The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMiscellaneous - 0 SAVILLE STREET 4/30/20181 V NPI Q� U �`�� r. /`��'#� �,. Legal Notice TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEALS -NOTICE I � I v February 17, 1987 Notice K *aereby given that the Board of Appeals will give a hearing - at the Town Building, North Andover, an Tuesday evening the 10 day of March, at 7:30 o'clock, to all -rties interested in the anoeal '-fiAn M C" 7 ojvviiikiniariurcutiuidDucorequu N 0 —1 . I Para. 7.3 & Table 2 of the zoning By Law so as to permit relief from side setback requirement of 30' to 20' on the premises, located at Lots 42-49 Saville St. By Order of the Board of Appeals Serio, Jr., Chairman _4 Legal Notice -----YOWN OF NORTH AN -DOVER MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEALS NOTICE February 17, 1987 Notice is, iereby given that the Board of Appeals will give a heartrig al the Town Building, North Andover, on Tuesday evening the 10 day of March, at 7:30 O'clock, to all pai ties interested in the appeal Of William and Pamela Buco requesting a variation of Sec. 7, Para. 7.3 & Table 2 of ft zoning By Law so as to permit relief from Side setback requirement of 30' to 20' on the Premises, located at Lots 42-49 Saville St. By Order of the Board of Appeals Frank Serio, Jr., Chairman Publish in North Andover Citizen February 19 and 26, 1987 1100 residential nu�ibers can be found in the white pages, but the farm has no business 4isting. Regardless of primitive advertising, the home delivery has helped keep the farm ping for nearly 40 years now. And neither the public's anti -cholesterol sentiments nor Eldred's recent stroke has cut into'egg and poultry profits. While Eldred was in the hospital dur- ing the summer of 1986, the younger generation had they're hands full. "I didn9t know if I'd get back into it, but they kept it going," Eldred,says., I Legal Notice ' TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEALS NOTICE February 17, 1987 Notice is iereby given that the Board of Apneals.will give a . hearing t at the Town Building,. North Andover, on Tuesday evening the 10 day of March, at 7:30 o'clock, to all parties interested in the appeal of William and Pamela Buco requesting a variation of Sec, 7, Para. 7.3 & Table 2 of the zoning By Law so as to permit relief from side setback requirement of 30' to 20' on the premises, located at Lots 42-49 Saville St. By Order of the Board of Appeals Frank Serio, Jr:, Chairman Publish in North Andover Citizen February, 19 and 26, 1987 1100 1A a� CHl19Q'"i� TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF. APPEALS �s CHl19Q'"i� TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF. APPEALS February, _ 17_ :..19. $ 7 Notice is hereby given that the Board of Appeals will give a hearing at the Town Building, North Andover, on .. Tue s day. . emen.ing........ the 1.Q.. day of March, 19.8.7 , at .7.3*lock, to all parties interested in the appeal of ... William. .& . Pamela. Buco ........ requesting a variation of Sec. .7, . Para. ..7-3. Abf the Zoning By Law so as to permit .......... Table 2 ... xeli.e f_ .from. side. setback requirement of 30' to 201. on the premises, located at. Lots . 4.2-49. • SaviIle ..St... . By Order of the Board of Appeals Frank Serip, Jr., Chairman Publish in N,. A. Citizen on February 1�& 26, 1987 �s M i February, _ 17_ :..19. $ 7 Notice is hereby given that the Board of Appeals will give a hearing at the Town Building, North Andover, on .. Tue s day. . emen.ing........ the 1.Q.. day of March, 19.8.7 , at .7.3*lock, to all parties interested in the appeal of ... William. .& . Pamela. Buco ........ requesting a variation of Sec. .7, . Para. ..7-3. Abf the Zoning By Law so as to permit .......... Table 2 ... xeli.e f_ .from. side. setback requirement of 30' to 201. on the premises, located at. Lots . 4.2-49. • SaviIle ..St... . By Order of the Board of Appeals Frank Serip, Jr., Chairman Publish in N,. A. Citizen on February 1�& 26, 1987 �s M 2 DEAR 16 TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEALS * * * * * * * * * * * * * Petition of: * William & Pamela Buco Lots 42 - 49 Saville St. