HomeMy WebLinkAbout4849 Wise Living 822-834 Route 28I I I i H i OWN CLERK,
TOWN OF YARMOUTH
BOARD OF APPEALS
DECISION
FILED MTH TOWN CLERK: Jule 30, 2020
PETITION NO: #4849
HEARING DATE: Jule 23, 2020
PETITIONER: ','V'ise Living Development LLC
0 %N-Nt ERS: Maclyn LLC, 834 Main Street Realt Trust, and
Balser Frank LLC
PROPER"I ivs: 822 Route 28, 834 Route 28 and 30 Frank Baker Road,
South Yarmouth, MA
Map 33/Parcel 70.1
Map 411Parcel 12
Map 41/Parcel 11.1
Zoning District: B2, HNIOD1, ROAD, and VCOD VC2
Title References with the Barnstable County Registry of Deeds:
Book 28032, Page 179 Lot 1 on Plan in Book 653, Page l
Book 25968, Page 22 Lot I on Plan in Book 41, Page 125
Book 32123, Page 16 Lot 2 on Plan in Book 653, Page I
MEMBERS PRESENT AND VOTING: Chairman Steven DeYoung, Sean Igoe, Dick Martin, Tom
Nickinello, and Susan Brita
Notice of the hearing has been given by sending notice thereof to the Petitioner and all those owners of
property as required by lau•, and to the public by postini7 notice of the hearin? and publishing in The
Reuister, the hearing, opened and held on [lie date as stated above.
The Petitioner is Wise Livine Development LL-C. The Property. located in the B2, HMOD 1, ROAD, and
VCOD VC? Zoning Districts, is currently the site of the Irish Village Hotel and restaurant complex. a
commercial building containing three rental spaces, and a vacant parcel of land.
The Petitioner %vas represented by Andrew Sinaer, attorney, and Kieran Healey, engineer.
The Petitioner has received use Special Permit approval from the Yarmouth Planning Board to redevelop
the Property into a mixed -use project consisting of senior housing, medical offices, and corruncrcial and
office use as follows:
A Wise Living Retirement Community for senior housing with 120 units (104 studios
and 16 one -bedroom units), common resident dining facility, and outdoor swimming
pool;
2. A leased medical complex (maximum of two ; 2 If doctors and related support staff) plus
an exercise/rehabilitation facility and wading pool; and
3. Continuation of existinc uses in the existing commercial building.
The Petitioner has also received approval from the Yarmouth Board of Appeals for certain site
redevelopment constraints (in -lot trees, signs, and sidewalk waiver) The Petitioner had previously
requested additional design relief for the two buildings to be re -used and withdrew such requests to �.
further review the design. To this end, the Petitioner has re -designed the buildings to reduce and alter the
type of relief requested and has applied to the Board in this case for a-
834 Route 28 Building: Special Permit in accordance with Section 414.6.4 of the
Yannouth Zoning By -Law ["Zoning By-Laix"] and M.G.L. Chapter 40A, Sections 6 and
9, in order to construct a bump -out addition to the east side of the existing building with a
reduced side yard setback; and
2. 822 Route 28 Building: Variance in accordance with Section 102.2 2 of the Zoning By -
Law and M.G.L. Chapter 40A. Section 10, from Section 414.8, including Sections
414,S.3. 414.8.5, and 414.8.6, in connection only with the balconies and patios of the
residential, senior housing units on the east and west sides ofthe building.
In its prior tiling. the Petitioner had requested Variance relief liar seven, total design aspects of the two
buildings to be re -used. In response to Board member concerns, the Petitioner revised the plans to
eliminate four aspects of the previously -requested relief and has converted one request to the Special
Permit. as follows: 1) in coluiection with the 822 R011te 28 budding?, an additional bump -out was added
on the south side facing Route 2S and two additional enclosures were added on the cast and west sides,
respectively, enclosing entrances, all In compliance the building modulation requirements of- the ZonirltiLF
I3y-Law; and 2) in connection with the. 834 Route 28 building, a nevi-, enclosed entrance has been added
on the west side of the buildin" in Compliance With the building ►noduiation requirements of the Zoning
By-I.aw. and the requested. ne«- bulllp-out on the east side of the building can be allowed by Special
Pcrnlit.
The proposal before the Board in this case has been reviewed by Yarmouth Design Review Committee
and Yarmouth Planning, Board for VCOD Site Plan Review. There was no correspondence in the file and
no public comment at the hearing.
