to approve the minutes of the March 13, 2008 meeting. 6:15 P.M. Upon motion by Barry Smith, seconded by Bob Riddle, the board voted m1m1imously to close the meeting. 6:15 P.M. Board adjourned. PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT. CITY OF NORTHAMPTON planning • conservation • zoning • housing partnership • redevelopment • northampton GIS economic development • community development • historic • community preservation • central business architecture Wayne Feiden, AICP, Director of Plarming and Development • Wfeiden@NorthamptonMA.gov • 413-587-1265 NORTHAMPTON PUBLIC MEETING/ Legal AD FOR Thursday March 27, 2008 ZONING BOARD Zoning Administrator meets in Council Chambers, Puchalski Municipal Building, 212 Main Street, Northampton, MA for a 4:30 PM Public Hearing: Scott Marlow for a Finding to reconstruct and expand a preexisting nonconforming porch at 36 Market Street (Map ID 32A-259). ZONING BOARD meets in Council Chambers, MA for a 5:30 PM Public Hearing: Mary Crane and Jane Bogan for a Variance to reduce the lot-size of an undersized lot and adjust two non-conforming lot lines at 35-37 Willow Street (Map ID 23C-73 & 74). PLANNING BOARD meets in Council Chambers for a 7:00 PM Public Hearing: Daniel Martinea for a Special Permit and Site Plan Approval for a restaurant at 25 West Street (Map ID 3 lD-52) with a rela,ted Special Permit to reduce parking space requirements 7:30 PM Public Hearing: Cooley Dickinson ;Hospital for Site Plan Approval Amendment for 18 additional parking spaces at 30 Locust Street (Map ID 23B-46). ELM STREET HISTORIC DISTRICTCOMMISSION meets in Room 10, Planning Director's Office, City Hall, 210 Main Street for a: . 7:00 PM Public Hearing: Trustees of Smith College for modifications to the entry door, full window replacement and installation of a new roof at· 116 Elm Street, Park Annex. (Map ID 31B-246). Publish: Bill: March 13 and March 20, 200.8 Office of Planning & Development 210 Main Street, Northampton, MA 01060 Account # 71350 CityHall •210MainStreet,Room11 • Northampton,MA01060 • www.NorthamptonMa.gov • Eax_413-587-1264 original printed on recycled paper PLANNING AND Dlwm.oPMENT • CrrYOF NORTHAMPTON The Northampton Zoning Board Administrator Minutes of Meeting April 23, 2008 City of Northampton Hearing Room 18, 210 Main St., Northampton, MA Members Present: Time 0 Chair, David Bloomberg Vice Chair, Malcolm B. "Barry" Smith Sara Northrup Bob Riddle, Assoc. Member Staff: 0 Senior Planner, Carolyn Misch Planning Director, Wayne Feiden 4:00 P.M. David Bloomberg opened the request for a Finding to expand a non-conforming side yard setback by Robert Walker for property located at 13 Fort St., Northampton, Map ID 38B-l 79. Steven Ross, representing Bob Walker, described the layout of the project. David Bloomberg asked about the siding materials. Libby Amey, 11 Fort Street, abutter raised a concern about the lack of a survey and presented pictures of the neighborhood. Gary Miller, 17 Fort Street raised a concern about the size/scale of the structure and the iming of construction. Mike Ahearn, 24 Fort St. and 20 Fort St. raised concern about lack of a survey. Ross responded to concerns of height and noted that a pitched roof like others in neighborhood would create a taller addition. The proposed has a flat roof. David Bloomberg stated that given the concerns from more than one abutter about the lot size and size of expansion, he would continue the hearing for a chance for the applicant to obtain a survey and evaluate options for reducing the scale of the project. The continuation date was set for 5-28 at 4 PM. CilyHaII • .21ll Mai:n.Btreat,Romn 11 • Nmfham.pkllt,.MA fil060 • www.Nmthampto.nMa.gov • Fo:413-581-1264 qltlilll.pmlild OO~J'ill'lll' l'u.NNING AND IlHVm..OPMENr • Cm OF NORTHAlldPION The Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes of Meeting June 12, 2008 City of Northampton Council Chambers, 220 Main St., Northampton, MA Members Present: Time 0 Chair, David Bloomberg 5:30 -7:30 pm 0 Vice Chair, Malcolm B. "Barry" Smith 5:00 -7:30 pm 0 Sara Northrup 5:30 -7:30 pm 0 Bob Riddle, Assoc. Member 5:30 -7:30 pm Staff: 0 Planner, Peg Keller 5:00-5:30 