Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-03-11 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Tern of North Andover ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Members Associate Member Michael T, Lisa, Chair fr j �, Matthew J.Ginsburg Laura Craig-Comm, Vice-Chair Zachary J.IHachey Frank J.Killilea, Clerk Melissa Rutherford James M.'Testa Zoning Enforcement Officer Alexandria A. Jacobs, Esq Raul G.Hutchins MEETING MINUTES Date of Meeting: Tuesday, March 11, 2025 Time of Meeting: 7:30 p.m. Location of Meeting: Town Hall, 120 Main Street,North Andover, MA 01845 Signature: Terri MacNeil 1. Call to Order called at 7:30 p.m.. Members Present: Alexandria A. Jacobs, Esq.,Michael T. Lis, Matthew J. Ginsburg, Esq., Laura Craig-Comin and Melissa Rutherford. Staff present: 'Perri MacNeil Gavel given to: Michael T. Lis Pledge of Alliance 2. Acceptance of Minutes—Reguest to Continue M. Lis has been given a draft of the following minutes: a. October 8, 2024 b. November 19, 2024 c. December 10, 2024 d. January 14,2025 A. Jacobs made a Motion to table the minutes for next meeting. L. Craig-Cowin seconded the motion. M. Lis, aye, M. Ginsburg, aye,M. Rutherford, aye. 3. 922 Dale Street The Applicant is requesting a "Variance pursuant to Town of North Andover ,Zoning Bylaws Section 195-7.1(A) Contiguous buildable area ("CBA") in the 1t-1 Zoning District for the purpose of constructing a single-family house on a vacant lot contingent upon the Planning Board's approval subdividing the lot into two parcels. Specifically,Applicant has requested CBA needing a,relief variance of 3,457 square feet (the CBA proposed is 61,883 square feet or 71% of the total lot area and the CBA. required is 65,340 square feet or 75% of the total lot area). Notices air(]agendas arc to be posted 48 It ours in a(Ivance of meeting excluding Saturdays,Sri nalays,anti legal holidays.I'Iease keep io In nd the Town Ctc:oes lroan-s of operation and make necessary amant entelits to be stare that posting is made io air adequate atniount of time.A listing of topics tii,e chain•reasonably anticipates Will be discussed of a meeting ni°e to be listed on file Agenda.Note:Atalters Minn be called out ofoi tei•and not as they appear in the Agenda. Page 1 of8 Town of North Andover ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS The Applicant is requesting a Variance pursuant to Town of North Andover Zoning Bylaws Section 195-7.3 Yards (setbacks) Table 2: Summary of Dimensional Requirements for one side setback in the R-1 Zoning District for the purpose of constructing a single-family house on a vacant lot contingent upon the Planning Board's approval subdividing the lot into two parcels. Specifically, Applicant has requested a side setback needing a relief variance of 2.7 ft. (side setback proposed is 27.3 ft.,side setback required per Table 2 is 30 feet). Clerk reads the legal notice into the record. Public Comment Joseph McCarthy, the Applicant, who lives at 922 Dale Street is at podium. He stated that there are 2 parcels. One parcel he will keep for himself, the other he will sell to Dr. Arthur Gonsalves. The CBA requires 75%is required for 2 acres, his lot has 3.47,75%. The other parcel which he will sell will have 71%,will still have 97%open space. If the land is split, he will have 98%open space. He spoke about the harm it would cause him. He spoke about the financial hardship to him if the variance would not be approved. M. Lis asked since you are dividing the lots into 2 parcels through the Planning Board, was there any apportionment of those 2 lots that would end up with both of them meeting the CBA requirement. Applicant states no. Wetlands are to the north side which is less than half an acre. It is the buffer zone, including the buffer zone on the other side of Dale Street, the land that belongs to a neighbor, that buffer zone is almost 2 acres. His parcel will be 1.5 acres of CBA which is required, the other parcel would be 1.4281 acres which is around 3500 square feet short. There is an obstruction on Dale Street, the Applicant spoke to the DPW, some construction material was buried on his property. Water has been backed up on his property for 20 years. The Town took care of it by removing the obstruction. No backup since that time. He has 8 parcels of land. All of parcels are approximately 1 acres, rezoned now 2 acres. His proposed lot would consist of 142,710 square feet or roughly 3.2 acres, and the wetland buffer zone would be 77,390 square feet, the CBA