Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985-04-08April 8, 1985 Regular Meeting The BOARD OF APPEALS held a regular meeting on Monday evening, April 8, 1985 in the Town Office Meeting Room with the following members present and voting: Frank Serio, Jr., Chairman; Alfred E. Frizelle, Esq., Vice Chairman; Augustine W. Nickerson; William J. Sullivan: and newly appointed regular member Walter F. Soule. Building Inspector Charles Foster was present. Chairman Serio opened the meeting with a presentation of a plaque to Richard J. Trepanier who recently resigned from the Board. Mr. Serio thanked him for his service and Mr. T~epanier stated it was a pleasure serving on the Board of Appeals. MOTION: SECOND: VOTE : by Mr. Frizelle to nominate Mr. Nickerson for Clerk by Mr. Sullivan Unanimous - motion carries PUBLIC Bubar, Michael - Variance - Dale Street (continued hearing) Building Inspector Foster stated that the petitioner does not need a variance. by Mr. Frizelle to allow the petitioner to withdraw the petition without prejudice. SECOND: by Mr. Sullivan VOTE : Unanimous - motion carries Ford, Brian - Variance - Ca, bell Road The Clerk read the legal notice. Mr. Ford was present and made the following presentation: - He applied for a building permit to add a garage. - It was issued to him by the Assistant Building Inspector. - The building permit was issued with a 20 foot setback where 30 is required. - He returned to the building department to secure a building permit for a pool and in discussion it was discovered that the garage is in violation. It was a mistake and the work on the garage has been completed. It is 22 feet from the lot line. - The lot adjacent to the violation is filled with water and is not built on. No one spoke in favor or opposition to the petition. Building Inspector Foster added that the applicant proceeded on a permit granted by his department. He apologized for the error and asked that the variance be granted to correct it. Member Soule added that he viewed the site and the lot next door appears to be unbuildable. The violation is actually two lots away from a house. MOTION: by Mr. Sullivan to take the petition under advisement. SECOND: by Mr. Frizelle VOTE : Unanimous - motion carries Franz, Robert - S~ecial Permit - Andover Street The Clerk read the legal notice. Mrs. Franz made the following presentation: - The plan submitted is preliminary. - An in-law apartment is proposed for her parents in a new dwelling she is proposing on Andover Street. - The apartment will consist of 2 or 3 bedrooms. She has two parents and they will need someone to take care of them. - The main dwelling will be two stories. - A dental practice will be located on the other side of the dwelling. There will be a parking lot with a "U-turn" drive- way. - The dcltal practice is very limited. - The structure will fit nicely on the lot. Mr. Richard Haltmaier, an abutter, stated ~hat.~he in-law apart- ment Special Permit must be granted for specific persons. He is concerned about the character of the neighbo~hood.~~ One or~,two cars would be acceptable. Member Frizelle asked what would happen when Mrs. Franz's parents no longer occupied the apartment. Mrs. Franz responded that it would become a guest wing. Member Sullivan asked about a third party and Mrs. Franz responded that her parents may need a nurse. When asked by the Board if they need the name of the party, the Building Inspector said he did not believe the Board needs it. A letter from the Building Insepctor dated 4/8/85 was read and placed on file. No one spoke in favor or opposition to the petition. MOTION: by Mr. Frizelle to take the petition under advisement. SECOND: by Mr. Nickerson VOTE : Unanimous - motion carries Note: Mrs. Franz's parents - Mr. and Mrs. Felix J. Cote Miele Realty Trust - Variance - Clark Street The Clerk read the legal notice. Mr. Raymond Malloy, representing the petitioner, was present and stated that the petitioner has entered into a Purchase and Sale Agreement. The request is for relief from the lot requirement. Note: No plan was submitted - TABLED. Norwood, Malcolm - Variance - Main Street The Clerk read the legal notice. Note: No plan submitted. MOTION: by Mr. Frizelle to continue the public hearing. SECOND: by Mr. Soule VOTE : Unanimous - motion carries Kelley, Kenneth - Variance - Grosvenor Avenue The Clerk read the legal notice. Mr. Kelley was present and made the following presentation: - He needs to variance to construct an addition to his dwelling. - There is a new child in the house and they need the extra room. - The proposed addition is 3 feet too close to the lot line. - The proposed addition is 14 feet by 31 feet. A letter from the Building Inspector dated 4/8/85 was read and placed on file. No one spoke in favor or opposition to the petition. MOTION: by Mr. Frizelle to take the petition under advisement. SECOND.- by Mr. Soule VOTE : Unanimous - motion carries Provost, Leonm:d - Variance - High Street Lundquist, Norman - Variance - High Street The Clerk read the two legal notices. Attorney Michael Martel, representing the petitioners, made the following presentation: - They are seeking variances for yard area, frontatge, and setbacks. The proposed lot will be consistent with those in the area. The variance will give the Provost's a chance to build a house in North Andover. The relief could be granted without a detriment to the public good and without derogating from the intent of the Zoning By Law. It would improve the looks of the area. The lot has been let go over the years. The second proposal would be a conveyance from Lundquist of 10 feet. The Lundquist lot is in conformance except for frontage. It would go from 80 feet to 70 feet. With the additional 10 feet, it would put the proposed dwelling lot in complete compliance with Section 7.8 of the Zoning By Law. They would have 6,095 square feet, which is larger than the lot next door. - The lot cannot be used without the variances. - A single family dwelling will be built. No one spoke in favor or opposition to the petition. Attorney Domenic Scalise, representing Mr. and Mrs. Powers, abutters, requested that there be no fence along the Power's portion of the lot line from the back corner of the proposed dwelling to the street. He