pm, 7:00-7:30 pm 0 Planner, John Frey 5:00 -7:30 pm 0 Planning Director, Wayne Feiden 5:30 -7:00 pm 5:00 P.M. Sara Northrup opened the public hearing on the request by Elissa Forman for a Finding to construct a ground level deck four feet from the side yard lot line at 33 Keyes Street (Map l 7C, Parcel 148). She recognized the applicant, Elissa Forman. Elissa Forman explained there is currently a keystone patio in place used only for recreation over which she proposes to construct a ground level deck. She explained there is a privacy fence in place already on the lot line, which she will continue to maintain. Also, all the neighbors required by ordinance were notified of the meeting. Sara Northrup read a letter from the DPW stating it has no concerns regarding this project. Sara Northrup opened the floor for public comment of which there was none. Sara Northrup closed the public hearing portion of this meeting. Sara Northrup decided in favor of the Finding to build a ground level deck, -220 sq. ft. in size, four feet from the side yard lot line. 5:30 P.M. David Bloomberg opened the public meeting to hear an appeal of the Building Commissioner's decision on alleged zoning violations of the Northampton Regional Landfill and seeking discontinuance of use as regional sanitary landfill (Map ID 42-089). All sides spent the first half of the meeting determining a time schedule for future meeting and submittal of briefs. The schedule is as follows: aty Hall • 2ffl MainSlnlM,Room 11 • N~1,rMA filaeiO • W"WW.N~ • Fllll:413-687-12M ~pmlld •mc;,rdldMW" • June 23, 2008 -DPW submits brief • June 26, 2008 -continuance of hearing • August 21, 2008 -final briefs due • September 1, 2008 -rebuttal briefs due • September 11, 2008 -ZBA deliberation meeting • September 30, 2008 -decision due Upon motion by Barry Smith, seconded by Sara Northrup, all vote in favor to extend final decision to September 30, 2008. Attorney Peter Koff, representing the appellants, sign the necessary documents allowing the decision extension. All sides agree to submit brief text by email. Any attachments are to be submitted by hard copy to the Northampton Planning Department to forward to the ZBA. Both sides also agree to submit a "stipulation of facts" to the ZBA as soon as possible. David Bloomberg explained the question before the ZBA is whether the Northampton Zoning Enforcement Officer (Building Commissioner, Anthony Patillo) erred in not finding the landfill currently operating illegally for failure to secure proper City permitting during their expansion to a regional facility in 1990. The purpose is not to determine whether the landfill is detrimental to the community or whether it should be expanded further. Also before the ZBA is to determine the scope of standing for the appellant. Attorney Koff begins his presentation of facts with a slide show and questions for appellant, Michael Fedora of 238 Glendale Rd. Mr. Fedora spoke of the history of the landfill and the negative impact it has had on his quality of life. (Full texts of the proceedings are available from the verbatim transcript of the meeting, which is attached by reference.) Public comment began with Lillian Fedora (Appellant), 238 Glendale Rd. explaining the problems with living next to the landfill since 1977. She explained there have been odors for at least 20 years. Craig Odgers (Appellant), 97 Glendale Rd. asked questions regarding the need for City permitting. He stated the City should be held accountable for their neglect in not receiving the necessary permits. Mary Odgers (Appellant), 97 Glendale Rd. argued there was a major change in use when the landfill expanded to be a regional facility. She argued if the City did not expand to be a regional facility they would not now need to expand capacity. Bob Aronson spoke of the impact truck traffic has on the local community. The scale of trucks needed constitutes a definite change in use. Linda Hiesiger (Appellant), 981 Parkhill Rd. spoke to the horrible odors emanating from the landfill. She also noted the extensive number of complaints logged by DEP when the landfill expanded to a regional facility. Upon motion by Sara Northrup, seconded by Barry Smith, all vote in favor of continuing the hearing to June 26, 2008 at 5:30 pm. At 7:00, the Zoning Board moved to Room 11, City Hall (as noted in the legal notice and agenda). 