Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMiscellaneous - 315 TURNPIKE STREET 4/30/2018 (22)M s RECEIPT Printed: January 22, 2014 @ 11:23:55 Essex North Registry M. Paul Iannuccillo Register Trans#: 908 Oper:LRRECKM MERRIMACK Book: 13759 -Page 326 Inst#: 1291 Ctl#: 27 Rec:1-22-2014 ® 11:23:55a NAND 315 TEMPLE ST { DOC DESCRIPTION TRANS AMT ----------- --------- DECISION Surcharge CPA $20.00 20.00 50.00 recording fee 50.00 5.00 TECH FEE 5.00 Total fees: 75.00 *** Total charges: 75.00 CASH PMT PAYMENT -CASH 75.00 Bk 137.559 .P:93261291 C11--22, 2014 a 11=23a Town of North i%% ,. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Albert I', I\ianzi Ill, )"-;q. Chairman ' F -Ten P. biclntyrc, [ ire -Chairman pE No orh 1ti Richard J. tiyerr, 13sy. Clerk 3? e!`;`r ti •. pp D. Paul Kath jr., E,y �. ... ..� �.� .. ..... Allan Cuscia 1• cney i P. ganri al Ss�eHuset This (s to ce ft that twenty (20) days Dcney $ I Aid nthal hM $apnd from date of dedsW, filed Douglas 1.udgin 1tI1U1011ttNingof 't mn Clerk Time St.unp ppeal. ' L,I�f�li� Any appeal shall be filed within (20) Notice of Decision days after the date of filing of this Year 2013 notice in the office of the Town Clerk, er Mass. Gen. L. ch. 40A, 5!t-1 Pro err at: 3151'um ike Strect (Map 25, Pnrcc)21) North Andover, MA 01845 NAME Merrimack College Volpe Athletic Center 14EARING(S): October 8, 2013, November 12, 2013, 10 December 2013 ADDRESS: 315 Turnpike Street (Map 25, Parcel PETITION: 2013-012 21)North Andover. MA 01845 The North Andover Board of Appeals held a public hearing at The Town Hall , at 120 Main Street, North Andover, MA on Tuesday, December 10, 2013 at 7:00 PM on the application of Merrimack College Volpe Athletic Center located at 315 Turnpike Street (Map 25, Parcel 21) , North Andover, MA 01845. Petitioner is requesting a Variance to allow two signs at the Volpe Athletic Center that will be internally illuminated in the R-3 Zoning District. The provisions of Section "6.5 Prohibitions: I No signs shall be lit except by steady stationary light, shielded and directed solely at the sign (per the Zoning Bylaws) Legal notices were sent to all the certified abutters provided by the Town of North Andover, Assessors Office, and were published in the Eagle -Tribune, a newspaper of general circulation in the Town of North Andover, on September 24'h 2013 and October I st, 2013. Tile following voting members were present: Albert P. Manzi III, Esq., Ellen P. McIntyre, Richard J. Byers, D. Paul Koch Jr., and Allan Cuscia The following Associate members were present: Michael Liporto, Deney Morganthal and Douglas Ludgin. Richard Byers recused himself from the vote. Upon a motion by McIntyre to GRANT a Variance to allow two signs at the Volpe Athletic Center that will be internally illuminated in the R-3 Zoning District. McIntyre then read the following, under these findings that the Board recognizes that in these particular circumstances, Merrimack College is an educational use as related to the so-called "Dover Amendment' contained in Mass. General Laws Chapter 40A, Section 3. The reasonableness of the zoning requirement in quesdi,) ! as, related to the Dover Amendment depends "on the particular facts of each case." See IVlartin y jhe oxporation of the Presiding Bishops of the Church of ]esus Christ of Latter -Day Saints, 434 Mass.: 141, 1504200 1). The particular facts of this case are unique. The two signs in question have already been installed on Merrimack.College's newly expanded hockey and sports medicine facilities at the Volpe Center. The variance regu68f is to,the internal illumination prohibition in Section 6.5.1 of the Zoning Bylaw for those existing signs. . Tre not adjacent to a public way, highway or private way. They face inward toward the campus f� a ' Their illumination would not cause a distraction or annoyance to abutters or to persons V� Town Ckrk Pagel of 2 Bk 13759 Pg327 #1291 operating motor vehicles on or off campus. There is no apparent public safety hazard caused by the illumination of the signs. The Board has received no opposition to this variance application. Therefore, in consideration of the particular factual circumstances here, the Board grants the variance from Section 6.5.1 for the two existing signs on the Volpe Center. Cuscia seconded the motion to Grant the Variance Those voting in favor to Grant the Variance:, Koch, Liporto, Cuscia and Manzi Not in favor of the Variance: McIntyre. 