HomeMy WebLinkAboutMiscellaneous - 3 HODGES STREET 4/30/20184f
,j)
,-9
LU
LU
C,
co 4
LU 0
CD 9
00
0 cci
I "�
f—
CD
PD
CD
0
p
5)
F�
Q
(D
UI
-u
CD
0
M 166 P 1� :- 3-11 HD ) e " St. Cj-,6 L�) �0551 j
0
m
CD
6
co
0
0
C?
4�-
r-
00
o
CD 3
CD (D
0-
0
>
CD
m 4
r- ;u
> 0
0
00
0 a
X 0
M
co
0
m
ri)
M
m
m
-q
L-
cn
x
m
0
2L- G) 4- 0 ci)
0 0) CD
0 0
:3
w 0 w C)
OD .9
-4=
rl) 9�
0 w w N) (A c
0
.;, � Cl)
-4 0 CD
r Q 6
x 0
(D CL
-n
U)
Ch
0
o
m
;a
0
>
r'
m
o
0
z
0
G) CL M:E
m 0 C -D < :03
0 X ch 0 n
;a m P! 0
Q X z
M;D ;a
M
>
r
z z
E m
> M
0 c
-4 (A
00
T
>
MO
0
M
m
x
j
0 0)
CO)
CD
— X (D
G)
-a
C-) I
0
14
;a
7'
u o
CL > CA CL
o
> @ !� R
C
03
8m
OD
4
0
-40
X
CD
G) C/) CD C/) (1)
@ E R 0) 0)
U).
= CD CD CD CD
C.3L
< -10 -v
C)
co
r-
2L'< 0) =3.
'090
CD CD
CR
0
> CO)
-9
CD Z
0
>
cn
(a
o
(1) c
0 '00
0
o
0
0
0
m
0
o
0 OTM
C) U)
CD.,
m
0
B
C(i CD M 0
-1 aca 0
Cil a)
I&
WO tj
P, C'n
3
;0 0 --
C.) On
o
CD CL
m 0
M 0
CD
0)
(D
CD 0
0
a C)
-7 M
-4
z
co
Q W
K)
>
3
CD
a) a)
8mo
5 a
CD
a: a
(P 1p
. -k x
-4 m
COL 0
;0
a
m
>
I
&
CO)
-j
-g� (J)
-a co) z
0
EF
(D -i X X
wo
> ;a
CA
t �? C;
0.
CD @ CL 0
*
6
POP z
c
Cn Z
a
ID Z3, 0 CL
rL 0
-n
> 0
>oc
N;u
0
0
0 ;a
03
:3
;a
CL M
z >
ic
Cn
z
m --I
>
4
C,
zzz G) -n
Z-, 0 0
5 C) 0
CD
z
5
0 ja
CL
j;� Z
-4(0
n >
z
0
'0
FOM95
(a 0 CD U)
0
CD
3
'0 = 0) *0
cD CD
(n CD
0 0
"N
4�,
0
(D
;u EL o
CD
r, r-
00
Cil
CD
0- CL
0
40
;a C- C) p 0
M co a*
w 0
CD
F
(A
U)
(OW
C)
w (D
-4 -4
M 166 P 1� :- 3-11 HD ) e " St. Cj-,6 L�) �0551 j
0
m
CD
6
co
0
0
C?
4�-
r-
00
o
CD 3
CD (D
0-
0
>
CD
m 4
r- ;u
> 0
0
00
0 a
X 0
M
co
0
m
ri)
M
m
m
-q
L-
99
p
16
9
>
cn
C,
C/)
cn
-d
>
00
Ar
0
a
PO 0
CP 0
m
CO
cq
--I
m
M
p m
C)
L I
>
MAY
00
C,
Ls
m
VVII
All;
00
A40p,,roV
a,
ST.
98,
toll
00
ID
%
16
003
tj
7- 0 3
06
99
p
16
9
>
cn
C,
C/)
cn
-d
>
00
Ar
lAo4ys Sk,
51 a"' El
0
T,
I
OQ
FAS
TOWN OF
NORTH ANDOVER
TOWNOF MASSACHUSETTS
NORTH ANDOVER
MASSACHUSETTS �OPTN
"oprk
'14,
0
0
$A
BOARD OF APPEALS
NOTICE
BOARD OF APPEALS September 25,1986
NOTICE Notice is hereby given that'
September 25, 1986 Board of APP981* Will give
Notice is hereby given that
Board of Appeals will give a hearing at the Tow"
a hearing at the Town Building, North Andover.
Building, North Andover, on Tuesday evening the 14
on Tuesday evening the 14 day Of October '986' at
7.30 o'clock, to all Parties
day of October 1986, at ad in the appeal Of
7:30 o'clock, to all parties interest ,
interested in the appeal of Robert K. 001910 request -
Ing a Special Permit of the
Robert K. Daigle request- Zoning By Law SO as to
ing a Special Permit of the permit of Sec. 9. Para. 91,
Zoning By Law so as to expansion of non -conform -
permit of Sec. -9, Para. 9.1, Ing building for a purpose
expansion of non -conform- d In a general buSI-
allowe rem -
Ing building for a Purpose ness district On the P
allowed in aigeneral busi- is.s, located at Hodge$
ness district on the prem- street*
ises, located at Hodges By order of the Board Of
Street. Appeals
By 'Order of the Board of Frank Serlo, Jr.
Appeals Chairman.
Frank Serio, Jr. Sept. 27, 29, 1986
Chairman E -T
E -T — Sept. 27, 29, 1986
TOWN OF
HORTH ANDOVER
MASSACHUSETTS
, 41 : i
.00
0
,vs. us
BOARD or, pPPEALS
NOTICE
September 25 1986
Notice is hereby glv�n that
Board -1 )kPP"" will give
I the Town
a hear ng 8' n over.
ull Ing, 0
, 'y vening the 14
on of CIO or i9se, at
day , I I to 811 parties
7-.30 0 c I of
interested In the OPPeOest.
rt Igj9 requ
,at Of it of the
Ing a pec 0 as to
Zoning By, Law are. 9.1,
permit 01 Sec. 9' conform -
expansion 0, non- purpose
Ing building 101 8 1 b Sl -
allowed in a genera pr u
ness district on the em-
ises located at Hodges
Street. of the Board of
By order Appeals
F,,�k Serlo, Jr.
Chairman
11,
E -T — Sept. � 29.