7:03 P.M. David Bloomberg opened the public meeting on the request by Taco Bell of America, Inc. for a special permit to install four signs on the new Taco Bell/KFC establishment proposed at 203 King Street (Map 24D, Parcel 329). He recognized Huseyin Sevincgil, an engineer with MHF Design Consultants in Salem, N.H., on behalf of the applicant Taco Bell of America, Inc. Huseyin Sevincgil explained that by right the restaurant is permitted one sign on each side (25 sq. ft. max each side) and two signs on the front fa9ade (69 sq. ft. max total). The applicant's proposal meets the side requirements but they request permission for four smaller signs on the front totaling just 64 sq. ft. Two signs would have wording (Taco Bell and KFC) and two would be logos. The signs would be illuminated internally. The building would be LEED certified and therefore the signs would be lit with LED or other low output fixtures. David Bloomberg opened the floor for public comment of which there was none. Peg Keller stated the conditions by which allowance are acceptable (see Chapter 350, Section 7.2M). Upon motion by Barry Smith, seconded by Sara Northrup, all (Barry Smith, Sara Northrup, and Bob Riddle) vote in favor of closing the public hearing portion of the meeting. Upon motion by Sara Northrup, seconded by Barry Smith, all (Sara Northrup, Barry Smith, and Bob Riddle) vote in favor (pending any conditions imposed by the Planning Board) of the applicant's request for a special permit to install four sign on the front fa<;ade (64 sq. ft. total). 7:25 P.M. David Bloomberg presented the minutes from the May 22, 2008 meeting for approval. One change needed to be made. Sara Northrup was in attendance. Change made to reflect her attendance. Upon motion by Barry Smith, seconded by Bob Riddle, all vote in favor of accepting the amended minutes of May 22, 2008. 7:30 P.M. Upon motion by Bob Riddle, seconded by Barry Smith, all vote in favor of adjourning the public meeting. l'u.NNING AND IlHVm..OPMENr • Cm OF NORTHAlldPION The Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes of Meeting June 26, 2008 City of Northampton Council Chambers, 220 Main St., Northampton, MA Members Present: Time 0 Chair, David Bloomberg 5:30 -8:46 pm 0 Vice Chair, Sara Northrup 5:30 -8:46 pm 0 Malcolm B. "Barry" Smith 5:30 -8:46 pm 0 Bob Riddle, Assoc. Member 5:30 -8:46 pm Staff: 0 Planner, John Frey 5:30 -8:46 pm 0 Planning Director, Wayne Feiden 5:30 -8:46 pm 5:30 P.M. David Bloomberg re-opened the public meeting (continued from June 12, 2008) to hear an appeal of the Building Commissioner's decision on alleged zoning violations of the Northampton Regional Landfill and seeking discontinuance of use as regional sanitary landfill (Map ID 42-089). NOTE -Full text of the proceedings is available from the verbatim transcript taken during the meeting. Said transcript is referred to by reference. David Bloomberg recapped the timeline of coming dates concerning this appeal. • June 26, 2008 -continuance of hearing (short additional presentation from appellants and full presentation from appellees) • August 21, 2008 -final briefs due • September 1, 2008 -rebuttal briefs due • September 11, 2008 -ZBA questions & deliberation meeting • September 30, 2008 -decision due Attorney Peter Koff continued his presentation on behalf of the appellants. He presented a timeline display showing the changes to the landfill over the years and the corresponding permits obtained or failed to be obtained. Attorney Thomas Mackie began his presentation on behalf of the City of Northampton, Department of Public Works. On Monday, June 24, 2008 he submitted a 20-page memorandum outlining the defense. He plans to present four people on behalf of the DPW: • Janet Sheppard, City of Northampton solicitor will speak regarding the history and zoning enforcement at the landfill. • Anthony Patillo, Building Commissioner will speak regarding his zoning appeal decision. aty Hall • 2ffl MainSlnlM,Room 