Loading...
08-013 ZBA Letter August 17 1994•..PW City of Northampton, Massachusetts Office of Planning and Development City Hall • 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 • (413) 586 -6950 FAX (413) 586 -3726 • Community and Economic Development • Conservation • Historic Preservation • Planning Board • Zoning Board of Appeals • Northampton Parking Commission TO: Zoning Board of Appeals FR: Paulette L. Kuzdeba, Senior P anner DA: August 17, 1994 t✓ • -( 5 sJ�A'�✓ RE: Variance Application - Mark Batty - Land Solutions Applicant is requesting a variance because the lot that was purchased does not have sufficient frontage and area as required under the Highway Business Zoning District. Last fall, the applicant was denied a Finding by the ZBA, for a truck sales and repair facility, because the Board found that the proposed use would be substantially more detrimental to the area, since the lot was smaller than what is required for all uses in an HB zone. Specifically, the (125 is required) required). The Ci frontage and area of soil shape and upheld in a court applicant's lot and 13,500 squa ty Solicitor has are not grounds topography, and of law. has 90.00 +/- feet of frontage re feet (20,000 square feet is informed me that insufficient for meeting the unique features that argument has been not been Based on the information from the Law Department and the information contained within the application, it does not appear that the reasons listed in the application warrant the granting of a Variance for the following reasons: The lot does not have any unique features relating to soil conditions, shape or topography, which affects only this parcel and not the parcels in the zoning district. There does not appear to be a financial or other hardship, since the Finding that was denied, did not state that all uses would be detrimental to the neighborhood, therefore the applicant could return with another Finding proposing a different use. scanrcd "_.".__ digitized ORIGINAL PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER I� M 1 %000 1 1.011 -2- Batty - Variance Under this application, the ZBA must decide if the applicant meets the criteria for a variance, as listed below: 1. That circumstances exist, relating to the soil conditions, or shape, or topography of such land or structures, which effects the property in question, but does not generally effect the zoning district in which the site is located. 2. That a literal enforcement of the provisions of the Ordinance would involve substantial hardship in the form of financial or otherwise to the petitioner or appellant: and 3. That desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good or nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent and purpose of the Ordinance. r .! �l scanr_ed digitized checked CITY OF NORTHAMPTON VARIANCE APPUCATION 9N � 3 l 1, 1. Applicants Name M A R K k 70 13AT T Y e /o LAND 5 oL- uT10t l5 Address: T"u10 AilHERST RD - F.O.13OX IZ1 5ut'4pr;RLAND NA Teleph one: 411- a�o35 2. AARK_�- - J - 6Y 13 ATT Y Address: zq Aypyl3oN RD. �-1- =ep5 MA 01-053 T 413- 561 5 -1 L9 I 3. Status of Applicant Owner Contract Purchaser Lessee Y Other (explain: vrt -iz tot, ownr -r, ) 4. Parcel Identification Zoning Map # R Parcel # 13 Zoning District(s) MB Street Address 8Z NORTI4 KIN(r ST, 5. Variance is requested under Zoning Ordinance Section 6 . Z, Page 6 - - 6. Narrative Description of Proposed Work /Project (use additional sheets if necessary) N p)JK1� d -iS I o oy. l X73 - FRue r uPr. 4 (ZON -_ 4) N E. l F /�'1 a 0 r o i rE Pt-^, _Z �7 - 4,! /ox G' ftW' fLr - p /M /, n/,t_1I-- �J�11n�JC A A . 7. State How Work /Proposal Complies with Variance Criteria (See Applicant's Guide and use additional sheets if necessary) LOT 15 '5616 57Ari D AP -0 /mot �,eoNrip�, 1a�F.�. D /� T F. S T 1-4 I? ZO N i n, c - 14a w J! I T r r — L — LNF'02 0 g o oN r A. LJ4.D 1J0 .&4.40eV A j 1) r.:; s/ cy.r I1, L/'5F 4 f'r 'r)4 r I-& - r e000j. -O 5,E V1si-uR /_F 55 i Vl-\f- /e [ <�OI+LD L�L t.ew ,C� Cu2ec�tfi� OnNFo,c1 v� SSE I G/O6/Lh NOT 17 , I~� 206�A7'� t�E �u t3t I �` raDn -N 0 2 4H E )2 t49e0.5A 0 t- 'r r-- o r - b I NANO 8. Attached Plans Sketch Plan X Site Plan None Required 9. Certified Abutters List from Assessors' Office must be attached. 