required is 65,340 square feet,that is what I will have, however the proposed lot is a 2 acre lot there will be 87,120 square feet, the wetlands buffer zone is 25,186 square feet, the CBA is 61,883 square feet, and as you said earlier, I need about 30,457 square feet to have 75%, I don't, I have 71%. A. Jacobs----you are creating your own lot line, so why aren't you just shifting the lot line so that you have essentially everything you need. The Applicant states there is not enough CBA, he needs 3 acres between the 2 lots. A. Jacobs--you said your lot would have 100%. ZBA Mintiles for March 11,2025 Page 2 of 8 Town of North Andover ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS The Applicant states that he would need 1.5 acres for his existing lot. The back of his property is hay, farm land, which all the neighbors enjoy. He will have that in writing with Dr. Gonsalves that the field will be untouched. M. Lis—Does anyone have any questions on the CBA? There were no further questions. M. Lis—Let's move onto the setback. Applicant - The proposed house that Dr. Gonsalves is building is 27.3 feet from the property line, so the setback is 2.7 feet. The applicant did research on prior•ZBA rulings, his variance is not out of the ordinary. M. Lis—the Board does not work on a precedent like a court of law. M. Lis—calls Dr. Gonsalves to the podium. Dr. Gonsalves was the general contractor for the in-law suite on the Applicant's lot. Ile wanted the highest lot. He would build a modern farmhouse. The corner of the house would be within the boundaries. M. Lis—if you are going to have set back variant I prefer it to be on the side that is neighboring the house of the other lot that this is coming from. M. Ginsburg—given the relatively generous size of the house, where there no other options available to you that would have taken that corner in 2.7 feet to have that in compliance. Dr. Gonsalves--the size of the garage. Getting the lot is the most important thing, I have 7 people in my family, that spot is ultimately where I would have an in-law. M. Ginsburg—my understanding is that you are building a house for your daughter. Dr. Gonsalves----that is correct. Two adults, the third spot on the garage would be an in-law apartment for me and my wife. L. Craig- Comin—why have a 3 car garage and not a 2 car garage? Dr, Gonsalves—other pitch is that the south face to be solar. Where it cuts into the other house you are not going to have that much surface area. L. Craig-Comin—you mean where the gable is, it's just over the garage. A. Jacobs—am I missing something is there a 4th garage ZBA Minutes for March 11,2025 Page 3 of 8 Town of North Andover ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Dr. Gonsalves—it's a spot to put an lawn mower in. A. Jacobs - am I missing a driveway on the plans Dr. Gonsalves—the driveway issue with planning and the building there is a tree in the way of the driveway. When they cut the street down to make it closer to the grade, they killed 4 trees. I have to come off Winter Street. L. Craig-Comin---asking the least to get exactly what they want. M. Lis—any other questions. Are there any comments from the audience who would like to come forward to speak. Tim Lane—21 Russett Lane is at the podium. Was concerned what else would happen if he didn't get the variance. Applicant states that he would have to move. Mr. Lane addressed the hardship and stated that the Applicant just built an in-law apartment. Interaction between the Applicant and Mr. Lane. M. Lis—the folks speaking need to be on the microphone for the sake of public record, let's take this one at a time and you can say everything you need and the Applicant can respond. Mr. Lane—Addressing the hardship on the Applicant, the Applicant just put a massive addition onto his house, which he understands that the Applicant would move into that and his son would move into the house. M. Lis—When we talk about hardship, we don't talk about financial hardship, we talk about hardship in terms of soil shape and topography, that if the existing zoning bylaws were to be applied to this wouldn't make proper sense that is out standard that we work from. Mr. Lane—so I guess it doesn't make sense either way. I do have a concern that I now hear that the new house is going to have basically two families in it, an in-law apartment and a regular house, our school systems are already strapped. We should probably stick to what our zoning is so that we are not adding more and more people to