Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1983-12-121983 ?,~ ~ , ~:.R. egular~ Meeting The BOARD OF APPEALS held a regular monthly meeting on Monda~;~December :t2,-,,~953 at 7:~O p.m, in the Town Office Meeting Room with the following members prese~ andvoting: Frank Serio, Jr., Chairman; Alfred E. Frizelle, Esq., Vice Chairman; Richard J. Trepanier, Esq.~-Clerk! ~illiamj]~.~ Sullivan; Augustine W. Nickerson and Associate Member Walter PUBLIC HEARIN~S~j~: ~ ,: Crotty, Mark - Party Aggrieved - Court Street The Clerk read the legal notice. Sitting: Serio, Frlzelle, Trepanier, Sullivan; Nickerson Mr. Crotty was present and made the following presentation: He is an abutter to a new building on court Street which he believes is a separate structure even~though it is connected by a garage. He believes it .is two buildings on one lot, which is not allowed. - The question is - "Is this a separate buil ing,. - In addition, it is not consistent with, the general intent of the Zoning By Law. - This same parcel was before the Board of APPeals recently ~r-. wher~a ~a.r~a~ce t~ ~onstr~t~a-.new, dwel~ing w.~s~e~ied. - There is 35 feet of land shown on,the plan-that is:no.~t in the deed. If the 35 feet of land is there, it is open to question on who it~ belongs to. The~setbacks cannot:-be resolved until the lot lines are defined. - Other people in the neighborhood could do the same thing and we would end up with a number of structures attached by garages. - He is seeking to have the building permit revoked. December 12, 1983 -2- Regular Meeting The following spoke in favor of the petition: Mr. Giles MacDonald Mr. Vincent Landers Mr. Robert Delude Pat Thompson A letter from the Building Inspector to Mr. Crotty dated 11/30/83 was read and placed on file. Also, a letter dated 11/24/83 from Mr. Crotty and others to the Building In- spector was read and placed on file. No one spoke in opposition to the petition. MOTION: by Mr. Nickerson to take the petition under advise- ment. SECOND: By Mr. Frizelle VOTE : Unanimous - motion carries. Katsikas, Georege - Variance - Winter Street The Clerk read the legal notice. Sitting: Serio, Frizelle, Trepanier, Nickerson, Soule. Attorney Richard Sullivan, representing the petitioner, made the following presentation: - The house was built in 1967. - Tl%e Morningside Drive setback could not be determined be- cause Morningside Drive was not staked out. - As a result, the petitioner's setback is 26.6 feet instead of the required 30 feet. - The variance is needed to convey the property. No one spoke in favor or opposition to the petition. MOTION: by Mr. Trepanier to grant the variance as requested. SECOND: by mr. Nickerson VOTE : Unanimous - motion carries. ' Cochran, C. Hale - Variance - Summer Street The Clerk read the legal notice. Sitting: Serio, Frizelle, Trepanier, Nickerson, Soule December 12, 1983 -3- Regular Meeting Attorney Reginald Marden, representing the petitioner, made the following presentation: feet. The problem was discovered when the property was recently conveyed. A plot plan done by an engineer found the problem. There is a shed too close to the lot line. It sits on concrete bloc~.and,, ther~fQre, ca,not be moved easily. The previous owner had a building permit for the shed. The per,it said 20 feet and it sho~ hav~-said 30 - %'he. shed .is 9' x 14' ~ - The. P~.titi~ne~ is asking for a side ~baCk variance 'to ~llow the shed to remain on the parce~ ..... The bank let them~close but they a~e insistin~ qg.the variance. It would involve a hardship to the petitioner if the variance were denied and the shed had to be moved. It cannot be placed in the back because of the,.land~caping. Mr. and Mrs. Mandry spoke in favor of the petition a~d no objection was voiced. MOTION: SECOND: VOTE : by Mr. Frizelle to grant the variance as requested. by Mr. Soule Unanimous - motion carries. Mc__Con&ghy.{ Daniel and Adele - Variance - Appleton Street The Clerk read the legal notice. Sitting: Serio, Trepanier, Sullivan, Ni'ckerson, ~°ule Attorney Reginald Marden, representing the petitioners, made the ~ollowing presentation: . .; .. _ ::A s{milar~petition was heard ~y t~is ~ard.several months ago, which was denied by the Board. - The petitio~S~wiS~ to d~vi~e t~eir parcel of ~and on Appleton Street into two parcels,....each having less than the required area. The McConaghy's were not represented by counsel at the original hearing. December 12, 1983 -4- Regular Meeting Since that time, a couple of things have happended. The petitioners have sought and obtained approval from the Planning Board to re-petition the Board of Appeals. Said approval was obtained following a public hearing held on 10/3/83 before the Planning Board. The petitioners PurchaSed ~heir prope~ty'at 59 Appleton Street in 1969. At that time, they purchased two (2) lots, being Lots #1 and 94. Their house 'is on LOt #1 and Lot ~4 conformed with area, frontage, etc. Lot #4 was held ~y the petitioners as a "nest egg" for-their retirement. Their deed refers to two separate lots. When the petitioners attempted to sell Lot ~4, they discovered that the property had been re,zoned. The zoning line goes through the New England Power Co. easement. The effect of the Zoning change made Lot ~4 6ndersized for purposes of construction. ~' They have been taxed for two lots since the time they purchased the property. Therefore, the town was-'and has continued to tax the property as two