HomeMy WebLinkAbout5100 11 Corporation Rd Decision RecordedBk 36398 Pg224 #21465
06-03-2024 @ 12:12p
FILED WITH TOWN CLERK:
PETITION NO:
HEARING DATE:
PETITIONER:
PROPERTY OWNER:
PROPERTY:
TOWN OF YARMOUTH
BOARD OF APPEALS
DECISION
May 9, 2024
5101)
April 25, 2024
Green Bird Landscaping, Inc.
Cloud Five Trust
11 Corporation Road, Yarmouth Port MA
Map 93, Lot 28.5
Zoning District: 133 & APD
Plan Book: 618, Page 18 (Lot 5)
Lot Size: 47,242 Sq. Ft.
MEMBERS PRESENT AND VOTING: Vice Chair Scan Igoe, Jay Fraprie, John Mantoni,
Barbara Nlurphy, and Anthony Panebianco
Notice of the hearing has been given by sending notice thereof to the Petitioner and all those
owners of property as required by law, and to the public by posting notice of the hearing and
publishing in The Cal ce Cod Times, the hearing opened and held on the date stated above.
The subject property is located at 1 l Corporation Road, Yarmouth Port, Massachusetts. It
consists of undeveloped land shown as Parcel 28.5 on the Town of Yamiouth Assessor's Map 93.
The property is located in the B-3 Zoning, District. It is also located in the Aquifer Protection
District and is shown as Lot 5 on an Approval Not Required ("ANR") Plan that was recorded in
the Registry of Deeds in Book h IS. Pace 18 on June 1, 2007.
The property is owned by the Cloud Five Trust under a Deed recorded in Book 30632. Pace 323
of the Barnstable County Registry of Deeds. The Cloud Five Trust provided a letter of support
for the Petitioner's application.
The Petitioner, Green Bird Landscaping,, Inc., seeks to acquire the subject property and proposes
to construct a new commercial building containing 7.000 square feet. The building, will have six
(6) contractor bays, a standing scam metal root; steel wall panel siding, a I -foot hick concrete
kicker wall around the perimeter. and seven (7) overhead doors. In addition to the commercial
building. fourteen ( 14) parking spaces, stormwater management system, septic system, grading.
utilities, holding tank, fire hydrant, landscaping. Fencing, lighting, and cA1DIS Cr 'Y'HffIEST
Bk 36398 Pg225 #21465
The completed building would utilize Town water and receive natural gas service. The proposed
building received the approval of the Yarmouth Old King's Highway Historic District
Committee at a public hearing on October 11, 2023.
The Petitioner advised that if its purchase of the property from Cloud Five Trust is completed,
the title to the land will be taken in an LLC, and Green Bird Landscaping, Inc. would occupy two
contractor bays (1,000 sq. foot bay #5 and 2,000 sq. ft. bay #6) under a lease with the LLC. The
remaining four (4) bays would be leased to other commercial tenants. There were no known
tenants as of the April 25, 2024, hearing date. As illustrated in the Site Plan Review Comments,
the Building Commissioner requires each prospective tenant to obtain a certificate of occupancy
for each unit(s) intended to be occupied. Additionally, the prospective tenants' proposed use(s)
remain subject to Sections 202.5 and Section 406 of the Zoning Bylaw.
The Petitioner is seeking the following relief:
1. Petitioner is seeking a Special Permit pursuant to Section 202.5 and as allowed by
Section 406 to allow a contractor's yard in the B-3 Zoning District and Aquifer Protection
Overlay District.
2. Petitioner is seeking a Variance from Section 301.4.3 to waive the requirement that the
driveway shall be comprised of two (2) travel lanes each not having more than twelve (12)
feet nor less than ten (10) feet in width.
3. Petitioner is seeking a Variance from Section 301.4.9 to waive the requirement that lots in
B3 Districts containing a business or industrial use shall include a twenty (20) foot wide
buffer along those boundaries of the lot which are adjacent to a way.
