Loading...
31B-273 (3) City of Northampton, Massachusetts O¢��xpTO Office of Planning and Development * � . City Hall • 210 MaIn Street ai ( ��-' • Northampton, MA 01060 • (413) 586-6950 N � # FAX (413) 586-3726 x ; t' • Community and Economic Development DEPT LD!Nw •� ��•�;- • Conservation • Historic Preservation NORTIIAPIPTON MAG1000 ' • !-. 0, • Planning Board • Zoning Board of Appeals • Northampton Parking Commission DECISION OF NORTHAMPTON ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS APPLICANT: LILLY AND BENNETT GAEV ADDRESS: 608 WESTHAMPTON ROAD, NORTHAMPTON, MA 01060 OWNER: MARY AND KENNETH O'BRIEN ADDRESS: 38 TERRACE LANE, NORTHAMPTON, MA 01060 RE LAND OR BUILDINGS IN NORTHAMPTON AT: 9 CENTER COURT ASSESSOR'S MAP and PARCEL NUMBERS: MAP #31B PARCEL # 273 At a meeting conducted on January 18 , 1995 the Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals unanimously voted 3 : 0 to GRANT the request of LILLY AND BENNETT GAEV for a FINDING under the provisions of Section 9 . 3 (2) (B) in the Northampton Zoning Ordinance to allow a change in use of a pre-existing, non-conforming building and lot at 9 Center Court. Zoning Board Members present and voting were: Chairman Peter Laband, Members M. Sanford Weil, Jr. and Alex Ghiselin. The Findings of the Board under Section 9 . 3 (2) (B) for a change in use of a Pre-existing non-conforming structure and lot were as follows: 1. The Board found that the change in use will not be substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood than the existing non-conforming use. The new use, as a psycho- therapy practice, will be a conforming use in the Central Business District. 2 . The Board found that the change in use will not create a new violation of the existing zoning requirements because the new use conforms to the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance for allowable uses in a Central Business District. Conditions imposed with this Finding are as follows: 1. The applicant shall advise all clients that parking is not allowed on Center Court. 2 . The three parking spaces that currently exist shall be maintained so that the parking problems do not increase. ORIGINAL PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER Pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws (MGL) Chapter 40A, Section 11, no Finding or any extension, modification or renewal thereof, shall take effect until a copy of the decision bearing the certification of the Cit 4Clerk that twenty days have elapsed after the decision has been filed, or if such an appeal has been filed that it has been dismissed or denied, is recorded in the Hampshire County Registry of Deeds or Land Court, as applicable, and indexed 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. It is the owner or applicant's responsibility to pick up a the certified decision of the City Clerk and record it at the Registry of Deeds. The Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals hereby certifies that a Finding has been GRANTED and that copies of this decision and all plans referred to in it have been filed with the Planning Board and the City Clerk. Pursuant to Massachusetts General Law Chapter 40A, Section 15, notice is hereby given that this decision is filed with the Northampton City Clerk on the date below. If you wish to appeal this action, your appeal must be filed pursuant to MGL Chapter 40A Section 17, with the Hampshire County Superior Court and notice of this appeal filed with the City Clerk within twenty (20) days of the date this decision was filed with the City Clerk. Applicant: LILLY AND BENNETT GAEV - 9 CENTER COURT Decision Date: January 18, 1995 Decision Filed with the City Clerk on: January 19, 1995 ra CR- Peter Laband, Chairman (‹: 6;1'/SC( Alex Ghiselin M. Sanf rd Weil, Jr. -2- City of Northampton, Massachusetts ¢� pT Office of Planning and Development • City Hall • 210 Main Street ak I= lit A Northampton, MA 01060 • (413) 586-6950 l44 aw" FAX (413) 586-3726 4 War • Community and Economic Development f•� _•� • Conservation •Historic Preservation _Sr*+ • Planning Board • Zoning Board of Appeals �' • Northampton Parking Commission Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting Minutes January 18 , 1995 The Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals met on Wednesday, January 18 , 1995 in Council Chambers, Wallace J. Puchalski Municipal Building, 212 Main Street, Northampton. In attendance were Chairman Peter Laband, Vice Chair M. Sanford Weil, Jr. , Member Alex Ghiselin, Senior Planner Paulette L. Kuzdeba, and Board Secretary Mary Martineau. Chair Laband called the meeting to order at 7 : 05 p.m. Minutes of January 18 , 1995 Zoning Board of Appeals meeting M. Sanford Weil, Jr. moved to approve the minutes as submitted. Alex Ghiselin seconded the motion which passed unanimously 3 : 0 . Chair Laband opened the Public Hearing on the request of Lilly and Bennett Gaev for a Finding under §9 . 3 of the Zoning Ordinance for a change in use of a pre-existing, non-conforming structure in the Central Business District at 9 Center Court. Present and sitting on the case were: Chairman Peter Laband, Members M. Sanford Weil, Jr. and Member Alex Ghiselin. A Legal Notice of this public hearing was published in the Daily Hampshire Gazette on January 4 , 1995 and January 11, 1995. Chair Laband said that the only correspondence received was from the DPW who had reviewed the application and expressed no concerns regarding the proposed change in use. Chair Laband reviewed procedures for conducting public hearings. M. Sanford Weil, Jr. read aloud a memo he had sent to Mayor Ford which stated: Have hearing 1/18 PM on request to change in use of structure at 9 Center Court, Northampton from residential to mixed occupancy. Am Treasurer of organization which owns abutting structure, but find that I have no conflict of interest and am neutral regarding approval or denial of request. ORIGINAL PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER i Mayor Ford responded as follows: I find that your interest in this matter as a member of the Masonic Lodge should not interfere with your impartiality. I hereby grant you permission to participate in the permitting process for 9 Center Court. Dr. Laband explained