The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMiscellaneous - 120 STEVENS STREET 4/30/2018 120 STEVENS STREET ! � p 210/036.0-0012-0000.0 J rr v� PAJ1 u- F J I i • Yh 120 STEVENS STREET p t 210/036.0-0012-0000.0 J ' IV U� MEMBER MA&NH BAR •R PETER G. SHAHEEN ATTORNEY AT LAW CHESTNUT GREEN ` 565 TURNPIKE STREET,SUITE 81 (50'6)689-0800 NORTH ANDOVER,MA 01845 FAX(S.QJa .)794-0890 Intemet address:PGSlaw@aol.com 7� t HORTyr -1O OCL 1 ii �. } V4 0 p TOW 9S��cHuSE� 9 JUL l0 o ' ll .; TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER MASSACHUSETTS Any appeal shall be filed BOARD OF AFPEALS within(20)days after the date of filing of this notice NOTICE OF DECISION in the office of the Town Clerk. Property at: Lot B, 120 Stevens Street NAME: Christopher&Audrey Surette, 104 Second St. DATE:7/15199 ADDRESS: for premises: Lot B, 120 Stevens Street PETITION:018-99 North Andover, MA 01845 HEARING:6/22/99&7/13/99 The Board of Appeals held a regular meeting on Tuesday evening, July 13, 1999 upon the application of Christopher &Audrey Surette, 104 Second Street,for property at: Lot B, 120 Stevens Street, North Andover, requesting a Variance from the requirements of Section 7, P7.1 &7.3 for relief of lot area dimension,and side and rear setbacks of Table 2,and as a Party Aggrieved of the Building Commissioner. The property is in the R-2 Zoning District. The hearing was advertised in the Lawrence Tribune on 5/25199&6/1/99 and all abutters were notified by regular mail. The following members were present: William J. Sullivan, Raymond Vivenzio, Robert Ford,Scott Karpinski. Upon a motion made by Raymond Vivenzio and 2nd by Robert Ford, the Board voted to uphold the Building Commissioner's decision and deny the party aggrieved petition. Voting in favor. William J. Sullivan, Raymond Vivenzio, Robert Ford, Scott Karpinski. Upon a motion made by Raymond Vienzio and 2'by Robert Ford, the Board voted to GRANT a Variance from section 7, P7.1 &7.3 for relief of lot area dimension, and side and rear setbacks and to allow the land to be divided into two(2)lots with sufficient frontage on the condition that the new lot be limited to use of a single family home and that Mrs. Helfrich's children only be allowed to build on the lot in accordance with the Plan of Land by: Scott Giles, Registered Land Surveyor,#13972,dated:4/28/99. Voting in favor. William J. Sullivan, Raymond Vivenzio, Robert Ford, John Pallone. 10.4 Variances and Appeals The Zoning Board of Appeals shall have power upon appeal to grant variances from the terms of this Zoning Bylaw where the Board finds that owing to circumstances relating to soil conditions,shape,or typography of the land or structure and especially affecting such land or structures but not affecting generally the zoning district in general,a literal enforcement of the provisions of this Bylaw will involve substantial hardship,financial or otherwise,to the petitioner or applicant, and that desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent or purpose of this Bylaw. Note: The granting of the Variance and/or Special Permit as requested by the applicant does not necessarily ensure the granting of a Building Permit as the applicant must abide by all applicable local,state and federal and building codes and regulations,prior to the issuance of a building permit as requested by the Building Commission. By order of the Zoning Bard of Appeals William J. Sulli an, Chairman ml/1999decision/26 u' HOFTM .. ► - ) / fit. �' / ^,, X73 SACHU3ES�. NORTH ANDOVER OFFICE OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 27 CHARLES STREET NORTH ANDOVER,MASSACHUSETTS 845 (97S) 688-9542 Notice is hereby given that the Board of Appeals will hold a public hearing at the Senior Center, 120R Main St., North Andover, MA on Tuesda ay of June 1999, at 7:30 PM to all parties interested in the appeal of Christopher & Audrey Surette, 104 Second Street, No. Andover, for premises at: Lot B, 120 Stevens St., No. Andover, requesting a Variance from the requirements of Section 7, P7.1 & 7.3 for relief of lot area dimension, and side and rear setbacks of Table 2, and as a Party Aggrieved of,the Building Commissioner's denial of said application for a building permit . Premises affected is land and property with frontage on the West side of Stevens St. which is in the R-2 Zoning District. Plans are available for review at the Office of the Building Dept., 27 Charles Street, North Andover, Monday through Thursday, from the hours of 9,AM to 1:PM. B Order of the Board of Appeals, Y PP , Willi m J. Sullivan, Chairman I Published in the Eagle Tribune on 5/25/99 & 6/1/99. Legainov/25 _ �o v Nv v C,U CL -0� 10 C c —cc . momz iOaZ .1mo J Z. QO (O r CD (D nw coQa0 -1 ` p _ af0 -.. �zf5> �c aO�c aivOv a .� ao � � ° in o rD!�m N -4 �m��DmO6 c o m o �_- o m m m o m o ate- �,� Nc.�� r O ion as a.< o m' D ^a`m y.C�D °1 c D"o 00 0.0 o(n m <U)0 t cnDm m m C) D c �� -0 ao(o ° m (no m< a9 0 7] ° m 0 j`.G O N O N(D G O W O._ CJ -0 d m m Nmmm�� 3 �v� rn o ^o< 1m �� >�_:.� � (C) ? vi j cOn m O w c0 C.-. .vi< .. .t 'i_aA'\1VG Glia-`7j i BUILDINGS 6JS �` -` COriSI:RV?."F10�b38.95U HL:aLT'r:&8S u NORTH 0 St�1D ��,41 31 .::+ • 0 o a , M i � �SSACHUS�t NORTH ANDOVER OFFICE OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 27 CHARLES STREET NORTH ANDOVER,MASSACHUSETTS 01 845 FAX(978)688-9542 TO ALL CONCERNED PARTIES, PLEASE BE ADVISED OF THE FOLLOWING RESCHEDULED MEETINGS OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, The North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals has rescheduled the public hearing portion of their June 8, 1999 meeting to the following date: Tuesday, June 22, 1999, relative to the following public hearing petitions: NorthEast Storage Corp, Chris Jenkins, Dutton & Garfield, Inc,, Michael & Margaret Mannion, Andrew & Maureen Heinze, Walter & Virginia Wilson, Christopher & Audrey Surette, A.L. Prime Energy, Inc., Terry R. Stonecipher. Location of the meeting: North Andover Senior Center, 120R Main Street. Time of the meeting: 7:30 PM. By order of the Chairman of the Zoning Board of Appeals, William J. Sullivan MI/citizen B(.).