13-088 26 stonewall dr zoning�f:Jr,l ��,E3vT TO r;E�CISI'01N Or
THE ZONING BOA3_D OF AP?EALS
This is an amendment to the Decision of the Zoning Board
of .' peals of the City of Northampton, made on Wednesday, May
9, 1978, and filed with the City Clerk of the City of Northampton
on Thursday, Play 18, 197 8, granting the petition of Raymond and
Lillian Campbell for variances from the frontage reouirements of
the Northampton Zoning Ordinance.
1.1Thereas it was the intent of the Zoning Board of Appeals to
grant the petitioners variances from the lot frontage require—
ments of the Northampton Zoning Ordinance, and whereas the De—
cision, through clerical error, incorrectly stated that the
variances were granted from the fifty (50) foot requirement of
the Northampton Zoning Ordinance, when in fact the frontage re—
quirements are one huVndred twenty —five (125) feet for properties
in Suburban Residential Zones and one hundred sevenpy —five (175)
feet in Rural Residential Zones. Therefore, this amendment is
hereby made a part of the Decision of the Zoning Board of Appeals
made on Play 9, 1978 and filed with the City Clerk of the City of
Northampton on May 18, 1978, and said Decision is hereby amended
so that the first paragraph shall read as follows:
At its meeting of Wednesday, May 9, 1978, the Zoning Board
of Appeals for the City of Northampton voted to grant the petition
of Raymond and Lillian Campbell for variances from the frontage
requirements of the Northampton Zoning Ordinance.
The remainder of said Decision shall remain the same.
ERIC B. GERVAIS,
ACTING CHAIRMAN
THOMAS BRUSITUAY
DAVID WAVIPLER, ASSOCIATE
DECISION OF THE
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
1..0�
At its meeting of Wednesday, May 9, 1978, the Zoning Board
of Appeals for the City of Northampton voted to grant the
petition of Raymond and Lillian Campbell for variances from the
fifty (50) foot frontage requirement of the Northampton Zoning
Ordinance.
Based upon evidence presented to the Board, the Board made
the following findings in regard to the variance:
1. The properties in their present form are unique and have
problems affecting them and no others in the zoning district in
that although they have sufficient area, they do not have suf—
ficient frontage under the Zoning Ordinance adopted in July, 1975.
Furthermore, the lots were subdivided prior to the date of adop—
tion of the Ordinance, and do not comply, through no fault of the
developer.
2. The literal enforcement of the zoning ordinance would
involve substantial hardship to the owners in that they had
followed the proper procedure and have built houses on these lots
unaware of the error of the Planning Board. As a result of this
error the owners will be unable to sell the houses if a variance
is not granted.
3. The proposed uses will not be detrimental to the public
good in that the properties will be sold as one family dwellings.
If the variances are not granted, the properties will have to be
rented or abandoned, which will be detrimental to the neighbor—
hood.
4. The proposed uses will not nullify or derogate the intent
of the zoning ordinances because the uses are allowed within a SR
Zone, and the lots have sufficient area, are in keeping with the
rest of the nei and meet all other zoning requirements.
4 GEAIS, ACTING CHAIRMAN
1 //, THOMAS__ BRUSH'KAY �
x
DAVID - :'AMPLER, ASSOCIATE
S6./ V
NORTHAMPTON BOARD OF APPEALS
Decision on Application of
Raymond and Lillian C anpbell
May 9, 1978
The Board of Appeals met at 7:15 PM in the Building Inspector's
office to decide on the application of Raymond and Lillian Campbell.
Eric B. Gervais, Acting Chairman, presided.
The minutes of the public hearing, held on May 3, were read
and approved unanimously.
Mr. Campbell had appeared before the Board on May 3 to request
a variance on three parcels, each containing a single family dwelling.
He had been about to sell one of the homes when it was discovered
that, through a procedural error on the part of the Planning Board,
the subdivision had not been properly recorded with the City Clerk.
It was noted that the Board members had checked the property
after the public hearing.
After moving to vote on the matter, with Mr. Wampler seconding
the motion, Mr. Brushway made the following findings:
o The lack of frontage on the lots produces special conditions
affecting these lots but not others in the district.
o According to Chapter 41, the lots are legal but they do not
meet the present zoning ordinance requirements through no
fault of the developer.
o Granting the variance would not be detrimental to the neigh-
borhood, but rather, would enhance the area.
o Use of the homes for other than single family homes would be
detrimental to the neighborhood.
o the Properties meet all other zoning ordinance requirements.
