Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCorrespondence - 56 CHURCH STREET 5/3/2017 (2) xyk� r d ,`. � E Town of North Andover Building Department Community& Economic Development Division 120 Main Street North Andover, Massachusetts 01845 P(978)6889545 I+(978)688-9542 May 3, 2017 Edward G. Kollen 56 Church Street North Andover MA, 01845 RE: Edward G. Kollen; 56 Church Street,North Andover, MA 01.845 MAP 41 LOT 40 ZONE GB Dear Mr. Caffrey, Per our conversation after the ZBA meeting 03-14-2017 reference two letters; 1) Law Office of Matthew A. Caffrey, P.C. DATED February 24, 2017, stated"Property is a duplex, there are two (2) separate addresses involved: 56 Church Street and 58 Church Street. The rental unit is located at 56 Church Street. As discussed, that unit is presently not occupied." 2) Law Office of Matthew A. Caffrey, P.C. DATED March 10, 20 17, stated"The house contains three (3)units, two (2) of which are rental units, and one in which Mr. Kollen resides." Zoning Bylaw Town of North Andover, Table 1: Surrunary of Use Regulations; Multi-Family Dwellings &Apts N (NOT ALLOWED). The expansion of a Legal Nonconforming use (Two (2) family to a Three (3) family) would require a variance Zoning:Board of Appeals (ZBA). The aforementioned constructed without the proper permitting constitutes a 8th Edition of the Massachusetts State Building Code, 780 CMR., and is subject to $1000.00 fine, each day constitute a new violation until the violation is resolved. In addition this is also a violation of the Zoning Bylaw of The Town of North Andover section 10.:13, subiect to a fine of$300.00, each day that such violation continues shall be considered a separate offense. International Building Code (IBC) 2009 Section 114, with Massachusetts Amendments 780 CMR 8th Edition The Town of North Andover 'Zoning Bylaw Section 4.131. You are hereby ordered to Cease and Desist the aforementioned violation and report to the Building Department upon receiving this letter to resolve any and all violations to include the following but not limited to: 1) Schedule an onsite inspection with the Building Official, Health Inspector, and Fire Prevention Officer, 2) Provide floor plans to scale, label all space including common areas etc... 3) A Plot Plan, stamped by a registered land surveyor, showing all structures and off street parking for the units 3�wl Donald Belanger Inspector of Buildings/ Zoning Enforcement Officer cc: Law Office of Matthew A. Caffrey,P.C. 93 Main Street, Suite 211 Andover, MA 0181 Q MCAFFEY@CAFFREYLAW OFFICE.COM Monday -. July 199 1971 Regular Meeting - 2 Hearings The BOARD OF APPEALS held its regular meeting on Monday evening, July 19, 1971 at 7:30 P.M. in the Town Office Building with the following members present and voting: Philip Arsenault, Esq.t Chairman; Kenneth E. Pickard, Vice Chairman; Arthur R. Drummond and Associate Members William N. Salemme and Atty. Joseph A. Mi.ragliotta who sat in place of regular members Dr. Beliveau and Frank Serio who were unable to attend. There were 10 people present for the 2 hearings of the evening. Bill Plante the Eagle-Tribune reporter was also present. 1. HEARIMt Edward H. Bollen Mr. Pickard read the legal notice in the appeal of Edward H. Kallen who re-- quested a variation of Seco 4.11 of the Zoning By-Law so as to permit the re- modeling of one side of a duplex dwelling to two apartments; on the premises located at the north side of Church Street, 113.13 feet from the corner of Water Street and known as 58 Church Street. Mr. Koll.en appeared on his own behalf and explained that he wants to make two small apartments on one side of the duplex building. He presently lives on the other side and will make no changes there. He said he will conform to all requirements of the Zoning By-Law and that there is a need for apartments in town. There is a 3--stall garage on the lot that is fully occupied. Building Inspector Foster said he would meet the requirements as to the exits. Mr. Bollen showed the floor plans to the Board and said there would be no change to the exterior of the dwelling. Frederick Redmant an abutter$ said he had no objection to the petition. No one else spoke and there was no opposition. Mr. Pickard made a motion to take the petition under advisement; Atty. Miragliotta seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. 