Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984-01-30January 30, 1984 Regular Meeting The Board of Appeals held a regular monthly meeting on Monday evening, January 30, 1984 at 7:30 p.m. in the Town Office Meeting Room. The following members were present and voting: Frank Serio, Jr., Chairman; Alfred E. Frizelle, Esq., Vice Chairman; Richard J. Trepanier, Esq., Clerk; William J. Sullivan; and Associate Members Walter F. Soule; Maurice S. Foulds; and Raymond A. Vivenzio, Esq. Building Inspector Charles Foster was also present. PUBLIC HEARINGS WNEV-TV - Variance and/or Special Permit - Boston Hill Sitting: Serio, Frizelle, Trepanier, Sullivan, Soule The Clerk read the legal notice. Attorney Clifford Elias was representing the applicant and made the following presentation: He presented informational packages to the Board members. The applicant is the TV station in Boston in conjunction with Mr'. Benjamin Farnum. Several people from WNEV and the Lawrence Eagle Tribune are also present. The application seeks either a Special Permit or a variance under Section 9.1 and 9.2 and 10.31 of the zoning By Law for a Special Permit, or 10.4 under the Zoning By Law for a variance. Specifically, it relates to Boston Hill on Route 114. It seeks to increase the height of a building on the site by approximately 30 feet. Presently,-there is an antenna on the building on the site · being used by Rollins Cable T.V. and by Microwave and by MITRE. The Lawrence Eagle Tribune has an interest in this application. They are involved in news gathering in the State. Channel 7 is one of the major T.V. stations in Massachusetts and Boston. They have recently taken steps to improve the news coverage. k January 30, 1984 -2- Regular Meeting The T.V. station is not just for Boston - one of the improvements implemented by Channel 7 in October of 1983 was the "News Ex- change". It establishes a relationship with Channel 7 and five area newspapers to the North and West and South of Boston. This news exchange is a major commitment to the areas around Boston. Channel 7 has established a news bureau in the newspapers men- tioned in the package. It allows the newspaper and Channel 7 to exchange information. One of the problems facing the news exchange is how to get the news and the information from this area to Boston. A good example is the recent train derailment. The information had to be helicoptered from North Andover to Boston. It could have been done electronically. It must be above the tree line and have direct access to Boston. At the present time, the tower on BostOn Kill, together with the antenna on top of the tower, is approximately 140 feet. The intent is to increase that, not by adding to the building, but by adding to the tower and putting a dish on top, ex- tending it approximately 30 fe~t.~ ~ ~ ~ .~ -' The site has been hero,re the Board three times.. The.first time was in 1957 when the Board granted a variance to M.I.T. It allowed the erection of a radar tower for research to a height in excess of what was permitted. The second matter was a decision in 1982. That decision is not relevent to what is before the Board. - The third was a decision dated July, 1982. On Page 2 in the fourth paragraph of that decision, it states "review and re- search of the 1957 decision" is an acknowledgement of what the Board did in 1957 was to grant a variance to the petitioner. - In July of 1982, the Board granted the applicant a Special Permit in order to change the aspects of the origianl variance. What the Board did in July of 1982 was, by Special Permit, ex- tend the purview of the variance granted in 1957. The Board had that power and has that power this evening. The increase will not be to the tower but to the antenna. The Board does have the power to grant a Special Permit. This is a minor extension that will not affect the neighborhood. It is not on a street so no nuisance or vehiclesor pedestrians exists. The user, is in harmony - the Board~decided~:that~in 1957 and re- 'stated it again in 1982. The Board also has the power to grant a variance. ~e asked that the Board consider the issuance of a Special Permit instead of a variance. january 30, 1984 -3- Regular Meeting There have been no problems with the site since 1957. On two occasions, the Board has made affirmative findings with respect to the site and the use. The Board has the authority to grant this request. - Under Sections 9.1 and 9.2 there will be a reasonable extension to the present use. This would be in harmony with the existing Zoning By. Law. - The Board and