Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLegal Document - 56 CHURCH STREET 3/22/2017 LAW OFFICE OF MATTHEW A. CAFFREY, P. C . THOMAS F. CAFFREY 93 MAIN STREET, SUITE 2 1 1 MATTHEW A. CAFFREY* ANDOVER, MA 01 8 V o SAMER OBEID 978-475-0043 FAx 978-475-0049 i E-MAIL: MCAFFREY(4)CAFFREYLAWC7FFICE.COM *ALSO ADMITTED IN N.H, a March 22, 2017 AGGRIEVED PARTY'S REQUEST FOR SPECIFIC FINDINGS Albert P. Manzi, 111, Esq. North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals North Andover Town Hall 120 Main 'Street North Andover, MA 01845 RE: Request for Specific Findings 56-58 Church Street,North Andover, MA (the "Property") Dear Chairman Manzi: As you ]snow, I represent Edward G. Kollen, the owner of the above-referenced property (the "Aggrieved Party"). In furtherance of our Appeal (already filed with the Board), please � consider this a Request for Specific Findings by the Board in this case: 1. The Condition of the Property The personal property which was observed by the Building Inspector during his site visit on December 20, 2010, was personal property belonging to the Aggrieved Party, and not f "refuse and debris," as claimed by the Building Inspector. In any case, the Board finds that such personal property has since been removed by the Aggrieved Party. 1 i Accordingly, the Board finds that this basis for issuance of a Cease and Desist Order is not supported by the facts, and the Building Inspector's Order is hereby reversed by the Board for this reason.. 2. Parking of Commercial Vehicle in Front of the Property During his site visit on December 20, 2016, the Building Inspector observed a commercial vehicle parked in front of the Property. The vehicle is owned by the Aggrieved Party, The Building Inspector olid not cite to any rule or regulation of the Bylaw which would prohibit such parking. The Board finds that such parking of a commercial vehicle is not in violation of the Bylaw, as claimed by the Building Inspector. LAW OFFICE OF MATTHEW A. CAFFREY, P.C. Albert P. Manzi, 111, Esq. March 22, 2017 Page -2- Accordingly, to the extent the Building Inspector's Order was based on this claim, it is reversed by the Board. 3. Zoning Status / Permitted Use/ Groundskeeping Business The Building Inspector erred when applying the Bylaw to the current use of the subject Property, which is operated as a groundskeeping business. A "gro unds keep i ng business" is an allowed use in the General Business District because it is a "mercantile activity, not involving manufacturing." Section 4.131(1).' It involves or relates to the "trade" of landscaping. Further, under the Summary of Use Regulations, the office which the Aggrieved Party operates at the Property for his business is allowed, as of right, because it qualifies Linder the heading "Business & other offices." Accordingly, for these reasons, the Building Inspector's Order that the Aggrieved Party is not permitted to operate his business at the Property is hereby reversed by the Board. 4. Zoning Status /Permitted Use/Contractor's Yard The Building Inspector erred when applying the Bylaw to the current use of the subject Property to store vehicles and equipment related to the Aggrieved Party's Business. The Aggrieved Party operates a contractor's yard at the Property for his landscaping business, which includes the storage of vehicles and equipment related to his business. Those vehicles, and related equipment, were noted by the Building Inspector during his site visit on December 20, 2016. Under the Bylaw's '"I'able of Uses, a"contractor's yard" is a permitted use, as of right. Accordingly, for these reasons, the Building Inspector's Order is hereby reversed by the Board to the extent it relates to the storage of commercial vehicles, and equipment at the Property which are used in the Aggrieved Party's business. 5. Zoning Status / Pre-Existing, Non-Conforming Use The Building Inspector erred when applying the Bylaw to the current use of the subject Property because that use constitutes a pre-existing, non-conforming use under the Bylaw. The Aggrieved Party has submitted testimony that he has operated his landscaping I I)amition of -mercantile"for English Language I,,earnee•s:of or relating to the business of buying and selling products to earn nioncy: of or relating to trade or merchants. Menlam-Webster Dictionary(On-Line), littl)s://wwtN,,iiiet-riaiii-webster.coiii/dictioii,ii,y/iiierc,iiitile(cnii)hasis added). I-Aw OFFICE OF MATTHEW A. CAFFREY, P.C. Albert P. Manzi, 111, Esq. March 22, 2017 Page -3- business continuously at the Property since 1976. The Board finds this testimony credible. Based on these facts, the Aggrieved Party's use as a landscaping business and contractor's yard is grandfathered Linder the Bylaw as a pre-existing, non-conforming use, and the Building Inspector's Order is hereby reversed by the Board for this sepal-ate and independent reason. 6. Penalties for Violations The Building Inspector erred when applying the Bylaw when he referred to the penalties which may be imposed against the Aggrieved Party to include a"$1,000 fine" ror each day the alleged violations continue under the Massachusetts Building Code (8,f' Ed.). Pursuant to Section 1.0.13, the Penalty for any violation of the provisions of the Bylaw is $300 for each day that the violation continues. In any case, the Board finds no such violations have occurred in this case. Very truly yours, Matthew affrey