HomeMy WebLinkAbout1967-09-18202 '
Monday - September 18, 1967
Regular Neeting & Hearings
The BOARD OF APPEALS held their regular meeting on Monday evening, September 18,
1967 at 7:30 P.M. in the Town Office B,,~ld~-g, Meeting Room. The following members
were present and voting~ ~s A. Deyo, Chairman~ Arthur Dr,.~=~nd, Secretary;
Daniel T. O'Leary, Associate Members Howard L. G~lw~, and Robert J. Burk~ who sat in
place of members ~ohn J. Shields and Donald J. Scott.
There were 16 people present for the hearings of the evening.
1. HEARING: Paul Crete.
Nr. Drummond read the legal notice in the appeal of Paul Crete, ~or a variance
under Section 6.31 of the Zoning By-Laws, so as to divide four lots of land into two
lots each having less than the required frontage and area on ~Am~ Avenue.
Mr. Crete spoke in his own behalf. He said he purchased the lots in 1952 and his
father-in-law bought the other two lots. His father-in-law passed away and he now
has 4 lots.
Bldg. Insp. Foster said Crete had applied to h~ for a building permit and showed
h~ two deeds to the lots of land, one deed in the name of Crete and his wife and
the other two lots through inheritance from the father-in-law. Mr. Foster explained
that there ars alot of lots in that area that are this size or smaller. Board should
consider this factor and note the sizes of the lots on the Assessor's maps.
Joseph MorAn, Martin Avenue and Atty. Willis, speaking in Mahalf of his wife who
owns~ property in the area, both falt that lots should meet the zo~.g requirments.
Mr. O'Leary made a motion to take the petition under advisement. Mr. ~mmond
seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous.
2. HEARING.' Xevin Donovan.
Mr. D~,,~.~ond read the legal notice in the appeal of Kevin C. Donovan, from the
decision of the Building Inspector refusing to issue a building permit under the
provisions of Section 6.61 of the Zo~4~g By-Law, for the erection of a residential
two-story building at the corner of PLlgrim and Middlesex Streets.
The Board noted that a complete set of plans had not been submitted.
Atty. Charles W. Trombly said it would be unfair to proceed with the hearing without
a complete set of plans.
Atty. Ralph Stein, representing the petitioner~ said he thought that because original
planm had been submitted at a previous hearing held by the Board and it was denied
that the s~ set of plans would be all right.
Member O'Leary said a vote cf the Board should be taken as to whether or not to proceed
with the hearing without the plans. He explained that the Board has rules and regu-
lations regarding plans and they should be abided by.
o03
September 18, 1967 - Cc**.
Chairman Deyo felt that they could proceed with the hear~ and -~e the decision
subject to submitting ~roper plans but that he would go along with what the majority
of the Board wishes.
Atty. Stein asked if they could have a continuance without prejudice. The Board
agreed to that.
Member 0'Leary mdc a tactics to hold the hearing at a later date without prejudice
and have the proper submission of plans. The Board so voted.
3. HEARING: M. & S. Building & Construction Co.
Mr. Drumaond read the legal notice in the appeal of the M. & S. Bv//ding &
Construction Co;, Inc. for variances and special per,~t under Section 4.7 of the
Zo~E By-Laws to as to permit a ~omplex of two ~,~ldings, as defined by the
~,~l~ Inspector, of an apartment house unit at 90 Sutton Street.
Atty. Willis represented the petitioner. He explained that the lets involved are
adjacent to the Hunt Club, which the petitioner o~ns and is now leasing to Mr.
Waites -,ho has an option to purchase in his lease. This particular parcel cannot be
used. There would be a 20 ft. easement. This area is some~4~kt of a iow rent area
amd this apartment complex would greatly e-b-~ee the entrance to the to~n.
There would be 14,000 sq. feet 'less than required by the Zoning By-Laws for apartments.
He presented plans and explained that it would be a 2-1/2 story building. The ground
floor cont~--~ 9 apartments, the first floor lp apartments and the second floor lO
apartments. These apartments are what are called Studio apartments. Have complete
facilities, stove, refrigerator, etc. This type of ap~_ _me_nt is for individ~s.
It will not result in an increase in school population since there is no r°oa for
children. This type of apartment serves a particular need of this town. Would be
the type of apartment for businessmen, technicians, single people, etc. Ha showed
architectural drawings of the appearance of the front of the buil~-~ when it is
completed. The petitioner is attempt~ to purchase adJoing land and if th~ eau be
done the ~il&~-g will he turned around so that it faces the frost instead of the
side as shown now.