�RD 01 APPEALS 688-9541 BUILDINGS 688-9545 CONSERVATION 688.9530 HEAITH 688-9540 PL-\NXj\'()6N%-9S35 i 0 QRTH • ' Qf 4TbiD '{1'VQ 0 r O p ,sSACH U56< NORTH ANDOVER OFFICE OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 27 CHARLES STREET NORTH ANDOVER,MASSACI-RJSETTS 01 845 FAX (978)683-9542 Notice is hereby given that the Board of Appeals will hold a public hearing at the Senior Center, 1208 Main St., North Andover, MA on Tuesday the 8th day of June 1999, at 7:30 PM to all parties :interested in the appeal of Christopher & Audrey Surette, 104 Second Street, No. Andover, for premises at: Lot B, 120 Stevens St., No. Andover, requesting a Variance from the requirements of Section 7, P7.1 & 7.3 for relief of lot area dimension, and side and rear setbacks of Table 2, and as a Party Aggrieved of the Building Commissioner's denial of said application for a building permit . Premises affected is land and property with frontage on the West side of Stevens St. which is in the R-2 Zoning District. Plans are available for review at the Office of the Building Dept., 27 Charles Street, North Andover, Monday through Thursday, from the hours of 9:AM to 1:PM- By Order of the Board of Appeals, William J. Sullivan, Chairman Published in the Eagle Tribune on 5125/99 & 6/1/99. Legalnov/25 _aLn �nO'W, 0 Ln.0 1 � �,� o D� ��o� 3 c,< mov�� ma. CL 10D U o� yoa�Qu73[ny ,w��o� om� Om O 3 y K — m .`G N O03 Z`0 �, S(D-0 N O- d N N - R*-* N N(�N G N<°'� T O O ro �� oco }O.. rui N m Wm -4 C .cc.. sDZ- S T m �m m N Ln s m s� o m o 3w m Z-• 0 3D..o o m a-- f» v'm��sD�m m �o:� ��n.m woo Z"O M =m m a�m DQmC)mZ c- 3 a D� a p� 70 �_.CD ao 3 �� v o rD n N Zmo sva c D n�O- 6o0 °' m0 =r CD nm�°� D�a�p�w�mNo�m�.rp0< 1� <�O �-.�m `° N� v w 3.� 3 °�' NaQ _a W�ID M CL ��a��c D�m NO (8O C3J 0, W C�OO�=O OOH - ''�.N < �aOOO (� NO _ OO .�_.y O co ? m 3 3 v m m a' 7 m m 3_ o S2�m o' > >m�._.- BO:uRll Ol MIPEALS 655-95.41 BU1LllRJC;S 655-9545 CONSLRV.ATIUN 6&5-9530 HLALTH 655-954U NORTH a 4 ( i OfStao a�p A t ' F P ♦ off+ _ `ti'e Ii �sSACHUS NORTH ANDOVER OFFICE OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 27 CHARLES STREET NORTH ANDOVER,MASSACHUSETTS 01845 FAX(978)688-9542 i Notice is hereby given that the Board of Appeals will hold a public hearing at the Senior Center, 120R Main St., North Andover, MA on Tuesday the 8th day of June 1999, at 7:30 PM to all parties interested in the appeal of Christopher & Audrey Surette, 104 Second Street, No. Andover, for premises at: Lot B, 120 Stevens St., No. Andover, requesting a Variance from the requirements of Section 7, P7.1 & 7.3 for relief of lot area dimension, and side and rear setbacks of Table 2, and as a Party Aggrieved of the Building Commissioner's denial of said application for a building permit . Premises affected is land and property with frontage on the West side of Stevens St. which is in the R-2 Zoning District. Plans are available for review at the Office of the Building Dept., 27 Charles Street, North Andover, Monday through Thursday, from the hours of 9:AM to 1:PM. By Order of the Board of Appeals, William J. Sullivan, Chairman Published in the Eagle Tribune on 5/25/99 & 6/1/99. anOV/2... -- - ov �oivwwv - co -00, mm g 1 m� W<v��a�°' a�a�vm��'ma�a C-1 .�amZ -i a ° o os^� 0 ?m-v�°',�oma�ay33c»'mww�pZomoci m p I cF11m p> c Nm < �..0, -0dm0 ro Zap o=,; .N� Nw�aow�� °�yy�cD CD �N.�..D29°.sDZ-2 N 07 -i�-° (n�<°'C N c•'9 Q N.w N W a C:°Z W 7 fD °ID Z )D i Q' w < �D. w a -.-ad w o o° of Z•' a a'm D°'0 C_ 3 a Dc z)- o< =co�.»ao °° rn 0 r>SD N CMD 3mv.-m G CD0 az�-<V05 7p-3nc°ID(7n �.°�D^p'o •0m W��o�mcQ5—,0 o ao < i W C'0- �0 Q N M 0 Vi(D �,�p a�,m M Q- m A s v m 3 w( 7Do co3w2_KOO=s-" °00�3'a3fD�o�o°mroo�� 0°41�F.� r o co 7 fn N 3�i N W 7 10 0 a' —N<fD CD 7 3 O !p N O 0 7 fD= BOARD OF APPEALS 688-9541 BUILDINGS 688-9545 CONSERVATION 688-9530 HEALTH 688-9540 PLANNING 688.9535 Location No. v7 a Date `L0^ O Z NORT" TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER F:,• • OR A Certificate of Occupancy $ Building/Frame Permit Fee $ JACMUS Foundation Permit Fee $ Other Permit Fee $ TOTAL $ _ Check # 15922 �/ Building Inspector TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER BUILDING DEPARTMENT APPLICATION T�)CONSTRUCT REPAIR,RENOVATE, OR DEMOLISH A ONE OR TWO FAMILY DWELLING r� + fl[' s rw "bgI ,. BUILDING PERMIT NUMBER: DATE ISSUED: _ a --- 2 9PY I SIGNATURE: Building Commissioner/IEEeEctor of Buildings Date SECTION 1-SITE INFORMATION t 1.1 Prop y Address: 1.2 Assessors Map and Parcel Number: ct 0 i �r rn A ) 6 ,/Q� �� map Number Par umber 1.3 Zoning Information: 1.4 Property Dimensions: i I Zoning District Proposed Use Lot Areas Frontage ft ` 1.6 BUILDING SETBACKS ft Front Yard Side Yard Rear Yard R Required Provide Required Provided Re red Provided l d Z 1.5. Flood nformation: 1.8 Sewerage 1.7 Water Supply M.G.L.C.40. S4) ag Disposal System Public 0 Private 0 Zone Outside Flood Zone ❑ Municipal ❑ On Site Disposal System 0 a SECTION 2-PROPERTY OWNERSFIIPIAUTHORIZED AGENT i 2.1 Owner of Record C r oo Name(Print) Address for Service II Signature Telephone 2.2 Owner of Record: { Name Print Address for Service: 0 z Signature Telephone --- SECTION 3-CONSTRUCTION SERVICES 3.1 Licensed Construction Supervisor: (I Not Applicable ❑ Licensed Construction Supervisor: i C) 6 i 4A/ ( �� ®��- License Number Ad `t111 V �l! //� zf add Expiration Date Signature Telephone 3.2 Reg tered Home Improvement Co Tactor /is Not Applicable ❑ Company Name / /� �`�`.0 ✓,�V ad,/e� Registration Number rM Add is , } a® Expirati�n Date Signature Telephone SECTION 4-WORKERS COMPENSATION(M G.L C 152 § 25c(6) Workers Compensation Insurance affidavit must be completed and submitted with this application.:Failure to provide this affidavit will result in the denial of the issuance of the buildina permit. Signed affidavit Attached Yes.......❑ No...:....❑ SECTION 5 Description of Proposed Work(check all applicable) New Construction ❑ Existing Building ❑ Repair(s) ❑ Alterations(s) ❑ Addition ❑ Accessory Bldg. ❑ _ Dert►olition ❑ £ ;,Other ❑ Specify i Brief Description of Proposed Work: F.r + t .�• w %``te, ; /41 40/u 4 SECTION 6-ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COSTS Item Estimated Cost(Dollar)to be OFFIia USE ONLY f Completed by permit applicant 1. Building (a) Building Permit Fee Multiplier 2 Electrical (b) Estimated Total Cost of Construction 3 Plumbing Building Permit fee(a)x (b) 4 Mechanical HVAC 5 Fire Protection 6 Total 1+2+3+4+5 O Check Number SECTION 7a OWNER AUTHORIZATION TO BE COMPLETED WHEN OWNERS AGENT OR CONTRACTOR_ APPLIES FOR BUILDING PERMIT as Owner/Authorized Agent of subject property. Hereby authorize (� SCo/ / l Gl�i rl s� to act on My b Iialf,in all matters e ativ tgwo k authorized by this building pen-nit application. SiQ nature of Owifir 0 Date SECTION 7b OWNER/AUTHORIZED AGENT DECLARATION I_3wi/ �Yya� ` as Owner/Authorized Agent of subject property Herebv declare that the statements and information on the foregoing application are true and accurate,to the best of my knowledge and belief Print Si titre of OA�ent Data Jill 1111111 SEEM- NO. OF STORIES SIZE BASEMENT OR SLAB RD SIZE OF FLOOR TIMBERS 1 2 3 SPAN DIMENSIONS OF SILLS DIMENSIONS OF POSTS DINIENSIONS OF GIRDERS. HEIGHT OF FOUNDATION THICKNESS SIZE OF FOOTING X MATERIAL OF CHDANEY IS BUILDING ON SOLID OR FILLED LAND IS BUILDING CONNECTED TO NATURAL GAS LINE I i Board of Building Regulations and Standards HOME IMPROVEMENT CONTRACTOR Registration: 934690 Expiration:=1/4/04 =Type: Private Corporation COLONIAL VILLAGE DEVELOPME tHR6L'6 PISCATELLIr 1049 TURNPIKE ST. _rrea N.ANDOVER,MA 01845 Administrator BFOARD OF;BUILDING'REGULATIONS t n 'License CO NST.RUCTION'SUPERV.ISOR' t@�h 'Plumber SCS 0"53181 91i thdatMA 111411'941 v0 Expires.1411412603 Tr.no: 9351 IkestriotedAo i CHARLES.