this town would be providing a very valuable public~service. Member Frizelle asked Attorney Ellas about Section 9.23 - extending non-conforming uses not to exceed 25% of the original use. Attorney Elias responded that from 120 feet they are asking for 30 feet - it is just that - 25%. Also, if the Board grants the application, all of the findings will have to be made on the face of the decision and he would appreciat~it if they would. Note: the following information was contained in the informational packages submitted to the Board: Letter dated 10/18/83 to Ms. Diane Willis from Mr. Irving E. Rogers, Jr.; Board of Appeals decision dated 7/23/82 for Petition No. 22-'82; Letter dated 10/11/83 from Jeff Rosner; Preliminary chart dated 10/24/83 by K. Arey; Figure 1 dated 11/21/83 of Boston Hill Intercity Plot; Media Information sheet from Channel 7; List of Members of the New England News Exchange; and several copies of newspapers involved in the news exchange. No one spoke in favor of the petition and there were no letters from Town Departments in the file. Speaking in opposition was Attorney Martin Jacobs, representing Mr. Jack Carter and Mr. Raymond Agler of 300 Chestnut Street, owners of "Mills Hill". Attorney Jacobs made the following presentation: - The Board is familiar with Mr. Carter and Mr. Agler, They own 300 Chestnut Street ("Mills Hill"). · The tower - on Mills Hill was put up as a companion to the Boston Hill site. The time table that was just presented to the Board is accurate. Their site has also come before this Board twice. Once, under Rollins, who asked for a Special Permit to use the site for commercial purposes. This petition was denied. One of the reasons it was denied was the Building Inspector's decision that there was a change in use. This decision was made despite the fact that the Board said Mr. Farnum could use his site for commercial use. Then Mr. Carter came to the Board for the same thing that Mr. Farnum received. This request was also denied. The reason for the denial was that the same request (Rollins) was in litigation. January 30, 1984 -4- Regular Meeting At this point, Mr. Carter and Mr. Agler have nothing against WNEV-TV, but they would like to be in a position of being able to bid for what WNEV-TV needs. - Because of the actions of the Board of Appeals, the Farnum site has become very valuable. Note: Attorney Jacobs submitted a letter from Mr. Carter dated January 30, 1984 outlining the history and his objections to ~hif 9etition. He continued with the following: - Under the section of the Zoning By Law that was just questioned, what has happened is that the Boston Hill site started with 100 feet but the Board allowed ia 40 foot increase and they are now being asked to allow another 30 feet. That is a 70-80% increase and is not allowed under the zoning By Law. -~-~he~roblem is not against WNEV-TV, but one land owner in town / has been denied the use of his property in a way that another has been allowed. It is a monopolistic situation and a very serious situation. Mrs. Bernice Fink also spoke in opposition with the following presentation: - Granting this petition will promote the growing commercial use of residential property. It prolongs the life on a non-con- "~ f6~mTng use. The height restriction is dangerous and granting of a f~rther variance would compound a previous error. The whole thing has to stop. Using the site for commercial use was not included in the original variance. This is no longer non-profit. The current use is not in harmony with the current Zoning By Laws. - In the original 1957 decision, it stated that the lease will provide for a term of six years with a right to renew. Also, the proposed installation is of a "%emporary" nature. At the termination of the lease the building will'be taken down. It never happened. - The only appropriate action is to deny this request. It belongs before Town Meeting. In further discussion, Attorney Elias stated that he is puzzled re- garding Mr. Carter's objections. They stated that they are not opposed to WNEV-TV so it seems they are not objecting to the petition but their comments stated they are opposed. Attorney Jacobs responded that they are not opposed to WNEV-TV - it is that if the Board allows this, they have further made a division of two sites that were treated alike. January 30, 1984 -5- Regular Meeting Attorney Elias added that their objections are economic. He has asked for a variance and Special Permit and enough facts have been presented. Attorney Jacobsen=said the objections have to do with