4-1 Approved Variance Section "6.5 Prohibitions: 1 No signs shall be lit except by steady stationary light, shielded and directed solely at the sign (per the Zoning Bylaws) R3 Zoning District. Site: 315 Turnpike Street (Map 25, Parcel 21) North Andover, MA 01845 Allow two signs at the Volpe Athletic Center that will be internally illuminated in the R-3 Zoning District. Plan(s) Title: ])Plot Plan of the Land for Volpe Athletic Center Lot Prepared by Merrimack Engineering Services 66 Park Street Andover, Ma 01810 , Dated Jan 9, 2013 and Revised April 4, 2013 2)"Schemetic Entry Plan" I sheet Drawn by Huntress Associates 17 (Cont)Plan(s) Title: Tewksbury Street, Andover MA 0 18 10 (dated April,2 2013) 3) "Merrimack College Athletic Complex Building Signs" Elevation, Entrance, Fabricated internally LED Illuminated Logo with translucent face and painted sides, and Sign type 23 illuminated Logo Containing 3 sheet by Roll & Barresi and Associates dated August 2013) Voting in Favor Albert P. Manzi 1II, Esq., D. Paul Koch Jr., and Allan Cuscia and Michael Liporto, tVo:t:i:n�inthe�Neativ�e Ellen McInDLre ...� ....— v, a...V;U a .41lailix cv auuw rwo signs at the votpe Athletic Center that will be internally illuminated in the R-3 Zoning District. Notes: I. This decision shall not be in effect until a copy of this decision is recorded at the Essex County Registry of Deeds, Northern District at the applicant's expense. 2. The granting of the Variance 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 building codes and regulations, prior to the issuance of a building permit as required by the Inspector of Buildings. 3. - If the rights authorized by the variance are not exercised 1 year of the date of the grant, it shall lapse, and may be re-established only after notice, and a new hearing. No over Zoning Board of Appeals At6er Manzi III, Chairperson Ellen P. McIntyre Vice Chairperson Richard J. Byers, Esq., Clerk D. Paul Koch Jr. Allan Cuscia Michael Liporto 2013-012 Page 2 of 2 Mbert P. Manzi III, I."sq. Chairmaa Ellen P. McIntyre, I 'ice -Chairman Richard J. Byers, Esq. Clerk: D. Paul Koch Jr., I?sq. :Allan Cuscia Assoeiate illeahers Michael 11. L.iporto D-ey Morganthal Douglas l,udgin Town of NortA_ de , ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Any appeal shall be filed within (20) days after the date of filing of this notice in the office of the Town Clerk, M64 0 1'own Clerk'1'ime Sump Notice of Decision Year 2013 This is to certify that twenty (20) days have elapsed from date of decision, filed wltlWfllinngof appeal. a JoyOe A, eredbhaw Torn Clerk per Mass. lien. L. ch. 40A, § 17 Pro ert at: 315 Turnpike Street (Map 25, Parcel 21) North Andover, MA 01845 NAME Merrimack College Volpe Athletic Center HEA.WNG(S): October 8, 2013, November l2, 2013, 10 December 2013 ADDRESS: 315 Turnpike Street (Map 25, Parcel PETITION: 2013-012 21)North Andover, MA 01845 The North Andover Board of Appeals held a public hearing at The Town Hall , at 120 Main Street, North Andover, MA on Tuesday, December 10, 2013 at 7:00 PM on the application of Merrimack College Volpe Athletic Center located at 315 Turnpike Street (Map 25, Parcel 21) , North Andover, MA 01845. Petitioner is requesting a Variance to allow two signs at the Volpe Athletic Center that will be internally illuminated in the R-3 Zoning District. The provisions of Section "6.5 Prohibitions: 1 No signs shall be lit except by steady stationary light, shielded and directed solely at the sign (per the Zoning Bylaws) Legal notices were sent to all the certified abutters provided by the Town of North Andover, Assessors Office, and were published in the Eagle -Tribune, a newspaper of general circulation in the Town of North Andover, on September 24t1i 2013 and October I st, 2013. The following voting members were present: Albert P. Manzi III, Esq., Ellen P. McIntyre, Richard J. Byers, D. Paul Koch Jr., and Allan Cuscia The following Associate members were present: Michael Liporto, Deney Morganthal and Douglas Ludgin. Richard Byers recused himself from the vote. Upon a motion by McIntyre to GRANT a Variance to allow two signs at the Volpe Athletic Center that will be internally illuminated in the R-3 Zoning District. McIntyre then read the following, under these findings that the Board recognizes that in these particular circumstances, Merrimack College is an educational use as related to the so-called `'Dover Amendment" contained in Mass. General Laws Chapter 40A, Section 3. The reasonableness of the zoning requirement in question as related to the Dover Amendment depends "on the particular facts of each case." See ,.Iyartin_v_.;The C6r_poration of the Presiding Bishops of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter -Day Saints, 4341 -Mass. 141,150-(2001).