'40"Th
0 4
0
0
0
4;
TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER
MASSACHUSETTS
BOARD OF APPEALS
Date -
Dear Applicant:
Enclosed is a copy of the legal notice for your application before
the Board of Appeals.
Kindly submit for the following:
Filing Fee $
Postage
Your check must be made payable to the Town of North Andover and
may be sent to.my attention at the Town office Building, 120 Main
Street, North Andover, Mass. 01845.
Sincerely,
BOARD OF APPEALS
........ .. .......
Audre�y. Taylor, Clerk
-0
It
APIM711
TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER
MASSACHUSETTS
BOARD OF APPEALS
September - 2.5 .19-86
Notice is hereby given that the Board of Appeals will give a
hearing at the Town Building, North Andover, on .... Tuesday
. even.ing .. .... the 14 .. day of . October ............
19. 8 (� at 7 : Mclock, to all parties interested in the appeal of
Robert. K, -Daigle ................................
requesting a 5,pe-qi a I P e . r . mi . t of the Zoning
of Sec 9, Para 9.1
By Law so as to permit ...................................
expansi.on. of. non.7Cp.nfo.rmipg. b�ui.l.din.g. f.or a
purpose -al-low-ed. -in. -a - gene-ral. -busine.ss. -district
.......... I ........... -1 ........................
............. I ........... ............................
on the premises, located at. . H o d g e s - S t r e e. t
.....................................................
By Order of.the Board of "ppeal
Frank Serio, Jr., Chairman
Publish in the Lawrence Eagle Tribune on Sept 27
and Sept 29, 1986
L
D AN
TCII�
ER
i
OCT 2 3 9 44 AVI '85
SSA
TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER
MASSACHUSETTS
BOARD OF APPEALS
Mr. Daniel Long, Town Clerk
120 Main St.
North Andover, MA 01845
Dear Mr. Long:
Any appeal shall be filed
within (20) C?,I,\'s after the
dat-2 Of a,
�. cf this Notice
in the Office of the Town
Clerk.
October 22, 1986
Petition #32-87
Robert * K. Daigle
Hodges Street
The Board of Appeals held a public hearing on October 14, 1986 upon
the application of Robert K. Daigle requesting a Special Permit of
Section 9,'Paragraph 9.1 of the Zoning ByLaws so as to permit expan-
sion of non -conforming building for a purpose allowed in a general
business district. The following members were present and voting:
Alfred Frizelle, Vic ' e -chairman, Augustine Nickerson, Clerk, William
Sullivan, Walter Soule and Raymond Vivenzio.
The hearing was advertised in the Lawrence Eagle Tri,bune on September 27
and September .29, 1986 and all abutters were notified by regular mail.
Upon a motion made by William Sullivan and seconded by Augustine
Nickerson, the Board voted unanimously to DENY the Special Permit
as requested.
The Board finds that adding to the pre-existing non -conforming building
would be a substantial detriment to the neighborhood and would be above
the 25% aggregate allowed by Section 9, Paragraph 9.2(3) of the Zoning
ByLaws. Further, the Board finds that a proposed parking area across
the street in question is not in accordance with the provisions of the
Zoning ByLaws.
Sincerely,
BOARD OF APPEALS
Alf,'ked Frize-Ije, Vice-chairman
/awt
A
'00
0 E,- F 1 9
0 A
AmL7"
T 0 '11!
N 01m) T �i
OCT 3 19' 4 4 A AnY aPPeal shall be filed
TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER
MASSACHUSETTS Within (20) ClaYs after the
dato Of fi Of this NOtice
in tile Office Of the
BOARD OF APPEALS Clerk, TOWn
NOTICE OF DECISION
Robert K.,Daigle Date .... Cc t ob er. .2 2., . 19 6-.6 ..
1521 Great Pond Rd.
N. Andover, MA 01845 Petition No.. . 3 2 , 9 7 .............
Date of Hearing. October.. .,..1986
Decision: October 21, 1986
Petition of .... Rob-ert- -K-.- -Da:igl-e ................................... ! ..................
Premises affected ................... Hodge-s-Stre-et ............
Special Permit
Referring to the above petition for a ypxix#mfrom the requirements ofAk(K. Se c.tion .9.,...
Para -graph. .9. I.of the. Zoni.ng..ByLaws ...........................................
90astOPermit -expansion —of - non�-tconf oxming. bui.ld�.ng..f or..a. pvrpQpg. ?L.jjpwed
.i.n.,a..gen.e.r.al.-busin.ess..distr.ict ..................................................
After a public hearing given on the above date, the Board of Appeals voted to ... DERY .... the
S p ep i a.1. . P.e. r mi. t .................. NO& kft]§W XXtM3HftX H%XEWYdW kNW*Xf6XMAXaX
P)VXRiA)k -Th-e - B-oard . f -eel -s . that-.ad.din.g. to. t.-he..p��e.--�existixi.g..zio.ri7qQp;�Q-rpiing
building would be a substantial detriment to the neighborhood
and would be above the 25% aggregate allowed,
by Section 9, Paragraph 9.2(3) of the Zoning ByLaws. Further, the Board
finds that a propose*d parking area across the street in quastion is not
in accordance with the provisions of the Zoning ByLaws.
Signed
Af rd F lle, Vice-chairman
r
I _ n N c k 6' *§ 6h ... C 1 6'r k'
William Suli'iva*n
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Walter Soule
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ; . . . ... . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . .
Raymond Vivenzio
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Board of Appeals
ij
T 7-'.
'117
'. 0
OCT Zi S'
,,OPtTH
SA
TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER
MASSACHUSETTS
BOARD OF APPEALS
Mr. Daniel Long, Town Clerk
120 Main St.
North Andover, MA 01845
Dear Mr. Long:
Any appc-al Shall be filed
wit"_,'ill (20) d,7,N,/s, after the
i L_ 1.11-', 1 1
Of c': this Notice
in the Offrice of the Town
Clerk.
October 22, 1986
Petition #32-87
Robert ' K. Daigle
Hodges Street
The. Board of Appeals held,a public hearing on October 14, 1986 upon
the application of Robert K. Daigle r uesting a Special Permit of
u
Section 9, Paragraph 9.1 of the Z I ng yLaws so as to permit expan-
p
sion of non -conforming building r a ) rpose allowed.in a general
m
b'usiness district. The followinf Kme be s were present and voting:
Alfred Frizelle, Vice-chairman, Au ustine Nickerson, Clerk, William
v
Sullivan, Walter Soule and Raymc V-11
nzio.
