HomeMy WebLinkAboutCorrespondence - 197 HIGH STREET 9/14/2017 SMOLAK & VAUGHAN
MEMORANDUM
To: Town of North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals
Applicant: jeffco, Inc.
Property: 197 High Street (Map 66/Parcel 44)
Date: September 14, 2017
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF
PETITIONS FOR SPECIAL PERMITS AND VARIANCES
I. INTRODUCTION
The Applicant,jeffco, Inc.,is requesting a special permit to allow for the
conversion of an existing single family dwelling located at 197 High Street,North
Andover,MA (the "Property") to a two-family dwelling. Specifically,the Petitioner is
seeking relief pursuant to Sections 4.122(14)(B) and 4,122(14)(D) of the Zoning Bylaw of
the Town of North Andover, as amended (the"Zoning Bylaw")in the form of a special
permit to allow for the razing of the existing structure on the Property and for the
construction of a new duplex home on the Property. In addition, the Applicant is
seeking to confirm the pre-existing nonconforming nature of the residential lot with
respect to frontage. Finally,the Applicant is also seeking a Variance from certain
dimensional requirements of Section 4.122(14)(B) and Section 7 of the Zoning Bylaw in
connection with the proposed new structure as outlined below.
II. BACKGROUND
The Applicant has negotiated with the current owner of the Property located at
197 High Street,which is a single family home with an attached barn structure, and has
entered into a purchase agreement that is contingent upon the Applicant receiving
necessary permits,variances and approvals to convert the Property to a two-family
dwelling. The Property is designated on the Town of North Andover Assessors Maps as
Map 66, Lot 44. The Property is presently owned by Dawn Crescitelh who has
{00110679;Nr2}
East Mill,21 High Street, Suite 301,North Andover, MA 01845
WWXV.SM0LAKVAUGHAN.00M
Memo to North Andover ZBA
Re:197 High Street
September 14,2017
authorized the filing of the petitions for special permit and variances as outlined herein.
The Applicant intends to purchase and substantially improve the Property by razing an
old, oversized,pre-existing nonconforming structure on the Property which is situated
at a near zero setback to the northerly abutting parcel. A new home would be situated
centrally on the lot with a reduced footprint and eliminating all setback violations,
making the Property substantially more conforming to current dimensional zoning
requirements. A copy of the Deed for the Property and a Plot Plan depicting the existing
and proposed footprint of the structure are included with the Applicant's application.
The Property is located in the Residence 4 ("R-4") Zoning District where the
existing use of the Property as a single family residential dwelling is permitted by right.
Pursuant to Sections 4.122(14)(B) and 4.122(14)(D) of the Zoning Bylaw,however,the
construction of a second dwelling unit on the Property and the conversion of the
Property from a one-family home to a two-family home would require the issuance of a
Special Permit by the Zoning Board of Appeals. Accordingly,when the Applicant
applied for a building permit to allow for the construction of the new structure, the
Building Inspector issued a denial of the building permit(the"Denial Letter"),citing as
the basis for denial that the proposed project requires a Special Permit. In addition, the
Denial Letter also cited that relief was required because the gross floor area (GFA) of the
newly proposed structure did not meet certain dimensional requirements as set forth in
Section 4,122.14.B of the Zoning Bylaw. As such,the Applicant has also applied for a
Variance with respect to certain dimensional characteristics that may not meet the
various requirements of Section 4.122.14.B.
The Property as presently exists is an older home with a number of preexisting
lawful nonconformities. The Property is improved with a single family home and
attached barn,with existing dimensional setback nonconformities (which include a side
setback of only 1.3 feet where 15 feet is now required,and a front setback of 28.1 feet
where 30 feet is now required) and with an existing dimensional frontage
nonconformity (street frontage is only 82.33 feet where 100.feet is now required.) The
proposed project will include substantial improvement(both aesthetically and
structurally) to the existing structure and Property. It is noted that while the project will
eliminate existing dimensional setback nonconformities,the existing frontage
nonconformity will remain,and as such the Property will be made substantially more
conforming and with no existing nonconformities to be increased'. In connection with
I Section 6,Para.4 of G.L.c.40A exempts the lot from the applicability of frontage requirements as the
Property constitutes a pre-existing lawful non--conforming lot. Specifically,Section 6 of M.G.L.c.40A
provides,in part,that: "Any increase in area,frontage,width,yard or depth requirements of a zoning ordinance
or bylaw shall not apply to a lot for single and two-family residential use which at the time of recording or
endorsement,whichever occurs sooner,was not held in common ownership with any adjoining land,
conformed to then existing requirements and had less than the proposed requirement but at least five thousand
square feet of area and fifty feet of frontage."See M.G.L. c.40x1,s. 6,par.4. As a result,the lot does not need
to comply with Minimum Street Frontage(Section 7.2) requirements of the Zoning Bylaw.
100110679;v2} 2
Memo to North Andover ZBA
Re.197 High Sheet
September 14,2017
this application Applicant has also requested a special permit to confirm the pre-existing
lawful nonconforming front setback.