- The 4..1',i50-(2001).The particular facts of this case are unique. The two signs in question have already been installed on Merrimack Coll ege's..newly expanded hockey and sports medicine facilities at the Volpe Center. The variance Ir 1. c t is to the internal illumination prohibition in Section 6.5.1 of the Zoning Bylaw for those existing si-Ils. ThATWThre not adjacent to a public way, highway or private way. They face inward toward the campus a1 1 14g�iot. Their illumination would not cause a distraction or annoyance to ab6tte.rs or to persons Town Clerk Page l of 2 operating motor vehicles on or off campus. There is no apparent public safety hazard caused by the illumination of the signs. The Board has received no opposition to this variance application. Therefore, in consideration of the particular factual circumstances here, the Board grants the variance from Section 6.5.1 for the two existing signs on the Volpe Center. Cuscia seconded the motion to Grant the Variance Those voting in favor to Grant the Variance:, Koch, Liporto, Cuscia and Manzi Not in favor of the Variance: McIntyre. 4-1 Approved Variance Section "6.5 Prohibitions: I No signs shall be lit except by steady stationary light, shielded and directed solely at the sign (per the Zoning Bylaws) R3 Zoning District. 315 Turnpike Street (Map 25, Parcel 21) North Andover, MA 01845 Site: Allow two signs at the Volpe Athletic Center that will be internally illuminated in the R-3 Zoning District. j) -jot Plan of the Land for Volpe Athletic Center :Lot Prepared by Merrimack Plan(s) Title: Engineering Services 66 Park Street Andover, Ma 01810 , Dated Jan 9, 2013 and Revised April 4, 2013 2)"Schemetic Entry Plan" 1 sheet Drawn by Huntress Associates 17 (Cont)Plan(s) Title: Tewksbury Street, Andover MA 0 18 10 (dated April,2 2013) 3) "Merrimack College Athletic Complex Building Signs" Elevation, Entrance, Fabricated internally LED Illuminated Logo with translucent face and painted sides, and Sign type 23 illuminated Logo Containing 3 sheet by Roll & Barresi and Associates (dated Au ust 2013) Voting in Favor Albert P. Manzi III, Esq., D. Paul Koch Jr., and Allan Cuscia and Michael Li orto, Votingin the Negative. Ellen Mcfn re 'he .Board Granted n VnrinnOP to X11--+— .t_ - - •� �••� • ��•� the R-3 Zoning District. tilt;,la at ti,Volpe Hmietic Center that will be internally illuminated in Notes: I . This decision shall not be in effect until a copy of this decision is recorded at the Essex County Registry of Deeds, Northern District at the applicant's expense. 2. The granting of the Variance 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 building codes and 1. regulations, prior to the issuance of a building permit as required by the Inspector of Buildings. 3. If the rights authorized by the variance are not exercised 1 year of the date of the grant, it shall lapse, and may be re-established only after notice, and a new hearing. No it Andover Zoning Board of Appeals AlberfManzi III, Chairperson Ellen P. McIntyre lice Chairperson Richard J. Byers, Esq., Clerk D. Paul Koch Jr. Allan Cuscia Michael Liporto 2013-012 Page 2 of 2 'C-4 } \� / aa# l\ !z# s#N� Z � v L % [ r ) \ §) - \§ | § / - \ ) / uj\ 11 }\ f / k Q 2$ tel, a- z,. z y= ; $ r t 0 g % c) E <w/ q2§ 2� : _ \ - -2 - Q. § [e //§ b2 : 4 ¢(} )�� \{ ..§ ( ` .\ _ ` $ ) , ^~ ._. . 