11 • N~1,rMA filaeiO • W"WW.N~ • Fllll:413-687-12M ~pmlld •mc;,rdldMW" • Peter McErlain, former City of Northampton, Director of Health will speak regarding the operation changes at the landfill over the years. • Jim Laurila, City of Northampton, DPW Engineer will speak regarding the waste tonnage calculations. Attorney Mackie highlighted the pre-hearing memorandum: • The 1990 change in use was not to the magnitude warranting a permit change. • Zoning ordinance changes over the years do not apply to structures or uses lawfully in existence before the change. The landfill was lawfully started in 1974. Later zoning ordinances do not apply and the landfill should remain under 1969 ordinances. • The City does not dispute the landfill's expansion to a regional facility. • The appellant has the burden of proof in a ZBA appeal. Also, the ZBA must be unanimous in order for the appeal to be accepted. • The building commissioner and city solicitor found the regional expansion to be lawful in 1988. A 6-year statute of limitations then applied to any appeals. • Natural progression, growth and change in best business practices not enough to signal a non-conforming use change. • A letter was presented confirming the presence of iron floe in 1969 before the opening of the landfill. • The yearly tonnage data has remained fairly steady since 1990. The source of waste has changed but has not created a "change in kind" on the neighborhood. • The City ofNorthampton has spent over $lmillion mitigating landfill odors. The appellant testified to odors existing since before 1990. • A traffic study in 2002 found mostly small trucks and pick-ups frequenting the landfill. Only 18-wheelers were for cover material. Very little history of accidents in the area. The traffic mirrored the tonnage data. • Only 13% of waste comes form outside the city. Also, the income from outside the city is a benefit to the residents of the City of Northampton. Janet Sheppard, City of Northampton Solicitor presented permitting history of the landfill. Major points included: • The applicable definition of non-conforming use comes from the 1949 zoning ordinance. • The zoning amendments of 1958 and 1974 exempt municipal uses. It was upheld in 1975 that the landfill is a municipal use. • The site has been used as a landfill since 1972. The appellant has brought no evidence of significant changes warranting a non-conforming change of use charge. • City Council votes since 1972 have demonstrated the council's belief that no additional permitting has been required at the landfill. This issue was contested in 1988 and upheld. • The City ofNorthampton paid a claim to Mr. Fedora (appellant) in 1990. • Northampton zoning ordinances apply to the city just as they do to private citizens. • The final decree of 1972 did not limit the landfill to municipal usage only. Other towns have used since 1969 with day tickets. Sara Northrup, ZBA member disclosed working in the past on a city landfill tonnage data study. She stated the work on the study has no bearing on this case. Anthony Patillo, City of Northampton Building Commissioner spoke regarding his enforcement of zoning laws pertaining to the landfill. Major points included: • The area of the landfill property has not expanded since 1969. • The Board of Health was originally against the city landfill. It was legally permitted in 1969. • A 1988 letter from the city solicitor stated changes in cells and creation of lined cell did not create a change in permitted use of 1969. • The 1972 decree only stated the landfill needed to be municipally owned and operated. • Mr. Patillo testified to having firsthand knowledge of non-Northampton use of the landfill. While working as a contractor from Buckland, MA in 1985-88 he often used the landfill with a day ticket pass. • The building department issued a permit for leachate treatment in 1989. The statute of limitations to appeal that permit expired in 1995. • The power plant is an accessory use, not primary. It is a best practice technique used nationwide to mitigate possible methane explosions. Peter McErlain, former City of Northampton Director of Public Health (1977-2003) spoke