-d PISCATELLI- 1;FLASHfRD - y NO;READING, IMA 01864' Administrator I , r North Andover Building Department Tel: 978-688-9545 DEBRIS DISPOSAL FORM In accordance with the provision of MGL c 40 S 54, a condition of Building Permit Number is that the debris resulting from this work shall be disposed of in a properly licensed solid waste disposal facility as defined by MGL c11, S150A. The debris will be disposed of in: (Location of Facility) Si ature of Permit Applicant /�/ Date NOTE: Demolition permit from the Town of North Andover must be obtained for this project through the Office of the Building Inspector Z a The Commonwealth of Massachusetts Department of Industrial Accidents Office of Investigations Boston, Mass. 02111 Workers'Compensation Insurance Affidavit Name Please Print Name: Location: City (h1-°.(— �tjA Phone # I am a homeowner per all work myself. I am a sole proprietor and have no one working in any capacity �/ I am an employer providing workers' compensation for my employees working on this job. Company name! Address City Phone# Insurance.Co. Policy# Company name: Address City Phone#: Insurance Co. __ Policy# Failure to secure coverage as required under Section 25A or MGL 152 can lead to the imposition of criminal penalties of,a fine up to$1,500.00 and/or one years'imprisonment-as_well_as-civil.penaltiesin theImm-of-aSTOP _ORK ORDER.And..a.fine_of.01,00M)-arlay.against.me I understand that a copy of this statement may be forwarded to the office of Investigations of the DIA for coverage verification. a i do hereby certify un er a pain and pe a 'u that the information provided above is true and correct. Signature Date _ Print name Phone.# Official use only do not write in this area to be completed by city or town official' City or Town Permit/Licensing Building Dept [:]Check if immediate response is required j] Licensing Board p Selectman's Office Contact person: Phone A- E] Health Department I] Other NORTH LED / 0VM Of over . - It ��A�o� L,�� - dover, Mass., �0 � Z DRATE D P? C7 S H E BOARD OF HEALTH PERMIT T D Food/Kitchen Septic System BUILDING INSPECTOR THIS CERTIFIES THAT....elve.4.4f.4000.........W.. ....cv.. . ............................................................ Foundation p g � Qi.110 S . . . g has permission to erect .�........... buildin s on ..... to be occupied as rl ..... �� / Chimney . I'm.............. ........ . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . provided that the person accepting this permit shall in every respect conform to the terms of the application on file in Final this office, and to the provisions of the Codes and By-Laws reting to the Inspect' n, Alteration and Construction of Buildings in the Town of North Andover. 63 to //4 /1040 ® PLUMBING INSPECTOR VIOLATION of the Zoning or Building Regulations Voids this Permit. 'Rough PERMIT EXPIRES IN 6 MONTHS Final UNLESS CONSTRUCTION STARTS ELECTRICAL INSPECTOR Rough ........ .... ................. ................ Service BUILDING INSPECTOR Final Occupancy Permit Required to Occupy Building GAS INSPECTOR Display in a Conspicuous Place on the Premises — Do Not Remove Rough Final No Lathing or Dry Wall To Be Done FIRE DEPARTMENT Until Inspected and Approved by the Building Inspector. Burner Street No. SEE REVERSE SIDE smoke Det. j !-0 Y C E 7:3,w,: t: 4 OR T N l0 F-'� ,gq from the desk of- Mary Leary-IPPOlito M-E-M-o yet '115199 - N:018-99 - To. 3:6/22/99&7/13/99 ` DAT : .y e application of Christopher I 1 _Andover, requesting a i nd side and rear setbacks of Z-2.Zoning District. were notified by.regular Ai- — Scott Karpinski �— hold the Building Sullivan, Raymond IT a Variance from the land to be divided i single family home i of Land by: Scott 1, Raymond Vivenzio, variances from the terms or typography of the land ✓�'� i general,a literal )etitioner or applicant, ing or substantially tea,",un ot-the Variance and/or S g pecial Permit as requested b the cant does not necessarily q Y PP y ensure the granting of a Building Permit as the applicant° pp must abide b all applicable local state and federal o . Y PP er I and building codes and regulations, nor to the issuance ° p of a building permit as requested by the Building Commission. By order of the Zoning Board of Appeals i William J. Sulli an, Chairman ml/1999decisicn/26 1 1 TQ;Y'N C E Received by Town Clerk: N O E. . {i A� i TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER, MASSACHUS4,_I ZS 2 15 NO! BOARD OF APPEALS APPLICATION FOR RELIEF FROM THE ZONING ORDINANCE Applicant Christopher & Audrey SurPttP _Address 104 Second Street North. Andover, MA 01845 Tel. No. (087—&883 1. Applicant is hereby made: a) For a variance from the requirements of Section Paragraph Id f? and Table ; of the Zoning Bylaws. b) For a Special Permit under Section Paragraph of the Zoning Bylaws c) As a Party Aggrieved, for review of a decision made by the Building Inspector or other authority. 2. a) Premises affected are land and building(s) numbered Lot $, 120 Stevens Street. b) Premises affected area property with frontage on the North( ) South ( ) East-( ) West (X) side of Stevens Street. C) Premises affected are in Zoning District R2 and the premises affected have an area of 24650 square feet and frontage of 151 47 feet. 3. Ownership: a) Name and address of owner (if joint ownership, give all names): Christopher & Audrey Surette, 104 SPrnnrl Street_ North Andover, MA 01845 Date of Purchase 3-4-99 Previous Owner Evelyn Helfrich b) 1. If applicant is not owner, check his/her interest in premises: Prospective Purchaser Lessee Other 2. Letter of authorization for Variance/Special Permit required 5 of 8 4. Site of proposed building: N/A front; N/A feet deep; Height 41A stories; feet. a) Approximate date of erection N/A b) Occupancy or use of each floor: N/A C) Type of construction N/A 5. Has there been a previous appeal, under zoning, on these premises? yes When 1 a6 6. Description of relief sought on this petition Petitioner requests that the Building Commissioner' denial of their building permit be overturned. 