HomeMy WebLinkAbout1973-11-12 The BOARD ~ APPEALS ~et en ~ eve~, Nevanber 12, 1~73 at 7=30 P.M.
in the To~n Office ~,41a~.g meeting ro~. The following members were presser sad
voting: Dr~ ~agene A. 2eliveau, Aotiag Oh-~'~aan; W~ll~a N. Salemae, Louis
DiFruscio and Associate Manbere Alfred E. Friselle, Esq. sad Jaaes D. N~ble, Jr.
Chairman Frank Serio, Jr. and aanher Arthur ~oad were un_~ble te attend.
There were 20 people present fo~ the meeting.
HEA~NG= Richard Nocnan~
Atty. Friaelle read the .legal notice in the appeal of Ri,J~srd Nee~,,f ~d~
requested a variation of Sec. $.3 ami Table 2 of the Zeroing By-Law se as to pemait
aa existing dwell~ eloesr than 30 feet to the side lot linel located at the
west side of Carleten Lane, approx. 200 feet fram the corner of Raleigh Tavern
Lane and knmm as 16 Oarleton Lane.
Atty. ~rank Pttocchel~4, ef Methuam, represented the petitim~r. ~e explained
that the Noonano purchased the home last year and upon having the p~operty '~.-
veyed, -~£oun~ that the garage was located approximately ton feet from the lot
line. The dwelling in the adjacent lot is located app~oxinately 50 feet from the
lot l~..f thereby leaving $0 feet between dwellt-Es which would be Flt~tn ~he
intent of the B~-Law since the setback re.~-, t~emente for an R-2 area are 30 feet.
It would be a great expense to the petitioner to ~aee the f~rage and remove it
in order to comply. The same bvt~er built both homes. He feels there ha~ have
been a problam in locating the house for the septic system.
Building Inspector Foster explained that man~ lots in this deveXolmaent were
changed around by the-developer and that vhan he inspected the building It was
in the winter and covered with snow so that the stone bounds could not bo located.
There were no abutters present and there was no opposition.
~r. Frtzelle made a motion to _~_AHT the variancel ~r. 8al~ seconded the motinn
and the vote wu -n-~mOus. The Board found that.there would bo a hardship and
expense if the garage were razed and that the intent of the By-lam was net in
that there are at least ~0 feet between
~ Atty. F~o ~ ~he le~ ~tiee ~ the ap~ of J. P. St~ & ~.', ~e.
e~ ~st~ a ~ti~ of Sec. 6.2 A T~le '2 of ~e Z~w~ ~ so ~ ~ ~
~t, for the ~se of eoa~y~ce~ a ~ ~ ~ ~t ~ the ~ f~
~ a pubic ~l ~ ~ ~-'~ loea~ at the ~ side of M=tw 8t~et app~x.
2~ feet f~ t~ ce~r of ~a~r S~t..
Dr. Beliveau read the letter fram the BuiXdin~ Inspector, in which he had suggested
~o the pettti~__er that they apply to the Board f~r a variance because they did not
have the required frontage and a~,as because a building peruit coul~ not bo issued
for the renovations and aXterationo that they had planned for the mill building.
Atty. Clifford E. m4u represented the petitioner. Also present were Horace
Stevens, V. P. of J, P. Stevens ~o. and Norman Xneiesler, V.P. ef Keuics
the prospective purcB_~er.
L
Atty. ~ gave eeme back~ :cf the m~ pe~porty, ~hich w~ .~t ~e
~s ~ ~ ~ atone ~. ~ ~ m ~aed~~ a~
~ ~ ~t ~ ~ for ~act~n~ s~ee t~ t~, ~e8 Co~ra~
~ reco~ of tho ~t ~ b~4~g ~ t~t i~ w~ ~cess~ t~ pre~e ~.
~ce the ~t d~s ~t ~ t~ ~ f~, t~ m ~ ~sti~ ~ to
e~t~ or ~t tho P~-~ Bo~ ~d e~e it ~ ~o ~ ~st~ ~ t~
~g. ~p. tho~ ~ ~ ~t be a b,,~ ~-~ ~t ~ for the
which they plan to do on the mill b,,tla4ng. He presented bro~s to each
ueauber ,of the ~oard.Ho e~s4w-d that Konica Corp. is~ligh~ man~acturing
cempan~ employing-~ae 1~0 people. They will transfer their e~tire operation
from Danvere to North Andovor and they plan to esqmun~ to probably about 300 people
i~ the future.
The p~oblem is the frontageS the size of the lot is proper. Tho use of tho
building end the .property is a conformt~ ~e under the Zenisg By-Law. He ·
doesn't think the~ need a variance becauee when this lot was reduced leaving
32 feet on Ma~. Street, it was per~issable u~der the 1~3 Zeai:tg B~-Law. ~n
business a~d industrial distr~cts there Wore ~ frontage require~eats. They hsd
sufficient frontage. They conveyed property along ~ator Street an~ the :last
conveyance was in 1950, leaving a frontage of 32 ft., whiCh was-acceptable under
the Zoning By-Law at that tine. However, there ess a question in their minds
about getting approval from the p1anntn~ Board and the Buildiag Inspector and
that is the basis for .their appeal. There are conditions affecf~Lng this parcel
that do not affect other parcels. Relief could he granted without affecting
the public geed and derogating from the intent and purpose of the Zontug By-Law
and there would he a hard~hip, There is an easement right-of-way that has hess
· gr_~ted By Davis & Furber for access to the pr~erty from Elm Street.; The
principal means of access will be over Elm Street =~ not Hain Street. Mith
this type of operatio~ there will be no pollution or ecology problems. [t wt~
help the teen and employ people.