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * I' he ice EIo:; ii -ie Town Clerk. -- Petition # 48 - 87 DECISION The Board of Appeals held a public hearing on March 10, 1987 on the application of William and Pamela Buco requesting a variance from the requirements of Section 7, Paragraph 7.3 and Table 2 of the Zoning ByLaws so as to permit relief from side setback requirement of 30' to 20'. The following members were present and voting: Frank Serio, Jr., Chairman, Alfred Frizelle, Vice-chairman, William Sullivan, Walter Soule and Raymond Vivenzio. The hearing was advertised in the North Andover Citizen on February 19 and February 26, 1987 and all abutters were notified by regular mail. The petitioner was represented by a representative of Coolidge Construction Co. who stated that after they began constructing a dwelling for the petitioners they dis- covered that a proposed room would be ten(10) feet beyond the side setback. Upon a motion made by Mr. Sullivan and seconded by Mr. Vivenzio to grant the variance, the vote was as follows: In favor, Mr. Sullivan and Mr. Vivenzio, opposed, Mr. Frizelle, Mr. Soule and Mr. Serio. The motion did not carry and the variance is DENIED. The Board finds that the petitioner did not present sufficient evidence to show that there was a hardship as set forth in Section 10, Paragraph 10.4 of the Zoning ByLaw. Dated this 19th day of March 1987 BOARD OF APPEALS Frank Serio, Jr. Chairman /awt ,. APRIM TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEALS NOTICE OF DECISION be filed the in tl,e G a1 'she Town CIeVk. William & Pamela Buco 357 Raleigh Tavern Lane March 11, 1987 North Andover, MA 01845 Date ............................ Petition No.....4.8-87 .......... _ . Date of Hearing .. March 10 , 19 8 7 •• William & Pamela Buco Petitioa of.............................................................................. Premises affected . Lots . 42 - 49 . Saville .......................................... . ......................................... Referring to the above petition for a variation from the requirements of the .. S e c t ion .7 , Paragraph..70. and.Table,2.of.the.Zoning,ByLaw....................................... so as to permit ...reiief..from. Side .Setback .regu r,emenXe, of .30' . to..20................ After a public hearing given on the above date, the Board of Appeals voted to ....DENY.... the variance. as .reques.ted ........... Motion made by Mr. Sullivan and seconded by Mr. Vivenzio to GRANT the variance, vote was in favor: Mr. Sullivan and Mr. Vivenzio, opposed Mr. Frizelle, Mr. Soule and Mr. Serio. VARIANCE WAS DENIED Motion did not carry. Signed Frank Serio, Jr., Chairman .........................I................. Alfred Frizelle, Vice-chairman .......................................... William Sullivan ......................................... .... Walter. Soule Raymond..Vivenzio , . , . Board of Appeals �. .. 6 NORTH OFFICES OF: wn of **** APPEALS NOR ` AND ER BUILDING CONSERVAI ION g°'°"pBE� IVISION OF HEALTH PLANNI ' , PLAN ING COM UNI Y EVE K REN H.P. NEL ON, DI EC OF 120 Main Street No#h Andover, sachuS 01845 1 ) 685-4 7lS March 11, 1987 Petition #48-87 William & Pamela Buco Lots 42 - 49 Saville St. Mr. Daniel Long,. T wn Cle 1 in •t. o t An ov r , 18 l Q� De r M . Lo g: G� The Board of Appeals held a public hearing on the application of William and Pamela Buco requesting a variance from the requirements of Section 7, Paragraph 7.3 and Table 2 of the Zoning ByLaws so as to permit relief from side setback requirement of 30' to 20'. The following members were present and voting: Frank Serio, Jr., Chairman, Alfred Frizelle, Vice-chairman., William Sullivan, Walter Soule and Raymond Vivenzio. The hearing was advertised in the North Andover Citizen on February 19 and February 26, 1987 and all abutters were notified by regular mail. the vote was as follows: In favor, Mr. Frizelle, Mr. Soule & Mr. Serio, opposed aeniea. Upon a motion made by Mr. Sullivan and seconded by Mr. Vivenzio to4T the variance, the vote was as follows: In favor Mr. Sullivan and Mr. Vivenzio, opposed, Mr. Frizelle, Mr. Soule and Mr. Serio otion't ethe variance -(p DENIED. 