7. Deed recorded in the Registry of Deeds in Book No. Page Land Court Certificate No. Book Page The principal points upon which I base my application are as follows: (must be stated in detail) The Building Commissioner has denied�_ai nlnatian for a—building past based upon para 2(a) of Sec. 10.4 of the zoning Bylaw and Rec 10 of G b e 40A on the grounds that our variance, granted in 1986, lapsed. We contend, however, that the only action required to excercise our rights under the variance was recording the decision at the Registry of Deeds which was done within 60 days after the variance was granted In su=rt th reof we ,;nhmit Hogan vs. Hayes 19 MA App. Ct. 399, (1985). A copy of that case is I agree to paycf ie ilmg fee, advertising in newspaper, and incidental expenses* i Signature of Petitioner(s) 6of8 U� i r TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER UST OF PARTIES OF INTEREST: PAGE OF SUBJECT PROPERTY MAP I PAEEZ NAME ADDRESS s +a c. ABUTTERS: 1 / 2 3 „ 4 5 6 7 8 9 SG s 10 a� s- 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 I THIS RTIFIES ONLY THAT ON THIS LIST OF NAMES&ADDRESSES OF PARTIES OF INT T WAS P EP ED BY THE APP15LIdANT FROM THE RECORDS OF THE ASSESSORS OFFICE. ASSE ORS OFFICE t MA: Mass. Supreme Judicial / Appeals Courts HOGAN v. HAYES, 19 Mass. App. Ct. 399 (1985) 474 N.E.2d 1158 FRANK H. HOGAN & another[fnl] vs. ROBERT P. HAYES & others. [fn2] Appeals Court of Massachusetts. Norfolk. November 8, 1984. February 22, 1985. [fnl] Katherine A. Hogan, his wife. [fn2] Mary A. Hayes, his wife, the inspector of buildings of Quincy, the board of appeals of Quincy, and the planning board of Quincy. As indicated below, this action was consolidated with another brought by the same plaintiffs and naming as defendant only the board of appeals of Quincy. Present: GRANT, KAPLAN, & KASS, JJ. Zoning, Variance, Building permit, Building inspector, Appeal to board of appeals. Permit. Although, under G.L.c. 40A, §§ 7 & 8, parties claiming to be aggrieved by a municipal building inspector's issuance of a permit were required to make a protest to the building inspector and obtain his written response thereto before seeking administrative review by the board of appeals, omission of this procedural step was not fatal to their action for judicial review of the board of appeals' decision upholding the permit, where opposing parties did not raise the issue. [402-403] Where a zoning variance with respect to a parcel of land was granted in 1974 and was exercised in 1975 by the division of the parcel into two lots, each of which would be in violation of the city's zoning ordinance were it not for the variance, and by the conveyance of one of the lots with the buildings thereon, the issuance in 1983 of a building permit for a dwelling on the unimproved lot presented no issue as to any retroactive effect of provisions in G.L.c. 40A, § 10, which took effect in the city on June 30, 1978, that a variance shall lapse if it is not exercised within one year after the date it is granted. [403-405] Where the record in an action for judicial review of the issuance of a building permit did not reveal the building inspector's basis for concluding under G.L.c. 41, § 81Y, that municipal subdivision requirements were satisfied, the judgment upholding the permit was reversed, but with leave to the permit holders to supplement their pleadings and proof after taking any steps they deemed necessary to fulfil § 81Y. [405] Page 400 CIVIL ACTION commenced in the Superior Court Department on January 31, 1983. The case was heard by George N. Hurd, Jr. , J. , on a motion for summary judgment. Robert L. Marzelli for the plaintiffs. Robert W. Langlois for the defendants. KAPLAN, J. The plaintiffs Frank and Katherine Hogan own a lot on a private way in Quincy, called Patrick Road, and the two-story house and detached garage thereon. The lot is rectangular, has an area of 5,000 square feet, and a width of 50 feet fronting on the way. The defendants Robert and Mary Hayes own a contiguous lot, Date Printed: April 21, 1999 5:44:05 PM MA: Mass. Supreme Judicial / Appeals Courts similar in shape and area, and with a similar 50 foot frontage on the way. Their lot is vacant. The object of the present (consolidated) action was to prevent the Hayeses from building on their lot. On cross motions for summary judgment, aided by a statement of agreed facts, a judge of the Superior Court gave judgment for all the defendants, who included, aside from Mr. and Mrs. Hayes, the Quincy building inspector, the board of appeals, and the planning board. On the main issue, we, too, support the defendants, but there is a complication that stands in the way of an affirmance, as will appear. We abbreviate the facts as far as feasible. By 1949, Margaret Stanton and her husband were owners by the entirety of both lots, [fn3] a combined area of 10,000 square feet with the house and garage thereon, and a frontage of 100 feet. In April, 1974, after the death of her husband, Mrs. Stanton applied to the board of appeals for a variance to allow her to divide her ownership so that she could sell the lot with the existing house and garage, and build a small residence on the other lot. There was need for a variance because the zoning provisions then (and still) applicable in this residential district specified a minimum lot size of 7, 650 square feet, minimum lot frontage and width each of 85 feet, and minimum side yard depths of Page 401 thirteen feet. [fn4] On a determination that "a literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve substantial hardship to [Mrs. Stanton] , " and so forth, the board of appeals granted a variance "to subdivide the premises . . . and erect a single-family dwelling on the vacant lot created. " Mrs. Stanton did not at that time ask the planning board to give or dispense with approval under the Subdivision Control Law. See Arrigo v. Planning Bd. of Franklin, 12 Mass. App. Ct. 802 (1981) . In 1975 Mrs. Stanton sold the lot with house and garage to the plaintiffs' predecessor in title. The other lot remained vacant at the time. Subsequently, the defendants Robert and Mary Hayes purchased that lot from Mrs. Stanton, and, about that time, on December 14, 1982, they applied to the building inspector for a building permit for a one-story, single family dwelling. The permit issued on January 14, 1983. nn A=ril 7, 19R-A, the planning board nave the defendants an endorsement of "aRproval not required" under the Subdivision Control Law. The plaintiffs have attacked in a number of ways. On January 24, 1983, ten