competition and it-should be an issue. The Farnum's objected to Rollins' petition when they were before the Board. They were not abutters, but they were listened to. Building Inspector Charles Foster asked to hea~ from the owner of the property, Mr. Ben Farnum. He questioned wh~ Mr. Farnum did not sign the application form. Attorney Elias responded that WNEV-TV is the applicant as lessee. The owner of the site need not be the applicant. Mr. Farnum has come to a tentative agreement with the applicant subject to the issuance of a Special Permit or variance from this Board. Note: Mr. and Mrs. Ben Farnum were present. Building Inspector Foster questined if there will be studios and Attorney Elias said the request is for the installation of a parabolic dish and the extension of the tower. Mr. Foster said that it is there by way of a variance so it is NOT non-conforming. The use is non-conforming because of the change in the zoning By Law. When this was built the use was allowed but they needed a variance for the height. We are involved with both use and a structure. Because of this, he asked Attorney Elias if this changes his position on a variance or Special Permit and Attorney Elias responded "No - it does not - I am safe with this appli- cation''. Me~er William Sullivan asked if it is necessary that it go that high and Mr. Karl Renway responded that it is. MOTION: SECOND: VOTE : by Mr. Frizelle to take the petition under advisement. by Mr. Trepanier Unanimous - motion carries. Note: Member Sullivan left the meeting. Western Electric - Variance - Os~ood Street Sitting: Serio, Frizelle, Trepanier, Soule, Vivenzio The Clerk read the legal notice. Mr. Anthony Galvagna, representing Western Electric, made the following presentation: - They are requesting a variance on the height restriction to allow a 125 foot tower. It will be close to the Haverhill line. January 30, 1984 -6- Regular Meeting - It will serve as a test site for microwave products. The other site location is in North Pelham, N.H. There is a 40-45 foot tower which will be taken down if the ' Variance is granted. ~ The elevation at the top of the tower will be 165 feet above high tide. The stack on the boiler house is 181 feet. - It will not be in a flight path to the airport. - If the petition is denied, it will be an economic hardship to ~ the company because they will not be able to test their product. - It will be 125 feet above ground level. No one spoke in favor of the petition. A letter from the Building Inspector dated 1/27/84 was read P~ace~ on file. and Speaking in opposition to the petition was Attorney Martin Jacobs, representing Mr. Jack Carter and Mr. Raymond Agler of 300 Chestnut Street. Attorney Jacobs stated that they (Western Electric) are asking for a tower for commercial purposes. The Building Inspector and the Board of Appeals were against the same for his client. Mr. Galvagna responded that Western Electric is located in an in- dustrial zone and not a residential zone like Mr. Carter's land. The B~ildin~ inspector conCurred. ~ ~ Attorney Jacobs added that some instances ~ight make a difference - this'dOes not.~ Mr' Farnum's land (the sub3eCt 0f the previous hearing) is located in an R-2 district and Mr. Carter's land is located in an R-3 zone. MOTION: by Mr. Frizelle to take the petition under advisement. SECOND: by Mr. Vivenzio VOTE : In favor - 4 (Frizelle, Trepanier, Vivenzio, Soule) Abstain - 1 (Serio) Motion carries. Butler, Peter - Variance - Russet Lane Sitting: Serio, Frizelle, Soule, Foulds, Vivenzio Member Vivenzio read the legal notice. Mr. Peter Butler was present and made the following presentation: january 30, 1984 -7- Regular ~4eeting - He is seeking a variance from the height requirements in an R-2 zone to allow the use of a tower. - It is built and is 95 feet above the ground. - He is a licensed radio operator. - He has the highest grade amateur license - Extra Class. - He has BSEE. - He has been active in amateur radio for 30 years. - Amateur radio has been the determining factor in shaping his business life objectives. - He is currently a Sales Manager of a high tech company and sells specialized antennas. - He is considered an exper~ in radio propagation conditions. - He has won several awards. - He is known by the international amateur radio community. - His social life revolves somewhat extensively around amateur radio. - He has advised his neighbors of his intentions to gain their understanding of amateur radio. - The primary use is for long distance communication. - Proper antenna operation requires