Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021-04-20 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Approved May 11, 2021 Town of North Andover ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Members Associate Members D. Paul Koch, Jr., Esq., Chairman Michael T. Lis Ronn R. Faigen, Vice-Chairman Steven R. Seide Allan Cuscia, Clerk Frank J. Killilea Alexandria A. Jacobs, Esq. Zoning Enforcement Officer Ellen P. McIntyre Paul G. Hutchins MEETING MINUTES Date of Meeting: Tuesday, April 20, 2021 Time of Meeting: 7:30 p.m. Location of Meeting: Virtual Meeting Signature: Jennifer Battersby Town Clerk Date Stamp: 1. Call to Order called at 7:32 p.m. Members Present: D. Paul Koch, Jr., Esq., Ronn R. Faigen, Allan Cuscia, Ellen P. McIntyre, Alexandria A. Jacobs, Esq., Steven R. Seide, Michael T. Lis, and Frank J. Killilea Staff Present: Jennifer Battersby Gavel given to: D. Paul Koch, Jr. Pledge of Allegiance Chairman makes preliminary announcement that this is a meeting of public record, is being broadcast and recorded, and that anyone watching may email ZBA administrator with any questions, comments, or opinions. Chairman reads the Supplemental Legal Notice into the record. 2. New Public Hearing of 1268 Osgood Street The Applicant is requesting a Variance pursuant to Town of North Andover Zoning Bylaws Section 195-7.4(B) and Section 195-7.4(F) Building Height in the B-2 Zoning District for the purpose of allowing a pre-existing commercial building to remain unchanged as to building height; specifically, Applicant has requested a relief variance of 1.9 feet (the existing building height is 36.9 feet and the building height required is 35 feet). This matter discussed with 1274 Osgood Street, below. 3. New Public Hearing of 1274 Osgood Street The Applicant is requesting a Variance pursuant to Town of North Andover Zoning Bylaws Section 195-7.4 Building Height in the B-2 Zoning District for the purpose of allowing a pre-existing commercial building to remain unchanged as to building height; specifically, Applicant has requested a relief variance of 4.2 feet (the existing building height is 39.2 feet and the building height required is 35 feet). 1268 Osgood Street and 1274 Osgood Street were discussed simultaneously. Allan Cuscia reads both of the legal notices into the record. Mark Yanowitz lost WiFi and had to call into the meeting instead. Principal of LYF Architects in Andover. The Eagle Tribune had computer issues that resulted in this special meeting. Admits the elevation violation was not intentional and was an honest mistake. They had done internal review inside the firm to see how this happened. A Notices and agendas are to be posted 48 hours in advance of a meeting excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays. Please keep in mind the Town Clerk's hours of operation and make necessary arrangements to be sure that posting is made in an adequate amount of time. A listing of topics the Chair reasonably anticipates will be discussed at a meeting are to be listed on the Agenda. Note: Matters may be called out of order and not as they appear in the Agenda. Page 1 of 3 Town of North Andover ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS couple of years ago there were multiple staff members involved and they were in the process of transitioning to a new software program. There were some small mistakes in drafting and coordinating building sections and elevations and in measuring the height elevations of the four corners. The building height is the average of the four corners. Through a combination of factors this error transpired. Upon reviewing the Planning Board Site Plan review heard from abutters across Osgood Street, the residential buildings behind the commercial buildings on the same site were granted a waiver of 55 foot in height so they got a special waiver to increase the height and added a fourth story. Some of the abutters were concerned of the site lines. It was a discussion point during the site plan review that it would be beneficial to have the commercial buildings essentially block the viewpoint of the residential towers. Which led to a study of the view angle. In order to make accessibility and flow between the residential and commercial buildings it was determined to lower the grade of the commercial buildings. The commercial buildings are significantly lower than Osgood Street which is the public right away. The elevation grade differences document is a grading plan used by their civil engineer and it shows the grade elevations of both Osgood Street and the commercial buildings. The building height elevation is determined by the corners of the four grades. Not only is the front of the building approximately seven feet lower than the street, the backs of the building is even further lower. It is only the peaks of the roof that create the violation. There is no detrimental effect on the abutting properties. Chairman states that he didn’t hear what the underlying hardship is. The Board has to find a hardship. Mr. Yanowitz says the hardship is unique and qualifies stating the Planning Board requested the residential buildings be blocked by the commercial buildings and a