Saying he was fed up co-existing with town officials, the owner of a 1750s-era house on Main Street in Rowley, Mass., has put the home and the 6.8 acres it sits on up for sale and is encouraging developers to build affordable housing there.
"The town doesn't want me here anymore," Michael Kovalchuk said Tuesday morning.
Kovalchuk's words come as he fends off a lawsuit from the town accusing him of erecting a fence along 238 Main St. without permission. The fence, according to a complaint filed July 11 in Lawrence Superior Court, blocks the public's view of the historic 18th century house.
Kovalchuk erected the fence without the approval of the Rowley Historical Commission, which oversees two historic districts established at Town Meeting in 1988. He also violated the 1971 Historic Districts Act established by the state to allow communities to create historic districts and commissions.
As a result, the town is demanding that Kovalchuk take down the fence and pay $100 per day, retroactive to May 17, until it is gone. The lawsuit also asks Kovalchuk to reimburse the town for legal fees and any other expenses the court finds appropriate.
Kovalchuk said he spent between $12,000 and $14,000 on the 6-foot-high stockade fence.
Kovalchuk's wood-frame home was built in 1750 and is near Todd Farm and the Historical Society. Kovalchuk erected the fence in September, according to the lawsuit.
On Tuesday, Kovalchuk said he was asking $2.4 million for the property and that based on its proximity to public transportation, schools and other selling points, it would be a good place to build affordable housing.
To further his belief, Kovalchuk placed a sign on the fence highlighting the potential for affordable housing and declaring the site could be suitable for 48 units of housing.
"I think it is the highest and best use for the town," Kovalchuk said. "If someone wants to put in 17 townhouses, that's fine. If someone wants to put in affordable housing, that's fine, too."
Asked if his decision to place his property up for sale was related to his dispute with the town, Kovalchuk didn't leave much room for doubt.
"Yeah, I am tired of it," he said, adding that the town has been opposed to him and his on-site firewood business for decades.
Town Administrator Deborah Eagan declined to comment on Kovalchuk's decision to put his property up for sale or his assertion that the town was against him due to ongoing litigation.
"I'm not going to discuss this anymore," Eagan said Tuesday.
As the wheels began turning on the possible sale of his property, the lawsuit against him continued to spin.
On July 25, Kovalchuk said he appeared in Lawrence Superior Court to argue against the town's attempt to convince a judge to order a preliminary injunction, forcing him to remove the fence.
The judge turned down the town's request, according to Kovalchuk.
Eagan would not confirm Kovalchuk's claim, saying that she couldn't comment on matters in litigation.
Kovalchuk put up the fence without obtaining a certificate of approval from the Historical Commission, according to the lawsuit.
Following a joint meeting of selectmen and the commission, officials sent a letter to Kovalchuk on Jan. 25, saying he violated the 1988 bylaw that created the commission.
When Kovalchuk failed to respond, a second letter was sent Feb. 15, inviting him to the commission meeting March 2 to discuss the dispute.
Through his attorney, Kovalchuk asked if he could meet with the commission in April. When the April date arrived, neither Kovalchuk nor his attorney showed.
That set the stage for the commission to formally order Kovalchuk to remove the fence by May 16 or file an application with the commission for approval.
"Mr. Kovalchuk has neither removed the fence nor filed an application of any type with the commission," the complaint reads.
The town filed suit in Superior Court with the hope Kovalchuk would be compelled to comply.
"The town and the public will suffer irreparable harm if the said violation is allowed to continue," the complaint reads, "as the illegal maintenance of the fence on the premises offends the purposes of the act and the bylaw, disrupts the visual integrity of the historic districts, flouts the authority of the commission and will likely cause other owners of real property within the historic district of the town to spurn the lawful orders of the commission."
Kovalchuck said his lack of availability for those meetings stems from a physical condition that makes it virtually impossible to attend night meetings. That prompted him to contact selectmen in an attempt to schedule a meeting earlier in the day.