that, due to a recent Ordinance change, a Finding decision need not be a unanimous vote but needs only a two out of three vote to pass. Lilly and Bennett Gaev were both present to discuss the application for a change in use. Lilly Gaev said that the proposed use is for counseling offices, and stated: We are an established psychotherapy practice. We do not provide emergency, walk-in, or community after-care services. There will be an average of 4 people per hour entering or leaving the premises by appointment only. There is no noise associated with our business. There are no alterations planned to the exterior of the building. There are very minimal changes planned for the interior and they are in keeping with the traditional nature of the house and neighborhood. There will be no additional automobile traffic since our clients have always used street and garage parking with our current Main Street location. The three existing parking places will be limited to three Therapeutic Associates, P.C. staff persons. We have no need for deliveries of any kind. We maintain Monday through Friday business hours, with some early evening use. The building at 53 Center Street, which abuts 9 Center Court has been used in a similar fashion for many years. Our change of use will be from a non-conforming to a conforming use for Central Business zoning. Dr. Laband reviewed the Off-Street Parking Requirements under §8 . 1 (2) and found that the applicant met the requirements as outlined on page 8-1 of the Zoning Ordinance. Dr. laband asked if anyone was present to support the application: Maggie O'Brien, the current owner of 9 Center Court, was present to support the applicant's request for a Finding. Dr. laband asked if anyone was present tin opposition to the application: Floyd Andrus, 81 Lake Street, Florence, who owns property on Center Court, said he was concerned about extra traffic that may be generated by a new business use of the property. Although Andrus said he did not actually object to the business, he was concerned about the lack of parking availability. Andrus also expressed concern about whether emergency vehicles would be able to get through the site. He said that if people are late for an appointment, they may be more apt to park as close as possible to their destination regardless of whether parking is allowed or not. Lilly Gaev said she will be on the site everyday and will be responsible for telling all the clients that there is no parking available on the site. Gaev said that the DPW had already approved the driveway for the property. She further noted that the change in use will not negatively impact the neighborhood, and will in fact change from a pre-existing, non-conforming use to a conforming use. Further discussion ensued, with all participating, on the problems of parking downtown and of policing illegal parking. It was noted that Center Court is a private way and not a public street, and therefore, the ZBA has no jurisdiction over the parking situation. Julia Andrus, 20 Center Court, expressed concern about the parking situation and worried that people would drive into the property and than have to drive to the end of Center Court before turning around in a really tight area, which would result in a safety problem for both pedestrians and other traffic. Andrus said she thought that the increase in traffic might prove to be substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood than the previous residential use. M. Sanford Weil suggested that the neighbors investigate the possibility of putting up a sign to show that parking is prohibited. Camille Balestli of 16 Center Court expressed concern about the possible increase in traffic. She said she hates to see the balance of residential and business in the Central Business District be changed since she feels that a healthy mix is crucial to a healthy downtown. Lilly Gaev said that she does not need visibility for the business since all appointments are arranged through the main office in Longmeadow. She assured the neighbors on Center Court that she and her husband would be happy to work with them to help improve the parking and traffic problems in the area. Alex Ghiselin moved to close the Public Hearing. M. Sanford Weil, Jr. seconded the motion which passed unanimously 3: 0 M. Sanford Weil reviewed §9 . 3 (1) (D) for a change in use of a pre- existing, non-conforming structure in a Central Business zone from a residential use which was a pre-existing, non-conforming use to a business use which is a conforming use in the district. Weil said 'that the ZBA needed to find that the new use will not be substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood than the -3- e previous use. Weil said he was satisfied that the applicant's proposal will not be more detrimental than the previous use and said he was prepared to vote in favor of granting the Finding. Alex Ghiselin said he agreed with Weil and would also vote in favor. He noted that he recognized the opposition, but did not agree with the argument that the change in use would increase problems with traffic and parking in the area. Ghiselin acknowledged that parking downtown is a problem for everyone. Dr. Laband said he agreed with his colleagues and would vote in favor of granting the Finding since the change in use will not be more detrimental to the neighborhood than the previous use. He noted that the downtown parking problem is very difficult, if not impossible, to solve. Laband suggested that a condition be imposed upon the Finding that: 1. The three parking spaces that currently exist shall be maintained so that the parking problems do not increase. Alex Ghiselin moved to grant the Finding without any conditions. M. Sanford Weil, Jr. suggested an amendment to the motion to add the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall advise all clients that parking is not allowed on Center Court. 2 . The three parking spaces that currently exist shall be maintained so that the parking problems do not increase. Alex Ghiselin accepted the amendment to his motion and the motion passed with a unanimous vote of 3: 0. M. Sanford Weil, Jr. moved to adjourn the ZBA meeting at 8: 00 P.M. Alex Ghiselin seconded the motion which passed unanimously 3: 0.