days after the issuance of the building permit, they filed a written protest with the building inspector. Failing any response on his part, the plaintiffs, on February 28, 1983, filed an administrative appeal with the board of appeals. That board denied relief on June 24, 1983. [fn5] As early as January 31, 1983, however, the plaintiffs had instituted an action in the Superior Court against all the defendants named above. Their complaint, as finally amended on May 11, 1983, and amplified by the statement of agreed facts, asserted as a main proposition that the variance had "lapsed, " thus destroying the Page 402 basis for the building permit. If that contention were to be rejected, then the plaintiffs would assert that the permit was invalid because it was not preceded by satisfaction of the Subdivision Control Law (whether, as we may suppose, by approval of a subdivision or by endorsement of "approval not required") ; and, further, that the necessary conditions did not exist for the endorsement given by the planning board. Perhaps to fortify themselves procedurally, the plaintiffs on July 12, 1983, commenced a second action in the Superior Court attacking , r f3„ i nil l y on the arnnnd of "l arta" the rnl i ng of the hnarrl of appeals of June 24, 1983, which had refused to disturb the Date Printed: April 21, 1999 5:44:05 PM _. MA: Mass. Supreme Judicial / Appeals Courts allowance of the building permit. The two actions were ordered consolidated, and the summary judgment appears to have been intended to dispose of both actions. [fn6] 1. There is a possible difficulty - not raised by the defendants - which threatens to frustrate the plaintiffs' appeal. According to the case of Vokes v. Avery W. Lovell, Inc. , 18 Mass. App. Ct. 471, 479 (1984) , decided after the decision below, the triggering event for an application for administrative review of the action of the building inspector would be a written response by him to the plaintiffs' protest; but in the present case he has made no such response voluntarily or by compulsion. See G.L.c. 40A, §§ 7 & 8. [fn7] We think, however, that the plaintiffs can escape this abyss. The defect, although it may be spoken of as "jurisdictional, " appears not to be of such significance that a court must take notice of it even if the opposing party fails to press it, cf. Mass.R.Civ.P. 12 (h) (3) , 365 Mass. 757 (1974) (subject matter defect) ; rather, like a defect of "personal" jurisdiction, it may be overlooked if not timely objected to, cf. Mass.R.Civ.P. 12 (h) (1) , Page 403 365 Mass. 757 (1974) . Accordingly, the plaintiffs' appeal is not destroyed and we consider it. [fn8] 2. On the main question of the claimed lapse of the rights granted by the variance, the Dlaintiffs wouI=ave to c de that under The Zoning Enabling Act which antedated the present The Zoning Act, G.L.c. 40A (effective in Quincy on June 30, 1978) , a variance once validly allowed could continue in force without limit of time although not exercised. [fn91 Nor was a time limit set on the instant variance, either by the ordinance or by the actual text of the variance as allowed The plaintiffs contend, however, that the new statute, G.L.c. 40A, § 10, quoted in the margin [fn101 does establish a limit of one year, and that this (or possibly the policy expressed by it) applies not only to variances granted after the effective date of the statute, but retroactively to variances granted theretofore. The plaintiffs do not spell out convincingly the extent or detail of this claimed retroactivity, but they assert that the instant variance, unexercised, as they claim, through 1982 and beyond, was extinguished and could not furnish a lawful foundation for the building permit. The notion that variances more than one year old, and remaining unexercised by the effective date of the new statute, are destroyed wholesale by a retroactive application of § 10, would appear quite drastic, and hardly matches the text of that provision. A milder contention might take the form that § 10 should extend to cancel variances, granted well before the effective date of the new statute, which have not been exercised within a year after that date. Even that proposition might put a great and insupportable strain on the statutory language. (See Page 404 the reading of § 10 in Knott v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals of Natick, 12 Mass. App. Ct. 1002, 1004 [1981] . ) But we need not and should not attempt to rule on the broad issue of retroactivity. We are prepared to saythat, so far as 10 may conceivably bear on the past variance at bar, there was a sufficient exercise of it not later than the time when Mrs. Stanton sold the lot and buildings to the plaintiffs' Predecessor in 1975. As indicated (see note 4, supra) , the predecessor at that point (and, indeed, the plaintiffs today) would be in multiple violation of the zoning ordinance were it not for the variance. So also, after disposing of the plaintiffs' lot in reliance on the variance, Mrs. Stanton retained a lot which. except for the variance, could not have been developed and would Date Printed: April 21, 1999 5:44:05 PM MA: Mass. Supreme Judicial / Appeals Courts have lost value. Even though the variance had not been fully .carried out by actually building we think it was sufficiently (and irrevocably) exercised_ Cf. Dimitroy v Carlson 138 N.J. Super. 52, 59 (1975) ; Hill Homeowners Assn. v. Passaic, 156 N.J. Super. 505, 512 (1978) ; Nuckles v. Allen, 250 S.C. 123, 130 (1967) . [fnll] Moreover, the plaintiffs' position is so intrinsically inequitable that it should not prevail. They take advantage of so much of the variance as is needed to enable them to hold their property lawfully but seek at the same time to escape from its coincident burden upon them. See Ellen M. Gifford Sheltering Home Corp. v. Board of Appeals of Wayland, 349 Mass. 292, 295 (1965) ; Skipjack Cove Marina, Inc. v. County Commrs. for Cecil County, 252 Md. 440, 450-452 (1969) . Cf. Selectmen of Stockbridge v. Monument Inn, Inc. , 14 Mass. App. Ct. 957, 958-959 (1982) . Page 405 In holding that the variance at bar did not lapse but on the contrary has been sufficiently availed of, we do not mean to reflect in any way upon a possibility that an old variance, long unexercised, may lose its force by reason of radically changed conditions at the locus, including changes brought about by revisions of a zoning ordinance or by-law. See Dimitrov v. Carlson, supra; Ambrosio v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals of Huntington, 196 Misc. 1005, 1008-1009 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1949) . No