The hearing was advertised in Lawrence Eagle Tribuneon September 27
and September 29,.1986 and alltNautters were notified by regular mail.
On a motion made by WilLiam Su lli an and seconded by Augustine Nickerson,
the -Board voted h6'V'N�Y�t e Special Permit as requested.
The Board that add' the pre-e>;,i t, lding
incr no,n- for b
t
would be 'g:t g --ti-s-e
a s bs antial d riKnt to t-e-
�5��and w ld bd above the 25% aggre te 1 d
9. 1
SectionA. P agr ph 3) of the Zoning ByLaws. r iftg r a
bd d
of a ��a
in
sti n
across in q sti is not in
:2 it
ere
Sinc
BOARD OF APPEALS
Nk.
Alfred Frizelle, Vice-chairman
/awt
'A0 T"
01
a
D i�
T
al
SACH
OCT 11 '85
TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER
MASSACHUSETTS
BOARD OF APPEALS
Mr. Daniel Long, Town Clerk
120 Main St.
North Andover, MA 01845
Dear Mr. Long:
Any appeal shall be filcd
withlin cl;�Nl!s aftor the
X
I L I
Of c " " his Notice
in the O'Hice of the Town
Clerk.
October 22, 1986
Petition #32-87
Robert.K. Daigle
Hodges Street
The. Board of Appeals held,a public hearing on October 14, 1986 upon
the application of Robert K. Daigle uesting a Special Permit of
Section 9, Paragraph 9.1 of the Zo ing yLaws so as to permit expan-
sion of non -conforming building r a p.rpose allowed,in a general
m e m and voting:
business district. The followin membe s were present
u
Alfred Frizelle, Vice-chairman, A<uVst' e Nickerson, Clerk, William
'3 _��Iv nzio.
Sullivan, Walter Soule and Raymond
The hearing was advertised in t Lawrence Eagle Tribune on September 27
JJN
and S,eptember 29, 1986 and al a u tters were notified by regular mail.
on a motion made by Will.,,iam Su li an and seconded by Augustine Nickerson,
the -Board voted t`o'7_�NY�t e Special Permit as requested.
The Board that add* 0 the pre- xj§tinq f n building
would be J=stantial d rim n t t o -Cgftr
0 an w ld b above the 25% aggre te 1 dela4gj;�/
cL
Section P agr ph 9. 3) o the Zoning ByLaws. �Vi g a
across in q sti n is not in
1 d b
0
3 )t)
i q s i
in
Sincere
BOARD OF APPEALS
Alfre�T_Frizelle, Vice�chairman
/awt
LAW OFFICES OF
GERALD M. COHEN
ONE ELM SQUARE
ANDOVER, MASSACHUSETTS 01810
617/475-5500
GERALD M. COHEN (Mass. & N.H.)
DANA S. COHEN
ROGER A. DuPONT
DONNA E. COHEN
(Of Counsel)
October 21, 1986
Zoning Board of Appeals
Town Ra -1-1--_
North Andover, MA 01845
Re: Robert K. Daigle Special Permit Application for
Hodges Street Property.
Dear Sirs/Madam:
BOSTON OFFICE
130 BOWDOIN STREET
SUITE 1802
BOSTON, MA 02108
Please accept the enclosed Memorandum of Law in reference
to the above matter to be used at the special meeting of
the Board of Appeals on Tuesday, October 21, 1986.
If there are any questions regarding this matter, please
contact us at this office.
sincerely,
_,,�Ge�raldM. Coheen, Esq.
Encl.
MEMORANDUM
Subject: Special Permit Application by Robert K. Daigle
for Hodges Street
Date: October 20, 1986
Name: Law Offices of Gerald M. Cohen
One Elm Square
Andover, MA 01810
617-475-5500
Facts:
The structure in question is a vacant, dilapidated
garage located on Hodges Street. It is a pre-existing
noncomformity use located in the General Business District
because front, side and rear set backs are not in
comformance with current zoning requirements. The
Applicant filed for a Special Permit under Section 9.1 of
the North Andover Zoning Bylaws. The purpose of the
Special Permit is to allow the Applicant to extend the roof
line, so as to add two apartment'units on a second floor.
A public hearing was held on Tuesday, October 14. The
Board closed the hearing and took the matter under
advisement.
Discussion:
Section 9.1 Requirements
Section 9.1 of the North Andover Zoning Bylaws
permits the continuation of a non-comforming use, but such
building or use shall not be changed, extended or enlarged
except for purposes permitted in the Zoning District in
which the building is situated or as permitted by a Special
Permit or otherwise by the Board of Appeals. A
pre-existing non-comforming use may be extended or altered
provided that the change shall not be substantially more
detrimental than the existing non-comforming use to the
neighborhood.
The Applicant intends to completely rehabilitate an
existing, dilapidated garage on Hodges Street. The garage,
if allowed to remain in its present condition, is and will
be a substantial hazard and eyesore to the neighborhood.
The proposed rehabilitation would benefit t7he neighborhood
and would not be detrimental in any manner. The Zoning
Board of Appeals should permit the addition to the existing
non-comforming structure based on the benefits gained by
the neighborhood if all other requirements are satisfied.
Section 9.2 Requirements
In addition to satisfying Section 9.1, Applicant
satisfies the provisions under section 9.2. First, the
proposed change is now before the Board of Appeals for
approval as required under Section 9.2(l). Also, the
change which is proposed will be only on the lot occupied
by the non-comforming use on the date that it became
non-comforming as required by Section 9.2(2).
The third requirement limits the increase in volume,
area or extent of non-comforming use to no more than twenty
five percent (25%) of the original use. The proposed
change to the existing structure will not add greater than
twenty five percent (25%) of area to the existing, original
use. If the Applicant were to rehabilitate the existing
structurej without extending the roof line, he would
construct space for two (2) businesses on the first floor
arid' 'two '(2) apartments on the second floor. If the
Applicant is permitted to raise the roofline over the
existing structure, he would merely add two more apartments
on the second floor. These proposed changes, as submitted
by plans, would not violate the twenty five percent (25%)
limitation provided in Section 9.2.(3).
Section 9.2(4) permits changes which would not lengthen the
economic life of the non-comformity larger than a period
reasonable for the amortization of the initial investment.