The Petitioner submitted the follo«-ing testimony in support of the Petition:
Special Permit In accordance with Section 414.6.4 of the Zoning By -Law and as set forth in Section
414.3.3 of the Zoning By -Law, the Board is authorized to grant the requested relief to construct a bump
out on the east side of the 834 Route 28 Building within the side setback in order to comply with building
modulation requirements:
The Planning Board has issued a Site Plan Review Decision for the Proposal, and the
redevelopment supports Mixed Use development, maintains and improves pedestrian
access, provides on -site open space, and incorporates low impact design techniques;
7
2. In addition, the redevelopment provides a vehicular cross -connection between the
properties to be combined and traffic demand management is provided through the Mixed
Use in the two buildings, the side yard relief improves the appearance of the building and
is safe and visually attractive, and is set back substantially from the front sidewalk and is
partially screened by an existing fence to the east; and
3. Finally, no undue nuisance, hazard or congestion will be created, there will be no
substantial harm to the established or future character of the neighborhood or Town, the
relief is consistent with the purposes and will conform to the provisions of Section 414 of
the Zoning By -Law, the Yarmouth Architectural and Site Design Standards, and the
Design Standards of Section 414.8 of the Zoning By -Law.
Variance. In accordance with Section 102.2.2 of the Zoning By -Law and M.G.L. Chapter 40A, Section
10, the Board is authorized to grant the requested relief to alter only the design of the balconies and patios
(open cable end porches!patios and porticos) along the east and west sides of the 822 Route 28 Building
to the middle and rear of the Property away from Route 28:
By not enclosing the outside balconies and patios on the east and west sides of the noddle
and rear portions of the 822 Route 28 Building and leaving them with railings as shown,
the following benefits result:
A. The residents' apartments will receive more sunlight and will not be dark;
B. The residents will have safe, private, and personal spaces to sit outside:
throughout the year as weather conditions alloy;
C. The breathability and attractiveness of the apartments used for senior housing
will be improved:
D. Emergency, public safety access to the apartments from the outside of tile
building will be available as well as potential. alternative. future exterior access
ill response to Covid-19 and changing replations;
n.
[t enclosed, these sniall areas will become predonlinantly dead storace spaces
Without coolllli-I In the summer or heatln�, In the winter (even with sliders);
F. The expense to condition the ,mall, enclosed spaces and to add exterior walls,
sliders. and additional structural construction under a literal enforcement of the
Zoning By -Lase• �� ill cost in the high six figures without substantively inlprovingT
the appearance of the building,'
G These two sides of the building are in the middle and rear of the Property and are
not readily visible from Route 28; and
H. The remainder of the redeveloped building will comply %vith all building
modulation requirements of Section 414.E of the Zoning By -Law. The front of
the building facing Route 28 and the east and west sides at the front portion of
the building closest to Route 28 have been redesigned in complete confomlance
with the Zoning By -Law;
3
2. Not granting the relief will result in a substantial financial or practical hardship to the
Petitioner, this hardship is owing to unique circumstances relating to the historical,
developed layout and nature of the existing structures and site infrastructure to be
re -used on the property. The existing developed nature of the existing building makes
complete compliance not practical or financially feasible. This is a large-scale
redevelopment that will offer a needed senior housing option in the community. The
building is in good shape and does not need to be razed and replaced as is often the case.
Meeting these final building modulation provisions along the east and west sides of the
middle and rear portions of the building will not only prevent the practical, beneficial
results to the residents outlined above, but the cost to comply is prohibitive. The
Massachusetts Appeals Court has found that excessive additional cost in similar
circumstances can justify the grant of relief. In this instance, the proposal involves
opportunity zone ownership. Creating the best redevelopment for the residents and the
conununity is foremost. The additional costs for this portion of the building that are not
readily visible from Route 28, in particular when they will demonstrably detract from the
residential experience and could jeopardize the viability of the proposal, meet the
Variance hardship standard and merit the grant of relief. and
3. Finally, for all of the reasons set forth in the Special Permit and Variance discussions
above, the proposed relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public
good and without nulhfying or substantially derogating from the intent or purpose of the
Zoning By-1.atv. The proposal w ill not cause or contribute to any undue nuisance, hazard
or congestion in the neighborhood. zoninu district or Town, and there will be no
substantial harn to the character of the neighborhood or Tenon. The proposal will
provide needed services and residential opportunities in the Town.