such claim can be made here. 3. Like too many zoning cases, this one is beset by a procedural difficulty, here arising upon the plaintiffs' objection, already adverted to, that the issuance of the building permit was not preceded by satisfaction of subdivision requirements. More particularly, the plaintiffs point to G.L.c. 41, § 81Y, second par. (as appearing in St. 1953, c. 674, § 7) , which states .that a building inspector may not issue his permit "until first satisfied that the lot . . is not within a subdivision, or that a way furnishing the access to such lot as required by the subdivision control law is shown on a plan recorded or entitled to be recorded under [§ 81X] , " etc. We do not know on what basis the building inspector acted. The planning board's "approval not required" endorsement would be a proper basis, but that came too late for the purpose. The plaintiffs' grievance seems minor at best: although asserting that the planning board's endorsement of "approval not required" was improper, the plaintiffs do not provide any solid support for the assertion. See Haynes v. Grasso, 353 Mass. 731 (1968) ; Adams v. Board of Appeals of Concord, 356 Mass. 709 (1970) . Having lost their point that the variance has lapsed, the plaintiffs may see little profit in persisting with this litigation. Strictly, however, they are entitled to a reversal of the judgment, but with leave to the defendants to supplement their pleadings and proof with respect to compliance with G.L.c. 41, § 81Y (having reapplied so far as they may deem necessary to the building inspector or planning board to attain compliance) ; the action to proceed further in the Superior Court as occasion may require. So ordered. [fn3] The lots were originally laid out as part of a plan recorded in 1902. By the late 1940's, the two lots came to be separately owned. The Stantons bought one of the lots in 1948 and the other in 1949. [fn4] Without the variance, the division proposed by Mrs. Stanton would have put the built-on lot in manifest violation of the lot area and minimum frontage and width provisions. There would be a Date Printed: April 21, 1999 5:44:05 PM =_ MA: Mass. Supreme Judicial / Appeals Courts violation, also, of the side yard provision because a lot line bounding the vacant lot would run within four feet of the existing house. Mrs. Stanton's plan put the proposed house within ten feet of a lot line. [fn5] The board indicated that the "lapse" question, mentioned immediately below, would have to be finally decided by the court in the plaintiffs' action commenced on January 31, 1983. [fn6] We read the notice of appeal as being addressed to the consolidated action although nominally lodged only in the first action. [fn7] As to the administrative route that must be traveled before judicial review is sought, see Neuhaus v. Building Inspector of Marlborough, 11 Mass. App. Ct. 230, 235 (1981) ; McDonald's Corp. v. Seekonk, 12 Mass. App. Ct. 351, 353 (1981) ; and note Banquer Realty Co. v. Acting Bldg. Commr. of Boston, 389 Mass. 565, 574-575 (1983) . [fn8] It may be observed that the building inspector is joined in the present action and is aligned as a defendant. [fn9] See, however, the reference below to the possible supersession of an unexercised variance by reason of a severe change of conditions. [fn10] Section 10, as amended by St. 1977, c. 829, § 4B, provides: "If the rights authorized by a variance are not exercised within one year of the date of grant of such variance they shall lapse, and may be reestablished only after notice and a new hearing pursuant to this section. " [fnll] We decide that the exercise of rights herein would be sufficient to prevent a lapse of the variance even on the plaintiffs' hypothesized interpretation of § 10. We do not attempt a definition of "exercise" under § 10 in its prospective sense. Cf. Hunters Brook Realty Corp. v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals of Bourne, 14 Mass. App. Ct. 76 (1982) . Unlike § 10, some zoning provisions have carried definitions of use or exercise. See Roy v. Kurtz, 357 So.2d 1354, 1356 (La. Ct. App. ) , writ denied, 359 So.2d 1307 (La. 1978) ; 230 Tenants Corp. v. Board of Standards & Appeals of New York, 101 A.D.2d 53, 54 (N.Y. 1984) ; In re Appeal of Newton Racquetball Associates, 76 Pa. Commw. 238, 242 (1983) . Page 406 Date Printed: April 21, 1999 5:44:05 PM Of HORTIy , O n 3, a OL :i t'. o - A 10YGE 3 �. TOW Ni k NO R T H a'd! ','�~E! -AC US JUL LO F. `[ TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER MASSACHUSETTS Any appeal shall be filed BOARD OF APPEALS within(20)days after the date of filing of this notice NOTICE OF DECISION in the office of the Town Clerk. Property at: Lot B, 120 Stevens Street NAME: Christopher&Audrey Surette, 104 Second St. DATE: 7/15/99 ADDRESS: for premises: Lot B, 120 Stevens Street PETITION:018-99 North Andover, MA 01845 HEARING:6/22/99&7/13/99 The Board of Appeals held a regular meeting on Tuesday evening, July 13, 1999 upon the application of Christopher &Audrey Surette, 104 Second Street,for property at: Lot B, 120 Stevens Street, North Andover, requesting a Variance from the requirements of Section 7, P7.1 &7.3 for relief of lot area dimension,and side and rear setbacks of Table 2,and as a Party Aggrieved of the Building Commissioner. The property is in the R-2 Zoning District. The hearing was advertised in the Lawrence Tribune on 5/25/99&6/1/99 and all abutters were notified by regular mail. The following members were present: William J. Sullivan, Raymond Vivenzio, Robert Ford, Scott Karpinski. Upon a motion made by Raymond Vivenzio and 2nd by Robert Ford,the Board voted to uphold the Building Commissioner's decision and deny the party aggrieved petition. Voting in favor. William J. Sullivan, Raymond I Vivenzio, Robert Ford, Scott Karpinski. Upon a motion made by Raymond Vienzio and 2'by Robert Ford, the Board voted to GRANT a Variance from section 7, P7.1 &7.3 for relief of lot area dimension, and side and rear setbacks and to allow the land to be divided into two(2)lots with sufficient frontage on the condition that the new lot be limited to use of a single family home and that Mrs. Helfrich's children only be allowed to build on the lot in accordance with the Plan of Land by: Scott Giles, Registered Land Surveyor,#13972,dated:4/28/99. Voting in favor. William J. Sullivan, Raymond Vivenzio, Robert Ford, John Pallone. 