Mr. Wampler found that:
o Mr. Campbell had followed the required procedures, unaware
that the Planning Board had erred.
o Denial of the variance would cause the petitioner severe
financial hardship.
o At its meeting of May 3, the Planning Board had recommended
approval.
Mr. Gervai s found that:
o Literal enforcement of the zoning ordinance would cause the
applicant substantial hardship.
o The applicant cannot be held responsible for the Planning
Board's error.
o The neighborhood would be impaired if the homes could not
be sold.
o The lots have sufficient area and are in keeping with the
rest of the neighborhood.
Based on the findings mentioned, the Board voted unanimously
to grant the variance with no restrictions.
The meeting was adjourned at 7:25 PM. Present and voting were
Eric B. Gervais, Acting Chairman, Thomas Brushway, and David Wampler,
Associate. Also present were Clare Fennessey, Clerk and one interested
citizen.
t
.GtiJ
B. Ge vais
Acting Chairman
- 2 -
es
l
Application nber: 'y 9
t:ilnrl Ppp Pri_ Recd. ZBA map (s) Parcels)
A�=I l }4 3Y MADE TO THE CITY OF NORTHAMPTON ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS:
1. Name of Applicant _[�` I Y y ��;V +� (�� , t�, �� � �!?rV 1
Address 0) 0 1,2,2 1-
2. Owner of Property `i f} r') ff _ F) 13 l f L _—
Address `' " Y
3. Applicant is: Owner; _Contract Purchaser; L Lessee; C!Tenant in Possession.
4. Application is made for:
VARIANCE from the provisions of Section � !� page "/ of the Zoning Ordinance of the
City of Northampton.
SPECIAL PERMIT under the provisions of Section page of the Zoning Ordinance
of the City of Northampton.
OTHER:
S i D IV r= W t I-
5. Location of Property C` 11 f r.'- t_ }t:'�? EZ��I .Il- _, being situated on
the " _U - �' _.._side of ! O 1) - Street; and shown on the Assessors' Maps,
Sheet No. 27713 C , Parcel(s)
6. Z_ore_ T , � ) _j z 6 , tic .r� ' R--
7. Description of proposed work and/or use;,._
8. Sketch plan attached; /<Yes . 'No
9. Site plan: A.ttched Required tt
10. S et forth reasons upon which application is based: _ � V c,
Ji
_���1z.� �'1' t ✓'. s- u�r_1� ;. .. '� � j 1) .� i�� f . i� _J C.0 = .SL —LJ 1
LL�. •_n _ 1 ��7`� (Jci �!^ - f ' 1 ! h C t� l <. t cT
�..L'��- ).__.� — .° V1 G D ��. L � L �� [ !/ --- 1^ — •• J��.-- .- -.�� —� yt S � _K ra[' c7
11. Abutters (see instructions: list on reverse side of form).
12. 1 hereby certify that information contained herein is true to the best of my knowledge.
Lt j_...._t� .�� --- Applicant's Signature o�-
Ass
Sheet No
11. List of Abutters: Ad l-
2.
3.
� �• _j ) / 'Y f- . ��) � s�i iii � flfS �� 4 � ,3
4.
5. �'r' K
ap
Parcel
ft
�-r
1'
n
7.
/ 2
All K
,
9.
10.
�
J 7— �
11. �! i1 y1 f� / S l �f #its' r � t^
- f - 1 ,•
1
14.
15. r
�-
' I3
18.
19. '
20.
I
13 J"
22.
23. ,
24.
25.
26. --
27.
28.
29.
(Attach additional sheets, if necessary)
-�
CITY NORTHAMPTON
` "
ZONING PERMIT APPLICATI�'�:
Zoning Ordinance Section 10.2 ^_ ,, �Rec
Owner A I''IUS`4[) eoj:(
Address 01VTX 0c - D P
Telephone —<` / Y I – -.S t- jj - -,3
t. rap No, -' Lot
1- ,f iQ7P Fi e No. Plan File
Sd�b4 ^ r ol�, M jl�- � ^t
Telephone -�; , =
This section is to be filled out in accordance with the ''Table of Dimensional and Density Regulations:
(Z.O. ARTICLE VI)
Zoning
District
Use
Lot
Area
Front
Width
Depth
p
Setbacks
Max. Bid.
