From Article VI- section A of the Longmeadow Zoning Bylaws.
In the Residence A-l Zone no dwelling shall be erected or maintained on a lot having a frontage of less than 125 feet for an interior lot and 140 feet for a corner lot or having an area of less than 18,750 square feet.
Questions
Because the frontage of this lot on Bliss Road is only 71.0 ft (less than the minimum of 140 ft required for a corner lot) …. Would this property be considered non-conforming by the Longmeadow zoning bylaw cited above?
In the Residence A-l Zone no dwelling shall be erected or maintained on a lot having a frontage of less than 125 feet for an interior lot and 140 feet for a corner lot or having an area of less than 18,750 square feet.
Questions
Because the frontage of this lot on Bliss Road is only 71.0 ft (less than the minimum of 140 ft required for a corner lot) …. Would this property be considered non-conforming by the Longmeadow zoning bylaw cited above?
Therefore, if the original structure is demolished as suggested in my previous post as the likely scenario for a new owner…. Would a variance by the Longmeadow ZBA be required for a new structure to be erected on the site? Is it likely that it would be granted?
Here is an interesting idea that might be considered by the abutting property owner….
1. Purchase the 386 Bliss Road property and demolish the building.
2. Combine the two adjacent lots
Here is an interesting idea that might be considered by the abutting property owner….
1. Purchase the 386 Bliss Road property and demolish the building.
2. Combine the two adjacent lots
3. Redivide the lot into two new parcels- each ~ 0.50 acre in size. Build a new dwelling on the second parcel which would appear to meet the existing zoning bylaws (see sketch below).
The second “new” lot would likely have a market value of $175-200K given the current assessment valuation of land for this section of town.
The town is hoping to recoup their $100K expenses which would be added to the General Fund.
Let’s hope that the town realizes at least that amount during next week’s auction and that this property is re-established as a contributor to Longmeadow’s property tax rolls.
2 comments:
Perhaps the town should include an automatic zoning variance as part of the sale. Any real estate lawyer should be able to draw up something that would protect both the town's interest in maintaining the community's character and the buyer's right to demolish and rebuild a similar structure on the property. Absent a guarantee like that, it's hard to see why any buyer besides the abutter would want this property.
Alan,
I agree completely with your comments.
It seems that the town has not done enough to ensure that it obtains the maximum market value at the upcoming public auction. The problem that I have highlighted should be pretty obvious to most potential bidders. As you suggest the town's Zoning Board of Appeals should provide an automatic zoning variance if current structure is demolished and a new one of similar size and location is built on the property..... but that has not happened!
One last interesting point... the owner of the adjacent property happens to be a current member of the Longmeadow Select Board and I suspect that he may be one of the bidders at the upcoming public auction. Let's hope that there are some other interested parties at this auction.
Post a Comment