Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1953-08-11August 11, 1953 The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 7:30 P.M. in the Court Room of the Town Building. This was a Public Hearing advertised in the Evening Tribune on July 27, 1953. A~I a~utters were ~otified. Members present: R~chard G. Whipple, Chairm~u,' Andrew E. Alvin% Secretary, Peter RitChie, Henry E. Lurid and Edward Reinhold. An application was received from Philip W~tson and others who cl~im to have been aggrieved by a decision of the Building Inspector in issuing a building permit so as to allow two trailers to be placed on one lot located on Irving Road. Attorney Paul J. Pero~chi represented the group of persons making this appeals ' Arty. Perocchi referred to Article 2, section 2, paragraph(a) and Article 2 section 1 .of the Zoning By-Laws of the Town which sectibns cover General aud Single Residence Districts. Mr_, Perocchi stated that a trailer was no~ ac~tually. a single famil~ residence and g~ave for reference Chapter 90, section 1 of ~he General laws giving the definition of a trailer and this definition was under the heading of vehicles and aircraft. He also referred to the Building Laws of the Town and read section 31 which states that : "Each room shall be in every part at least seven feet~ six inches from the finished floor to the finished ceiling" this same section also s rates tbmt, "In every dwelling-house there shall be in each apartment at least one room contel-tug no% less than 140 squsre feet. Mr. Perocchi stated that trailers could not meet either of these requireme~r~s. He also brought before the Board the question of l~metherr~r not the Board of Selectmen had authority to instruct the Building Inspector to either issue or revoke a building permit. He declared that the Selectmen only had the right to appoint or discharge the Building Inspector, He also stated that there should be a co~y of the Building Permit application and a plot plan filed with the Board by the Buildin~ Inspector and asked if this Board had such a plot plan and application in their files. He was informed that the Board did not have the application and Plot plan on file. He stated that the two trailers in question were formerly located on Chickering Road~ but were' ordered moved because t~ey were in violation and that they were also in violation at the new location on Irving Road. Mr. Perocchi again refer~ed to the Board of Selectmen and stated' that it was his understaudin~ that they first instructed the Building Inspector to issue a permit and then later instructed him to revoke it. That they ag~t- recinded the revocation and instructed the Building Inspector to issue a new permit. Ne stated again that the Board of Selectmen do not have the authority to ~struct the Building Inspector either to issue or revoke a Building Permit but that the Building Inspector was answerable to the Zoning Board of Appeals. He then asked if the owners of the trailers were present and when informed that they were not he stated that they should have interested enough to be present so that he could ask them questions. Mr. Perocchi stated that the Building Inspector had no right to issue the building permit in the first p~Aoe since trailers cannot meet the building laws. He then asked what type of permit was issued. If it was a construction permit~ he stated that there was nothing constructed. He them stated that the objectors had nothing personal against the Lymph.* who have the trailers but that they felt that trailers should not be pe~mltted ~in a residential areat that they all had nice homes amd that these trailers will bri~ the valu~ of the surrounding home down in value. - Tho fe3_lowing perseus then addressed the bard and gave %hei~ reasons for being aggrieved, Philip Wa~8on) 33 Perley ~d.) Ernes~ gress~ ~ I~ Rd.~ Charles W. MeDade 3~ Columbia Ed., Alvin C. Watt,~ Cold, ia Rd.~ $everie Medici, Oelumbia Rd., Ra~mond J. ~urke, Perley ~d., Nmber~ Wilcox, 2horndike Rd.~ Joseph Montgomery, Therndike Rd. a~ Wilfred Bottomley, Thorndike Rd. ~11 ~he opponents $~a~ed that ~hey had nothing personal agains %he LTmans bat all felt that the alloawan~e of trailers in this area would devaluate ~he S~-A~LI~i~g properties. They aloe questioned ~he right of an~ person to place two dwellings en one lot. The question August 1I~ 1~53 0ent. ef sanitary conditions was alee discussed. Mr. Watson declaring that the ~ had been at this location for several weeks new and that there wer~ & mmber of children in the iuned£a~e neighborhood and with the pelto season at hand he felt that this was a dangerous situation. He. wx'ged that the ~nans either be removed er be provided with sewer a~d water. He was advised at this point that this was a Batter for the Board ef ~ealth. At~omuy L~n~h t~en spo~ for the LTmaua. Ho charged that Mr, de~tion of a ~er w~ ~en f~n ~e ~r ~oba ~ ~n ~e ~e~ of a tr~er ~ ~d ~d it ~ ~ced en a f~ation ~o ~ ~ve ~d ~ ~ on ~ nei~ for b~ ~r. tM ~t~r of ~s~ ~s a mt~r for the ~ of ~t~ He ~t ~ ~e ~ ~fe~d ~ w~t for ~ &cisi~ of t~ Attorney I~nch then submitted a u~tion for the dismissal of the case en the gre-nds that the appellants were not properly' age, eyed. M~tion was then ~ade and seconded and it was unani~us~v Veted to take the ~attsr under advisenent* After a five Linate recess~ the Board heard the application ef Ch4rles' Oyr, whe otst~ that he had been refused a building permit by ~ Building' Inspector to constrnct two dwellings on Great Pond Road. Mr. ~yr stated that he was a~are ef the fact that he had to co~p~V with not on~v ~he local Board of Health laws but also had to ceup~V with $~ate Board of health regulations for fats partim~lar locations. He stated that he had met aL1 the requirements as fc~ as the State was concerned a nd at this point Mr. Duffy assured the Board that Mr. O~r had met all the State requirements and that the State we.~' require him tete inspect ~he set-up before it is covered. Mr. Oyr then stated that he had mt AI_~ possible requirements and he felt that he sould not be denied a building per,fit at this location. Motion was then nade And seconded and it was voted to take the matter under advisement. After earet~,lly considering the above applications~ ~ motion was made and ~ecended and it was ,,~-~,~usly VOTED that the Board would view $~e premises where the trailers were located on August 13, 1~53 and then would neet in executive session to veto on this matter. Motion was then made and seconded and it was ,,~-~m-us~v voted to anthoriee 'the Building Inspector to issue a bu~lding permit te Charles 0yr te erect two hoUSes en ~reat Pond Head for the following reasons: 1-The two lots in question are not considered a subdivision by the Board. 2-The legation ef these lets is on an accepted street. ~-The Board fe~ls that Mr' Cyr has met all the requirements from the State and that the building ef the cep+~ic tanks and draiuage will be done under the supervision ef Mr. Duffy of the local Board of Public Werks, N~tion was then aade and seconded and it was voted 't~ adJoux~ She mo, sting at 'lO:h~ P.~.