2. HEARIIU: Trinitarian Congregational Church. Mr. Pickard read the legal notice in the appeal of Trinitarian Congregational Church requesting a variation of Sec. 7.23 of the Zoning By-Law so as to permit the erection of a youth activities building nearer the lot line than is allowed under the Zoning BY-Law; on the premises located at 72 Elm Street and the corners of Church and Cross Streets. Robert W. Friis, chairman of the trustees for the church, represented the petitioner. The church is asking for a variance to permit the location of the youth activities center on the rear of the church property, to be located 20 feet from Church Street and 5 feet from the Redman lot line. This building would cover less than 4% of the total area of the propertyt which is 45,600 sq. ft. He presented a brief history of the former scout cabin, which is presently one foot from the Redman property line. He said the sills and interior have deterior ated so that meetings cannot be held in the building any longer. Mr. Friis distributed a brochure depicting the future plans of the church. He said families of the scouts and the church people will help with the labor. He explained that the placing of the building in this particular location was necessary in order to avoid hardship and practical difficulties in � i l tl I Ju1Y 19, 1971 -- cont. providing parking and gaining access to the rear entrance of the church building. The placing of the building on the lot as planned does not derogate from the purpose and intent of the Zoning By—Law and would not be detrimental to the neighborhood since there now exist other structures in the immediate area that are as close to the lot line as this proposed building. A literal enforcement of the side yard bylaw requiring more than 5 feet will cause a hardship and, practical difficulties in pro— viding parking and gaining access to the rear entrance of an expanded church building. The relief sought by approval of this variance will be desirable and without sub— stantial detriment to the public good. John. Robinson* Mass. Ave.t spoke in favor of the petition, as representing the Boy Scout troops and as a member of the church. Speaking in opposition was Atty. Maurice Schwartzr who represented Frederick Redmang an immediate abutter. Atty. Schwartz explained that Mr. Redman is also a member of the church and approves of the church activities but he wants to be protected as a property owner. There is no hardship of any kind involved and the building can be placed 15 feet from the lot line and stall leave ample parking and expansion area for the church. Discussion was held as to whether the petitioner and Mr. Redman could compromise as to the 5 foot setback. Mr. Friis said they would. Atty. Schwartz said they Wouldn't object to 15 feet from the lot line. Discussion was then held as to which was the .front and rear of the lot and it was determined that the church faces Elm Street making Elm Street the front lot line and Church Street the rear lot line. Mr. Pickard trade a motion to take the petition under advisement; Mr. Drummond seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. EARTH REMOVAL PERMIT: Hereford Corporation A letter was received from Atty. John J. Willist representing Hereford Corp., requesting renewal of the earth removal permit for the pit on Boxford Street. Mr. Arsenault read the original decision to the.memmbers to familiarize them with the situation since different Board members sat on the original petition. He explained that the bond that was submitted is a continuous one and is valid. He read a letter from the Building Inspector who had inspected the site and reported to the Board. He said he was concerned because no attempt has been made to dispose of the trees that have been knocked down. The area is still strewn with huge boulders and no attempt has been made to cover them on to replace any of the top soil in any area of the pit. (at its next mCl.) Atty, Miragli.otta made a motion to have the petitioner come before the Board/to explain the items outlined in the Building Inspector's letter. Mr. Pickard seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. The Board then discussed the hearings held earlier in the evening. 1. KOLLEN: Mr. Pickard made a motion to GRANT the variance; Atty. Miragliotta seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. July 19, 1971 -- cont. 2. Trinitarian. Congregational Church: Atty. Mir liotta made a motion to ag grant the rear lot line variance to 20 Feet but DMY the sideline variance of 5 feet. Mr. Drummond seconded tete motion and the vote Was unanimous. The meeting adjourned at 9:00 P.M. Chairman Philip Arsena t Secretary Anna Donahue