SAUGUS — The Zoning Board of Appeals heard from resident Donna Fazio Thursday night as she was seeking a special permit for her property on Biscayne Avenue or a family accessory dwelling in a finished basement.
Fazio noted that she is not looking to have a family dwelling unit, but instead a registered accessory dwelling unit.
Chair Tom Traverse stated that the construction code for a non-family unit is a bit stricter.
“(Building Commissioner) Mike LaVecchia is going to need to go in there and see what needs to be done and get you what needs to be done,” Traverse said.
He continued that he was on Fazio’s side and was looking to get this wrapped up for her.
“I can’t say anything will need to be done. If the unit was in there before and never permitted… He might even have to go as far as to go back and look at the plumbing… and the electricity. So I can’t say that he doesn’t have to open up some wall,” he said.
Fazio noted that LaVecchia had explained this to her, and she was speaking with people to get this looked over.
Traverse stated he didn’t want to keep Fazio stalled and wanted to make sure everything was up to code, so she didn’t have to keep coming back.
“I’d like to almost get it approved tonight if we can… And to make sure that you meet what he (LaVecchia) says has to be done. That way, we’ll approve it for you,” Traverse said. “But you’ll need to make sure you meet the code that he states is required. When you do a non-family accessory unit, it’s strict.”
Board member Chris Riley pointed out that it had been advertised as a family dwelling unit on the agenda and that they may have to advertise it again.
Though there was no one there for public comment, he stated a neighbor could change their mind if they saw it was not a family member moving in.
“I don’t feel terribly strongly about it, but it’s not advertised what’s being presented here,” Riley said.
Board member Stacey Herman-Dorant asked if construction would be needed, to which Traverse said there would most likely be some to meet code. However, the agenda stated no construction would be needed.
“I just don’t think somebody is going to come out if we take out that word family,” Traverse said. He also said that the construction would depend on what the building inspector requires. “We’re overriding that to begin with.”
Riley held firm on it needing to be advertised properly.
“I think it would be more likely that somebody would show up, but again I’ll defer to your opinion on this,” Riley said.
Traverse pointed out that the application sent in did not have family on it, making it an error of the Board on the agenda.
Fazio said she had spoken to all her neighbors and that paperwork had been signed by them to agree to a regular apartment, which now makes it allowed “by right” for Fazio to move forward with the ADU. She stated that she was told to come to the Board and withdraw the application.
Traverse said that they would continue the meeting to next month and ensure it was advertised properly. However, Riley pointed out that since it was now “by right,” this was a matter between Fazio and the building inspector, and the Board did not need to be involved in a vote.
“We don’t have the authority to override it,” Riley said.
The Board accepted the withdrawal, allowing Fazio to deal with LaVecchia and not have to go through the Board unless necessary.