4. Petitioner is seeking a Variance from Section 301 A.9 to waive the requirement that lots in
B3 Districts containing a business or industrial use shall include ten (10) foot wide buffers
along the boundaries of the lot not adjacent to a way.
5. Petitioner is seeking a Variance from Section 203.5 to waive the requirement of a
minimum thirty-foot (30') rear setback.
SPECIAL PERMIT:
The Petitioner, through its representatives, presented evidence establishing how its proposed use
as a contractor's yard complied with the Special Permit requirements set forth in Section 103.2.2
and Section 406 of the Zoning Bylaw. Specifically, the Petitioner established that the proposed
uses have been well vetted by the Yarmouth Board of Health, which issued a memorandum dated
April 8, 2024 ("the Memorandum") regarding the Petitioner's proposed on -site operations within
the contractor's yard, including but not limited to the indoor storage of up to 90 gallons of liquid
hazardous materials and up to 5800 pounds of solid hazardous materials with secondary
containment, the indoor washing and servicing of company vehicles and indoor service of small
engine equipment. The Petitioner's proposed uses, more detailed in the Memorandum from Carl
Lawson dated April 8, 2024 (the "Memorandum"), require a Special Permit in the APD. The
Petitioner demonstrated that on April 1, 2024, the Petitioner appeared before the Board of -
A TRUE COPY ATTEST. .
2 ,
Bk 36398 Pg226 #21465
Health, which unanimously voted to recommend the proposal, finding that it adequately
controlled all hazardous materials and protected the intent of the APD bylaw. In addition, the
Petitioner showed that the proposed treatment of on -site stormwater complies with the
requirements of Section 406 and that its proposed forms of secondary containment and spill
response plan will adequately protect against toxic or hazardous materials discharges or spills.
Protocols to ensure compliance with the Bylaw requirements from the Building Department and
Board of Health proposed during the Site Plan Review on October 31, 2023, were discussed. The
Petitioner addressed a Board of Health Site Plan Review Comment that indicated car washing
was prohibited on -site. Petitioner noted this comment from the Board of Health was superseded
by the Memorandum dated April 8, 2024, which indicated that the Board of Health unanimously
recommended Petitioner's proposed uses including the indoor car washing of company vehicles.
This Board was impressed with the thoughtful Memorandum drafted by Carl E. Lawson Jr., the
Hazardous Waste Inspector from the Board of Health, and was satisfied that the imposition of the
conditions and regulations recited in the Memorandum, that the proposal would meet the
requirements under the Bylaw for the issuance of a Special Permit. As such, the Memorandum is
hereby incorporated herein in its entirety.
VARIANCES:
The Petitioner next addressed the four (4) requests for Variances. The Petitioner began by
discussing the creation of the property through an Approval Not Required ("ANR") plan on June
1, 2007. The Petitioner explained that although the property had the requisite frontage and lot
area at the time of its creation, zoning relief is required for essentially any business use of the
property given the narrow portion of its unique "flag" shape. The Petitioner expressed that
despite the requests for relief, the proposed development attempts to meet the intent of the
Zoning Bylaw to the extent possible.
Section 301.4.3 of the Bylaw has a requirement that the driveway shall be comprised of two (2)
travel lanes each not having more than twelve ( l 2) feet nor less than ten (10) feet in width. The
Petitioner demonstrated it is proposing a paved driveway totaling sixteen (16) feet in width
which would allow two (2) travel lanes each having a width of eight (8) feet. In addition to the
paved driveway, one (1) foot of crushed stone is proposed to be added on both sides of the paved
driveway, increasing the width of each travel lane to nine (9) feet, and increasing the total width
of the driveway to eighteen (18) feet. The Petitioner demonstrated that these proposed widths
were shared with the Fire Department for their input and that the Fire Department requested a
fire hydrant in the landscaped island of the parking lot. A fire hydrant is proposed per the Fire
Department's specifications.