H°raoe Stevens told the Board that they looked hard to bring somebody into t~wn
and he thinks it will be an asset to the to~n.
~r. haissler said they ,ill prObably open 8~uetime in ~tty. They plan on
ren~ating the interior of the
Mr. Phelan, Chsiruan of the Board of Assessors, said the b~,~!a4n~ is assessed
for $200,000 whiCh seems about $24,000 in ta~eo to the town - this is equivalent
to 2~-30 new ho~es. Tho Board Should look t~ the economy ' for the town - he
thinks it would be geed for the town and would aid employment*
Bldg. ~usp. Foster said this seem8 to b~ a perfect example of uhF a Board of
Appeals is necessary- to correct inequities such as this.
There. was no opposition-to the Petition.
~obert Xereage, eh0 owns proPerty on Main Street, said 'he has bean Using the road
from N~ Street for access to the rear of his proPerty. He wanted [to know if
he would still bo able to ueo %he road when the new owner takes 'over. Mr.
Kneissler said it i's not~ their intent to restrict passage '-.the ~e that have
been using it will not be stopped from using it in the ~uturo.
November 12, 1~3 - cont.
Mr. Friselle made a motion to take the petition under advisement; ~r. Noble
seconded the motion and the vote wes unanimous.
Bldg. Insp. Foster reported that he had inspected the operatiun amd that
nothing has been done since the last time ~r. ~Adamo was in. Mr. Ad-ms had been
advised during the summer that the .operation should be completed es the Board .had
requested. The purpose of the bond is so that the area will be seeded ami finished
off after the operation is completed.
After discussion of the matter, Mr. Noble made a motion to send a registered
letter to Mr. Adams advising 'him that his 5cad must be extended for one year and
if no reply is received from him within ten da~s, then the Bldg. Insp. 'will be
authorized to proceed immediately with the necessary action. He added that the
operation wast be completed by June 30, 197~. Mr. DiFruscio seconded the mOtion
and the vote was uwAw4m~us.
GUY RICHARDS ~
The Board discussed the above petitic~ Chairmen ter~o wes ~t
~e but ~ ~om~ ~. B~veau ~ teleph~ t~t ~ wo~ ~te ~ fav, r of
it ~ ~ ~ w~ ~eas~. Assoc. M~er Mc~ ~e a ~i~ ~es
the ~cisiom of the ~ ~s~or ~ to ~ ~te~tati~
~ to isle a b~ ~t~ Assoc. ~er ~ble sec~ ~ m~i~ ~ the
vote ~ ~o~ ~ the fo~ ~bers. ~ B~ f~t that ~e
w~ ~t cle~ ~d by the~ ~te~etation ~ ~t ~~
~t ~e p~ ~e is ~t~but~; ~t t~s is ~ a s~ fa~4ty such
~ a ~er'a w~e. ~t ~a t~of bus,cea ~ be ~ ~set to the
to~ ~ t~t t~s ~ Be a p~r .~, as~ a~ce t~s ~ea ~d
b~ z~d for ~u~ ~e f~ ~ ~s ~ t~s t~ ~f
~ ~o~d ~ t~ ~ ~-~w.
SPECIAL PERI,fIT FOR ST~ pr[.~. ~ONVER~ION.-
The matter of ~t,:L~ on ~ of th~s permit w~l be tabled until a~l
members of the Board are present.
DAVIS & ~ VIOLATION:
NO ansuer was received from Da~8 & Furber ~aehino Co. to the Board's
request for more ~rLfermation from them conc~ the sale of the house8 on
East ~ater and Clarendon ets. Lengtby discussion was held on this matter.
The Board feels it is now a mor~!iesue and that Davis & Furber m~erepresented
themselves to the Board and to the people. They completely i~aored the Board
and did not show the courtesy of a reply. The Board a~reed to send a re~stered
letter to Da~8 & Furbor with the request that they reply within ton days. If
they do not reply, then the Board w~ 3 3 ~0 to the Selectmen to see ~f they eamt to
take an~ action.
November 12, 1973 - e~.
A petition was reeeived fr~ 'the neighbers of ~r, & Mrs. San ~ on
Heeitt Avenue askiag the Board to recoasi~er the ~atter c~ncerai~ the divisien
of the property.
The Beard said that ae actien can by takea - that a nee petitien ~we~ld have to
be presented before the Beard. Mr. DiFruscio said he ~ eeaau~teate with
~r. Saa Antonio to expl~ the matter ~mrther.
VIOLATION - Dr. Patterson.'
A copy of a letter was reeeived which the Bldg. Imsp. sent to Dr. ¥illia~
Pa%torec~. A ¢ow~*%i~ of granting the variance was fha% part of t~e garage
shown on tMe pla~ be razed. No~h~-~ b~___~ been done for 18 m~ths and the Bldg.
~nsp. gave notice that the eenditi~s of the Board be co~pliedWith by Dee. 2J+th.
The Board ~eted the lettor aud placed it oa file.
The present balance ef the Board's budget is $27.~7 to last until Jane 30, 197~.
Mr. Noble made a aetiea to authorize the secretary to ask for an additioaal $150
for 'expenses to earry the Board through the 'fiscal ~e~r~ ~r. 5alee~e sece~ded the
notion and the vote was unanimous.
The Board reeeived notice of a meeting to be held ~n .Tues., NOv. 13th, by
the pl~-w4.~ Board a~d other t~n departmeats relative to te~n streets. Mr.
D~ruscio ~! attend.
The seeting adjourned at 10:30 P.~.
(Frank SeriO, jr.)
SeoA. etary