HomeMy WebLinkAbout026-74
----..
{\~'.~~~',(~.
.. \ (:"1-''''; -,. _ i.
, ". \ "
..
,
~,
~---
,"", ."'/0
,~, "".,.r',:,, .,
~,""
Minutes of the meeting of the Board of Appeals, November 19,
.
'1974. PresAnt were W. llolmes, H. Backus, R. Taylor and alternate.
member E. Cahoon.
In the matter of the petition of~red D'Ag~
requesting re~ief from the provisions.of the Building Code to
.
allow the use of pier type foundations.
Appearing fqr the pet it ioner was Herman rUnstrell., Mr. Min-
:~ <:: .,... ,
strell'.sta~ed~the owners intended to use poured concrete piles
with steel rod re-inforcing in lieu of concrete block foundation.
The Building Code does'.not provide for pildHg -foundations and
" he seeks relief to make this substitution. Hr. Hinstrell stated
the owner was unable to spend the money necessary for the concrete
biock foundation.
The lot is situated on Sherburne Avenue north of Cliff Road.
In response to qu~~~ions from Member Taylor, Mr. Minstr~ll
stated he had received the approval of the Building Inspector for
, t;he design of the pilings and the structural integrity of the pil-
ings was assured.
No other person abp~ared in favor of or'opposed to the.peti-
ltion.
The Chairman read. a letter from Caroline R. Stevens in favor
of the petition.
, .
i After due deliberation, the Board found:
:~ A '
. .~
-
1.
't~e proposed piling type f6undatio'n could be effectively
.. _. /'..~ r'" ,
. used without am'impairment of use or'ut'ilityof foundati'ol1; ,
.~ -~
..
iI'"
2. The proposed b~ling type wa~ equal in structural. integ-
to the concrete block or poured concrete foundation;
3. The substitution could be made without jeopardizing the
c9de and without detrimedt to the code.
On motion of ~r. Tavlor and~secoQded by Mrs. Backus, it was
~ :.
d
c\~~~~~x~~
. \
petition.~" ',', ~
l~\. ','.
, ~
~... 4 '
~ . ....
.:.-~ _~- ..-"11 _ ".';:' ;.-. -.'."-:." ',:-""-':;"-,; ,__'::~li:
.,..~,,~':, .~.J, -..~;.L..Ll'