10. Certification I hereby certify that' I have read the VARIANCE CRITERIA, and that the information contained herein is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. Date: a 71, Date Filed: (zba/varlance.zbe pJiGent's Signature: %; <4 -? File scanrc ` City of Northampton, Massachusetts Office of Planning and Development City Hall • 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 • (413) 586.6950 FAX (413) 586 -3726 • Community and Economic Development • Conservation • Historic Preservation • Planning Board • Zoning Board of Appeals • Northampton Parking Commission ../ � •� ' �� � .j -!�� � •': DECISION OF NORTHAMPTON ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS APPLICANT: LAND SOLUTIONS FOR MARK & JOY BATTY ADDRESS: P O BOB 121, SUNDERLAND, MA 01035 OWNER: MARK & JOY BATTY ADDRESS: 24 AUDUBON ROAD, LEEDS, MA 01053 RE LAND OR BUILDINGS IN NORTHAMPTON AT: 828 NORTH KING STREET ASSESSOR'S MAP and PARCEL NUMBERS: MAP #8 PARCEL #13 At a meeting conducted on November 3, 1993, the Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals voted 2 IN FAVOR and 1 TO DENY the request of Land Solutions (representing Mark & Joy Batty) for a FINDING under the provisions of Section 9.3 (c) in the Northampton Zoning Ordinance, to allow a change in use for a pre- existing non - conforming lot at 828 North King Street. Since the vote must be unanimous in order to be granted, the petition was denied. Zoning Board Members present and voting were: Chairman Robert C. Buscher, William R. Brandt, and M. Sanford Weil, Jr. The reasons that the Board Members voted IN FAVOR of the application, under Section 9.3 for a change to a Conforming use on a pre- existing non - conforming lot were: 1. That the requested use would not be substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood than what was previously on the site because the proposed use is allowed "by right" in a Highway Business Zone. 2. That because the property in question is located in the Highway Business Zone, it was found that the requested use would be more appropriate than a dwelling because residential uses are no longer allowed in Highway Business districts. 3. That if the Board denied the application, they believed that they were in effect saying that no business could be allowed on the property since a business would be more detrimental to the neighborhood than the previous uses.-, which was a residence. scanted digitized checked 1�1 VMOVI The reasons the Board member voted against granting the Finding were: 1. The change, extension, and /or alteration will be substantially more detrimental than the existing nonconforming use to the neighborhood because: a. The proposed use is a more intensive use than a residence and would increase the amount of traffic entering and exiting the site. b. The proposed use would be for a business for used truck and equipment sales and a large parking area must be provided. Therefore a greater amount of property would be covered with either pavement or a gravel -based covering in order to create the required parking spaces for that particular business. Since the lot is substandard than that which is required by the Zoning Ordinance, the impervious covering would create additional runoff which could impact abutting sites. C. The proposed use would create more noise, fumes, and a greater fire hazard than the previous residential use of the property. 2. Although the Board member found that the change, extension and /or alteration from the existing nonconforming use of a residence, to this particular use of a used truck and equipment sales business would be more detrimental to the neighborhood for the reasons stated above, it is this member's position that his finding does not preclude the applicant from applying for another use on the site, where the Zoning Board of Appeals could decide that the proposed use would not be substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood. -2- lk%W City of Northampton, Massachusetts Office of Planning and Development City Hall • 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 • (413) 586 -6950 FAX (413) 586 -3726 • Community and Economic Development • Conservation . Historic Preservation • Planning Board • Zoning Board of Appeals • Northampton Parking Commission .... Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals November 3, 1993 meeting The Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals met on Wednesday, November 3, 1993 in Council Chambers, Wallace J. Puchalski Municipal Building, 212 Main Street, Northampton. Present were Chairman Robert C. Buscher, Member William R. Brandt, and Associate Member M. Sanford Weil, Jr., Senior Planner Paulette L. Kuzdeba, and Board Secretary Mary Martineau. Chairman Buscher opened the Zoning Board of Appeals meeting at 5:00 p.m., and stated that the Board would reach a decision on the request of Land Solutions (for Mark & Joy Batty) for a Finding under §9.3 of the Zoning Ordinance for a change in use to a used truck and equipment sales at 828 North King Street. Buscher noted that the Pubic Hearing was opened on October 6, 1993 with the members of the Board sitting that night the same as present tonight: Chairman Robert C. Buscher, Member William R. Brandt, and Associate Member M. Sanford Weil, Jr. The Public Hearing was closed on October 6, 1993 and the Board met again on October 20, 1993 at which time they postponed reaching a decision on the request for a Finding to seek advice from the City Solicitor. William Brandt asked whether the City Solicitor had rendered an opinion on the case. Paulette Kuzdeba said that there had been no conclusion drawn on the case, since no legal decisions could be found on cases such as the applicant's request for a Finding. The Finding request is to replace a nonconforming use with an allowed use on a pre- existing non - conforming lot. Kuzdeba said there was also the issue of whether the non - conforming use's grandfathering status had expired, and said that if the Board wanted to document this use, they would have to re -open the Public Hearing to obtain that information. If the property was marketed as a residence, then there is a question as to whether the nonconforming use's status had expired or not. M. Sanford Weil said he had more or less made up his mind on how he would vote for the Finding at the last meeting. Weil said he was willing to make a decision based on all the information presented. Weil said the applicant's request was to put a business in a Highway Buziness zone where other businesses are located. The fact that there are people residing in that zone does not give them the authority to control future uses of � erty. Weil said that scanned digitized . _. _.. ---- -- checked Pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws (MGL) Chapter 40A, Section 11, no Finding or any extension, modification or renewal thereof, shall take effect until a copy of the decision bearing the certification of the City Clerk that twenty days have elapsed after the decision has been filed, or if such an appeal has been filed that it has been dismissed or denied, is recorded in the Hampshire County Registry of Deeds or Land Court, as applicable, and indexed under the name of the owner of record or is recorded and noted on the owner's certificate of title. The fee for such recording or registering shall be paid by the owner or applicant. It is the owner or applicant's responsibility to pick up a the certified decision of the City Clerk and record it at the Registry of Deeds. The Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals hereby certifies that a Finding has been denied and that copies of this decision and all plans referred to in it have been filed with the Planning Board and the City Clerk. Pursuant to Massachusetts General Law Chapter 40A, Section 15, notice is hereby given that this decision is filed with the Northampton City Clerk on the date below. If you wish to appeal this action, your appeal must be filed pursuant to MGL Chapter 40A Section 17, with the Hampshire County Superior Court and notice of this appeal filed with the City Clerk within twenty (20) days of the date this decision was filed with the City Clerk. Applicant: Land Solutions, - 828 North Ring Street Decision Date: Novemba 3, 1993 This Decision was Filed City -3- Novenben 10, 1993 M. Sanjond Weil, I%. i i Cur ^'°RT" ry "o Si �. � "•"•'mow a .. ..�,..� w �. ._ • � 'rte ffolol on fflmwlwh VIA" tm WAit*s 4W ALL A&Mr p!!opft"fy ChINW" V� a� IA +o4 ' r tip W W r s tV APME VIM ' 1 ti A ,C [ • %VI1 WQtilJtTlMW r it • •� / 'k «: 'r ; •' of r','. i'..'.� -' .,y r 00 i�C� l - Et3 iir�t�r# 4 A � - OWICE SALn fit' I WAls I we ttr F i for `'ACES , ftOELLAW v t4 VIM 1 �P71�M1�y� i +► t r pl! 11 y s 1 CK�l ----_ 10 4 Ic-� 11i> L4 ND LAN Dart@ : *i JtJwe 'M'` `. r WORTINARM I UN , s s mw -A-C 413i 09 _ .. _ . } . •'y ^rte; �..'. Y:. Scanned Digitized Checked t 1 ! t