the antenna to be in the clear of trees and metallic objects and at a determined height. - The determined height is an engineering judgement based on the following considerations: A. Radio propagation factors. B. Angle of radiation. C. Surrounding terrain. D. The ability to place guy anchors on the owner's property. E. Economics. - Antennas supported by guyed steel towers are not unusual for amateur radio stations. - The antenna system described has been erected to establish design practicecs. - It has survived, without problems, the high winds in December that reached 80 MPH. - It has shown good efficiency. January 30, 1984 -8- Regular Meeting If the variance is denied, he will suffer a hardship due to the following: A. Unable to effectively use an amateur radio station. B. Unable to use amateur radio, a public service, in an effective way. C. Will not be able to investigate technical matters. D. Loss of investment in radio equipment. In erecting the tower, he followed the guidelines of the manu- facturers. - It has been erected since September and is working very well at 95 feet. - FCC regulations say he can go 200 feet and he could go 149 feet with respect to the airport. Letters from the following were read and placed on file: W. Michael Melvin (January 30, 1984) Gabriel and Sandra Yuil (January 20, 1984) Building Inspector Charles Foster (January 27, 198~4) Mr..Peter McMahon asked Mr. Butler if there will be any interference and ~f. Butler responded "No". Mr. Emil Tanana added that it could be any height and have inter- ference. He is also a ham radio operator, and if you look at the tower from his viewpoint, the top of the tower is below the level of Mr. McMahon's living room. It is essential that the tower be as high as possible. There should be no objection. Mrs. Ann Dion stated that she and several of her neighbors have interference in their telephones. Mr. Tanana responded that one of the problems with telephones is with the manufacturer. If anyone has interference, they should go back to the telephone company. It has nothing to do with the antenna. Mrs. Dion argued that she never had interference before the antenna was erected. Also opposed to the petition were Mrs. Walter Bleszinski, Mrs. Joseph Borgesi, and Mr. William Gordon. Mrs. Bleszinski stated that the antenna is distasteful in the residential area. Also, if this one is allowed, there will be more. Mrs. Borgesi stated that the applicant has tripled the height allowed, which is 35 feet. Mr. Gordon stated that he paid extra for his lot because the utilities are underground. The antenna does not look good. January 30, 1984 -9- Regular ~4eeting Mr. David Meldrum added that he has helped put up a lot of towers and this one is within the engineering principles. It exceeds safety factors. Mr. Butler added that the FCC acts as a watchdog for interference. He operates with a Morse Code, so if the neighbors are hearing voices, they are not coming from his antenna. Also, the high tension lines are higher than his tower. Responding to a question from the Board, Building Inspector Foster stated that no building permits were issued for the structure. MOTION: by Mr. Vivenzio to take the petition under advisement. SECOND: by Mr. Frizelle VOTE : Unanimous - motion carries. Charette, Ronald - Variance - Os~ood Street Sitting: Serio, Frizelle, Soule, Foulds, Vivenzio Member Vivenzio read the legal notice. Mr. Charette was present and made the following presentation: - The property was formerly Maggie's Place and is now Aqua Dream Pools, owned by the applicant. - The business has grown, but there is no room for expansion. - He has hired several employees and would like to keep them. He is trying to provide full time employment for them. - There was a variance granted to the previous owner allowing an addition to the building toward the street and he would now like to extend that toward the parking lot with a solar room to add spas and a line of products. - The State will not lease any land. - The proposed addition will not meet the setback requirements. No one spoke in favor or opposition to the petition. A letter from the Building Inspector dated 1/27/84 was read and placed on file. Mr. George Barker, an abutter, asked to view the plan but did not voice any objection. MOTION: SECOND: VOTE : by Mr. Frizelle to take the petition under advisement. by Mr. Foulds Unanimous - motion carries. January 30, 1984 -10- Regular Meeting Fart, George - Variance - Granville Lane Sitting: Serio, Frizelle, Soule, Foulds, Vivenzio Member Vivenzio read the legal