10.4 Variances and Appeals The Zoning Board of Appeals shall have power upon appeal to grant variances from the terms of this Zoning Bylaw where the'Board finds that owing to circumstances relating to soil conditions,shape,or typography of the land or structure and especially affecting such land or structures but not affecting generally the zoning district in general,a literal enforcement of the provisions of this Bylaw will involve substantial hardship,financial or otherwise,to the petitioner or applicant, and that desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent or purpose of this Bylaw. Note: The granting of the Variance and/or Special Permit as requested by the applicant does not necessarily ensure the granting of a Building Permit as the applicant must abide by all applicable local,state and federal and building codes and regulations,prior to the issuance of a building permit as requested by the Building Commission. By order of the Zoning B and of Appeals William J. Sulli an, Chairman ml/1999decision/26 7671 Date 99 pages Post-it®Fax Note EP r From To s Co. ,� %W�`1 L i Co./Dept. �' Ll' ��-�s�i Phone#��((/ Andover Office Phone# Fax# !O 4,` 26 Chestnut Street f, n 0-17 7 Andover,MA 01810-3600 Fax# q 7 v��v �� BOAR 17" Telephone 978-475-4552 THOMAS THOMAS J.URBELIS Telephone 617-338-2200 v rend ho Correspondence E-1V1AIL:tju@ufb.com Telecopier 617-338-0122 /�/ �/ To Boston Address Q ) /1� June 24, 1999 William Sullivan North Andover Board of Appeals 27 Charles Street North Andover, MA 01845 Re: Surette, Lot B, 120 Stevens Street Dear Mr. Sullivan: Per your request, I have reviewed the materials submitted with regard to the lapse of the variance in this matter. M.G.L. chapter 40A, §10, T3 states: "If the rights authorized by a variance are not exercised within one year of the date of grant of such variance such rights shall lapse." - In Hogan v. Ham, 19 Mass. App. Ct. 399 (1985), a building permit was issued on the strength of a variance granted in 1974, from the lot area, frontage and sideyard requirements of the Quincy zoning ordinance. The variance permitted Mrs. Stanton,owner of two adjacent lots, to divide them, sell the lot with the existing improvements on it, and build a smaller house on the vacant lot. As a result of the division, both lots were at variance with the local zoning ordinance. Mrs. Stanton sold the lot with the improvements on it sometime in 1975, and subsequently sold the vacant lot to plaintiff's predecessor in title who applied for a building permit in 1982. The Court held"there was sufficient exercise of[the variance] not later than the time when Mrs. Stanton sold the [improved lot] to the plaintiffs' predecessor in 197.i . . . Even though the variance had not been fully carried out by actually building, we think it was sufficient (and irrevocably) exercised." Id. at 404. In Laberis v. Gandolfo, 2 L.C.R. 99 (1994)(Kilborn, J.), the Land Court held that a variance authorizing the division of a parcel of land had been exercised timely when plaintiff recorded l)the variance, 2) the approved plan, 3) two partial releases from outstanding mortgages; and 4) two deeds effectuating a.land,exchange contemplated by the variance all within the one year period (as extended by agreement). In Alroy v. World Realty and Development Co., 5 L.C.R. 245 (1997) (Scheier, J.), the variance applied only to Locus and the variance was not necessary in order to divide Locus from adjoining 990 Centre Street, which was in full compliance with the zoning ordinance. The mere s:\wp5l\work\n-andove\corresp\sulhvan.Itr.doc 4 tjJul3El"Iis;FIELDSTEEL& BAILIN, LLP William Sullivan June 24, 1999 Page 2 transfer of title, without further action, was not legally significant to the validity of the variance. The court found that there was not sufficient exercise of the variance to prevent the variance from lapsing within the applicable period. Thus, the cases appear to stand for the,proposition that when the holder of a variance substantially changes his or her position in reliance upon the variance, it will be deemed to have been"exercised" for the purposes of G.L. c. 40A, §10. In the present case, from the materials 1 received, it appears that th;; only thing the owner did within one year after the variance was granted in 1986 was to record the variance. In my opinion, under the circumstances of this case, the recording of the variance was not sufficient to "exercise" the variance for purposes of G.L. c. 40A, §10. Please call if you have any questions or if there is anything else you need. Very truly yours, TJU:jeh r` Thomas J. ells cc: Board of Selectmen D. Robert Nicetta Robert J. Halpin URDELIS, FIELDSTEEL& BAILIN, LLP { � ....o. � ; 155 FEDERAI..,STREET Cj �•�`,� 'S Toti�� p`-c.+us�"" BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS 02110-1121 UN24'99 * M P -V6METER nJh-ate ., 5116747 JU9 POSTAGE f William Sullivan North Andover Board of Appeals 27 Charles Street North Andover, MA 01845 j j i d'.. ] j j t -nh 4'-"Ir 1 iw•f-.+M i cFEiIM111IN1111OiliI:d�1. ..Ii ? S'.;t;I,- lili3 ' 'Town of North Andover H° � oT1A OFFICE OF to ° 3 L COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND SERVICES 27 Charles Street 9 North Andover, Massachusetts 0 184 " , • � °"s1` WILLL,%M J. SCOTT Aryu7E Director (978) 688-9531 Fax (978) 6800-9542 FAX Transmission TO: a7 FA)CNumber: 6 ,17 — U/Z,2 FROM: Town of North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals FAX: 978-688-9542 PHONE: 978-688-9541 DATE. Z-z 9 SUBJECT: a,62 7-Te L o 7 rer/eo,r i j Total number of pages; i . N/F ' ~ Trustee's of the Reservation 213.56' . S 7°36'57"E S 6025'07 113.56' s 84-53'33"yw , 51.4 0 .••� 100.00' J 27' 40' Existing. Lot 2 Gana e/ v' Bag Area= 60,060 s.f. Lot A � 0 Z 35,410 s.f. o 0 a' — 301 i � existing Lot B rt Building Existing Building 24,650 s.f. 8.5' w o Hse. #120 w O N t1- OG N_ � � W Proposed Lot Line • 151.47' N 6000t00,,E 51'48' 302.95' Total STEVENS • • (60'Wide-Public) STREET N/F Trustee's of the Reservation THIS IS TO CE WITH THE RUL REGISTERS OF 9 ly'� r , V_S!n Town of NorZ Andover oE NORTH OFFICE OF �� .` •,�0 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ANIS SERVICES � A 27 Charles Street North Andover, Massachusetts 01845 WILLIAM J. SCOTT �SSACHUS�� Director (978)688-9531 Fax (978)688-9542 FAX Transmission To: 4rr-t. re' C � e FAX Number: 7 f j/• D FROM: B '� Town of North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals FAX: 978-688-9.542 PHONE: 978-688-95841 DATE: SUBJECT.- Total UBJECT:Total number of pages: REMARKS: Attached is a fax containing your legal notice. As you are aware,the attached legal notice has to be placed with the legal notice department of the Lawrence Eagle-Tribune and it is your responsibility to do so as-soon-as-possible in order to meet the required deadline. Failure to place the legal notice in the paper within the required deadline will mean that you will not be able to be placed on the ZBA agenda for the upcoming meeting. The phone number for the Eagle Tribune is: 978-685-1000, ext.