Section 301.4.9 of the Bylaw has a requirement that lots in B3 Districts containing a business or
industrial use shall include a twenty (20) foot wide buffer along those boundaries of the lot
which are adjacent to a way. The Petitioner demonstrated that it cannot meet this requirement
given the shape of the lot and the boundaries of the lot adjacent to Corporation Road. Meeting
these 20' buffers on either side of the driveway entrance abutting Corporation Road would
impact and negatively affect the driveway travel lane widths and impact sightlines for vehicles
A TRUE COPY ATTEST. .
3
L1�G l"u M1iIRiC
.,MAY-. �,
Bk 36398 Pg227 #21465
turning in and out of the lot. The Petitioner presented evidence indicating it was meeting the
intent of the Bylaw by adding landscaping along those front boundary lines adjacent to
Corporation Road, while preserving available driveway travel lane width and promoting safe
sightlines for vehicles turning in and out of the lot.
Section 301.4.9 of the Bylaw has a requirement that lots in B3 Districts containing a business or
industrial use shall include ten (10) foot wide buffers along the boundaries of the lot not adjacent
to a way. The Petitioner demonstrated that the 10' landscape buffers cannot be met along the
narrow portion of the "flag" shape of the lot. The Petitioner demonstrated it is attempting to meet
the intent of the Bylaw by proposing a b' tall solid fence along the westerly boundary of the
narrow portion of the lot. The Petitioner indicated that a 10' landscape buffer exists on the
property of 17 Corporation Road along the easterly boundary of the narrow portion of the lot.
Petitioner opined that when this 10' buffer is fully grown in, it will screen the subject property
from 17 Corporation Road. The Petitioner demonstrated that there is a natural, existing landscape
buffer behind the proposed building that sufficiently meets the 10' width requirement. Petitioner
will leave this natural landscape buffer and along the easterly boundary of the lot undisturbed.
The Petitioner demonstrated that it will add 10' landscape buffers around the remaining
boundaries of the lot which presently have no vegetation. The Evergreens will be between 10'-
15' planted height and be spaced approximately twenty-two feet apart and be a considerable
improvement over the current landscaping conditions.
Section 203.5 has a requirement of a minimum thirty-foot (30') rear setback. The Petitioner
described that until recently it was believed that the easterly boundary line of the property was
the "rear" boundary line and that the proposed building easily complied with the thirty (30) foot
rear setback requirement. The Petitioner described that in March of 2024, the Building
Commissioner commented that upon further review the easterly boundary line was a side
boundary line and that the "rear" boundary line was the southernmost boundary line of the
property. The Petitioner concurred with the Building Commissioner's determination, hence the
request for relief.
The Petitioner demonstrated that the proposed building did not meet the rear setback requirement
by three and one-half (3.5) feet. The Petitioner indicated that given the unique shape of the lot,
the building cannot be moved north three and one half (3.5) feet without interfering with the ten
(10) foot side yard setback or the ten (10) foot landscape buffer between the proposed building
and the property located at 17 Corporation Road. The Petitioner presented evidence that the
property located to the south of the property was a fully wooded, Town -owned lot. The
Petitioner indicated that according to Assessor's records, the Town foreclosed on this Lot in
1980 from its former owner "John Doe." The Petitioner stated that no book or page references
are available on the Assessor's card, which separately noted that the lot as being "landlocked".
The Petitioner indicated to the ZBA that the reference to "landlocked" could mean the lot does
not have sufficient frontage to be a buildable lot.
The Petitioner concluded its presentation of the criteria needed to support its request for Special
Permit relief and Variance relief. Upon completion of Petitioner's presentation, the Vice Chair of
the Zoning Board of Appeals asked if anyone from the public was present to speak either in
favor of the requested relief or in opposition. Dan Ojala, P.E. of Down Cape Engineering spoke
A TRUE COPY ATTEST.
