Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981-12-14December 14, 1981 Regular ~leeting The BOARD OF APPEALS held a regular monthly meeting on Monday eveninp, December 14, 1981 at 7:30 p.m. in the Town Office Meeting Room with the following members present and voting: Frank Serio, Jr., Chairman; Alfred E. Frizelle, Esq., Vice-Chairman; Augustine W. Nickerson; Raymond A. Vivenzio, Esq.,; and Maurice S. Foulds. Associate Member Walter F. Soule and Building Inspector Charles Foster were also present. PUBLIC HEARINGS Ruggiero, Michael Variance request - Wav~rly Road Member Vivenzio read the legal notice. Before the hearing began, it was brought out that Robert and Sally Ann Bryan's names appear on the legal notice and the appli- cation along with Mr. Ruggiero's and the Chairman asked for an explanation. Mr. Bryan was present and explained that he owns Lot B and Mr. Ruggiero owns Lot A. Mr. Bryan will convey a portion of Lot B to create Lot C. Mr. Rup~iero was present and told the Board that because of financial difficulties, he, would like to create a new lot, fronting on Morris Street, behind his home on Waverly Road. His intention is to sell the lot for the construction of a single family dwellinp. He is requesting variances for the area, front set back, and rear set back on the proposed lot in addition to allowing the existing dwellings on Lots A and B to continue to exist. They do not have the required area. Major points by Mr. Ruggiero: - His home needs improvements, which he cannot afford unless he can sell this parcel of land. - He has been informed that becaQse his wiring system contains violations, he could face a fine of $50.00 per day until it is brought up to standard. - The back land is a field and it is too much for him to maintain. - He would like to stay in North Andover. - The back lot is of no use to him. - There was a 4-stall garage which was destroyed in a storm and the debris is all over the lot. - He would not construct a house himself - he would sell the parcel. - He assumes that whoever purchases the land will clean it up. Speaking in favor of the petition were Mrs. Pappalardo and Mr. Ritchie. Both said that whi~e they don't believe it would take a lot of money to clean up the debriS, if this is the only way to improve the property, they will support the petition. Mr. Ritchie added that he would prefer to see the driveway come off Horr~s Street as opposed to Waverly Road. December 14, 1981 -2- Regular Meeting ~ggi~o - continued Speaking in opposition to the petition was Mrs. Blanche Longo, a direct abutter. Letter from the Building Inspector was read and placed on file. MOTION: by Mr. Frizelle to take the matter under advisement. SECOND: by Mr. Nickerson Motion carries unanimously. FARNUrl, BENJAMIN Request for an extension of a S.pecial Permit granted in 1957 and name change on same. Member Vivenzio read the legal notice. Atty. James McInnis was present representing Mr. Farnum, who was also present. Mrs. Farnum present. Atty. McInnis gave the following summary of what has transpired regardi'ng the land: In 1957, the Board of Appeals granted a Special Permit to MIT to extend the height of a tower beyond the requirements of the Zoning By Law. At that time, the tower was an allowed use in the district. The question now is - if MIT were to abandon their lease, what can be done with the property- the tower is no longer an allowed use in the Residential district. There will be no change to the structures, just in ownership. It appears to be under the terms of the Special Permit that if MIT were to stop conducting their research, they would be re- quired to tear down the buildings. Building Inspector Foster told the Board that he discussed this petition with Town Counsel and it is his (Town Counsel's) feeling that once a Special Permit is issued, that Permit is the governing factor of what is allowed on the site, rather than the continuance of a non-conforming use. At that time (1957), radar, etc. was allowed. Now, it is NOT in a residential district. If the Board continues the use of th~ property, it must be a similar use. If th6 use changes to commercial, it is considered a change in use. Atty. McInnis said that this is a "Catch 22" situation because Mr. Farnum does not know at this time what is going in there. Member Frizelle voiced concern that Mr. Farnum's petition is asking the Board to extend a Special Permit without knowledge of who or what is going to utilize the property. December 14, 1981 -3- Regular Meeting Farnum - continued Atty. McInnis added that the cost of tearing' down the structures is substantial -- approximately $3,000.00. If the extension of the Special Permit is not granted, then MIT will probably take the structures down at their expense and abandon the site. If