#412, should you require further assistance. Ml/fax BOARD OF APPEALS 688-9541 BUILDING 683-9545 CONSERVATION 683-9530 HEALTH 683-9540 PLANNING 688-9535 p 4126 Date.......... ....................... NORTI� "0 TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER AL PERMIT FOR WIRING S., CHUS� r This certifies that ...:..:....:. has permission to perform .......................... wiring in the building of a ....... :..... at.� {'....... Y,. .�...:�' �.............. .North Andover,Mass. Fee::. `l.J�� i ....�........ Lic.No.............. ......�.....1. ..:�.. ..................... _ELECTRICAL INSPECTOR Check # /'�' n ThECOMMOArREALTHOFAWSACHUSEM Office Use only DEPARTMENT0FPUBYCS4FETY � (v BOAROOFFREPREVE MON Permit No. It'�s'GUTATIONS527CtY1R12:GYI —u Occupancy&Fees Checked APPUCATIONFOR PERMIT TO PERFORMELECTRICA.L, WORK ALL WORK TO BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MASSACHUSSTS ELECTRICAL CODE,527 CMR 12:00 (PLEASE PRINT IN INK OR TYPE ALL INFORMATION) Date j o i 6 a Town of North Andover To the Inspector of Wires: The undersigned applies for a permit to perform the electrical work described below. Location(Street&Number) d o Owner or Tenant Owner's Address Is this permit in conjunction with a building permit: Yes r" No (Check Appropriate Box) ED Purpose of Building Sj Albe5 I y )1U LL Gi (� Utility Authorization No. _ Existing Service �� Amp �Volts Overhead a Underground g No. of Meters New Service Amps / Volts Overhead Under 'ound -- ------ �' No. of Meters Number of Feeders and Ampacity — Location and Nature of Proposed Electrical Work s-f (A A B, jv✓�� 1 No.of Lighting Outlets No.of Hot Tubs No.of Transformers Total No.of Lighting Fixtures Swimming Pool Above BelowKVA Generators round round KVA No.of Receptacle Outlets No.of Oil Burners No.of Emergency Lighting Battery Units No.of Switch Outlets No.of Gas Burners No.of Ranges No.of Air Cond. Total 4 FIRE ALARMS Tons No.of Zones No.of Disposals No.of Heat Total Total No.of Detection and 3 Pum s Tons InitiatingDevices �,0.of Dishwashers Space Area Heating K No.of Sounding Devices No.of Self Contained No.of Dryers Detection/Sounding Devices n Heating Devices KW Local Municipal No.of No.of Other No.of Water Heaters KW Connections Signs Bailasis No.Hydro Massage Tubs No.of Motors Total HP OTHER• imaaI MCov=�e.Rusuanttathelaqurterna>LsofMass<tda>�ltsGa�aallaws haveaamentLialx7i kmmrmpblicymc)]ng CDWWoritsmbstaMapvalffI YES El NO YES ff havelelgBYESIeaseideheypof ver hddngtbogeby� BOlp,vN MIER ( may) EVffabmD* �«lcrostart ID*RWs1ed Rao EMrnatedvalueofDocftxalWak$ ignodunda- p7ai AiesofFel RMNAME 4J O L y-.1e C (� IioarneNo. >seL- -E�W� � �l V k�//� Iiariae No a �U BusirmTe1No. JVIVIIZ S INSURANCE W Al Tel No � AVER;IamawarethattheLmmdoesnothavetheirozdnceoDverageoritssubsWtia quvalal as repred byNbMchusM GffrralIam 3thatmysgnahueontbispwi tappfi�fhisreguirement lease check one) Owner Agent arf Telephone No. PERMIT FEE$ L� " Signature orowner or Agent s. Date.(.z .r /.Q .�... ;r, . HORTN h I 3� TOWN OF NORTH A : OVER - q PERMIT FOR G S STALLATION a. �9SSACHUSEt�h This certifies that . fI f �sl.�. . ,/?��/1 f—�i? has permission for gas installation A roe 1%S in the buildings of . . . .:. . . . . . . . . . . . . . at . ,/ .�. . {.� . . . .�?. . . . . . . . . . ., North Andover, Mass. . ? . . . . . Fee. .a '� . . Lic. No.. . L . . . . . . . �� ! .r-:mac ,...,, AS'INSPECTOR Check# / 7 1 >>� r. 6020 i MASSACHUSETTS UNIFORM APPLICATION FOR PERMIT TO DO GASFITTING (Print or Type) 1 NORTH ANDOVER Mass. Date 6/07 2007 Permit Building Location 120 STEVENS ST Owner's Name ANDREW MARCHESSEAULT Owner Tel# 978 337 3621 Type of Occupancy RESIDENTIAL New O Renovation Replacement Plan Submitted: Ye[]No[—] FIXTURES �;. W" udrrudgas line $30-50 L w a o ° x x a N �" �' z z o H z x z m w o a .� o w H w a a ¢x z W Wz ¢ xWW9WH z � 9 �D3A0 ° a > C� ° 0 ? SUB-BSMT BASEMENT 1ST FLOOR 1 t 2ND FLOOR d 3RD FLOOR 4T"FLOOR 5T"FLOOR 6TH FLOOR IT"FLOOR 8T"FLOOR Installing Company Name Eastern Propane & Oil, Inc Check one: Certificate Address 131 Water Street ZCorporation Danvers, MA 01923 F]Partnership Business Telephone# 800-322-6628 — Firm/Co. Name of Licensed Plumber or Gas Fitters INSURANCE COVERAGE: I have a cur liability insurance policy or its substantial equivalent which meets the requirements of MGL Ch.142. Yes No ❑ If you have```c ecked rimes,please indicate the type coverage by checking the appropriate box. A liability insurance policy�✓ _ Other type of indemnity.__❑. T_ Bond, OWNER'S INSURANCE WAIVER:I am aware that the licensee does not have the insurance coverage required by Chapter 142 of the Mass.General Laws,and that my signature on this permit application waives this requirement. Check one: Owner ❑ Agent ❑ Signature of Owner or Owner's Agent I hereby certify that all of the details and information I have submitted(or entered)in a plication are true and accurate to the best of my knowledge and that all plumbing work and installations performed under the permi ' sued fo nis a lication will be in compliance with all ertinent provisions of the Massachusetts State Gas Code and Chapter 142 of a Ge a By Type of License: ' •-Plumber nature of Licensed Plumber or Gas Fitter Title JGas fitter • -Master License Number 3 City/Town •-Journeyman APPROVED(OFFICE USE ONLY) I N C STRUCTURAL CONSULTING & DESIGN DEVELOPMENT 31 BIRCHWOOD DRIVE• RYE, NH 03870 V:603.379.2349 • F:603.379.2348 WWW.SCADD.COM DATE JUNE 1 2007 PROJECT : 0617 - 1 20 STEVENS STREET, ❑RTH ANDOVER, MA TO MIKE A EEN ANDOVER UITY BUILDERS 89 N. MAIN STREET ! ANDOVER, MA O 1 B 1 0-6503 SUBJECT: SITE VISIT AS REQUESTED, WE HAVE MADE A SITE VISIT ON JUNE 1 1 , 2007 TO THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT FOR THE PURPOSE OF MAKING GENERAL VISUAL OBSERVATIONS OF THE STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS AS SHOWN ON OUR DRAWINGS DATED NOVEMBER 6, 2006 AND SKETCH SK1 AND SK2 DATED JANUARY 8, 2007. BASED ON OUR EXPERIENCE, IT 15 OUR OPINION THAT THE WORK MEETS THE GENERAL DESIGN INTENT OF OUR DRAWINGS AND MEETS AND/OR EXCEEDS THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE MASSACHUSETTS STATE BUILDING CODE 6T~ EDITION. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING OUR FINDINGS, PLEASE GIVE US A CALL. SINCERELY YOURS, SCADD, INC. I•tH .G, v, WILLIAM S. A SUPINO r WILLIAM B. SUPINO, P.E. STRUCTURAL PRESIDENT N0.U838 WS U PINO(0)SCA D D.COM +gyp �EOJSTE � ' Rf Nit EM4t�A i i I I