The non-comformity in this instance is due to set back
requirements under current Zoning Regulations. The
Applicant is not changing a wooden structure to a steel
structure or brick structure, rather, he is beautifying an
existing wooden structure. The non-comformity will
continue to exist for as long as the foundation is intact
whether or not the building is rehabilitated. Beautifying
the existing structure will not, in itself, extend the
economic life of the non-comformity.
As an added note, Section 4.128(6) of the Zoning Bylaws
permits residential use in a General Business District
'_' a
where the use is not more than fifty percent (50%) of the
total floor space in the structure. The Applicant intends
to use the total first floor space for two (2) businesses.
The second floor space is intended to be structured for
four (4) residential apartments. Where the Applicant will
be using not more than fifty percent (50%) of floor space
for residential use, the provisions of this Section are
satisfied.
Further, the Applicant is purchasing the vacant lot
on Hodges Street and has committed himself to providing
sufficient parking for both structures. As previously
mentioned at the public hearing, parking easements or
rights of way restrictions shall be denoted on the deed for
the second parcel so that the parking easements or
restrictions will run with the land in any subsequent
transfer of either or both parcels.
Applicant expects that approval of this special
permit will be contingent upon these special conditions
under Article 10.31(2) of the By -Laws.
Conclusion:
In light of the above discussion, where the Applicant
is able to satisfy all requirements of the Bylaws, it is
respectfully requested that he be granted a Special Permit
by this Board for the following reasons:
a) The specific site is an appropriate location for
such a mixed residential and business use;
b) The use as developed will not adversely affect
the neighborhood as the neighborhood is already
a mixed use area;
C) There will be no nuisance or serious hazard to
vehicles or pedestrians;
d) Adequate and appropriate facilities will be
provided for the proper operation of the
proposed use;
e) The use is in harmony with the general purpose
and intent of the By Law.
Respectfully Submitted,
Gerald M. Cohen
One Elm Square
Andover, MA 01810
617-475-5500
� 0
MEMORANDUM
Subject: Special Permit Application by Robert K. Daigle
for Hodges Street
Date: October 20, 1986
Name: Law Offices of Gerald M. Cohen
One Elm Square
Andover, MA 01810
617-475-5500
Facts:
The structure in question is a vacant, dilapidated
garage located on Hodges Street. It is a pre-existing
noncomformity use located in the General Business District
because front, side and rear set backs are not in
c6mf'o3�manc'e' with current zoning requirements. The
Applicant filed for a Special Permit under Section 9.1 of
the North Andover Zoning Bylaws. The purpose of the
Special Permit is to allow the Applicant to extend the roof
line, so as to add two apartment units on a second floor.
A public hearing was held on Tuesday, October 14. The
Board closed the hearing and took the matter under
advisement.
Discussion:
Section 9.1 Requirements
Section 9.1 of the North Andover Zoning Bylaws
permits the continuation of a non-comforming use, but such
building or use shall not be changed, extended or enlarged
except for purposes permitted in the Zoning District in
which the building is situated or as permitted by a Special
Permit or otherwise by the Board of' Appeals. A
pre-existing non-comforming use may be extended or altered
provided that the change shall not be substantially more
detrimental than the existing non-comforming use to the
neighborhood.
The Applicant intends to completely rehabilitate an
existing, dilapidated garage on Hodges Street. The garage,
if allowed to remain in its present condition, is and will
be a substantial hazard and eyesore to the neighborhood.
The proposed rehabilitation would benefit the neighborhood
and would not be detrimental in any manner. The Zoning
Board of Appeals should permit the addition to the existing
non -conforming structure based on the benefits gained by
the neighborhood if all other requirements are satisfied.
Section 9.2 Requirements
In addition to satisfying Section 9.1, Applicant
satisfies the provisions under Section 9.2. First, the
proposed change is now before the Board of Appeals for
approval as required under Section 9.2(l). Also, the
change which is proposed will be only on the lot occupied
by the non-comforming use on the date that it became
non-comforming as required by Section 9.2(2).
The third requirement limits the increase in volume,
1, — a
area or extent of non-comforming use to no more than twenty
five percent (25%) of the original use. The proposed
change to the existing structure will not add greater than
twenty five percent (25%) of area to the existing, original
use. If the Applicant were to rehabilitate the existing
structure, without extending the roof line, he would
construct space for two (2) businesses on the first floor
and two (2) apartments on the second floor. If the
Applicant is permitted to raise the roofline over the
existing structure, he would merely add two more apartments
on the second floor. These proposed changes, as submitted
by plans, would not violate the twenty five percent (25%)
limitation provided in Section 9.2.(3).
Section 9.2(4) permits changes which would not lengthen the
economic life of the non-comformity larger than a period
reasonable for the amortization of the initial investment.
The non-comformity in this instance is due to set back
requirements under current Zoning Regulations. The
Applicant is not changing a wooden structure to a steel
structure or brick structure, rather, he is beautifying an
existing wooden structure. The non-comformity will
continue to exist for as long as the foundation is intact
whether or not the building is rehabilitated. Beautifying
the existing structure will not, in itself, extend the
economic life of the non-comformity.
As an
added note,
Section
4.128(6)
of the Zoning Bylaws
permits
residential
use in
a General
Business District
0
where the use is not more than fifty percent (50%) of the
total floor space in the structure. The Applicant intends
to use the total first floor space for two (2) businesses.
The second floor space is intended to be structured for
four (4) residential apartments. Where the Applicant will
be using not more than fifty percent (50%) of floor space
for residential use, the provisions of thi7s Section are
satisfied.
Further, the Applicant is purchasing the vacant lot
on Hodges Street and has committed himself to providing
sufficient parking for both structures. As previously
mentioned at the public hearing, parking easements or
rights of way restrictions shall be denoted on the deed for
the second parcel so that the parking easements or
restrictions will run with the land in any subsequent
transfer of either or both parcels.
Applicant expects that approval of this special,
permit will be contingent upon these special conditions
under Article 10.31(2) of the By -Laws.
61
Conclusion:
In light of the above discussion, where the Applicant
is able to�satisfy all requirements of the Bylaws, it is
respectfully requested that he be granted a Special Permit
by this Board for the following reasons:
i
a) The specific site is an appropriate location for
such a mixed residential and business use;
b) The use as developed will not adversely affect
the neighborhood as the neighborhood is already
a mixed use area;
C) There will be no nuisance or serious hazard to
vehicles or pedestrians;
d) Adequate and appropriate facilities will be
provided for the proper operation of the
proposed use;
e) The use is in harmony with the general purpose
and intent of the By Law.
