The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2016-02-09 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes ?bin/ qfNorlh Andover ZONING BOA RD &vA/PlALY Albert P. Manzi III,Ls6. Chairman tIORTH Associate Member F.WenAMcIntyre, Vice-Chairman 0 Ame yMo/gm/tho/ ll Paul Koch Jr. Eb� NoU)n//J� }Myi/ru�0 .4Vxn ��/s6o Alexandria,d. Jacobs Esq. Doug Lmdg&x Zoning Enforcement Officer 3 Are. GemldA. Dmwn CHUS Tuesday February 09,2Ol6ut7:3OPM School Administration Building 566 Main S1ooct,NnrtbAudovcr,Mumuuubnodta Members present: Al Manzi 0D,Eog.,Doug&,udgim and 0, Paul Koch JrEsq. Associate Members yrumoot 0cocy Mocgautbol,and Nathan Wminroimh. Excused Absence: Ellen P McIntyre,Allan Cuscia,Alexandria Jacobs,Esq. &8\ aonzj III called the Meeting{o order or7:35pm Acceptance of Minutesjanuary 12,2016 TlliUdgin made a motion(oapprove I2]P.l Koch second the motion Those voting in favor to approve the minutes were: A. Manzi 111,D.P.Koch,D. LUdgin, D. Morganthal and N. Weinreich. Chairman declared the minutes approved. � Committee Reports Housin$!Partnership Committee � A.Manzi stated that E. McIntyre sits oil both the Housing Partnership Committee and the OSGOD Committee,so the report will have to be tabled until ILl McIntyre iuiu attendance at the next meeting. � Miscellaneous Correspondence � � December 3l,20l5 Law Office nf Matthew A. Cuf6oy P.C. oUcr� Rc�Tn�nnJ0or&��oduvcr/Dr� ��ohmdLouiboiIannury07, � . � 20l6 Town oINorth Andover, Zoning Board of Appeals Letter:Ku: AUnnnuyCuffrcy|oUur January ||'28|6 Goodman, Shapiro& Lombardi,LLC Letter:Re: Oakrdgo Village—Maple Reserve. January 29,2Ol6 Community Housing,Inc. re: OakrNgeVillage. � New Public Hearin � � Variance for Zoning District 0-| Smolak and Vaughn LLP and Andover Consultants, Inc. oil behalf of Suzanne Wright,Trustee of tile Technical Training Foundation n.k.a. Technical Training Foundation Trust for property located at ]665 Great Pond Road(Map 6%, Parcel }9)'North Andover,M/\Ol845.Petition 28|6-O0|`the applicant is requesting u variance pursuant in section 4.|36.3.c.ii3for � ounotruubonofanuvvpormuuuctytrootureboUbok-| ZonbugDiubiuL AJ Manzi disclosed that Mr.MacLeod from Andover Consultants, Inc. had done some work.for him and asked if Attorney Vaughn or MxJMacJ^eo�l`*ould like him torecoaehimself. Mb.MacLeod and Attorney Vaughn stated that&. Manzi did not need tn/uouuohimself Attorney B.Vaughn and Mr.MacLeod on behalf of on behalf of Suzanne Wright,Trustee of the Technical Training Foundation a.k.a. Technical Training Foundation Trust ioat the podium/table 1oayuak.. A.Manzi stated that procedurally the way tile ZBA works is they are a five(5)person board,with five(5)regular members and three (3)alternates. He stated they these inaters require a super majority vote to be approved which would be four(4)votes to be approved. I .P.J Koch read the Legal Notice: � l �Pugo anou ,y | 2 . 20 1 6 � � 2bnn of Norlh Andover Z0NIY88(A880FA/P/ALS J0xrtP.Maxzilll,Esq. Chairman OORTH Associate Member £ �&�n/�r4 Y/�xm-/Choirmuo Ellen 8m/qyMo/gon/6n/ I\ yoo/�oc6Jx �� Nathan Iff\einreich A&x// Umdo d&xoo��. Jxm6x�yg. &ong Lndgin o Zoning Enforcement Officer Crerx6/d,B/nwx Notice ia hereby given that the Board of Appeals will hold a public hearing at the North Andover School Administration Building at 566 Main Street, North Andover, MA on Tuesday, yuhnumy 09, 2016 at 7:30 PK4ro all parties interested in the petition for Smn\uk and VmoDho LLy and /\uJovm Consultants, Inc. on behalf of Suzanne Wright, Trustee of the 7oohnion] Training Foundation a.k.a. Technical Training Foundation Trust for property located at 1665 Great Pond Road(Map 62,Pa rcel 19),North Andover,M&8lX45. The applicant is requesting a variance pursuant to section 4.136.3.c.ii.3 for construction of a new permanent structure io the D-lZoning District. /\ Variance is requested under 8cchoo4.