'C-4 } \� / aa# l\ !z# s#N� Z � v L w � -.1K Z �@s O O N ze ° 0 �g m gig � w z � o g ,66'046 3 W Ll 9b N Bk 13759 Pg328 #1291 g 8 i d a � � ,66'046 3 W Ll 9b N Bk 13759 Pg328 #1291 ESSEX NORTH R GISTRY OF DEEDS LAWRENCE, MA A TRUE COPY: EST REGISTER OF DEEDS Town of North Andover ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Albert P. Manzi III, Esq. Chairman Ellen P. McIntyre, Vice -Chairman Richard J. Byers, Esq. Clerk D. Paul Koch Jr., Esq. Allan Cuscia Associate Members Michael P. Liporto Deney Morganthal Douglas Ludgin Any appeal shall be filed within (20) days after the date of filing of this notice in the office of the Town Clerk, per Mass. Gen. L. ch. 40A, § 17 Town Clerk Time Stamp Notice of Decision Year 2013 L { DFC 23 i 30 Property at: 315 TllmDike Street (Man 25. Parcel 211 North Andnve.r MA 01 RAI; NAME Merrimack College Volpe Athletic Center HEARING(S): October 8, 2013, November 12, 2013, 10 December 2013 ADDRESS: 315 Turnpike Street (Map 25, Parcel PETITION: 2013-012 21)North Andover, MA 01845 The North Andover Board of Appeals held a public hearing at The Town Hall, at 120 Main Street, North Andover, MA on Tuesday, December 10, 2013 at 7:00 PM on the application of Merrimack College Volpe Athletic Center located at 315 Turnpike Street (Map 25, Parcel 21) , North Andover, MA 01845. Petitioner is requesting a Variance to allow two signs at the Volpe Athletic Center that will be internally illuminated in the R-3 Zoning District. The provisions of Section "6.5 Prohibitions: 1 No signs shall be lit except by steady stationary light, shielded and directed solely at the sign (per the Zoning Bylaws) Legal notices were sent to all the certified abutters provided by the Town of North Andover, Assessors Office, and were published in the Eagle -Tribune, a newspaper of general circulation in the Town of North Andover, on September 24h 2013 and October 1st, 2013. The following voting members were present: Albert P. Manzi III, Esq., Ellen P. McIntyre, Richard J. Byers, D. Paul Koch Jr., and Allan Cuscia The following Associate members were present: Michael Liporto, Deney Morganthal and Douglas Ludgin. Richard Byers recused himself from the vote. Upon a motion by McIntyre to GRANT a Variance to allow two signs at the Volpe Athletic Center that will be internally illuminated in the R-3 Zoning District. McIntyre then read the following, under these findings that the Board recognizes that in these particular circumstances, Merrimack College is an educational use as related to the so-called "Dover Amendment" contained in Mass. General Laws Chapter 40A, Section 3. The reasonableness of the zoning requirement in question as related to the Dover Amendment depends "on the particular facts of each case." See Martin v. The Corporation of the Presiding Bishops of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Dgy Saints 434 Mass. 141, 150 (2001). The particular facts of this case are unique. The two signs in question have already been installed on Merrimack College's newly expanded hockey and sports medicine facilities at the Volpe Center. The variance request is to the internal illumination prohibition in Section 6.5.1 of the Zoning Bylaw for those existing signs. The signs are not adjacent to a public way, highway or private way. They face inward toward the campus and parking lot. Their illumination would not cause a distraction or annoyance to abutters or to persons Pagel of 2 operating motor vehicles on or off campus. There is no apparent public safety hazard caused by the illumination of the signs. The Board has received no opposition to this variance application. Therefore, in consideration of the particular factual circumstances here, the Board grants the variance from Section 6.5.1 for the two existing signs on the Volpe Center. Cuscia seconded the motion to Grant the Variance Those voting in favor to Grant the Variance:, Koch, Liporto, Cuscia and Manzi Not in favor of the Variance: McIntyre. 4-1 Approved Variance Section "6.5 Prohibitions: 1 No signs shall be lit except by steady stationary light, shielded and directed solely at the sign (per the Zoning Bylaws) R3 Zoning District. Site: 315 Turnpike Street (Map 25, Parcel 21) North Andover, MA 01845 Allow two signs at the Volpe Athletic Center that will be internally illuminated in the R-3 Zoning District. Plan(s) Title: 1)Plot Plan of the Land for Volpe Athletic Center Lot Prepared by Merrimack Engineering Services 66 Park Street Andover, Ma 01810 , Dated Jan 9, 2013 and Revised April 4, 2013 2)"Schemetic Entry Plan" 1 sheet Drawn by Huntress Associates 17 (Cont)Plan(s) Title: Tewksbury Street, Andover MA 01810 (dated Apri1,2 2013) 3) "Merrimack College Athletic Complex Building