22

Page 22 THE EVERETT ADVOCATE – FRiDAy, ApRil 8, 2022 ~ LEGAL NOTICE ~ CITY OF EVERETT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 484 BROADWAY, ROOM 24 EVERETT, MASSACHUSETTS 02149 617-394-2498 To Whom It May Concern: This notice is to inform you that a public hearing will be held on Tuesday April 19, 2022 at 6:00 PM, Everett City Hall, 3rd Floor George Keverian Hearing Room. All interested parties may attend and opinions will be heard regarding the following petition. Whereas a petition has been presented by: Property Address: 19-21 Cedar Street Map/Lot: B0-01-000073 Person Requesting: Mr. Charanjit Singh Ms. Ranjit Kaur 17 Rock Valley Street Everett, MA 02149 PROPOSAL: The applicant seeks to convert the existing 2 family residence built approximately in 1894 into a 3-family residence by adding an additional floor. Reason for Denial: Permit was denied in accordance to the City of Everett Zoning Ordinance Appendix A as follows: • The existing building is shown to be non-conforming in that the front yard is only 5.9 feet the left side which is the corner is only 1.4 feet, Side Yard Total of 14.8 feet and the rear yard is only 22 feet • The FAR (floor area ratio) for the proposed use is 1.5 • Parking is shown to be in the side yard (corner) setback. • Parking is shown to be within 8 feet of a window on the first floor • The proposed parking spaces are shown to be stacked parked • Parking is shown to be backing out into the street Zoning: Section 3 General Requirements paragraph C which states the following: Existing non-conforming structure or uses may be extended or altered, provided that such extension, alteration or change of use shall be permitted only upon the grant of a Special Permit by the zoning board of appeals after a public hearing and a finding by the board that such extension, alteration or change of use shall not be substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood than the existing non-conforming use or structure. (Ord. of 4-29-91) For Reference of the Non-Conforming Structure Section 4 Dwelling Districts b) Dimensional Requirements: 4. Front Yard: Twenty (20) feet minimum except where the average front yard of a least two (2) buildings on the same side of the street and within two hundred (200) feet of the lot are less than twenty (20) feet, and the front yard may be equal to the average of those buildings but not less than ten (10) feet. Porches may encroach ten (10) feet onto the required front yard. Stairs shall be excluded from any front yard restrictions. (Ord. of 6-29-87) 5. Corner Lots: Seven (7) feet minimum on one (1) side of the corner. (Ord. of 6-29-87) 6. Side Yard: a. Four (4) feet minimum with a total of sixteen (16) feet b. Garages and sheds—Two (2) feet minimum (Ord. of 6-29-87) 7. Rear Yard: a. Twenty-five (25) feet minimum, except for open decks and porches which may encroach into the required rear yard providing that in no case shall the rear yard be less than fifteen (15) feet measured to any part of the porch or deck. Section 4 Dwelling Districts (b) Dimensional Requirements line C. All other uses--------------0.5 maximum floor area ratio (Ord. of 6-29-87; Ord. of 4-29-91 Ord. of 7/16/2002; Ord. of 11/13/2007) Section 17 Off-Street Parking paragraph K which states the following: K. Parking facilities shall be designed so that no vehicles shall be parked nearer to any street lines than the minimum specified building setback for the Zoning District in which the parking facility is located. Section 17 Off-Street Parking paragraph J which states the following: Parking facilities shall be designed so that each motor vehicle may proceed to and from the parking space provided for it without requiring the moving of any other motor vehicle. The Board of Appeals, however, may by special permit modify this requirement and the dimensional requirements of paragraph (I) of this section, where a parking facility is under full-time attendant supervision Section 17 Off-Street Parking paragraph M which states the following: M. No parking stall shall be located within eight (8) feet of any window of habitable rooms in the basement or first story level of any building. Section 17 Off-Street Parking paragraph O line 4 which states the following: 4. Except for one- and two-family dwellings, parking shall be designed so that it is not necessary to drive over sidewalks or curbs or to back into the street or driveway. Mary Gerace - Chairman Roberta Suppa - Clerk Board of Appeals April 1 & April 8, 2022 BEACON | FROM PAGE 21 take more and more money out of their budgets to try and keep up with the increasingly poor road conditions. This and schools are usually the biggest factors in property taxes going up. Again, I believe this issue needs to be one of our top priorities at the Statehouse.” Opponents noted that the package already contains $200 million for roads and bridges and an additional $150 million for other local transportation projects. They said that the current formula, created decades ago, for distribution of the funds is considered unfair by many cities and towns. They argued the House should wait until an attempt is made to change the formula so that the additional $25 million will be distributed in a fairer manner. Rep. Bill Strauss (D-Mattapoisett), the House chair of the Transportation Committee and the sponsor of the bill, did not respond to repeated requests from Beacon Hill Roll Call for a comment. (A “Yes” vote is for the $25 million. A “No” vote is against the $25 million). Rep. Joseph McGonagle No “CROWN ACT” - FORBID DISCRIMINATION AGAINST A PERSON WITH A NATURAL HAIRSTYLE (S 2796) Senate 40-0, approved a bill that would prohibit any person or entity including educational institutions, workplaces and public spaces from implementing any policy that would explicitly target someone who wears their natural hairstyle. The measure defines natural hairstyle as hair texture, hair type and protective hairstyles including braids, locks, twists and other formations. The House has approved a different version of the measure and the Senate version now goes to the House for consideration. “Today’s passage of the Crown Act is a symbol from the Massachusetts Legislature that we stand with women of color who have experienced hair discrimination,” said Sen. Adam Gomez (D-Springfield). “As a father to young women of color this legislation means a great deal to me, but legislation is just the first step. In order to change hearts and minds, you have to ensure that people know that this exists, that it is deeply wrong and that it is something that many women of color have … experience with.” “On the long march toward justice, and especially racial justice, the Senate’s unanimous passage of this legislation marks another step forward,” said Sen. BEACON | SEE PAGE 23

23 Publizr Home


You need flash player to view this online publication