|36(VVo|orahed Protection Division), 3 (Uses and Building Requirements), o. b (3) (Non- Disturbance Buffer Zone),of the Zoning Bylaws. Application and supporting nuain6u)a are available for review at the mOIoa of the Zoning Department |uuntod at 1600 Osgood Sbou|' North Andover, MA, Monday, Wednesday and Thursday from the hours of 8:00-4:00, Tuesday from the hours of 800-5:30 and Friday fiom8:O0tm 11:30 By order of the Board ofAppeals Albert P. Manzi ULEug., Chairman � A l Manzi asked for verification from Attorney Vaughn and Mr. MacLeod that this request iou multi-board jurisdictional project. � Attorney Vaught and Mr.lMacLeod ooufinothat they have already filed all application with the Planning Board and that they have � requested a continuance until March 1,2016 pending a decision from the Zoning Board of Appeals. A'Manzi asks if this need to also br heard 6y the Conservation Commission. Attorney Vauphn and Mr. MacLeod state that no this petit i on/app I ication does not need to be heard by the Conservation Commission. AJ\&anzi states that the Board has had previous app|icudooa5nzVYutembedPnoteodon`vaivorbeariogo,oudquoo|ionwhu<horthureio Storm water component ao pail of the Planning Board process. Attorney Vaughn and Mr. MacLeod state that yes there is and it is in review right now with the Planning Boards pier engineer. � A Manzi asks if the construction plan is different fi-om the plan submitted to the Board. Attorney Vaughn � and Mr. MacLeod 000firo that yes d could 6o different and that�6isionlioluh�diOerunt600u maybe what�uBoard � has�pioaUyseen iu&o past ioNc respect that thmrionkuudydo have uooxioting structure so6y right*o could raise and rebuild oil the same foundation. As this has progressed we think we call improve the project by actually getting rid of the foundation itself and � slightly moving the tbo|p6ut of the building. Under the Bylaw vve occd o Variance for enovv Structure; under the Bylaw you do not need u Variance for the replacement ofon existing structure. So the question came Lip ao{n whether or not wo need in come before this Board. Attorney Vaughn then walks up to the display board (which is on|oqgod and colorized version of the ^^Piuo of the Land", Showing Lot A,(/\auooaor`u Map 62Lot l9)Prepared 6y Andover Consultants Ino.'Dated Jan |3'20|6) and proceeds to clarify that the new proposed structure is substantially located in the same location as the existing Structure and that it is only moving approximately tell (10)feet closer to the roadway going from one hundred and four point six(104.6)to ninety one point four(91.4)feet,and the reason for doing that is the reconstruction is somewhat limited by the existing foundation and that it is a split entry style home, and we believe that we call build a better home than what can be built oil the existing foundation and secondly from a zoning perspective we are actually able to eliminate some existing nonC011formities by moving the structure un you call see hythe Display Board there are a couple of preexisting nonconforming setbacks,where the setback for the side is thirty(30)feet and tile 2 111 v &o Jouuu,y ] 2 ` 201 6 Tgivii ofNorlh A mo ver ZONING BOARD 0F APPEALS Albert P411o/x/III,Esq. Cboi,muo AmmooixtmMemo6mr Ellen P.McInlyr4VioeCbuirmun BmeyMoi-gx/x/0x/ l\ ftn/Koch Jr.E,sq. No/ha/J. Weh/nic6 Allan 0mdo A&zan(lria A. Jacobs Esq. I'o//gl»(lgin Zoning Enforcement Officer Gemhl A, Bm/m existing structure is twenty-five point one(25.1)the proposed would be thirty one(3|) feet. Where sliding the foundation forward wo are looking to build a nicer home. Also as mentioned there is still a need to go thru the Planning Board process. A J Manzi asks Attorney Vaughn if the process is a Plan Review or if it is more than that?As it relates to what you want to do? MI. MacLeod states that itio actually n watershed special permit. A Manzi states that is why they require the Storm water report as it relates to the Lake. A.]Manzi asks Attorney Vaughn and Mr. MacLeod what is driving the need for the project,what is driving the need to change the structure and configuration? Mr. MacLeod states that the applicant looked at having a contractor rebuild the house that was there, and if you have driven by the property you can see that there is still the structure of a house there, but