The Board members asked questions and discussed the existing and proposed changes to the design ofthe
IWO buildirttigs as well as the granting of Special Permit and Variance relief. respectively. Y
Based on the above and additional testimony and diSCUSSlon received at the public hearing, the Board
toot: the follow•1110 votes:
Based upon finding-s that the proposal as presented as it relates to the cast side of the 834 Route
28 building satisfies the Special Permit criteria set Cm-th in the Zoning By -Law, ineludirig'without
limitation as specified in Sections 414 3.3 and 414.6.4 of the Zonin-, By -Law, and
Chapter 40A, Chapter 40A, Sections 6 and 9, on a Motion by Mr. Nickinello and seconded by
Mr. !Martin, the Board voted five (5) in favor and none (0) opposed to grant a Special Permit to
construct a bump -out addition to the east side of the existing building with a reduced side yard
setback as shown on the plans. and
1 Based upon findings that the proposal as presented as it relates to the east and west sides of the
822 Route 28 building satisfies the criteria of Section 102.2.2 of the Zoning By -Law and M.G.L.
Chapter 40A, Section 10, by promoting a safer, better design for the re -use of the existinu
building, on a Motion by Mr. Igoe and seconded by iV1r. Nickinello, the Board voted five (5) in
favor and none (0) opposed to grant a Variance from Section 414.8 of the Zoning By -Law,
including Sections 414.8.3, 4t4.8.5, and 414.8.6, solely in connection with the open gable end
porches patios and balconies of the residential, senior housing units on the east and west sides of
the building as shown on the plans.
4
No permit shall issue until 20 days from the filing of this decision with the Town Clerk.
Appeals from this decision shall be made pursuant to MGL c40A section 17 and must be
filed within 20 days after filing of this notice/decision with the Town Clerk. Unless
otherwise provided herein, the Special Permit shall lapse if a substantial use thereof has not
begun within 24 months. (See bylaw §103.2,5, MGL c40A §9) Unless otherwise provided
herein, a Variance shall lapse if the rights authorized herein are not exercised within 12
months. (See MGL c40A§10). This Decision must be filed with the Barnstable County
Registry of Deeds, Route 6A, Barnstable.
Steven DeYounv, airman
5
Y. �,� t� COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
r J
TOWN OF YARMOUTH
BOARD OF APPEALS
h � f \
1
Appeal #4549 Date: August 20, 2020
Certificate of Granting of a Special Permit and Variance
(General Laws Chapter 40A, section 1 1)
The Board of Appeals of the Town of Yannouth Massachusetts hereby certifies that a Special
Permit and Variance has been granted to:
PETITIONER: Vise Living Development LLC
OWNERS: Maclyn LLC, 834 Main Street Realty Trust, and
Baker Frank LLC
Affecting the rights of the owner with respect to land or buildings at: PROPERTIES: 822 Route
28, 834 Route 28 and 30 Frank Baker Road, South Yarmouth, MA
Map 33/Parcel 70.1
Map 41/Parcel 12
Map 41/Parcel 11.1
Zoning District: B2, tIMOD1, ROAD, and VCOD VC2
Title References with the Barnstable County Registry of Deeds:
Book 28032, Page 179 Lot I on Plan in Book 653, Page 1
Book 25968, Page 22 Lot l on Plan in Book 41, Page 125
Book 32123, Page 16 Lot 2 on Plan in Book 653, Page 1
and the said Board of Appeals further certifies that the decision attached hereto is a true and
correct copy of its decision granting said Special Pen -nit and Variance, and that copies of said
decision, and of all plans referred to in the decision, have been filed.
The Board of Appeals also calls to the attention of the owner or applicant that General Laws.
Chapter 40A, Section 1 1 (last paragraph) and Section 13, provides that no Special Permit, or
Variance or any extension, modification or renewal thereof, shall take effect until a copy of the
decision bearing the certification of the Town Clerk that twenty (20) days have elapsed after the
decision has been filed in the office of the Town Clerk and no appeal has been filed or that, if
such appeal has been filed, that it has been dismissed or denied, is recorded in the Registry of
Deeds for the county and district in which the land is located and indexed in the grantor index
under the name of the owner of record or is recorded and noted on the owner's certificate of title.
The fee for such recording or registering shall be paid by the owner or applicant.
zq_� �4�
Steven S. DeYo ng, Chairman
TOWN OF YARMOUTH
1 146 ROUTE 28, SOUTH YARMOUTH, MASSACHUSETTS 02664-4451
Telephone (508) 398-2231 Ext. 1285, Fax (508) 398-0336
CERTIFICATION OF TOWN CLERK
Town
Clerk
1, Susan M Regan, Town Clerk, Town of Yannouth, do hereby certify that 20 days have elapsed
since the filing with me of the above Board of Appeals Decision #4849 that no notice of appeal
of said decision has been filed with me, or, if such appeal has been filed it has been dismissed or
denied. All appeals have been exhausted.
Susan M. Regan
Town Clerk