Another variance requested is as to the n~aber of apartments per ,m~t as required by
k~ the Zo-~8 By-Laws in a single building. He explained the plans as to fire wa~ s,
entrances, exits, etc. He will provide for the whole building to have a
system. He talked with the Fire Chief who was in favor of such a system. The cost
of construction of this apartment will run about $400,000. This type of construction
would benefit the town. This will u~lift the whole geaeral area. Wi]_l help the
appearance of the town. ~e thinks they have met every other requirement of the
Zo~-8 By-Laws.
Mr. Phelan and Mrx. Lurid, Assessors were in favor tha apartment development. That it
would do alot for the tows and would be a first for North Andover for this type of
apartment. Will be good for the tax base. Apartments are a good help to the Town.
This is a good site for such a development. They are very much in favor of it.
Mr. Xalinowski wes also in favor.
There was no Opposition registered.
204
September 18~ 1967 - Cont.
F~. Shields expl~4-ed that tha design of the b,41~4-g is in complete c~form~ty with
the State laws. The architect was also present but did not speak.
Mr. O'Leary asked if the Fire Chief had put anything in writing.
Mr. Shields he would request that he do so if the Board desires.
Mr. Deyo asked about the easement. Mr. Shields said it has not been recorded yet.
Mr. Dru~amd seeoz~ed
Mr. Burhe made a motion to take the petition under advisement.
the motion and the vote was ,~4~ous.
KALI~OWSXI ~
Mr. Ealinowaki, his soo and Donald Brasseur, surveyor~ were present~ as was re-
quested by the Board in their letter to Mr. Xalinowaki.
Tha Board explained that they thought it would he better to create a 40 ft. easement
to the back lot and all were in favor of the suggestioo. New plans will he presented
to the Board for their nex~ meeting.
R. & S. CONSTR~CTION CO..'
Atty. Willis said that the FHA has requested changes in the apartment plans
and requested that he meet with the Board at a later date.
In Ex~utive session tha Board ~iscu~sed th~ petitioos of the
1. Paul Crete.
The Board cheeked with the Assessor's maps to see the other lots ia the area. They
noted that there was also sewer facilities in the area. There were m~,y u~derai~e~
lots in the surrounding area and the division as proposed would create ~m*~ar lots.
Mr. O'Leary =*de a motion to GRANT the variance. Mr. Burke seconded the motic~ and
the vote was unanimous.
1. Granting the petition ~ not deviate frc~ the intent and purpose of the Zonimg
By-Lawe.
2. Denial ef the petition would cause h~dship, financial or otherwise, te tha
petiticaer.
3. The lots, as proposed, are in keeping with those ia the i~mediate area and w~2
not be detrimental or degrading to the neighborhood.
2. Ke~im D~ova~ This petition is to he heard at the next meting pending presentatioo
of proper plans.
3. M. & S. Building & Const~action Co.
A lengthy discussion was held. Mr. Deyo felt that an article should be re-
subaitted and passed at Town Meeting then the Board ea~ a~t on this type of petition.
He feels that the Board w~uld he overs$$~ing their authority if they passed on this.
September 18, 1967 - Cont.
That there would be too mush of a deviation from the By-~aws.
~r. Burke made a motio~ to GRANT the petition. ~r. D~mn,~ seconded the motion.
discussion ~as held.
F~rther
Mr. O'Leary felt the Board should get legal advice from Town Oounsel. He agrees that
the to~n needs someth~_~ like this, but le~s look at it the right ~ay.
Mr. D~mond, Mr. Burke and Mr. O~]wa, feel it is good for the toga. There was no
oppos[tion at the hear~_~_~.
Mr. O'Leary said he would like to defer his vote - he doe~a~t wish to vote the way it
Mr. Deyo said the Zoning By-Laws should be changed to allow Studio apartments a~d
~ er area requirements - then if it is passed at To~ Meeting the Board can aot
on it.
The vote was t~ken on the motion. Mr. G~w~, Mr. Burke and Mr. Drummond voted in
favor of granting the petition. Mr. O'Leary and Mr. Deyo voted against t.~ granting.
It was not a ~aJority vote so that the petition is denied. The reasons would be that
it is too gross of a deviation of the Zoning By-Laws and the petitioner can go to
Town Meeting for relief.
The ~eeting adjourned at 9:15 ~ P.~4
JAD