there would be so many things that would have to be done in order to bring the building up to code because you would be improving more than fifty(50%)percent of the house that its really better financially and environmentally better to put a new house on the foundation that's there but we have a foundation of unknown quantity and quality, we have a cellar floor slab that is not the best, and it would reallyjust be better to replace the entire house and if we are replacing the house then that is where we sighted it where we did because now we can get rid of the nonconforming setbacks that are currently there for the existing dwelling and we are putting the house where it is so we are able to the same driveway and doing the least amount of disturbance on the site so that is better to have the least amount of disturbance when we are inside the Washer Shed and its � working with the topography that is there now. The front yard is about eight(8)feet lower than the back yard,so we are fitting the house in to the slope that's there so that we can maintain the level back yard that is there on the site now,and the house would have a � garage under the left hand side so that we are using most of the existing driveway in the front so that we are not having any work at all within o hundred (|0O)feet of the lake.This is why we actually not filing with the Conservation Commission because wo are outside the buffer zone, so this would allow the Trust to build new house and demolish the old house. The new house would be more energy � � offioicn1 oofer,with all new mechanical, and have the least amount of disturbance on the sight. A. Manzi inquires to whether there is mature vegetation on the purposed new location. Mr. MacLeod states that om the area iaclear. A. Manzi inquired ou<u what style home would be constructed oo the location. � Mr. MacLeod stated that u two story home would 6o constructed, but the design of the house was not been set yet.8u also made � mention of the fact that the new location and plan there would be less impervious cover. � l\]Manzi asked what ur who io the Technical Training Foundation. Mr.1MacLeod stated that the Foundation is a non-profit, and that the former owner bequeathed the house to start a not for profit education trust. This Organization(trust)donates all profits to education. So the Trust is looking to maximize the value of the property because all profits are donated 1oeducation. A Manzi asked if the use uf the building will 6e for trust purposes. Mr. MacLeod stated that no that they will build the house and then sell it and the profits will then be donated. Attorney Vaughn also added that this would be a residential home and will be marketed and sold as such, and that it would not be Subject ru any kind wf deed restriction. A. Manzi asked what the landscape is since on the plans it sl ows a retaining wall,what the topography is. 3 1 Pugc Junuu ,y 1 2 , 2 Vl6 � Ybwn offorth Andover ZONING 8LA/W0yAPPEALS Albert P.&yxxzi III,Isy Cboirmao OORTH Associate Member b�vP8�D�� / �icCbairmun Duoey,11orgaxtho/ � Dzn/J�chJnJ�� Nathan J. 111'ehu Vch ,4Vm/ �odx J�mo��J. Jacobs Esq. Do«glaoght Zooing Enforcement Officer � GemldA. Bm/v// � Mb. MacLeod address'the fact of the topography and the slope of the land, and states that there is approximately a seven (7)foot drop � front the back yard to the front,he is purposing to address this by putting the new structure in that location with a garage under the new home, in a similar fashion to the old structure,retaining wall and walkway. A. Manzi asks if the new structure will conforin to the setbacks.Also stated was the fact this is a watershed request. He asks if the Planning Board has given any feedback io terms o[what you are requesting todo. Mr.]MacLeod confirms that yes kwould. In regard to the Planning Board there have only been a few comments fi-on]the peer review, which will bu address once u decision ia made from the ZB/\. � Attorney Vaughn also states that there was a question as to whether or not this would be a replacement structure or a new structure. He