1l JJ G te refo The Board finds that the petitione _ C/O d h as set forth in Section 10, Paragraph 10.4 of the Zoning B Law �a -€i Chex �''is .t if the Sincerely, BOARD OF APPEALS Frank Serio, Jr., Chairman CL- ��,e i ... • t ':0RTH;1 IL • S,• 1835 ' �s ACHUs �•vvvv�� TOWN OF NORTH AN MASSACHUSETT BOARD Of APPEA NOTICE OF DECIS William & Pamela Buco 357 Raleigh Tavern Lane North Andover, MA 01845 Date ... March 11, 1987 . .............. Petition No.... 48-8 7 ............. Date of Hearing.. March 10, 1987 Petition of........William & Pamela Buco ........................................................................ Premises affected ...... Lots 42 - 49 Saville St. ............................................................ Referring to the above petition for aL variation from the requirements of the .. Se c t ion .7 , . Paragraph. 7.3ble th . and. Ta2 of. e Zoning, ByLaw........... so as to permit :..relief. .from. side . set bac,k .regurements, of .Q' , to. ,20' , , , , , , . After a public hearing given on the above date, the Board of Appeals voted to ....DENY.... the .. variance. as .reques.ted ........... X�X............................................................................... Motion made by Mr. Sullivan and seconded by Mr. Vivenzio to GRANT the variance, vote was in favor: Mr. Sullivan and Mr. Vivenzio, opposed Mr. Frizelle, Mr. Soule and Mr. Serio. Motion VARIANCE WAS DENIED 4 Signed Frank Serio, Jr., Chairman .................................. Alfred Frizelle, Vice-chairman William Sullivan Walter. Soule Raymond..Vivenzio....... Board of Appeals / i� • 7i \�` � - _ pie i • w � r; + � � �.. e d^ �- � _ .Z. .rte"+ -� MOM w lk e w� I -120, '.0 --.P TF At WIN to o l ►,A) ` Rec,eived by Town Clerk: LV ep K)r- FEB 17 �1 of A`', TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER, MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEALS APPLICATION FOR RELIEF FROM THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE Applicant �� — --� el� AA ---Address 1. Application is hereby made: a) For a variance from the requirements 'of Section Paragraph 7o and Table a_of the Zoning By Laws. b) For a -Special Permit under Section —Paragraph —of the Zoning By Laws. c) As a Party Aggrieved, for review of a decision made by the Building Inspector or other authority. 2. a) Premises affected are land -and buildings) _numbered Street. r b) Premises affected are property with frontage on the -North ( ) South ( ) East 0 West ( ) side of S-(/ /l 5/ Street, and known as No. �p�'��lr�-�-y�'/ SL� _ Street. c) Premises affected are in Zoning District—, and the premises affected have an area of square feet and frontage of 3. Ownership V a) Name and address of owner -(if joint ownership, give all names): Date of Purchase Q __---Previous Owner b) If applicant is not owner, check his/her interest in the premises: Prospective Purchaser Lesee Other (explain) Size of proposed building:' �/_front; feet deep; ". Height stories; 3a feet. a)* Approximate. date of erection. b) Occupancy or use of each floor: P Y c) Type of construction:_�i/�Q—__ 5. Size of existing building:-- ____feet front; _ feet deep; Height stories; feet. a) Approximate date of'erection:_—_C b) Occupan,ey or use of each floor:— A c) Type of construction: 141d p \)6. Has there been a previous appeal, under zoning, on these premises? If so, when?