Respectfully Submitted,
Gerald M. Cohen
One Elm Square
Andover, MA 01810
617-475-5500
MEMORANDUM
Subject: Special Permit Application by Robert K. Daigle
for Hodges Street
Date: October 20, 1986
Name: Law Offices of Gerald M. Cohen
One Elm Square
Andover, MA 01810
617-475-5500
Facts:
The structure in question is a vacant, dilapidated
garage located on Hodges Street. It is a pre-existing
noncomformity use located in the General Business District
because front, side and rear 'set backs are not in
comformance with current zoning requirements. The
Applicant filed for a Special Permit under Section 9.1 of
the North Andover Zoning Bylaws. The purpose of the
Special Permit is to allow the Applicant to extend the roof
line, so as to add two apartment units on a second floor.
A public hearing was held on Tuesday, October 14. The
Board closed the hearing and took the matter under
advisement.
Discussion:
Section 9.1 Requirements
Section 9.1 of the North Andover Zoning Bylaws
permits the continuation of a non-comforming use, but such
building or use shall not be changed, extended or enlarged
except for purposes permitted in the Zoning District in
which the building is situated or as permitted by a Special
Permit or otherwise by the Board of Appeals. A
pre-existing non-comforming use may be extended or altered
provided that the change shall not be substantially more
detrimental than the existing non-comforming use to the
neighborhood.
The Applicant intends to completely rehabilitate an
existing, dilapidated garage on Hodges Street. The garage,
if allowed to remain in its present condition, is and will
be a substantial hazard and eyesore to the neighborhood.
The proposed rehabilitation would benefit the neighborhood
and would not be detrimental in any manner. The Zoning
Board of Appeals should permit the addition to the existing
non-comforming structure based on the benefits gained by
the neighborhood if all other requirements are satisfied.
Section 9.2 Requirements
In addition to satisfying Section 9.1, Applicant
satisfies the provisions under Section 9.2. First, the
proposed change is now before the Board of Appeals for
approval as required under Section 9.2(l). Also, the
change which is proposed will be only on the lot occupied
by the non-comforming use on the date that it became
non-comforming as required by Section 9.2(2).
The third requirement limits the increase in volume,
area or extent of non-comforming use to no more than twenty
five percent (25%) of the original use. The proposed
chang6 to the 'existing structure will not add greater than
twenty five percent (25%) of area to the existing, original
use. If the Applicant were to rehabilitate the existing
structure, without extending the roof line, he would
construct space for two (2) businesses on the first floor
and two (2) apartments on the second floor. If the
Applicant is permitted to raise the roofline over the
existing structure, he would merely add two inore apartments
on the second floor. These proposed changes, as submitted
by plans, would not violate the twenty five percent (25%)
limitation provided in Section 9.2.(3).
Section 9.2(4) permits changes which would not lengthen the
economic life of the non-comformity larger than a period
reasonable for the amortization of the initial investment.
The non-comformity in this instance is due to set back
requirements under current Zoning Regulations. The
Applicant is not changing a wooden structure to a steel
structure or brick structure, rather, he is beautifying an
existing wooden structure. The non-comformity will
continue to exist for as long as the foundation is intact
whether or not the building is rehabilitated. Beautifying
the,existing structure will not, in itself, extend the
economic life of the non-comformity.
As an added note, Section 4.128(6) of the Zoning Bylaws
permits residential use in a General Business District
where the use is not more than fifty percent (50%) of the
total floor space in the structure. The Applicant intends
to use the total first floor space for two (2) businesses.
The second floor space is intended to be structured for
four (4) residential apartments. Where the Applicant will
be using not more than fifty percent (50%) of floor space
for residential use, the provisions of this Section are
satisfied.
I
Further, the Applicant is purchasing the vacant lot
on Hodges Street and has committed himself to providing
sufficient parking for both structures. As previously
mentioned at the public hearing, parking easements or
rights of way restrictions shall be denoted on the deed for
the second parcel so that the parking easements or
restrictions will run with the land in any subsequent
transfer of either or both parcels.
Applicant expects that approval of this special
permit will be contingent upon these special conditions
under Article 10.31(2) of the By -Laws.
Conclusion:
In light of the above discussion, where the Applicant
is able to satisfy all requirements of the Bylaws, it is
respectfully requested that he be granted a Special Permit
by this Board for the following reasons:
a) The specific site is an appropriate location for
such a mixed residential and business use;
b) The use as developed will not adversely affect
the neighborhood as the neighborhood is already
a mixed use area;
C) There will be no nuisance or serious hazard to
vehicles or pedestrians;
d) Adequate and appropriate facilities will be
provided for the proper operation of the
proposed use;
e) The use is in harmony with the general purpose
and intent of the By Law.
Respectfully Submitted,
Gerald M. Cohen
One Elm Square
Andover, MA 01810
617-475-5500
MEMORANDUM
Subject: Special Permit Application by Robert K. Daigle
for Hodges Street
Date: October 20, 1986
Name: Law Offices of Gerald M. Cohen
One Elm Square
Andover, MA 01810
617-475-5500
Facts:
The structure in question is a vacant, dilapidated
garage located on Hodges Street. It is a pre-existing
noncomformity use located in the General Business District
because front, side and rear set backs are not in
comformance with current zoning requirements. The
Applicant filed for a Special Permit under Section 9.1 of
the North Andover Zoning Bylaws. The purpose of the
Special Permit is to allow the Applicant to extend the roof
line, so as to add two apartment units on a second floor.
A public hearing was held on Tuesday, October 14. The
Board closed the hearing and took the matter under
advisement.
Discussion:
section 9.1 Requirements
Section 9.1 of the North Andover Zoning Bylaws
permits the continuation of a non-comforming use, but such
building or use shall not be changed, extended or enlarged
except for purposes permitted in the Zoning District in
which the building is situated or as permitted by a Special
Permit or otherwise by the Board of Appeals. A
pre-existing non-comforming use may be extended or altered
provided that the.change shall not be substantially more
detrimental than the existing non-comforming use to the
neighborhood.
The Applicant intends to completely rehabilitate an
existing, dilapidated garage on Hodges Street. The garage,
if allowed to remain in its present condition, is and will
be a substantial hazard and eyesore to the neighborhood.