Signs" Elevation, Entrance, Fabricated internally LED Illuminated Logo with translucent face and painted sides, and Sign type 23 illuminated Logo Containing 3 sheet by Roll & Barresi and Associates dated August 2013) Voting in Favor Albert P. Manzi III, Esq., D. Paul Koch Jr., and Allan Cuscia and Michael Li orto, Votingin the Negative: Ellen In e The Board Granted a Variance to allow two signs at the Volpe Athletic Center that will be internally illuminated in the R-3 Zoning District. Notes: 1. This decision shall not be in effect until a copy of this decision is recorded at the Essex County Registry of Deeds, Northern District at the applicant's expense. 2. The granting of the Variance 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 building codes and regulations, prior to the issuance of a building permit as required by the Inspector of Buildings. 3. If the rights authorized by the variance are not exercised 1 year of the date of the grant, it shall lapse, and may be re-established only after notice, and a new hearing. No�4J Andover Zoning Board of Appeals Albert -Manzi III, Chairperson Ellen P. McIntyre Vice Chairperson Richard J. Byers, Esq., Clerk D. Paul Koch Jr. Allan Cuscia Michael Liporto 2013-012 Page 2 of 2 Town of North Andover ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Albert P. Manzi 111, Esq. Chairman Ellen P. McIntyre, Vice -Chairman Richard J. Byers, Esq. Clerk D. Paul Koch Jr., Esq. Allan Cuscia Associate tllen:herr Michael P. Liporto Deney Morganthal Douglas Ludgin Any appeal shall be filed within (20) days after the date of filing of this notice in the office of the Town Clerk, per Mass. Gen. L. ch. 40A, 417 o t Town Clerk Time Stamp Notice of Decision Year 2013 1 Property at: 315 Tumn>7ce Street (Man 25, Parcel 211 North Andover MA nl R45 NAME Merrimack College Volpe Athletic Center BEARING(S): October 8, 2013, November 12, 2013, 10 December 2013 ADDRESS: 315 Turnpike Street (Map 25, Parcel PETITION: 2013-012A 21)North Andover, MA 01845 The North Andover Board of Appeals held a public hearing at The Town Hall, at 120 Main Street, North Andover, MA on Tuesday, 10 December, 2013 at 7:00 PM on the application of Merrimack College Volpe Athletic Center located at 315 Turnpike Street (Map 25, Parcel 21) , North Andover, MA 01845. Petitioner is requesting a Variance to allow two signs at the Volpe Athletic Center that will be internally illuminated in the R-3 Zoning District. The provisions of Section "6.5 Prohibitions: 1 No signs shall be lit except by steady stationary light, shielded and directed solely at the sign (per the Zoning Bylaws). Petitioner, Merrimack College (Volpe Athletic Center) is now requesting the Board to allow them to "Withdraw without Prejudice" The following voting members were present:. Albert P. Manzi III, Esq., Ellen P. McIntyre, Richard J. Byers, D. Paul Koch Jr., and Allan Cuscia The following Associate members were present: Michael Liporto, Deney Morganthal and Douglas Ludgin. Richard Byers recused himself from the vote. McIntyre made a motion to Grant the Withdrawal without Prejudice as mentioned in a letter dated November 7th 2013 from Merrimack College Liporto seconded the motion No one was in favor to grant the Withdrawal without Prejudice Those not in favor to grant the Withdrawal without Prejudice were; : Koch, Liporto Cuscia, McIntyre and Manzi. 0-5 denied /1 Nort� ndover Zoning `Board A1bJefeManzi III, Chairperson Ellen P. McIntyre Vice Chairperson Richard J. Byers, Esq., Clerk D. Paul Koch Jr. Allan Cuscia Michael Lipbrto 2013-012A Appeals Page 1 of 1 JOHNSON BORENSTEIN, LLC ATTORNEYS AT LAIN 12 Chestnut Street Andover, MA 01810-3706 Tel: 978-475-4488 Fax: 978-475-6703 www.jbllciaw.com bob@jbllclaw.com October 25, 2013 Merrimack College Attn: Attorney C. Alexa Abowitz, SVP and General Counsel 315 Turnpike Street North Andover, MA 01845 IR oc��0da NOV 1 2013 D BOARD OF APPEALS Re: Illumination of the Volpe Center Signage Dover Amendment Analysis Ladies and Gentlemen: Mark B. Johnson (MA, NH, DC) Donald F. Borenstein (MA, ME, NH) Kristine M. Sheehy (MA) Denise A. Brogna (MA, CA, NH) Lorri S. Gill (MA) Bethany J. RafFa (MA, NH) Michael A. Klass (MA, NH) Nicholas J. Korbas (MA) Kathleen M. Heyer (MA) Of Counsel Robert W. Lavoie (MA, NH) Mary L. Cataudella (MA, Pu) Paralegals Karen L. Bussell