_---_— a ,t7;. Description of relief sought on this petition reb'eve 7ia ro m L�0 Ed i < ZL eat.,n',re n eet7 S. Deed recorded in the Registry of Deeds.in Book Page Page Land Court Certificate No. Book Page .:.'The principal points upon which I base my application are as follows: (must be stated in detail) JI agree to pay the filing fee, advertising in newspaper, and incidental expenses* Signature of Petitio errs) 'Every application for action by the Board shall be made on a form approved by the Board. These forms shall be furnished by the Clerk upon request. Any communication purporting to be an application shall be treatedasmere notice of' intention to seek relief until such time -as it is.made on the official application form. All information ''Called for by the form shall be furnished by the applicant in the manner therein -,.;prescribed. Every application shall be submitted with a list of7."Parties In Interest"• which list shall include .the petitioner,,abutters, owners of land directly .opposite on Any public or private street or way, and abutters to -the abutters -within' three hundred feet (300'.) of the property line of the petitioner as they appear on the most recent applicable tax list, notwithstanding that the land of any such owner is located in another City or town, the Planning Board of the city or town,.and the Planning Board every abutting city or town. *Every. application shall be submitted with an application charge cost in - the amount of $.25.00. In addition, the petitioner shall be' responsible .for any and all costs involved in bringing the petition before the Board.-:--,,.'..ji?1 Such_ costs shall include mailing and publication, but are not necessarily,.'.'.':,*,",';...t'. limited to these. Every application shall be submitted with a plan of land approved by the Board.. No petition will be brought before the Board unless said plan has AP, been submitted. Copies of the Board's requirements regarding plans are attached hereto or are available from the Board of Appeals upon request. Name LIST OF PARTIES IN INTEREST Address (use additional sheets if'necessary) t PLAN OF LAND TO ACCOMPANY PETITION Each application and petition to the Board shall be accompanied by " five (5) copies of the following described plan: The size of the plan shall be 11 x 17, drawn to scale, 1 inch equals 40 feet; it shall have a north point, names of streets, zoning districts, names and addresses of owners of properties within a minimum of 200 feet of the subject property, property lines and location of buildings on surrounding properties. The location of buildings or use of the property where a variance is requested and distances from adjacent buildings and property Lines shall be verified in the field and shown on the plan. The dimensions of the lot and the percentage of the lot covered by the principal and accessory buildings and the required parking spaces shalt be shown. Entrances, exits, driveways, etc. that are pertinent to the granting of the variance shall be shown. All proposed data shall_ be shown in red. Any topographical feature of the parcel of land relied upon .for a variance, such as ledge, rock peat, or natural condition of water, brook, or river, shall be shown on the engineering plan. When a variance is requested to subdivide a parcel of land, the dimen- sions and area of the surrounding lots may be taken from the deed or lotting plan for comparison of the size of the lots in the neighborhood, noted on the plan as such, and marked "approximate". The plan shall be signed and bear the seal of a registered surveyor or engineer. .Any plans presented with the petition shall. remain a part of the records of the Board of Appeals. If living quarters are to be remodeled,.,or areas are to be converted into living quarters, in addition to the plot plan, five. (5) copies of the following described plans shall be furnished: 1. A floor plan of each floor on which remodeling is to be done or areas converted into living quarters; 2. A floor plan showing the stairways, halls, doors opening into the halls, and exit doors of each floor or floors where no re- modeling or converting is to be done; 3. The plans and elevations shall show all existing work. All propo-sed work shall be shown in red. The size of each plant sh�3.11 be 1.1 x 17 or 17 x 22; it shall. be drawn to scale, 1/4 inch equals one foot. All plans and elevations presented with the petition shall remain a part of the records of the Board'of Appeals. For petitions requesting variation(s) from the provisions of Section 7, . Paragrpahs 7. l., 7. 