The proposed rehabilitation would benefit the neighborhood
and would not be detrimental in any manner. The Zoning
Board of Appeals should permit the addition to the existing
non-comforming structure based on the benefits gained by
the neighborhood if all other requirements are satisfied.
Section 9.2 Requirements
In addition to satisfying Section 9.1, Applicant
satisfies the provisions under Section 9.2. First, the
proposed change is now before the Board of Appeals for
approval as required under Section 9.2(1). Also, the
change which is proposed will be only on the lot occupied
by the non-comforming use on the date that it became
non-comforming as required by Section 9.2(2).
The third requirement limits the increase in volume,
area or extent of non-comforming use to no more than twenty
five percent (25%) of the original use. The proposed
change to the existing structure will not add greater than
twenty five percent (25%) of area to the existing, original
use. If the Applicant were to rehabilitate the existing
structure, without extending the roof line, he would
construct space for two (2) businesses on the first floor
and two (2) apartments on the second floor. if the
Applicant is permitted to raise the roofline over the
existing structure, he would merely add two more apartments
on the second floor. These proposed changes, as submitted
by plans, would not violate the twenty five percent (25%)
limitation provided in Section 9.2.(3).
Section 9.2(4) permits changes which would not- lengthen the
economic life of the non-comformity larger than a period
reasonable for the amortization of the initial investment.
The non-comformity in this instance is due to set back
requirements under current Zoning Regulations. The
Applicant is not changing a wooden structure to a steel
structure or brick structure, rather, he is beautifying an
existing wooden structure. The non-comformity will
continue to exist for as long as the foundation is intact
whether or not the building is rehabilitated. Beautifying
the existing structure will not, in itself, extend the
economic life of the non-comformity.
As an added note, Section 4.128(6) of the Zoning Bylaws
permits residential use in a General Business District
where the use is not more than fifty percent (50%) of the
total floor space in the structure. The Applicant intends
to use the total first floor space for two (2) businesses.
The second floor space is intended to be structured for
four (4) residential apartments. Where the Applicant will
be using not more than fifty percent (50%) of floor space
for residential use, the provisions of this Section are
satisfied.
Further, the Applicant is purchasing the vacant lot
on Hodges Street and has committed himself to providing
sufficient parking for both structures. As previously
mentioned at the public hearing, parking easements or
rights of way restrictions shall be denoted on the deed for
the second parcel so that the parking easements or
restrictions will run with the land in any subsequent
transfer of either or both parcels.
Applicant expects that approval of this special
permit will be contingent upon these special conditions
under Article 10.31(2) of the By -Laws.
Conclusion:
In light of the above discussion, where the Applicant
is able to satisfy all requirements of the Bylaws, it is
respectfully requested that he be granted a Special Permit
by this Board for the following reasons:
a) The specific site is an appropriate location for
such a mixed residential and business use;
b) The use as developed will not adversely affect
the neighborhood as the neighborhood is already
a mixed use area;
C) There will be no nuisance or serious hazard to
vehicles or pedestrians;
d) Adequate and appropriate facilities will be
provided for the proper operation of the
proposed use;
e) The use is in harmony with the general purpose
and intent of the By Law.
Respectfully Submitted, -
Gerald M. Cohen
One Elm Square
Andover, MA 01810
617-475-5500
MEMORANDUM
Subject: Special Permit Application by Robert K. Daigle
for Hodges Street
Date: October 20, 1986
Name:, Law Offices of Gerald M. Cohen
One Elm Square
Andover, MA 01810
617-475-5500
Facts:
The structure in question is a vacant, dilapidated
garage located on Hodges Street. It is a pre-existing
noncomformity use located in the General Business District
because front, side and rear set backs are not in
comformance with current zoning requirements. The
Applicant filed for a special Permit under Section 9.1 of
the North Andover Zoning Bylaws. The purpose of the
Special Permit is to allow the Applicant to extend the roof
line, so as to add two apartment units on a second floor.
A public hearing was held on Tuesday, October 14. The
Board closed the hearing and took the matter under
advisement.
Discussion:
Section 9.1 Requirements
section 9.1 of the North Andover Zoning Bylaws
permits the continuation of a non-comforming use, but such
building or use shall not be changed, extended or enlarged
except for purposes permitted in the Zoning District in
a
which the building is situated or as permitted by a Special
Permit or otherwise by the Board of Appeals. A
pre-existing non-comforming use may be extended or altered
provided that the change shall not be substantially more
detrimental than the existing non-comforming use to the
neighborhood.
The Applicant intends to completely rehabilitate an
existing, dilapidated garage on Hodges Street. The garage,
if allowed to remain in its present condition, is and will
be a substantial hazard and eyesore to the neighborhood.
The proposed rehabilitation would benefit the neighborhood
and would not be detrimental in any manner. The Zoning
Board of Appeals should permit the addition to the existing
non-comforming structure based on the benefits gained by
the neighborhood if all other requirements are satisfied.
Section 9.2 Requirements
In addition to satisfying section 9.1, Applicant
satisfies the provisions under section 9.2. First, the
proposed change is now before the Board of Appeals for
approval as required under Section 9.2(l). Also, the
change which is proposed will be only on the lot occupied
by the non-comforming use on the date that it became
non-comforming as required by Section 9.2(2).
The third requirement limits the increase in volume,
area or extent of non-comforming use to no more than twenty
five percent (25%) of the original use. The proposed
change to the existing structure will not add greater than
twenty five percent (25%) of area to the existing, original
use. If the Applicant were to rehabilitate the existing
structure, without extending the roof line, he would
construct space for two (2) businesses on the first floor
and two (2) apartments on the second floor. If the
Applicant is permitted to raise the roofline over the
existing structure, he would merely add two more apartments
on the second floor. These proposed changes, as submitted
by plans, would not violate the twenty five percent (25%)
limitation provided in Section 9.2.(3).
Section 9.2(4) permits changes which would not lengthen the
economic life of the non-comformity larger than a period
reasonable for the amortization of the initial investment.
The non-comformity in this instance is due to set back
requirements under current Zoning Regulations. The
Applicant is not changing a wooden structu2�e to a steel
structure or brick structure, rather, he is beautifying an
existing wooden structure. The non-comformity will
continue to exist for as long as the foundation is intact
whether or not the building is rehabilitated. Beautifying
the existing structure will not, in itself, extend the
economic life of the non-comformity.