lots. - Had they known about the zoning change, they could have recorded a plan and frozen the zoning. - Most of the other lots on Dale Street and Appleton Street are smaller than the proposed lot. - The property has some unique features -,it is abutted in the back by a power line easement and the zoning 'line. Since the McConaghy's last petition, there has'been ~ significant change in the area - a sewer line has been constructed in front of Lot 4. The BOard-could ~ow tie in to a public sewer . This was not available at the last hearing, it is a substantial change which affects the land. - In addition, the lot is locate~ on~a corner where ~ Appleton Street turns. It has a substantial amount of frontage. - After the last hearing, only four members of the Board voted on this member. One member disqualified hi~self after the hearing. Note: Member Frizelle stated that this statement by. Atty. Marden is incorrect - he was not present. December 12, 1983 -5- Regular Meeting Atty. Marden continued with the following: - Based on the addition of sewer and the 1983/1984 taxes, substantial changes have taken place. - Based on the circumstances and the designs and setbacks, there is plenty of room for construction of a house on the lot. They would live with any restrictions that the Board may want to impose. ~ - The petitioners have spoken to the neighbors and have received no objection. In fact, some neighbors support the petition. speaking in favor of the petition were: Mr. Robert Hay ~ ~ ., Mary Moynihan Mary McDonald Mr. Stannard Susan Lebel Bill McDonlad No one spoke in opposition to the petition. Atty. Marden completed his presentation with the following: - It is unusual to come back to a Board a second time, but the McConaghy's have a great deal at stake here tonight. They did not have an attorney at the last hearing and may not have been prepared enough. He presented a plan showing a rendering of a proposed dwelling for Lot %4 and offered to have the builder submit a site plan if required by the Board. MOTION: by Mr. Sullivan to take the petition under, adVise- ment. SEcbND:~ by Mr. Nickerson VOTE: Unanimous - motion oa~4es. Towle, James - Special Permit - Andover By-Pass The Clerk read the legal notice. Sitting: Serio, Frizelle, Trepanler, Sullivan, Nickerson Attorney Domenic Scalise, representing the petitioner, made the following presentation: ~- ~ - Mr. and Mrs. Towle recently purchased the property from the Burns family. December 12, 1983 -6- Regular Meeting There is 31,800 square feet of land. The petitioner is seeking a Special Permit to allow him to construct an in-law apartment, or "family suite" on his dwelling.~' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~i ~ ~ ~ The addition would increase the size of the existing dwelling by approximately 6 feet. They would like to add to the right side of the houseJ where the chimney is. The apartment will be occupied by Mrs. Towle's .~other, Mrs. Caruso. ~ ~' ' ~ ' - This is a request under the "family suite" se~ti0n of the Zoning By Law. Mrs. Caruso is 77 years old and currently lives Andover. She is ill and would like to live with the Towle's. - No request is being made for a variance at this time, since the setbacks in the R-3 zone will be met. No one spoke in favor or opposition to the petition. A letter dated 12/5/83 from Mrs. and Mrs. Walter Stamp, abutters, was read and placed on file. In response to the letter from the stamps, Atty.,..Scalis.~ reported that'they had Walked the site'With Mrs, Stamp and she did not object. She informed them that she is attempting to re-zone her property to Industrial. Atty. Scalise completed his presentation~by stating It will be beneficial to the family if the Special Rerait is granted. MOTION: It will not be a detriment t° the neighborhOod. by Mr. Frizelle to take the petition under advise- ment. SECOND: by Mr. Trepanier VOTE : Unanimous - motion carries. DECISIONS C_rotty, Mark - Court Street December 12, 1983 -7- Regular Meeting No action - the Board will wait until the Building Inspector returns. McConaghy, Daniel and Adele - Appleton Street MOTION: by Mr. Trepanier to reconsider the matter on the grounds that there has been a material change (ie., sewer). SECOND: by Mr. Nickerson VOTE : Unanimous - motion carries. MOTION: by Mr. Sullivan to grant the variance with the condition that the existing dwelling on Lot $1 and the proposed dwelling on Lot $2 tie into the sewer line down Appleton Street from Dale Street. SECOND: by Mr. Trepanier VOTE : Unanimous - motion carries. Towle, James - Andover By-Pass MOTION: by Mr. Frizelle to grant the Special Permit subject to the following conditions: 1. The family suite is solely for occupancy by Margaret Caruso, mother of Carol Towle. The Special Permit shall expire at the time Margaret Caruso 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, by acceptance of the Certi- ficate of Occupancy issued pursuant to this Special permit, grants to the Building In- spector or his lawful designee the right to inspect the premises. SECOND: by Mr. Trepanier VOTE : Unanimous - motion carries. Bruqueta, Jose - Pleasant Street Sitting: Serio, Trepanier, Sullivan, Soule MOTION: by Mr. Sullivan to grant the variance as requested. December 12, 1983 -8- Regular Meeting SECOND: by Mr. Soule VOTE : Unanimous - motion carries. The meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m. Fran~ Serio, Jr., ~h~irman Jean E. White, Se6retary