III. DISCUSSION
As noted above,the Petitioner is requesting a Special Permit for the conversion
of an existing one-family home to a two-family home pursuant to Sections 4.122(14)(B)
and 4122(14)(D) of the Zoning Bylaw.
With respect to the specific dimensional criteria for a two family conversion
under Section 4.122(14)(B) of the Zoning Bylaw,we note as follows:
a) Because the conversion involves razing and rebuilding a structure rather
than increasing the size of the existing structure the GFA limitations of
clause (a) do not apply and instead the project is subject to the GFA
limitations of clause (b) as outlined below.
b) The conversion involves razing an existing structure and the Applicant
believes GFA of the new structure does not exceed 150% of the GFA of
the original building.nor more than 1000 SF larger than the original
structure. However,due to a discrepancy in the calculation of GFA as
determined by the Building Inspector and by the Applicant(as further
discussed below), the Applicant has applied for a variance based upon
the higher calculations of SF as determined by the Building Inspector. The
Applicant is not creating new lots so the final sentence of subsection(b) is
inapplicable.
c) There will be at least 2 parking spaces for each unit with a total of 4
spaces proposed (2 garage spaces and 2 driveway spaces.)
d) All parking spaces are at least 10 feet away from any lot line.
e) The garage will not be a separate or attached garage,but is a garage
under,which is not more than 10 feet behind the front fagade (High
Street) of the structure. While it was not clear whether a garage under
constitutes a"garage" within the meaning of this provision of the Zoning
Bylaw(it is noted that this was not identified as a nonconformity
requiring relief by the Building Inspector) the Applicant Iias nonetheless s
applied for a variance from this provision as an abundance of caution.
f) The converted structure will meet all dimensional requirements of the R-4
District under the Zoning Bylaw (subject to existing grandfathered
nonconformities as noted above and subject to obtaining variances as
hereinafter provided to the extent the GFA calculations of the Building
Inspector rather than Applicant are correct.)
g) All stairways leading the second and upper floors are enclosed.
h) The entire length (100%) of the dividing wall between the first and second
dwelling unit is connected to a common wall and thus satisfies the 75%
common wall requirement.
(001 10679;v2) 3
I.
Mento to North Andover ZBA
Re;197 High Street
September 14,2017
i) The post conversion roofline does not exceed the height of the existing
roofline,and does not significantly alter the pitch of any post conversion
rooflines.
It is noted that the building inspector determined that the GFA of the existing
structure on the lot was 1,841 SF,that the GFA of the new structure was 4,532.8 SF and
that the GFA of the second dwelling unit was thus 2,266.4 SF.The Applicant, on the
other hand,had calculated GFA of the existing structure on the lot as 2,430 SF, and with
respect to the proposed new structure and second dwelling unit,the Applicant had
calculated that GFA was approximately 1,450 SF per unit for a total of 2,900 SF for the
new structure. Based upon the Applicant's calculations for existing and proposed,the
new structure would comply with the GFA limitations of the Bylaw. The Applicant
believes that the discrepancies between the building inspector calculations and the
Applicant calculations may be the result,in part,of the following: (i)the building
inspectors calculations for the existing structure may not have included certain square
footage for an existing attached barn structure that was included by the Applicant (it is
noted that this portion of the structure is apparently not reflected on the dimensions of
the building shown on the property tax card),and (ii) interpretation of the Bylaw on
whether to include or exclude certain space such as basement, garage and/or dormered
spaces. In any event,the Applicant has requested relief for variances consistent with the
more stringent calculations as were determined by the building inspector.
In addition to satisfying the dimensional criteria for a Special Permit as described
above, the current application will be consistent with the existing demographics of the
neighborhood. It is noted that many of the surrounding homes to the subject property
on High Street and neighboring roadways are two family or larger multifamily homes.
Many surrounding homes are larger multifamily homes and the proposed new structure
will not result in a derogation of the neighborhood.
IV. BASIS FOR SPECIAL PERMIT
The Petitioner's proposed special permit (subject to the grant of variance if and
as deemed necessary by the Zoning Board) meets all of the conditions for granting of a
special permit as set forth in the Zoning Bylaw as discussed above. In addition,each of
the required points 1 through 6 appearing in Section 9 of the Special Permit Application
are addressed in this application,including as follows:
1. The particular use proposed,for t1w land or structure: The proposed use for the land
will be for the construction of a second dwelling unit and conversion to a two-
family dwelling which is an allowed use in the R-4 zone with and upon issuance
of the special permit,
(00130679,v2) 4
i
Memo to North Andover ZBA
Re:197 High Street
September 14,201.7
2. Tlie s eci c site is an appropriate Ioeati'oiz for suchuse structure or cotzdition: The use
is permitted by right(with special permit) and the appearance will remain
consistent with other homes within the neighborhood. The home is surrounded
by other multi-family homes and the two-family use will be consistent with the
neighborhood.
3. There Will be ito nuisance or serious hazard to vehicles or edestrians:The residential
use of the property is presently allowed. Conversion of the home from a one
family dwelling to a two family dwelling will not create any hazard.