regarding landfill practices over the years. Major points included: • The landfill did impact Hannum Brook, however the iron floe was pre-existing before 1969. • Mr. Fedora filed odor complaints in 1980 and 1989. Odors were confirmed. • No significant changes in equipment from 1978 to 1991, and then to 2001. • In 1984 the City of Northampton provided notice of intent to Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs to expand to a new cell. A hearing was held in city hall and the expansion approved by DEP. Notice was sent to the community. • City Council in 1988 authorized $6.9mil for construction of the new lined landfill cell. • At that time no further unlined horizontal expansion allowed. Any expansion must be lined. • All discussion since 1977 was with intent of using full 50-acres of site for landfill. • The city sought bids in early 1990s to collect methane gas. First contract began in 1997 with Williams Energy. Currently contracted with Ameresco Northampton, LLC. Ameresco collects gas which is then sold to pay for the system. Jim Laurila, City of Northampton, DPW Engineer spoke regarding landfill usage and tonnage data. Major points included: • Two traffic studies from 2002 and 2005 show the area traffic to be within acceptable levels of service. • From 1969-1990 there was no scale at the landfill, all records kept by loose cubic yardage. Loose cubic yardage was consistent or falling between 1969 and 1990. Tonnage consistent from 1991-2007. • Current landfill limit set by DEP is 50,000 tons per year. • The historical number of communities using the landfill varies from 11 to 27. Currently 17 communities use the landfill. Attorney Arthur Krieger, representing Ameresco Northampton, LLC questioned Dan Gardner, project manager for Ameresco, regarding the methane capture equipment at the Northampton landfill. Dan Gardner explained the system. He demonstrated the collection system is integral to the safe and environmental operation of the landfill. He also explained current work is being done to install ductwork around the gas burner. This will be a directional abatement of the noise. Attorney Sheppard confirmed the city is not conceding appellant standing. Attorney Mackie asked the ZBA to specifically make a finding regarding standing. He noted there are two classes of abutters, those within 300' of the landfill and those further away. Non- abutters need specific evidence to show standing. Attorney Krieger spoke more regarding Ameresco's operations at the landfill. Major points included: • Progress of the unit installation was presented. Mitigation measures include silencer, fencing, and variable speed fans. After completion Ameresco will test for noise based on DEP requests. • Gas collection is not an accessory use, rather federal EPA standards state methane to electricity is a common practice and prevalent throughout Massachusetts. • Customarily incidental standard is met in this case. • The effort to collect methane gas dates back 15 years without objection. • The appellants have not met burden of proofregarding increased noise. No quantitative measurements have been presented. Peter McErlain spoke again regarding noise at the landfill. Basic landfill noise includes truck tailgates, banger guns for bird control, landfill trucks and high-pitched whine of gas pumps to old methane flares. Attorney Kreiger stated gas collection and mitigation must be done. It is not an accessory use, but rather a modernization of best landfill practices. However, Ameresco is permitted under either theory. Michael Fedora, 238 Glendale Rd. (Appellant) stated he has never received payment from the city for claims. Bob Aronson, 71 Sylvester Rd. stated he documented traffic at Jim's Variety on West Farms Rd. for three 90-minute periods. He offered to share his data with the ZBA. Linda Hiesiger, 981 Parkhill Rd. (Appellant) stated the DEP has tested noise levels coming from the landfill. She stated the noise "sounded like a freight train". Upon motion by Barry Smith, seconded by Sara Northrup, the board voted unanimously to continue the public hearing to September 11, 2008 at 5:30pm. 8:46 P.M. Board adjourned.