2, 7.3, and 7.4 and 'Table 2 of the Zoning By Law for conveyance purposes only, a plot plan, certified by a registered engineer or land surveyor, of the parcel of land with a structure thereon being conveyed, will be acceptable to the Board of Appoals provided: 1. The dwelling(s), structure(s), or buiLding(s) were constructed prior to March 14, 1977. 2. The pctiti.on is not to allow construction or alteration to the dwelling(s), structure(s), or building(s) which will re- sult in the need for tlhc issuance of a building permit. 3. Tjie size, of the plan shall be no sm,all.er than 8 1./2 x ll inches and must show .the existing area of the parcel, the existing frontage, and the existing setbacks of the dwelling(s), structure(s), or building(s) being conveyed. 4. Proper space is provided on the plot plan for the Board's signatures, as well as adequate space for the following information: date of filing, date of public hearing, and date of approval. r S was% 1 Iia l r- o/ K6 y OFFICES OF: APPEALS BUILDING CONSERVATION HEALTH PLANNING OF NORry{S 3? Town of NORTH ANDOVER DIVISION OF PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT KAREN H.P. NELSON, DIRECTOR VD To: Board of Appeal From: Karen Nel , irector Date: March 9, 1987 Subj: Comments - Agenda Items for March 10, 1987 My comments are as follows: /a=, Saville St. 120 Main Street North Andover, Massachusetts O 1845 (617) 685-4775 Since the applicant is requesting a side setback variance from a paper street, it has come to my attention that the street is not a public way but a nonexistent paper street. Should not in fact this applicant file for a frontage variance as well. Where is the legal frontage for this lot? Is the road going to to be developed to become a public way. From looking at the plans submitted it appears as if a one lot subdivision may have to be filed to bring the road to standard. Lastly, the applicant has based the variance request on the slope of the lot. Is there a topography plan submitted? Sheppard, Great Pond Rd. Lot B is an undersized lot in an Residential 2 District which requires 43,560 square feet of land. This property, including the land on Pleasant Street was not shown as part of the original subdivision plan and therefore is not protected from zoning changes. Any parcel(s) in common ownership must be combined to meet the zoning in existent. There is no sufficent hardship shown in this application as written. Samaha, Beverly St. It is my understanding that this petition was before the Board of Appeals in August of this year to permit the division of property located at 91 Beverly Street to construct a duplex. Since the Board of Appeals denied the variance the applicant has received a building permit to construct a single family dwelling to be connected to an existing dwelling by means of two garages, thus the assumed two-family qualification. I must state my concern regarding the construction of two family dwellings of this nature, when in fact they have the appearance and in my mind the definition of two single family dwellings on one lot. My only remaining comment on this matter is that in your review a 'common sense and practical' reading of the zoning bylaw be applied. I am enclosing a recent copy of a letter from Town Counsel on a similar matter. I would expect that you may want to solicit additional review on Town Counsel's part to assist you in the decision process. 212:3/9 UUMF.NIC.I. SCALISI'; I'ETEIt G. SIIAIIEEN 1OWN COUNSEL TOWN COUNSEL 89 I LAIN S'I'ItLti"I' NORTH ANDOVLIt, MASSACHUSLI"I'S 018415 ; 0 r_0 "•o+!ti r TO: Board of Selectmen FROM: 'Town Counsel RE: Middlesex St - 2 -Family;. Llwellings (61') 6X2-•115.1 (01 I) ('X9 -11X(() Under Section 4. 122 of the Town of North Andover's zc,n.i.ng By -Law, only one residential unit per lot is allowed. In the present case, we are concerned with the lot on Middlesex St. Two houses are situated on this lot; one fronting Harold ��trcct and one fronting Middlesex Street. In order to comp]_y �;ii.h thct by-law, the initial house fronting Middlesex Street arrd the addition ( fronting Harold Street) would have to be one residential building. 