4. Adequate and approptiate acilities will be provided for the proper operation of the
proposed use: The Property is in an existing residential neighborhood with all
necessary facilities presently existing and in place.
5. 711e use is in liarniony witli the puiVose acid hiteitt of the Zoning Bylaw: Allowing the
construction of the proposed second dwelling unit will not derogate from the
intent or purpose of the Zoning Bylaw. The proposed use is a permitted use in
the R-4 zone and will allow further improvement(of both functional and
aesthetic repairs) that is consistent with and in keeping with other properties in
the neighborhood and will allow for elimination of many substantial setback
violations and nonconformities. The use is permitted by right and the
appearance will remain consistent with other homes within the neighborhood.
6. Specific re rence acid res onse to t11e criteria required by t11e particular S ecial Permit
ff 7011iCh this application is made i.e. the Eartli Removal Special Permit 11as unique
criteria and subinittal requireiiientsj: The specific criteria required by a Special
Permit for a two family conversion are addressed in detail in the discussion
section of this memorandum above. Specifically,all of the dimensional criteria
have been satisfied(subject to issuance of variances, if and as deemed necessary
by the Board) as discussed in detail above and there are no other unique criteria
or submittal requirements.
Accordingly,for the reasons stated above,and others that will be presented at
the hearing, the Petitioner respectfully requests the Zoning Board of Appeals to grant
the requested special permit, and to allow the proposed conversion of the Property to a
two-family dwelling and to raze the existing structure and construct a new two-family
dwelling on the Property.
V. BASIS FOR VARIANCE
The Petitioner's proposed variances meet all of the conditions for granting of a
variance,and each of the required elements A through F appearing in Section 9 of the
Variance Application are addressed in this application,including as follows:
(00110679;v2) 5
Memo to North Andover ZBA
Re:197 High Street
September 14,2017
A. 77re particular use proposed for the laud or structure: The proposed use for the
land will be for the construction of a second dwelling unit and conversion to
a two-family dwelling which is an allowed use in the R-4 zone with and upon
issuance of the special permit..
E
B. Vie circutnstarzces relating to soil conditions slue e or topography of such land or
structures especially affectiyg affectingthe propghl or which the Variance is sou ht O icli do
nota ct generally the zoii jM district in which the property is located: Existing
structure on the lot especially affecting the Property is oddly shaped (long
and narrow) and located on the lot nearly entirely within the side setback
which makes razing and rebuilding the only viable alternative to
aesthetically and feasibly improve the property,but under the limitations of
the conversion provision of the bylaw it would be difficult to construct a
financially feasible project without exceeding the limited GFA requirements.
C. Facts which make up the substantial hardship, financial or otlxnvise, which results
froiii literal mforcenxiit of the applicable zoning restrictions with respect to the land
or building for which the variance is sought:A literal enforcement of the Zoning
Bylaw,based upon the GFA calculations as determined by the Building
Inspector,would substantially limit the size or type of building that might be
constructed and thus make the project financially unfeasible and loss of sale
and creating a substantial financial hardship to the owner.
D. Facts relied upon to support a ffiidbig that relief sou ht will be desirable and without
substantial detriment to the public good: The razing of the existing structure,
construction of the proposed new home and elimination of the setback
violations will enhance the aesthetics of the lot. In all respects,the proposed
new two family residence will be consistent with other lots in the
neighborhood,an improvement over existing conditions, and therefore will
not be a detriment to the public.
E. Facts relied upon to synort a ndin that reliefsought nza be vewithout
nulli&big or substaiihaffil deiaatijig froiit the intent or i2uiVose of the Ordinance:
AIlowing the construction of the proposed new two family residence will not
derogate from the intent or purpose of the Zoning Bylaw because the
proposed use is a permitted use in the R-4 zone with a Special Permit and
will allow development that is consistent with and in keeping with other
properties in the neighborhood. The use is permitted and the appearance
will remain consistent with other homes within the neighborhood. The pre-
existing home on the lot which does not comply with current zoning setbacks
would be razed and a newer and more conforming home,consistent with
other properties in the neighborhood,would be constructed
{00110679;v2} 6
Memo to North Andover ZBA
Re:197 High Street
September 14,2027
F. Subiiiit RDA roma Conservatioia Corraraaission 7vlrera Contiguous Buildable Area is
applied for hi ZBA applicatiow N/A;Contiguous Buildable Area is not
applicable to this application. (Note: Lot predates applicability of CBA
requirements per Section 7.1.1 of Zoning Bylaw and no wetlands identified.)
Accordingly,for the reasons stated above,and others that will be presented at
the hearing,the Petitioners respectfully request the Zoning Board of Appeals to grant
the requested variances,so as to allow the proposed two family conversion.
Respectfully submitted,
Jeffco, Inc.
By its attorn
F
Brian G.WU6h ,Esq.
SMOLAK&VAUGHAN LLP
21 High Street,Suite 301
North Andover, Massachusetts 01845
Tel. (978)327-5217
{00110679;A>2) 7