As an added note, Section 4.128(6) of the Zoning Bylaws
permits residential use in a General Business District
where the use is not more than fifty percent (50%) of the
total floor space in the structure. The Applicant intends
to use the total first floor space for two (2) businesses.
The second floor space is intended to be structured for
four (4) residential apartments. Where the Applicant will
be using not more than fifty percent (50%) of floor space
for residential use, the provisions of this Section are
satisfied.
1.
Further, the Applicant is purchasing the vacant lot
on Hodges Street and has committed himself to providing
sufficient parking for both structures. As previously
mentioned at the public hearing, parking easements or
rights of way restrictions shall be denoted on the deed for
the second parcel so that the parking easements or
restrictions will run with the land in any subsequent
.transfer of either or both parcels.
Applicant expects that approval of this special
permit will be contingent upon these special conditions
under Article 10.31(2) of the By -Laws.
conclusion:
In light of the above discussion, where the Applicant
is able to satisfy all requirements of the Bylaws, it is
respectfully requested that he be granted a Special Permit
by this Board for the following reasons:
a) The specific site is an appropriate location for
such a mixed residential and business use;
b) The use as developed will not adversely affect
the neighborhood as the neighborhood is already
a mixed use area;
C) There will be no nuisance or serious hazard to
vehicles or pedestrians;
d) Adequate and appropriate facilities will be
provided for the proper operation of the
proposed use;
e) The use is in harmony with the general purpose
and intent of the By Law.
Respectfully Submitted,
Gerald M. Cohen
One Elm Square
Andover, MA 01810
617-475-5500
NORTH ANDOVER BUILDING DEPARTMENT
120 MAIN STREET
NORTH ANDOVER, MA 01845
INSPECTOR OF BUILDINGS
ELECTRICAL INSPECTOR
GAS INSPECTOR
Boa,td oj AppeaE6
Town Oj�)ice Buitding
No,tth Andova, Ma.
Re: Petition 6A Robe&t DaiQZe
Genttemen:
OctobeA 14, 1986
Mt. Daigte',s apptication 4oA a speciat peAmit is
allowed undeA Section 9.1 o4 the Zoning By -Laws. HoweveA,
a much cteaAet inte)Lptetation may be made 6,tom the Enabung
Statute, ChapteA 40A, Section 6, a copy o4 which is enctosed.,
VeAy tAuty youu,
CHARLES H. FOSTER
N)
INSPECTOR OF BUILDINGS
AND
ZONING OFFICER
CHF: a�
Enc.
Section 6. Pre-existing Non -conforming Uses,
Structures and Lots
Exemption for
Except as hereinafter provided, a zoning ordinance or by -
Structure and Use
law shall not apply to structures or uses lawfully in
Lawfully Begun or
existence or lawfully begun, or to a building or special
in Existence
permit issued before the first publication of notice of
Within a Period of
the public hearing on such ordinance or by-law required
Exemption for
by section five, but shall agpj_� to any change or sub -
Building or Special
stantial exte�sion—oT —such use,lg a bui]ding nr -,ppcjaj
Permit Issued Before
permit issued afterlbe first - ontirroaf gaid public hearing
First Notice of
to any reconstruction, extension or structural change of
Public Hearing
such structure�and to any alteration of a structure begun
Single Lot
after the first notice of said'public hearing to provide
Exemption for
for its use for a substantially different purpose or for
Single,and
the same purpose in a substantially different manner or
Two -Family Use
to a substantially greater extent 2��e t where alter ation,
*
reconstruction, extension or structural change to a single
or two-family residential structure does not increase the
Pre-existing Non-
nonconforming nature of said structure. Pre-ekisting non-
conforming structures
conforming structures or uses may be extended or altered,
or Uses May be
provided, that no such extension or alteration shall be
Extended, Changed
permitted unless there is a finding by the permit granting
or Altered After
authority or by the special permit granting authority
Finding by
designated by ordinance or by-law that such change, '
Granting Authority
extension or alteration shall not be substantially more
detrimental than the existing nonconforming'use to the
neighborhood. This section shall not apply to billboards,
'signs and otker advertising devices subject to the
provisions of sections twenty-nihe through thirty-three,
inclusive, of chapter ninety-three, and to chapter ninety-
three D.
Ordinance or By-law A zoning ordinance or by-law shall provide that construction
Shall Provide that
or operations under a building or special permit shall
Building or Special
conform to any subsequent amendment of the ordinance or
Permit Shall Conform
by-law linless the use or construction is commenced within,
if Not Commenced
a period of not more than six months after the issuance of
Within a Period of
the permit and in cases involving construction, unless
Not More Than 6
such construction is continued through to completion as
Months
continuously and expeditiously as is reasonable.
Regulating of
A zoning ordi nance or by-laW may de ' fine and regulate non -
Nonconforming
conforming uses and structures abandoned or not used for
Uses After 2 Years
a period of two years or more..
Single Lot
Any i,,ncrease in area,.frontage, width, yard, or depth
Exemption for
requirements of a zoning ordinance or by-law shall not
Single,and
apply to a lot for single and two-family residential Use
Two -Family Use
which at the time of recording or endorsement, whichever'.
occurs sooner was not held in common ownership with any
adjoining land, conformed to then existing requirements
6-1
Mh
plpmw� Now
. . . . . . . . . .
In,
TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER
MASSACHUSETTS
OARD OF APPEALS
by Town t-'lerk:
0 P C EIVED
DANIEL. LO',,�G
Toypi c,!-ERK
NORTH Aw).OYER
TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER, kA4iAC2Uak'%T6
BOARD OF APPEALS
APP LICATION FOR RELIEF FROM THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE
Ap p I i c a n t R Q b e-r-t-L—La!Zl-e ------ -Address 1921 Great Pond Road, North
Andover
1. Application is hereby made:
a) For a variance from 'the requirements of Section Paragraph
and Table of the Zoning By Laws.
Paragraph of the Zoning
b) For a Special Permit under Section
Qy Law.'�.
C) As a Party Aggrieved, for review of a decision made by the,
Buildin4 Ins.pector or other authority.
2. a) Premises affected are land X, -and building(s) X -numbered—
�Hodges I Street.
b) Premises affected are property with frontage on the North
South (x ) East .( ) West side of— Hodges St.