notice. Mr. Dave Webber and Mr. George Farr were present and Mr. Webber made the following presentation: - Through an error, the 30 foot setback requirement was not met ~on 60 G~anville Lane, also known as Lot #25. - They added an enclosed porch. It is presently a slab with columns. It will be enclosed and used as part of the house. - The existing house conforms to the 30 foot setback requirement. - The addition was put on as an enhancement to the house. The lot line was not believed to be as close to the addition as it is. - Denial of the variance would involve an economic hardship to the petitioner since he will need to purchase land from the abutter (Eudaile¥)or remove the addition. Mr. Farr added that the Eudailey's looked at the plan and voiced no objection. Also, the addition was not included in the original building permit. It is not part of the original foundation - it is a concrete slab floor. The addition is 13x12.9 feet. No one spoke in favor or opposition. A letter from the Building Inspector dated 1/27/84 was read and placed on file. MOTION: SECOND: VOTE : DECISIONS by Mr. Frizelle to take the petition under advisement. by Mr. Soule Unanimous - motion carries. Crotty, Mark - Party Aggrieved - Court Street No action - only three members who sat are present. set for Thursday, February 2, 1984 at 7:30 p.m. Western Electric - Variance - Os~ood Street Sitting: MOTION: SECOND: Special Meeting Serio, Frizelle, Trepanier, $oule, Vivenzio by Mr. Frizelle to grant the variance. by Mr. Trepanier. January 30, 1984 -117 Regular Meeting Discussion: Member Frizelle stated that the land in question is located in an Industrial district. The tower is used in the manu- facturing and testing of products that are used there. It will not exceed the height of other structures in the area and is in fact replacing an existing tower. If denied, there will be a substantial hardship and it will preclude the manufacturing of a specific product by Western Electric. VOTE : In favor - 4 (Frizelle, Trepanier, Soule, Vivenzio) Abstain - 1 (Serio) Motion carries - petition granted. Butler, Peter - Variance - Russet Lane Sitting: Serio, Frizelle, Soule, Foulds, Vivenzio MOTION: by Mr. Frizelle to deny the variance request. SECOND: by Mr. Vivenzio Discussion: The Board felt that the petitiner failed to meet the hardship requirements of Section 10.4 of the Zoning By Law and the statute, and the tower is not in harmony with the zoning district in question. VOTE : Unanimous - motion carries - petition denied. Charette, Ronald - Variance - Os~ood Street Sitting: Serio, Frizelle, Soul~Foulds, Vivenzio MOTION: by Mr. Frizelle to grant the variance. SECOND: by Mr. Foulds Discussion: The building has existed only 7 feet from the property line. It is sufficiently set back from the street. To deny the petition would mean the applicant cannot expand his business and would create a financial hardship to the applicant. VOTE : Unanimous - motion carries - petition granted. Fart, George - Variance - Granville Lane Sitting: Serio, Frizelle, Soule, Foulds, Vivenzio MOTION: by Mr. Vivenzio to grant the varinace as requested. SECOND: by Mr. Soule VOTE : In favor - 3 (Serio, Soule, Vivenzio) Opposed - 2 (Frizelle, Foulds) Motion failes - petition denied. k January 30, 1984 -12- Regular Meeting OTHER BUSINESS Follansbee/Watson - Earth Removal Permit - Change name on bankbook Mr. Follansbee has requested~that the name on a bankbook held by the town for security in conjunction with an Earth Removal Permit be changed from Watson to Follansbee (Andrew Circle Realty Trust). The board instructed the secretary to call the bank for the proper procedure. M¢Cormish, Lance - Request. to extend Special Permit - Jetwood Street A letter from Mr. McCormish was read and placed on file. He is re- questing an extension to a Special Permit granted in 1982 for land on Jetwood Street. MOTION: by Mr. Frizelle to grant the extension of one year. SECOND: by Mr. Trepanier VOTE : Unanimous - motin carries McConagh¥, Daniel - Appleton Street - Sign Plans The Board members signed the plans. Re-Organization MOTION: by Mr. Trepanier to elect Mr. Serio for Chairman and Mr. Frizelle for Vice Chairman. SECOND: by Mr. Foulds VOTE : Unanimous - motion carries. MOTION: by Mr. Frizelle to elect Mr. Trepanier for Clerk. SECOND: by Mr. Foulds VOTE : Unanimous - motion carries. MINUTES - 11/14/83 and 12/12/83 MOTION: SECOND: VOTE : The meeting adjourned at 10:30 p.m. rank Semi6, Jr.~hairman by Mr. Frizelle to accept as written. by Mr. Foulds Unanimous - motion carries. Jean E. White,