stated that they had filed with Planning Board prior to filing with the ZBA under the assumption that it was a replacernent structure not a new structure,but were told that because the foundation is being replaced as well they wanted to make sure the ZBA bad a chance to review the request. � � A|Manzi asks about the Storm Water component. � Mr.MacLeod stated that they submitted their information and that it is under peer review and that there will now be less impervious / cover than before.This will be discussed and gone over with the Planning Boards peer review engineer Eggleston. I1_Lydgilasks if this were|o6c approved today what would 6o the basis and flexibility osio the footprint and design o[the house, after this hearing and/or decision. � Attorney Vaughn states that lie does not believe there would be any change as to the footprint but if it was to change then b would 6om � nloAu|atandpoinUnc*dt0000fbontou||Zmoiogmquimmon\u'ond6cn:vicvvod6ythc8uUdinglnapuc1or*hoxou\diamuctbobuUdiog � permits, Who if found that relief was needed would send us back to the Zoning Board for approval. � � Mr.MacLeod states that the final footprint might have u^Jqg`here and there ura bay window sticking out but k will comply generally to that footprint oashown on(Plan of the Land"containing one(1)nbuct,Showing Lot/k'(Assessor's Map 62 Lot 19)Prepared by � � Andover Consultants lnc,Dated Jan I3,2016), He also goes thru some of the details on the style of home that Would potentially be built. � Al Manzi states that if there were to be a modification/change to the approved foundation then there would be a need to corne before the l8/\ again. Mr. MacLeod states that the requested structure is currently at the Zoning setback requirements so any change would have to be brought � before the Board. � D.Ludgin clarified that the proposed structure could however grow out the front and rear without compromising setbacks in those locations. Attorney Vaughn agreed with that statement but maintained that the requested structure in the one being recorded and that legally that io what they would have to stay within the footprint that is set and been authorized to build on.The intent is that if this is approved to take it to the Architect and instruct him to design based on the approved footprint. There Board members discuss the lack of information uu10 what the new structure will look like, and uatothe Storm Water calculations. 4 1Pugo Juouu ,y 1 2 . 2 Ol6 2bnn oJWorth Avo0vm ZONING BOARD UFAf9EALS Albert y\ 111xn/III,Esq. Chairman AmmouiateMeinbmr Ellen A8IcInnw,e, Vice-Chuirmuu DuoeyiJo(eon/6x/ I\ Paul Koch Jr. �sq. Nathan J. Weh/relch ,d8o// C*xcio /4/uxua(lna,d. Jacobs Esq. J9*ng Laogb/ Zoning Enforcement Officer Gmnk/J. Br"w// D.P. A US Koch asks whether or not the existing structure is vacant or occupied,and it vacant for how long. The size of the existing structure looks to be approximately 3600 square feet vs.the new proposed structure as to the square footage. Both Attorney Vaughn and Mr. MacLeod state that yes it is in fact currently vacant, and has been so for more than a year. Mr. MacLeod states that the existed is a large split entry home and the home would be a large two story home at approximately the same square footage. � A}l Manzi speaks to the possibility of the applicant tocome back before the Z8/\board with what was approved by the Planning Board in regard 10 the deuigo/oonskuodonof the new structure. The is discussion amongst the Board members and the applicants as to what is under the purview of the ZBA in regard to the footprint and the Storm Water peer review information,The discussion went on to past applications and how the ZB/\granted them with conditions. D.P. Koch asked why this to does not need to go before the Conservation Commission. � Both Attorney Vaughn and Mr. MacLeod respond and discuss why they don't think they have togo before the Conservation � Commission. /Ll Manzi made note that uo abutters were present for the Hearing tonight. A. Manzi 000fizmswith Attorney Vaughn that lie is asking for a decision tonight based oil the information that has been subillitted. � Attorney Vaughn � 000fionothe request. � The Board discusses all procedural,evidence and information in regard to the case. � D.Ludgin moved 0o close the public hearing. � lZ.P!Koch seconded. � All in favor W close/\.Manzi, D.LuJgin,D.P. Koch,D. &1or&andba|and Y4. Woitiroich. 