Str.,ect, and known as No. H -044P-5- Street.
c) Premises affected are in Zonin and the premises
"g Districta.�,
affected have an a.rea.of 11Y6J square feet and frontage of
f e e t
3. ownership
a) Name and address of owner (if joint ownership, give all names):
Forbes Realty Trust (Thomas Laudani & Jay Philbin )
Crate of Purchase 5/7/85 Previous Owner Mr.TGiard & Mrs (�i ard
b)
If applicant is not owner, check his/her interest in the premises:
X-Prospcctive Purchaser Lesec -Other (explain)
4
Sizc
of prop6scd building:_____ front; ----feet deep;
f -stories; ---- f eiH .
I
a)
Approximate date of erection: When permit is granted
b)
Occupancy or, use of each floor: firs.t-�floor- btisiness-, second floor -
t 7 -apartments.
c)
Typc'of construction: . Wood frame
5.
Size
of existi-n�*'building:_ feet front; ------ feet deep;
1-1cight
--
stories;
a)
Approximate date of erection: 50 years ago
b)
Occupanc�br use of each floor:_.,,_,An_t__a_t;)��t
c)
Type of construction: wood frame
6.
Has
there been a previous apj�eal, under zoning, on these premises?
no
If so, when?
7. Description of relief sought on this petition I seek a special permit to
chan&es the irregular roof pitch to conform to standard gable roof pitch,
enhancing-tPe appearance of the building and allowiLE the occupancy of
apartments upstairs.
8. Deed recorded in the Registry of Deeds in Bookj2_10 Page 7Z2
Land Court Certificate No. Book Page
The principal points upon which I base my application are as follows:
(must be stated in detail)
At present this property is vacant and in extremely_delapitated condition.
I would rehabilitate this property into a colonial structure which would
beautify,the neighborhood
I agree to pay the filing fee, advertising in newspaper, and incidental
expenses*
.�Signature of Pe ioncr s
Every application for action by the Board shall be made on a form.approved
by the Doar(l. These forms shall be. furnished by the Clerk. upon request.
Any communication purporting to be an at�plication shall be treated as mere
notice of intention to seek relief until such time as it is made on the
official appLication-form. All information called for by the form shall
be furnishcd'by the applicant in the manner therein prescri)aed.
Every application shall be submitted with a list of "Parties In Interest"
which list shall include the petitioner, abutters, owners of land directly
opposite on any public or private street or way, and abutters to the
a.buttcrs within three hundr ed f ect (300' ) of the property line of the
petitioner as they appear on the most recent applicable tax list,
notwithstanding that the land of any such owner is located in another city
or town, the Planning Board of the city or town, and the Planning Board of
every abutting city or town.
*Every application shall be submitted with an application oharge cost- in
the amount of $25.00. In addition, the petitioner shall be responsible
for any and all. costs involved in bringing the petition before the Board.
Such costs shall include mailing and publication, but are not,necessarily
limited to these.
Every application shall be submitted with a plan of land approved by the
Board. No petition will be brought before the Board unless said plan has
been submitted. Copies of the Board's requirem,ents regarding plans are
attached hereto or are available from the Board of Appeals upon request.
LIST OF PARTIES IN INTEREST
Name Address
'6 -
(use additional sheets if necessary)
t .,40 ,
r
1.
PLAN OF LAND TO ACCOMPANY PETITION
racIll application and petition to the Board shall be accompanied by
five (5) copies ofithe following described plan:
Vie sizo of t�hc plan shall be 11 x 17, drawn to scale, I inch
equals 40 feet; it shall have a north point, names of streets,
zoning districts, names and addresses of owners of properties
within a minimum of 200 feet of the subject property, property
lines and location of buildings on surrounding properties. Tile
location of bu�ldings or use of the property where a variance is
requested andlflist�iLnces from adjacent buildings and property lines
sha L 1. bc vL-r i f i ed i n the ' f i eld and shown on the plan. . The
dimensions of the lot and the percentage of the lot covered by the
principal and accessory buildings and the required parking spaces
its, etc. that are
shaLl be s1lown. Entrances, exi driveways,
pertinent to the granting of the variance shall be shown. All
lown in red.
proposed data shall. be sl
pon for a
Any topogra6hical feature of the parcel of land relied Lr
variance, such as ledge, rock peat, or natural condition of water,
brook, or river, shall be shown on the engineering plan. When a
parcel of land, the dimen-
variance is requested to subdivide a
sions and arba of.the surrounding lots may be taken from the deed
or lotting plan for comparison of the size of tile lotS in the
neighborhood, noted on the plan,as such, and marked "approximate
The plan shall be signed and bear the seal of a registered
surveyor or engineer. Any plans presented with the petition shall
remain a part of the records of the Board of Appeals..
If Living quarters are to be remodeled, or areas are to be
converted into living quarters, in addition to the plot plan, five
(5) co.oics of -tl4e following described plans shall be furnished:
1. A floor-pLan of each floor on which remodeling is to be done
or areas converted into living quarters;
2. A floor plan showing, the stairways, halls, doors opening into
the halls, and exit doors of each floor or floors where no -re-
modeling or converting is to be -done;
3. The plans and'elevations shall show all existi'ng work. All
proposed work shall be'shown in red. The size of each plan
shall be .11 x 17 or 17 x 22; it shall be drawn to scale, 1/4
inch eqpals one foot.
All plans and el ' evations presented with the petition shall remain
a part of the records of the Board of Appeals.
For petitions requesting variatioll(s) from the provisions of
Section `7, Paragrpahs 7.1, 7.2, 7.3, and 7.4 and Table 2 of the
Zoning By Law for conveyance purposes only, a plot plan, certified
by a registered engineer or land surveyor, of the parcei of land
with a structure thereon being conveyed, will be acceptable �o the
Board of Appeals provided:
1. The dwelling(s), structure(s), or building(s) were constructed
p r l 14, 1977.
rior to M.arcl
2. # The'pctition is not to allow construction or alteration to
the dwoLling(s), structurc(s), or building(s) which will re-
suLt,in *ho,need for the issuance of a building permit.
3. The size of -the plan shall be no.smalLer than 8 1/2 x 11
inches and must show the existing area of the parcel, the
existing frontage, and the existing setbacks of tile
dwclling(s), structure(s), or building(s) being conveyed.
4. Proper space is provided on the plot plan for the Board's
signature6, as well as adequate space for tile following
information:. date of filing, date of public. . hearing, and
date of approval.