MIT, however, does not receive a decision within a certain time period, Mr. Farnum could be left with this expense. Member Frizelle asked "Does Mr. Farnum intend to operate the facility himself should MIT abandon it?" Mr. Farnum responded "On a lease basis." Member Vivenzio asked "Why can't you wait until you haw a lease?" Farnum "Time restrictions I am dealing with the United States Air Force and I don't have much time, If the decision is negative, the government will pay to have the structures removed." Member ~rizelle then asked "In the event you do lease the property, could you tell us what would be placed on the property?" Farnum - "Parabolic antenas." Member ~rizelle - "What you have now is a building with a use that is no longer allowed, and you want an extension for a future use." McInnis "We are asking for an extension of a use that was allowed in 1957 with no substantial changes." Farnum - "Any prospective user will need the height for any high- tech facility." Speaking in favor of the petition was Mr. Edward Phelan, Chairman of the Board of Assessors. Speaking in opposition was llrs. Stewart, 68 Boston Hill Road She would like to know exactly who is going to utilize the hill before she will speak in favor of the petition. A representative of the Trustees of Reservations also present. They want to know who will utilize the property they have a conservation interest in the land. Mr. Farnum added - "If we do not receive a reply from the Board of Appeals, the building will come down. The impact will be a sub- stantial one as to the amount Of money the town would receive from a commercial user. In addition, a commercial use would be less obnoxious than the military." December 14, 1981 -4- Regular Meeting Farnum - continued MOTION: by Mr. Frizelle to take the matter under advisement. SECOND: by Mr. FOulds Motion carries unanimously. McPHEE, HAROLD - Variance request - Brown's Court Member Vivenzio read the legal notice. Atty. John J. Willis, Jr., present representing Mr. McPhee. Major points by Atty. Willis: - The land was re-zoned at the 1981 Annual Towm Meeting from GB to R4. - Mr. McPhee owns the shaded area on the plan. - Two of the buildings are used as residences. The third was a barn and is now a residential structure. - If Brown's Court is extended, there is now a vacant lot belonging to Mr. McPhee. - He wants the three structures to have their own identities. - In order to accomplish this, the variances are needed because the dwellings do not have the required area, frontage, and set - backs. - There is a financial hardship to Mr, McPhee if the variances are not granted, because he would have to sell the dwellings as one package, making it difficult to market the property. There are other non-conforming lots in the area. If the variance is granted, the plan will go before the Planning Board as a Form A. Approval Under Subdivision Control Law Not Required. Brown's Court will be used as access. It is fully paved and plowed by the town. - Since Mr. McPhee has purchased the p~operty, he has improved it. - Brown's Court is not a public domain. - If the Board of Appeals feels that there is a better way to place the lot lines, Hr. McPhee will agree to move them. Atty. Willis and the Building Inspector disagreed about the building housing Ron's Lobster Pool. Mr. Foster thinks it should be included in this petition. Atty. Willis believes that it has always been and will continue to be a separate lot. December 14, 1981 -5- Regular Meeting McPhee - continued Mr. Foster said that Mr. McPhee needs a variance for the lot on Water Street because it is undersized. By action of the Town Meeting, it is non-conforming. For zoning purposes, land in one ownership is one lot. Atty. Willis argued that this is only true if it is available for combination - that building has always been zoned "B" and that front lot does not belong on this petition. Speaking in favor - no one spoke in favor of the petition. Speaking in opposition - Mr. Charles Breen and Mr. John Cronin. Letters from the Building Inspector and Town Planner read and placed on file. MOTION: by Mr. Frizelle to take under advisement. SECOND: by Mr. Foulds Motion carries unanimously. DECISIONS Farnum, Benjamin MOTION: SECOND: REASON: by Mr. Friz~lle that the request as presented b~ denied by the Board. by Mr, Vivenzio Insufficient facts before the Board to render a decision. Motion carries unanimously. Rug~iero, Michael MOTION: by Mr. Frizelle to deny the request. SECOND: by Mr. Foulds REASON: Taking two non-conformino lots and creating three non- conforming lots. Motion carries unanimously. December 14, 1981 -6- Regular Meeting McPhee, Harold Hold for next month - Board to view the site. The meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m. Jean E. White, Secretary