4
MAY 31 a��3
Bk 36398 Pg228 #21465
in favor of the petition and indicated that the subject property was created in anticipation of
requiring zoning relief. Dan Ojala commented that the property of 18 Enterprise Road had the
benefit of a Variance of Section 301.4.9 related to landscape buffers, and that relief of the
landscape buffer requirement for the subject property would be in keeping with the immediate
area. Dan Ojala also presented a letter given to him by Siddarth Siddarth, Trustee of the Cloud
Five Trust. The Letter contained the names, addresses, telephone numbers of eight (8) property
owners indicating their support of the Petitioner's proposal. The letter was accepted by the ZBA
and marked received at hearing. The Vice Chair then closed public comment.
The ZBA commenced Board discussions of the merits of the Petitioners' requests for the Special
Permit and Variances. The Members were pleased with the Petitioner's efforts in their attempts
to meet the spirit and intent of the Bylaw given the practical limitations set forth by the shape of
the subject property. Members were also satisfied with the thorough vetting that this proposal has
had with the Board of Health. The Board agreed that the relief could be addressed through the
Special Permit and Variances as requested.
Regarding the requests for Variances, the Board agreed that a literal enforcement of the
provisions of this Bylaw would involve a substantial hardship financial or otherwise, to the
petitioner or appellant, that the hardship is owing to circumstances relating to the shape of the
subject property, especially affecting the land but not affecting generally the zoning district in
which it is located, and that desirable relief may be granted without either: substantial detriment
to the public good; or nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent or purpose of this
Bylaw.
Regarding the request for Special Permit, the Board agreed that no undue nuisance, hazard or
congestion will be created and that there will be no substantial harm to the established or future
character of the neighborhood or town. The Board was appreciative of the thoughtful work of
Carl E. Lawson Jr., and to the Board of Health in vetting the proposed uses and found that the
additional Special Permit requirements of Section 406 have been met.
Vice Chair Sean Igoe proposed that a Motion be made to take up all four (4) requested Variances
and another Motion be made regarding the requested Special Permit. A Motion was then made
by Jay Fraprie to approve all the Variance relief requested. John Mantoni seconded the motion.
A roll call vote was taken on this Motion with the following results:
Mr. Igoe- Aye
Mr. Fraprie- Aye
Mr. Mantoni- Aye
Ms. Murphy- Aye
Mr. Panebianco- Aye
Accordingly, the requested Variances were approved on a 5-0 vote in favor.
A second Motion was made by Jay Fraprie to approve the Special Permit as requested. John
Mantoni seconded the motion. Vice Chair Sean Igoe suggested that Jay Fraprie's Motion also
require that the conditions of the Memorandum be made conditions of the Special.Permit. Jay
A TRUE C0P�C ATTEST•
6i
�.:�ti..g/iv i� il.��fill�l l►t..:t : �
MAY � �-2023
Bk 36398 Pg229 #21465
Fraprie offered this revised Motion, John Mantoni seconded the Motion, and a roll call vote was
taken:
Mr. Igoe- Aye
Mr. Fraprie- Aye
Mr. Mantoni- Aye
Ms. Murphy- Aye
Mr. Panebianco- Aye
Accordingly, the Special Permit was approved with conditions on a 5-0 vote in favor.
CONDITIONS:
l . The Memorandum of Carl Lawson dated April 8, 2024 is incorporated in its entirety and
the conditions set forth therein are conditions of the Special Permit.
2. Each contractor bay unit will be required to obtain its own Certificate of Occupancy. This
condition applies to all granted relief.
3. Any change in ownership or use of a contractor bay unit will require the issuance of a
new Certificate of Occupancy. This condition applies to all granted relief.
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).
S7S--Z: ---.
Sean Igoe, Vice Chair
CERTIFICATION OF TOWN CLERK
1, Mary A. Maslowski, Town Clerk, Town of Yarmouth, do hereby certify that 20 days have
elapsed since the filing with me of the above Board of Appeals Decision #5100 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.
I
Mary A. Maslowski, CMC MAY 3 12023
A TRUE COPY ATTEST.
FudIX444 -
S���Cbf71C�RI3�IR9 OF DEEDS
RECEIVY RO�Dto23ECTRONICALLY