5-0 io favor tu close The Board deliberated on what they heard tonight and all evidence and correspondence provided 1othem 6y the applicant. D.T!_Kich uNoro o motion oil the application of 8mn|uk and Vaughn CLP and Andover Consultants, Inc. on behalf of Suzanne Wright, � Trustee of the Technical Training Foundation a.k.a. Technical Training Foundation Trust for property located at 1665 Great Pond Road (Map 62,Parcel 1v),North Andover,Mb\0i845. The applicant is requesting a variance pursuant to section 4,136.3.c.ii.3 for construction of a new permanent structure in the R-1 Zoning District, � /\ Variance is requested under Section 4.|36(WotezdhuJ Protection Divisioo), 3 (Uses and Building Requirements), c ii (3) (Nnn' Diuturbuunn8uOerZuno)' o[thoZooing8y|op/y. With the following Conditions: Upon Approvals from the other Town of North Andover Boards, and an update filed with the ZBA oil the approved project, The dwelling that is constructed must stay with the boundaries as shown in the '^P|uu of the Land" containing one (}) sheet, Showing Lot&, (/\aoouuo/`a Map 62 Lot l9)Prepared 6y Andover Consultants|uu.,Dated Jan 13,2016 5 111 ugc ] 000u ,y 1 2 ^ 2 0l6 � � � Town Andover ZONING BOARD (lFA/,PEALS � | /i8wr PHanniJl1,Esq. Chairman tkORTH Associate Member � f�n//� Mdn�� Vio�Cbulcmou ��y��nAko/ J\ Paul Koch Jr. Esq. Nathan IReinru/d/ Allan Cbxcio d Alexandria.4. Jacobs Esq. � Doug Lmogh/ Zoning Bofvr cement @YOocr so Gemlti A. Bmwn D.P. CHU Koch referenced all letters and written materials that were in Goniofhim, along with all associated dates and those that prepared and/or created said documents. D. Ludgiu second the motion to grant the Variances � All those in favor of the Variances were Paul Koch and Doug Ludgin,Nathan Weinreich and Deney Morganthal. 4-0 all iu favor Chairman declared approved Variance Granted. Miscellaneous Correspondence • December 3|,2O]5 Law Office of Matthew A. Caffrey,P.C. Letter:Re: Town ofNorth Andover/Dr.Richard Lantioi • January V7,2Ol6 Town of North Andover,Zoning Board of Appeals Letter: Re: Attorney Caffrey letter. • January l|,2Ol6 Goodman,Shapiro&Lombardi,LLC Letter: Re: Ookzid&u Village—Maple Reserve. • January J9,20|6Conunuoi{y Housing, Inc. re: DokridgcVillage. IlJLudkgin made u motion W accept all four(4)correspondences. N.VVmiuroiob seconded the motion{n accept. All in favor of accepting the correspondence were D.P.Koch,D.Ludgin,N.Weiureich mudD.K4orgoudhnl. Q:%5pnm D. Morganthal made a motion io adjourn the meeting. Il-Ludgipaonood\komotiou All were in favor to aqjourn the meeting:D.P. Koch,D.Ludgin,N.Weinrcich and D.Morganthal, � ________________________________________________________________ � � Zoning Board of Appeals Agenda February 09, 2016, Draft Minutes; 0ccombcc 31, 20I5 Low Office of � MaUbenA. Cufhxy,P.C. Letter: Re: Town nf North Andover/Dr. Richard [onUni January 07,2016 Town oyNodbAndover, Zoning Board of Appeals U.d(uc Re: Attorney Caffrey letter. January 11,2016 Goodman, Shapiro &i Lombardi, LLC Letter: � Re: OokddQm ViUage — Mup|* Reserve. January 29, 2016 Community Noum|uQ, Inc. re: Ookddgo Village; January 14, 2016 Town of North Andover ZBA application and documou(abnx for u Variance, Legal Notice, January 26,2016 and February 02, � 2016; Owner Authorization Letter; 1[ecbo|cwl Training Fnnnduduo Trustee Certificate; Quitclaim Deed; /\bnt\ar`x list; Letter � from Smolak& Vaughn—to Town of North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals January 14,2016; Plait o[the Land" containing � one(1)sheet, Showing Lot xk, (Axsoaunr`x Map 62 Lot 19)Prepared by Andover CnumoDxutm Inc.,Dated Jon 13, 2016; Building Plans and elevations by Miuh&ozi Drafting and Design,Methuen Ma.Dated May 2015. � � � 6111 o g c J u o o o ,y | 2 , 2 0 16