17C-161 (7) that the project will increase traffic with the addition of a home.
Chair Andrew Crystal suggested that the applicant supply additional
information before the next meeting including the DPW's review of
the driveway plans. Nancy Duseau said she is concerned about that
suggestion. She said she did not think that the Board could turn
down this application because of driveway considerations. Crystal
said if there is a safety issue on the street, the applicant should
show how his plan alleviates such safety hazards. Dan Yacuzzo said
he agreed with Duseau and noted that there was no driveway plan
submitted, or required to be submitted, with the application. Jody
Blatt said she would like the applicant to submit calculation
information on lot sizes in the neighborhood.
Further discussion ensued regarding the original "intent" of this
provision.
Jody Blatt suggested that the ordinance may need to be re-written
to clarify the language since it is very confusing.
Nancy Duseau moved to close the Public Hearing. Dan Yacuzzo
seconded the motion which passed 5: 1: 0 with Mark NeJame opposing.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Nancy Duseau moved to approve the Special Permit for lot size
averaging to separate a parcel into two lots at 66 Chestnut Street
since the Special Permit criteria, as outlined in Exhibit "I" in
the application, has been met. Dan Yacuzzo seconded the motion.
Mark NeJame said he did not - think that the applicant had met
criteria "B" . Yacuzzo noted that there could be no less impact to
the neighborhood than by constructing a single-family home. NeJame
noted that there is less impact with one home on the parcel than
there will be with sub-dividing the property and having two homes
on the site.
The Planning Board approved the Special Permit with a vote of 5: 1: 0
with Mark NeJame opposed.
one parcel into two lots.
Discussion ensued, with all participating, regarding different
interpretations of lot size averaging in the Zoning Ordinance.
Mark NeJame said that, according to §6.3 (2) (C) , a list of all of
the lot sizes, frontages and other applicable dimensional and
density measurements for the abutters and abutters to the abutters
(as certified by the City Assessor's Office) must be filed with the
Special Permit. NeJame noted that he believed this requirement had
not been met.
No one spoke in favor of the plan.
Steve Edwards of 67 Chestnut Street said he would like to
understand the proposal since he lives across the street. He said
he was concerned because one lot would be on a lower elevation than
the other and worried about drainage. He said the lot that has the
house on it is higher in elevation than the other lot and noted
that the bank slopes down toward the lot.
Site inspector Nancy Duseau said she had visited the site. She
said she had noted that the houses in the area are small and the
lots are also small. She said if a house was built on the sub-
divided property, it would fit right into the neighborhood. She
said that allowing additional building through lot size average was
meant to allow such a use as long as the new building blended into
the adjacent properties. Duseau said she had no concerns about
putting a house on the lot since the applicants meet all the
requirements to sub-divide the parcel. Jody Blatt, the other site
inspector agreed.
Anneke Corbett of 78 Chestnut Street said she had no problem with
another house being built but was concerned with the bank between
her house and where the new house will be built. She said there
were ten, very large trees between the properties. She worried
about the trees being cut, since the cutting would have an impact
on her privacy and views. Corbett said she hoped that the
applicant would plan to keep the trees to serve as a buffer between
the properties.
Dan Yacuzzo said he would like to see the calculations for the lots
in the area as required by the Zoning Ordinance. He said he would
appreciate having those figures before making a decision.
Mark NeJame said that he lives about two blocks away from the site
and travels on the street on a daily basis. He said Chestnut
Street is a very busy street and traffic sometimes travels at a �.
very fast rate. NeJame said that he was concerned about the
Special Permit criteria #B being met which states that the
requested use will promote the convenience and safety of vehicular
and pedestrian movement within the site and on adjacent streets,
minimize traffic impacts on the streets and roads in the area.
NeJame said that the visibility from the sight line is not good and
-5-
t
Planning Board Meeting - 4/13/95
At 8 : 30 p.m. Chair Crystal opened the Public Hearing on a request
for a Special Permit from James & Patricia Boyle under §6.4 of the
Zoning Ordinance for lot size averaging to separate a parcel into
two lots at 66 Chestnut Street, Florence. Crystal explained
procedures for conducting public hearings and read a copy of the
legal notice which was published in the Daily Hampshire Gazette on
March 30th and April 6th.
Mark NeJame announced that he had a potential conflict in this
case. He is not an abutter but lives nearby. He said that he had
spoken in opposition to a proposed re-zoning on the property about
five years ago. NeJame asked the applicant whether he had any
objection to his sitting on the case. The applicants, James and
Patricia Boyle, stated that they had no objection to NeJame sitting
and voting on the application.
Attorney John Moriarty was present to represent the Boyles. He
said that the application contains a map of the parcel of land
located on Chestnut Street in Florence showing 140' of frontage,
which is not quite enough for two separate lots under the existing
Zoning Ordinance. However, with lot size averaging of the
frontages, the Zoning Ordinance allows sub-division into two
parcels if the applicant meets the average size of the lots
surrounding the particular parcel of land. Moriarty said that the
average frontage of surrounding parcels is 67 .26' and that the lal)(1.
on Chestnut Street after being sub-divided would contain two
parcels with 70.35' of frontage which surpasses the average
frontage. Moriarty said that the Boyles would be acquiring a strip
of land across the back of the lots which will allow each lot to
have 10, 000 square feet and meet the size requirement and Special
Permit criteria for lot size averaging. The house that is
presently on the parcel is located to one side of the lot. There
will be no problem with any setbacks with the new parcel. Moriarty
said that the applicants believe that the requirements of §6.4 of
the Zoning Ordinance for Separation of Lots and §10. 10 for Special
Permit criteria have been met.