request to lower the grade to make the accessibility features work. The most substantial hardship is the financial hardship. Chair asks how much money it would cost. Mr. Yanowitz states in the neighborhood of $200,000-300,000. A. Jacobs asks how this only affected 1268 and 1274 and not 1280. Mr. Yanowitz states there are only two buildings currently built. R. Faigen would have thought that the 35 feet would have been measured from the foundation. Why is it measured from the four corners and not the foundation? Mr. Yanowitz states that it is not universal and it is what is in the North Andover building code. Discussions continue regarding building height and how it is determined. A.Cuscia asks if the applicant can be fined instead and if the applicant would be willing to pay a fine? Mr. Yanowitz states it depends on how much. Chairman talks about hardship and states there is no hardship. E. McIntyre asks if the neighbors have any objection to this project. Mr. Yanowitz states the abutters were concerned about the visibility of the taller towers. S. Seide thinks there is a potential hardship around the unique physical property. Motion made by Ronn R. Faigen to close public comment. Motion seconded by Allan Cuscia. A. Jacobs voted yes. E. McIntyre voted yes. A. Cuscia voted yes. R. Faigen voted yes. P. Koch voted yes. The vote to close is unanimous 5-0. The board deliberates. Motion made by Allan Cuscia to approve the petition of Mark Yanowitz/LYF Architects for property at 1268 Osgood Street, North Andover, MA 01845, Map 34, Parcel 49 for a Variance pursuant to Town of North Andover Zoning Page 2 of 3 Town of North Andover ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Bylaws Section 195-7.4(B) and Section 195-7.4(F) Building Height in the B-2 Zoning District for the purpose of allowing a pre-existing commercial building to remain unchanged as to building height; specifically, Applicant has requested a relief variance of 1.9 feet (the existing building height is 36.9 feet and the building height required is 35 feet). Seconded by Ronn R. Faigen. A. Jacobs voted yes. E. McIntyre voted yes. A. Cuscia voted yes. R. Faigen voted yes. P. Koch voted no. The motion to approve is granted 4-1. Motion made by Allan Cuscia to approve the petition of Mark Yanowitz /LYF Architects for property at 1274 Osgood Street, North Andover, MA 01845, Map 34, Parcel 49 for a Variance pursuant to Town of North Andover Zoning Bylaws Section 195-7.4 Building Height in the B-2 Zoning District for the purpose of allowing a pre-existing commercial building to remain unchanged as to building height; specifically, Applicant has requested a relief variance of 4.2 feet (the existing building height is 39.2 feet and the building height required is 35 feet). Seconded by Ronn R. Faigen. A. Jacobs voted yes. E. McIntyre voted yes. A. Cuscia voted yes. R. Faigen voted yes. P. Koch voted no. The motion to approve is granted 4-1. The following plans and documents were referenced: (1) Upper Roof Plan A102, Building Elevations - East & North A200, and Building Elevations - West & South A201 prepared by LYF Architects dated November 22, 2019, containing three (3) pages; (2) Floor Plan ID101 prepared by LYF Architects dated August 12, 2020, containing one (1) page; (3) Foundation As-Built Plan of Buildings 2, 3, and 4 in North Andover, MA prepared by Hancock Associates dated March 1, 2021, containing one (1) page and cover letter regarding building height prepared by Hancock Associates dated March 1, 2021, containing one (1) page; (4) Site Grades Plan C103 prepared by LYF Architects dated March 10, 2021, containing one (1) page; (5) Undated Photos of 1268 & 1274 Osgood Street prepared by Applicant, containing two (2) pages; and (6) Notice of Decision, Site Plan Review, Multi-Family Housing & Reduction in Parking Special Permit Modification by North Andover Planning Board dated January 23, 2018 and filed January 24, 2018, containing six (6) pages. (7) Ground Floor Plan A101, Second Floor Plan A102, Roof Plan A104, Building Elevations East & South A200, Building Elevations West & North A201, Building Sections A300 prepared by JDLaGrasse dated November 18, 2019, containing six (6) pages; (8) Foundation As-Built Plan of Buildings 2, 3, and 4 in North Andover, MA prepared by Hancock Associates dated March 1, 2021, containing one (1) page and cover letter regarding building height prepared by Hancock Associates dated March 1, 2021, containing one (1) page; (9) Site Grades Plan C103 prepared by LYF Architects dated March 10, 2021, containing one (1) page; (10) Undated Photos of 1268 & 1274 Osgood Street prepared by Applicant, containing two (2) pages; and (11) Notice of Decision, Site Plan Review, Multi-Family Housing & Reduction in Parking Special Permit Modification by North Andover Planning Board dated January 23, 2018 and filed January 24, 2018, containing six (6) pages. 4. Adjournment, meeting adjourned at 9:27 p.m. Motion made by Allan Cuscia to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Steven R. Seide. A. Jacobs voted yes. E. McIntyre voted yes. A. Cuscia voted yes. R. Faigen voted yes. P. Koch voted yes. The vote to adjourn is unanimous 5-0. Page 3 of 3