'Thus, the house and addition %-mi'lld have to classify as a two-family house. phis '-is tide intCrlIJ�m of the owner. However, a problem may arise clue to the five foot foot breezeway'separating the two house-. A multiple dwelling is defined under MGL c 151 131 as dwelling which is usually occupied for permanent res.i_dence purposes and which is either rented, leased, let- or hi.r.c�d Id. It is unclear as to whother or not hor.lses illust i)c jc).i.ncd or have, a common entrance way to be considered a tcvc�-f_._un.iL} house. However, case-law supports the contention that tt.;() family dwellings on one lot is .got the same as a ttvc�-Caun.i.Ly dwelling. See Town of Maynard v. 'Tonlyl,. 193 N1 --"2d 291 (19611). Irl 'Town of Maynard, the court held that "there is noth.in�! i.rr i h ' contc�!ltion that the authorization of "two-farm-l.y dwe].]..i.n�)<;" au tiorized two single dwellings on the same to L. 1 d. ;1 L 291. ; See also Van Arsdale v. Provinceton, 344 MA 146, ].T7, 597. -Til is analysis can be appl_i.ed to the prc!senl: it seems provable that a two dwea.l.:i.rlg could corrs;.i:;i. crC two houses side by side, it is improvable that the houses i.n question could be considered a two-family blouse clue. to the breezeway. The zoning by-law requir.inq only one residential bul.ldinci per lot ( Zoning By -Law 4.1.22) should be construed as rerl �oc� �b.l y as possible. Green v. Board of Appeal of Norwood, 263 N1:2c] 423 (1970); Town of Manchester. v. Phillips, 130 rdl2d 333('/ 33( ); Town of Brookline v. Co -Ray Realty Co., 93 NE2d 531 (1950). In interpreting this by-law as reasonably as possible, i.t :url�d seen'' that the House and addition would not be considered tc.l 1)c2 one residence. This result would be unreasonable due to the sixty-five font breezeway. Frontage on two streets has been considered an asset by som(-, courts. See Winn v. Board of Appeals of Saugus, 263 NE2d 440 (1970). - However, in such cases the two-family Houses are aLtzm1led and there are no breezeways or detachments of the two aparLmeriL,;. Id. at 440. In applying this analysis to the case at hand, t:he Board should consider Lhe manner in which the :i.>>i.Lial hou:,e cruel addition are connected. In reasonably interp.. eting the by -1.n,-:, the Board should consider that initially there was one house- mi the lot and an "addition" was later added on. Both a bui.l.dirr<1 and occupancy permit were issued For this addition. It ;cern.,, that these permits were issued, however, on Lhe assumpLi.on Uic.iL -the Douse and addition complied with the zoning by-laws as hoimj one`"residential building" (see zoning by-law 4.122). An analysis of case-law and the applicable ley -law shov.s that the zoning enforcement officers interpretation may have been erroneous. There are several reasonsfor this. The "addition to the house is separated by a sixty-five fool breezeway; the addition and house both front different streets; and the "additioli" is only connected to the initial house by the breezeway. In conclusion, it is crucial for the Board to determine whether or not they would consider this "addition" to be an addition to the existing house or a separate residential building. If the latter is found, a violation of the by-law is present. HORTM 1 • r s r M o i 1 tkcmus TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEALS W & P. Buco 357 Raleigh Tavern Lane N orth Andover, MA 01845 Date. February 25, 1987 Dear Applicant: Enclosed is a copy of the legal notice for your application before the Board of Appeals. Kindly submit $ 4.68 for the following: Filing Fee $ Copies 1.60 Postage $ 3.08 total 4.68 Your check must be made payable to the Town of North Andover and may be sent to my attention at the Town Office Building, 120 Main .Street, North Andover, Mass. 01845. Sincerely, BOARD OF APPEALS t Audre W.,Taylor, Clerk Y 4 ` 1 \nL2 96' -7/V CJ" ��