Cover
Min. Op.
Space
, Front
Side
Rear
n-
/`J :t
-
3p
'
Yv
o
lU
Past S t
Existing
i3O
30
^ G',
40
/c� %
Present
Pro osed
m s / ,
/ S
°
%
Mark the appropriate box to indicate the use of the parcel:
X Non- onfgrmir�g end Structure. Specif % f %�11 % /� � OAj 1 X I S % 1 lei (---
X Residential XSingle Family Unit ❑Multi - Family
❑ Duplex ❑ Other
❑ Business
Individual
❑ Institutional
❑ Subdivision
Regular ❑ P.U.D.
❑ Cluster O Other
'K Subdivision with "Approval- Not - Required " - Stamp:
❑ Planning Board Approval:
;Zoning Board Approval (Special Permit 10.9: Varianc
❑ City Council (Special Exception S. 10.10)
W Protect D O ( Z. O. S XIV) ❑ Yes No
Parking Space Requ (Z.O. Sect. 8.1) Required Proposed
Loading Space Requirements: (Z.O. Sect. 8.2) Required _� Proposed ri
Signs: (Z.O. Art. VII) ❑ Yes KNo
Environmental Performance Standards: (Z.O. Art. XI 1) ❑ Yes j4 No
Plot Plan
(S.10.2)
' - KYes ❑ No
This section for OFFICIAL use only:
❑ Approval as presented:
❑ Modifications necessary for approval:
❑ Return: (More information needed)
❑ Denial: Reasons:
Site Plan O Yes 0,
(S. 10.2 and 10.11
Waiver Granted: Date O
Signature of Applican Date Si 9 nat Admin. Office Date
11,f n 1tivw9 t!&Ss
*ftw *400
CITY OF NORTHAMPTON . DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING INSPECTIONS
131 6 *
FROM: rAni i T m ark, R.. i? r1inr Tnan -
..
In reference to the subdivision of Raymond J. Campbell on Stonewall
Drive, Page 13, Lot 88; I have attached a site plan for your opinion
of Section 5A of Chapter 40A and Section 81 -L of Chapter 41 in refer-
ence to this particular site. These lots, as you know, were built
upon in 1977.
R,P-V4
4 P
- T,
cAU
LILIA N L CA p /
WT PER / P-LL
- 7
INI
Ay 70
1
03'-
77-
7 — Irl /Z/
7 C
0 11 AW N
APPROVED:
SCALE ZOO
D E -/ - - F
AL
RE S T E
2'a
B RZ
' A
CITY OF NORTHAMPTON
MASSACHUSETTS
CONSERVATION COMMISSION
PROJECT LOCATION:
TO: Raymond W. J.
e / c) 9p�
's f/iSi
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
CITY OF NORTHAMPTON \ _atk4
REQUEST FOR COMPLIANCE
MASSACHUSETTS G.L. Ch. 131, Sec 40
Stonewall Drive DATE: July 6, 1977
Northampton. MA
Campbell
58 ii0 t Street
01002 1 0�
After an inspection of the project indicated above, it has been determined that the area upon
which work is proceeding is potentially essential to public or private water supply, ground
water supply, flood control, storm damage prevention, prevention of pollution, protection of
land containing shell fish or the protection of fisheries.
Therefore, the Northampton Conservation- Commission
hereby makes the following request that:
1. The owner of the subject property, his agents and employees and parties entering
the premises pursuant to a contract with that owner or his agents and employees
immediately cease and desist from any and all removal, dredging, filling or altering
of any bank, flat, marsh, meadow or swamp bordering on the ocean or on any ex-
isting creek, river, stream, pond, or lake or on any land under said waters or any land
subject to tidal action, coastal storm flowage or flooding.
2. No further work take place on the subject property until such time as the
Northampton Conservation Commission acting under said chapter has issued
an Order of Conditions regulating the said work.
3. The owner of the subject property file appropriate forms and plans as required by
G.L. Ch. 131, Sec. 40.
ISSUED BY:
Northampton
CONSERVATION COMMISSION
The placing of st s in the swampy area beh nd the houses
on Stonewall Driv (Assessors Map 13 -88) i a clear violation
of the Wetlands P tection Act, Ch. 13 ec. 40.
Certified Mail #863561
r_1 - (,a1I 40"-�
IP AI 7 7 �, �• 41 Cam- �v
71
a 6 -04