Moriarty said that the requirements for Special Permit approval
have been met as outlined in Exhibit "I" in the application. He
said that a house will be located on the property after the parcel
is separated. The land is in a residential area and a single-
family home would be built on the parcel. The new house will not
substantially add to the traffic in the area. The storm drain
system, sewage and water are adequate to allow for the addition of
one single-family home in the area. He said that the new home will
have a positive impact on the neighborhood by adding a residential
unit. The single-family home will be in harmony with the
surrounding neighborhood.
Mark NeJame asked whether the applicant would need a Special Permit
on both lots. Paulette Kuzdeba explained the process of lot size
averaging and that one Special Permit would be granted to separate
-4
1
Pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws (MGL) , Chapter 40A,
Section 11, no Special Permit, 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 the certified decision from the City Clerk and record it
at the Registry of Deeds.
The Northampton Planning Board hereby certifies that a Special
Permit has been Granted 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 Laws, Chapter 40A, Section 15,
notice is hereby given that this decision is filed with the
Northampton City Clerk on the date below.
If anyone wishes to appeal this action, an appeal must be filed
pursuant to MGL Chapter 40A, Section 17, with the Hampshire
County Superior Court and notice of said appeal filed with the
City Clerk within twenty days (20) of the date of that this
decision was filed with the City Clerk.
Applicant: James & Patricia Boyle - 66 Chestnut Street - Florence
DECISION DATE: April 13, 1995
DECISION FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: April 27, 1995
ouculo-p
Andrew J. C stal
Jody Blatt Nancy Duseau
Kenn th J rie
Daniel Yacuzzo
-3-
r
D. The requested use is for an additional single-family home
and will not overload, and will mitigate adverse impacts on,
the City's resources including the effect on the City's
water supply and distribution system, sanitary and storm
sewage collection and treatment systems, fire protection,
streets and schools.
E. The request exceeds the average of all frontages that exist
within 300' of the proposed site, and will contain the
minimum lot area required by City Zoning regulations as
described in §6. 3 (2) in the Zoning Ordinance.
F. The requested use bears a positive relationship to the
public convenience or welfare because the use is in harmony
with the adjoining parcels which are residential.
The use will not unduly impair the integrity or character of
the district or adjoining zones because the district and
area are residential. The use will not be detrimental to
the health, morals, or general welfare and will be in
harmony with the general purpose and intent of the
Ordinance.
G. The requested use is in keeping with City planning
objectives in that it keeps the use of the property
residential and it also will conform to average lot
frontage in that location.
-2-
t
City of Northampton, Massachusetts
Office of Planning and Development
City Hall • 210 Main Street J
Northampton, MA 01060 • 413 586-6950
FAX (413) 586-3726 +�
•Community and Economic Development �j
•Conservation •Historic Preservation k O'C ,
• Planning Board•Zoning Board of Appeals ,
• Northampton Parking Commission
DECISION OF
NORTHAMPTON PLANNING BOARD
APPLICANT: JAMES F. & PATRICIA A. BOYLE
ADDRESS: 4 TIFFANY LANE, NORTHAMPTON, MA 01060
OWNER: JAMES F. & PATRICIA A. BOYLE
ADDRESS: 4 TIFFANY LANE, NORTHAMPTON, MA 01060
RE LAND OR BUILDINGS IN NORTHAMPTON AT: _,- E
MAP mo PARCEL NUMBERS:
At a meeting conducted on April 13 1995, the Northampton
Planning Board voted 5: 0: 1 t 11r, request of James F. and
Patricia A. Boyle for a under the provisions of
S c t e No amp on Zoning Ordinance
I M -_- ra
.Planning Board Members present and voting were: Chairman Andrew
Crystal, Vice Chairman Daniel Yacuzzo, Jody Blatt, Nancy Duseau,
Kenneth Jodrie, Mark NeJame.
In Granting the Special Permit, the Planning Board found:
A. The requested use to separate a parcel into two lots
protects the subject premises against the possibility that
it could be used as an ingress and egress from the adjacent
parcel, which is a large parcel zoned for commercial use.
B. The requested use will promote the convenience and safety of
vehicular and pedestrian movement within the site and on
adjacent streets, minimize traffic impacts on the streets
and roads in the area since the separated lot will be used
for a single-family dwelling which is a much lower traffic
generator than other possible uses for the property.
C. The requested use will promote a harmonious relationship of
structures and open spaces to the natural landscape,
existing buildings and other community assets in the area
because an additional single-family residential lot in an
area of single-family and some two and three family homes
will be in keeping with the neighborhood.
-1-
ORIGINAL PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER