Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1968-08-12244 Monday - August 12, 1968 Regular Meeting & Hearings The BOARD OF APPEALS held their regular meeting on Monday evening, August 12, 1968 at 7:30 P.M. in the Town Office Building. The following members were present and voting: James A. Deyo, Chairman; Arthur Drummond, Secretary; Daniel T. O'Leary, Donald J. Scott and Philip Arsenault, Esq. There were 12 people present for the hearings of the evening. 1. HEARING: Sherwood Homes, Inc. Mr. Drummond read the legal notice in the appeal of Sherwood Homes, Inc. who requested a variance under Section 6.33 of the Zoning By-Law so as to permit the utilization of a parcel of land containing 16.88 acres, which is greatly inexcess of the required area but lacking minimum street frontage requirements on the premises, located at the west side of Johnson Street, approx. 2500 feet distant from the corner of Rea Street and known as Clay Pit Hill Pasture. John J. Shields, president of Sherwood Homes, Inc., stated it was desired to have the property given the status of a legal lot. As the land now stands, it could not be used even though it is greatly in excess of the minimum area required because there are only 50 feet of frontage on a street. A building permit for any type of con- struction could not and would not be issued in its present status. He said a hard- ship exists from the financial aspect as well as the end use aspect. Mr. Thornton, an abutter, was opposed saying it does not meet the requirements of the Zoning By-Law. The question was asked as to whether or not this could go to the Planning Board as not requiring approval under the Subdivision Control Law. Mr. Shields said it is not his intention to subdivide the lot, he merely wants the land recognized and given the status of a legal lot. Mrs. Reynolds, another abutter, was concerned about there being alot of houses built there. Mr. Shields explained that it will be only one lot and only one house can be built on it. Mr. O'Leary made a motion to take the petition under advisement. Mr. Scott seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. 2. HEARING: Village Land Company. Mr. Drummond read the legal notice in the appeal of Village Land Company who requested a variance under Sections &.73-c, 6.2, 6.31 and 7.23 of the Zoning By- Law so as to permit the division of land with existing buildings thereon for the purpose of conveyance on the premises, located at 10, 12 & l& Clarendon Street; 6,8,10,12,16,18,22,24, 19,21,33,35,37,39,41 and 3~,36,38,~0,~2 and ~ East Water Street. Atty. John J. Willis represented the petitioner. Also present were Atty. Gerard Goldstein counsel for the prospective purchaser of the property and Mr. Warren Sawyer, the buyer. Atty. Willis explained that the Village Land Company desired to divest itself of the properties. The buildings etc., as situated, constituted one large parcel and it was necessary to divide the land into unique lots, tailoring the lots so as to best conform to the existing buildings. There would be no exterior work done by the prospective owner as far as extensions to the buildings. There is planned a complete refurbishing including exterior painting. In general, the only out- ward change would be an improvement to the site and a probable increase in valuation. Mr. Scott made a motion to take the petition under advisement; seconded by Mr. O'Leary and voted unanimously. August 12, 1968 - cont. DECISIONS: 1. Village Land Company: Mr. O'Leary made a motion to grant the variance; Mr. Drummond seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. The petition is granted as follows: 1. Regarding the land as shown on a plan submitted with said petition entitled "Appeal Board Plan East Water Street and Clarendon Street, North Andover, Mass." a variance is granted from the provisions of Section 6.2 of the North Andover Zoning By-Law ~a inso- far as it applies to subdivision. 2. Regarding Lots #6, #8 and ~9, all as shown on the plan submitted with said petition, a special permit is granted under the provisions of Section &.73 of the North Andover Zoning By-Law so as to allow apartment dwellings consisting of six apartments on said lots. 3. Regarding Lots ~6, ~8 and ~9, all as shown on plans submitted with said petition, a variance is granted from the frontage requirements under Section &.73, subparagraph E, of the North Andover Zoning By-Law and to the requirements of said Section &.73, subparagraph E of said By-Laws applicable to sidelines. &. Regarding Lot #8, the provisions of Section &.73C of the North Andover Zoning By-Laws will be varied to the extent that Lot #8 does not meet the necessary re- quirements of 3,500 square feet per apartment. 5. Regarding Lots #10 and #11, a variance is granted as to the area requirements contained in paragraph 6.31 of the said Zoning By-Laws. 6. E~XERegarding Lots#l, #2, #3, #A, #5, #lO and#ll a variance is granted from the requirements of Section 7.23 requiring thirty foot front yards and Section 6.31 requiring one hundred feet of street frontage and fifteen f~et for sideyards. 7. Regarding lots #6, ~ and $9 all as shown on plans submitted, a variance is granted from the provisions of &.73C insofar as the height of the two opposing walls are greater than the distance between the two buildings. 8. Regarding Lots #1, #2, #3, #~, #5 and~6 on the northeast side of East Water Street and which are non-conforming as residential use in an industrially zoned parcel of land, a special permit and variance under Sections 3.8, 6.51 and 7.& is granted so as to permit the continuance of the non-conforming residential use of the land. Reasons for granting variance and special permit: 1. The special permit and variance are granted due to special conditions affecting the parcels and buildings involved but not affecting generally the zoning district in which they are located. A literal enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance or By-Law would involve substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the appellant; desirable reliex may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good; and will not nullify or substantially derogate from the intent and purpose of our Zoning By-Law. 2. The land in question and the buildings involved have been owned by the appellant for a period in excess of 50 years. The present Zoning By-Law was passed in 1956 and all of the subject land and buildings in this petition became in effect non-conforming uses. The petitioner is in the process of offering for sale many of its real estate holdings throughout the town not directly connected with its operation as an industrial August 12, 1968 - cont. manufacturer. Said petitioner would be unable unless this special permit and variance were granted to effect the sale of the premises involved. The area in which the subject land and buildings are located is one which has been developed prior to our Zoning Law and consists of lots of similar size and similar use as the land and buildings in this petition. The granting of this variance and special permit would in no way change the nature and character of the neighborhood in- volved. The granting of this special permit and variance would be in the best interests of the town as testimony at the hearing indicated that the buildings involved would be substantially improved and result in a more attractive and desirable property in this area. 2. Sherwood Homes, Inc.: Mr. O'Leary made a motion to grant the variance; seconded by Mr. ~,~m,~x Scott. The vote was A-1 with Mr. ~rsenault voting against. The reasons for granting are as follows: 1. Not. granting the variance would cause severe hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner in denying him any use of said land. 2. The use of a 50-foot access to interior land is reasonably normal practice. 3. Granting the variance will not deviate from the intent and purpose of the Zoning By-Laws. The condition attached to this approval is that there be no structures within the lot erected within 50 feet of the access lane that would block access to the remainder of said lot. MEDOLO: Mr. Medolo had submitted new plans as requested, but the Board found they were still inadequate. Mr. O'Leary made a motion to grant the variance subject to the submission of satisfactory plans. Mr. Scott seconded the motion. Further dis- cussion was held and Mr. O'Leary withdrew the motion. The Board will wait until proper plans are submitted and then act on the petition. The meeting adjourned at 10:O0 P.M. JAD Chairman