the community. A. Jacobs—where are you in relation to the property. Mr. Lane—I am on 21 Russett Lane A. Jacobs--you are an abutter to the property. Mr. Lane--yes A. Jacobs--have you had any flooding issue or anything like that Mr. Lane—no we are higher ZBA Minutes for Marcii 11,2025 Page 4 of 8 Town of North Andover ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Amy Bergeron, 21 Russet Lane, the other owner is at the podium. We have not had any flooding issues related to that. L. Craig-Comin— so your concern would mainly be about increased density in the area. Can you see the property from your land. Amy Bergeron—yes we can see the property from the back field. Did not realize that it would be a two family,just heard that. A. Jacobs----the proposed building is to be a single family with either be a ADU or a family suite, which would be a separate issue that would come down the road. M. Lis--it is not defined as a two family L. Craig-Comin—you would need a special permit to add an in-law suite. A. Jacobs—a family suite, you do except for an ADU Paul Hutchins—So technically they put an accessory house right where he wants to put it with nobody involved in it. Amy Bergeron—say that again P. Hutchins----They could put an accessory dwelling of 900 square feet right where they want to put his house right now without anybody having to go through anybody right now. That is what the new ADU law is right now. He could put a solar farm on there right now, there are things he can do that I would have no control over it. Amy Bergeron—OK Mr. Lane---It would be put in writing that the house will go in that exact spot is that part of the process of this approval and later just decide to move it to the back corner. M. Lis—if we accept this variance we will site the plans with the house on them. If they want to build something else or somewhere else, they need to come back. L. Craig-Comin—anything other than what is on the plans that are referenced Mr. Lane—that was the only comment. We love the field. P. Hutchins—if he changes anything on the plans as built, he would have to come back before the Board. They can shrink it and make it smaller but they can't go outside the footprint that they have showing right now. Mr. Lane— I was just worried about it moving somewhere else P. Hutchins—It would have to be exactly what they are proposing in front of us right now. Mr. Lane and Ms. Bergeron leave the podium. Z.BA Minutes for March 11,2025 Page 5 of 8 Town of North Andover ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS M. Lis—any other questions or comments from the board before we move to our next step. Mr. McCarthy would you come back to the podium. The applicant is asked if he has any further questions or comments you would like to make before we move on. Applicant states no. M. Lis—The options before you is that is you so desire we can move to a vote so we will close the public comment. We would deliberate amongst ourselves in public, so no more input from outside of our group. We will then vote and like all variances we will need a super majority so you would need four out of five votes. Do you want to proceed? Applicant—yes. Ms. Lis—do we have a motion. A. Jacobs—I will make a motion to close public comment, Laura Craig-Comin, seconded, Michael T. Lis, aye, Matthew J. Ginsburg, aye, Laura Craig-Comin, aye and Melissa Rutherford, aye. M. Lis so public comment is closed. Board deliberates separating the variance and the CBA. A. Jacobs -The problem is that the application is put in as one application, they can't be split. They would have to take it out and come back. M. Liss — so if we vote today we are choosing to vote for all or nothing Laura Craig-Comin—if they came back with just the CBA variance, they would have to wait 2 months A. Jacobs—two years. When you get denied, unless you have a substantial change it can't come back for two years. M. Lis—it would have to be a radically different plan A. Jacobs—I don't think eliminating a 2.7 foot variance would be enough M. Rutherford even if we as a board request that change A. Jacobs—The Applicant just closed the meeting, so the board has two options you either approve or you deny that's the whole purpose is there anything other before we shut it. L. Craig-Comin—is it truly too late to ask if they want to continue M. Ginsburg----I think the problem is that the applicant was not aware. Z13A Minutes for March It,2025 Page 6 of 8 Town of Noah Andover ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS M. Lis—I don't feel comfortable hitting them with this that way. I did not inform them sufficiently as the chair. I would be open to reopening this meeting if the Board deems it necessary, but I am not going to do it without permission from the rest of you. M. Ginsburg W--I am in favor of reopening. P. Hutchins—The applicant stated that the CBA was more important than the set back. M. Lis—The only way to rewind this is to reopen the meeting. A. Jacobs—This is very self-creating, I would vote to deny the setback. L. Craig-Comin—does anyone have an issue with the CBA. M, Ginsburg—does not have an issue with the CBA M. Rutherford - does not have an issue with the CBA L. Craig-Comin - does not have an issue with the CBA M. Lis—I am not bothered by the set back. M. Lis--In the interest of wrapping up this meeting at some point, are we interested in unwinding the clock. I want people's comments because this is a vote to close the deliberation and reopen the public comment. A. Jacobs—I am not objecting to unwinding if you feel that the Application didn't get a full- fledged explanation or fee of what they do. M. Lis--I don't think they did, so is someone willing to make a;notion A. Jacobs—I'll make a motion to reopen public comment, L. Craig-Comin, seconded. M. Lis - All in favor. M. Lis, aye, M. Ginsburg, aye, aye and M. Rutherford, aye M. Lis—Asks the Applicant to return to the podium. Dr. Gonsalves is at the podium Dr. Gonsalves—as far as the corner of the lot, as I briefly alluded to the whole project wasn't contingent on the corner of the garage being 2 feet wider than it had to be, we would be happy to pull the plans, come back at the next meeting or whatever we have to wait and have my architect slice it to like a two and half foot garage so like a mini car or a smaller car would still fit in. The other things is that every time the wetlands got measured and everything got shifted around on the property size. Originally the lot that I was getting was huge and there was going to be a lot of places to put the house in respecting the field. I do not know the protocol. I can speak for the Applicant that he would want that. M. Lis—we would continue the meeting for next month and you would come back with a revised variance request. You would need to get updated plans. ZBA Minutes for March 11,2025 Page 7 of 8 Town of North Andover ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Applicant agrees L. Craig-Cumin—your other option if you don't want to give up the garage, you could squeeze the front porch. Dr. Gonsalves----the porch could be a little shorter. I wanted the house to be straight with the street while he had it kitty cornered and it fit and I didn't dislike a kitty cornered house. There are options. M. Lis—I am largely responsible here for not understanding our own Mlles about what can be separated and what can't when we vote so that's really on me. Applicant we are taking out the 2.7 variance, update the plot plan. How far do I have to go, a new application? M. Lis—it is a continuance not a new one. If you withdrew this and filed a new one in like 4 months then it would require that, but because it's a continuance,you don't need to. In terms of the plans, the number one thing is that we need to be able to see the floor plan on the map that is now conforming so that we can site that as the thing we are approving and whether you have the full breath of designs like this it is up to how much you want to convince the Board that the design is worthwhile and fits. As long as it is a conforming footprint,then you are bound to that footprint, I consider that sufficient for our records in terms of what we list in the variance. Applicant—so basically taking out the 2.7 foot setback and exclude that from the variance update the plot plan, and we are back next month. M. Lis—so on our end we need a motion to continue. A. Jacobs—I make a motion to continue 922 Dale Street until April S«'. M, Ginsburg seconded. M. Rutherford, aye, L. Craig-Comin, aye, M. Lis, aye 4. 40B Correspondence. Was not provided to the Board. It will be tabled for next meeting. A. Jacobs--I make a motion to continue the acknowledgment of the 40B correspondence that's dated January 29, 2025 regarding Orchard Village. L. Craig-Comin—Seconded, M. Ginsburg, aye, M. Lis, aye, M. Rutherford, aye 5. Adjournment 8:30 p.m. M. Lis—I make a motion to adjourn, Alexandria seconded, M. Ginsburg, aye, M. Lis, aye, M. Rutherford, aye, L. Craig-Comin Z13A Minutes for Mach 11,2025 Page 8 of 8