said the Powers' driveway is very close to the lot in question. He added that the applicant has agreed to this request and asked that the Board consider making it a condition of approval should the variances be granted. MOTION: by Mr. Frizelle to take the two petitions under adviSe- ment. SECOND: by Mr. Nickerson VOTE : Unanimous - motion carries Not e: Building Inspector Foster questioned if they are asking for a variance on the petition to combine the lots. He stated that the smaller lot is not grandfathered in. J J & E Realt~ Trust - Variance - Turnpike Street The Clerk read the legal notice. Attorney John J. Willis, Sr., representing the petitioner, made the following presentation: Through an oversight, the applicant needs a variance. A house is being constructed in violation of the 100 foot setback on Route 114. The land is way down the end of Turnpike Street near Mr. Meadows. - The engineer certified that the structure conforms to the Zoning ByLaw. - The Zoning By Law footnotes every exception except this one. - The structure is 10 feet short on the right front corner. - It is 100 feet to the left hand corner. The Zoning By Law does not have Footnote 3 next to front setbacks for R-2. The house was constructed in accordance with the engineer's plans. The Building Inspector did not catch the error and the petitioner proceeded to construct in normal fashion. To require the 100 foot setback would require reconstruction and it would be a financial hardship to the petitioner. It would delay the ~ompletion of the property and the potential of lost sales. It is an area of North Andover that is unique. It is less than 1/4 mile from the town line. There have been a cluster of homes in the area. Only one of six on the north side of the road is 100 feet back. The intent of this portion of the By Law'applies to I-1. At the time, the Master Plan provided for all industrial land. It was for traffic control and the setback of large facilities. - This is a single family dwelling. The burden of traffic on Route 114 is minimal. · - If the variance is granted, it would be in keeping with the intent and purpose of the Zoning By Law. - There have been other variances granted from the 100 foot setback requirement. They were for the Girl Scout building and Jim Gordon's office building. No one spoke in favor or opposition to the petition. A letter from the Building Inspector dated 4/8/85 was read and placed on file. MOTION: by Mr. Frizelle to take the petition under advisement. SECOND: by Mr. Nickerson VOTE : Unanimous - motion carries Miele Realty Trust - Tabled earlier A representative asked that the plan he has with him tonight be used for the hearing and stated that he will submit a correct plan at a later date. The Board stated they need a board approved plan. MOTION: by Mr. Frizelle to continue the public hearing. SECOND: by Mr. Nickerson VOTE : Unanimous - motion carries D~CISIONS Meikle, Robert - S~ecia! Permit - Salem Street Sitting: Serio, Frizelle, Sullivan, Soule Ms. Nancy Salafia asked for the book and page of the property. MOTION: by Mr. Frizelle to grant the Special Permit for the in- law apartment for the existing dwelling and garage only with no additions under the provisions of the Special Permit subject to the following conditions: 1. The front entrance shall be in the presently existing breezeway. 2. There shall be no other entrance to the family suite in the front of the building. 3. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Special Permit shall be recorded at the Registry of Deeds by the Board of Appeals. 4. The family suite is solely for occupancy by Irene Meikle, mother of Robert Meikle. 5. The Special Permit shall expire at the time Irene Meikle ceases to occupy the family suite. The Special Permit shall expire at the time the premises are conveyed to any person, partnership, trust or corporation. The applicant, be acceptance of the Certificate of Occupancy issued pursuant to the Special Permit, grants to the Building Inspector or his lawful designee the right to inspect the premises. SECOND: by Mr. Soule VOTE : Unanimous - motion carries Ford, Brian - Variance - Campbell Road MOTION: by Mr. Sullivan to grant the variance as requested. SECOND: by Mr. Frizelle VOTE : Unanimous - motion carries 3 J a E Realty Trust - Variance - Turnpike Street MOTION: by Mr. Frizelle to grant the variance as requested. SECOND: by Mr. Nickerson VOTE : Unanimous - motion carries Franz, ~obert - S~ecial Permit - Andover Street No action - Board to view the site Kelley, Kenneth - Variance - Grosvenor Avenue MOTION: by Mr. Soule to grant the variance with the condtition that the plan be revised to meet the Board's requirements SECOND: by Mr. Frizelle VOTE : Unanimous - motion carries Provost and Lundquist - Variances - High Street MOTION: by Mr. Frizelle to grant the variances for Lundquist (163 High St.) and Salach (Lot 26) petitions. The variance shall be as set forth on the plan for Lundquist, namely, the frontage for the Salach lot SECOND: shall be 50.88 feet; the frontage for the Lundquist lot shall be 70 feet. In addition, the Board grants a variance for the area on the Salach lot and a side line variance for the Salach lot to allow construction to 13 feet on either side and denied the variance for a rear setback, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the construction on Lot 26 be limited to a single family dwelling. That no fence be erected on the Salach lot between the street and the front line of the dwelling abutting Powers on the lot line. 3. That two (2) additional plans be submitted to the Board to conform with the variances as granted. by Mr. Sullivan VOTE : Unanimous - motion carries Century Laminators - Discussion with representative A company representative reported that the abutter who opposed the variance now wants them to take down the stockade fence and plant shrubs. The Board responded that it is up to the Building Inspector to make sure the variance is adhered to. Revised Application Form The secretary presnted a new application form to the Board. contains two or three minor changes. MOTION: SECOND: VOTE : by Mr. Soule to accept the new application form. by Mr. Nickerson Unanimous - motion carries It The meeting adjourned at 10:30 p.m. Jean E. White, Secretary