Danielle R. Corey Lianne Patenaude Ellen M. Melvin Maria C. Pember As requested, Johnson & Borenstein, LLC has reviewed Merrimack College's proposal to illuminate in a reasonable fashion the two (2) signs which have been installed on the College's newly expanded hockey and sports medicine facilities at the Volpe Center (the "Volpe Center Signs"). As we have discussed, although the College does unquestionably enjoy the benefit of the Dover Amendment (as incorporated into Massachusetts General Laws ("MGL") Chapter 40A, Section 3), the College has had a long history of working cooperatively with the Town of North Andover, particularly when it comes to constructing new facilities, major additions onto existing facilities, and significant rehabilitation of previously .constructed facilities. Our analysis involves two principal areas of review. The first area involves a discussion of the now enlarged Volpe Center and its qualification for inclusion under the College's Dover Amendment status. Our Merrimack College October 25, 2013 Page 2 research confirms that the prevailing law in Massachusetts is that athletic facilities constructed by qualifying educational institutions have unquestionably been afforded appropriate coverage under the Dover Amendment. Our work on this matter also confirms that this is how North Andover and the College have mutually handled previous major athletic facility construction on the College campus. From early on in the interpretation and application of the Dover Amendment, Massachusetts Courts have continuously read and applied the Dover Amendment as including the construction and operation of collegiate level athletic facilities, including without limitation, hockey rinks. Massachusetts Courts early on recognized the important role that intercollegiate athletics plays in the education and development of the Commonwealth's college age students. In fact, the existing hockey rink facilities originally constructed in the Volpe Center, along with the newly expanded Volpe Center, certainly demonstrate the public policy values and public benefits underlying the original adoption and continued operation of the Dover Amendment. As a good neighbor and corporate citizen of North Andover, Merrimack College has made its hockey facilities available for use by North Andover's school age and other populations. This is yet another fine example of the general benefits of the Dover Amendment under which private educational institutions are able to raise and administer the large capital costs of educational and athletic facilities and share them with their host communities. This sharing in turns allows those communities to avoid their taxpayers from having to go out and duplicate, at tremendous taxpayer expense, the capital expense of facilities such as the Volpe Center and its proposed improvements. The second area of analysis our firm was asked to undertake is whether or not Merrimack College's Dover amendment status allows Merrimack College to illuminate the Volpe Center Signs. Like all Massachusetts municipalities, the Town of North Andover is entitled to regulate the eight (8) permissible areas of "bulk and height of structures and determining yard sizes, lot area, setbacks, open space, parking and building coverage requirements" under the Dover Amendment (MGL c.40A, s.3). Based upon the fact that the Town of North Andover has presented Merrimack college with no definitive authority allowing the Town of North Andover to prohibit the illumination of the Volpe Center Signs, it is our current viewpoint that signage is clearly not within the eight (8) permissible areas of "bulk and height of structures and determining yard sizes, lot area, setbacks, open space, parking and building coverage requirements" under the Dover Amendment (MGL c.40A, s.3). The exact wording of the Dover amendment is very clear: the statute clearly does not contain express language allowing municipalities to regulate signage. We trust that the foregoing discussion has been helpful at this time to Merrimack College in connection with this issue. Merrimack College October 25, 2013 Page 3 Should any further information or analysis be desired, please do not hesitate to contact us. Very truly yours, JO N & BORENSTEIN, LLC c Abert a oie RWL/mbf k � ® \ �{ �§m§§ tky»/ U§\j) JOHNSON BORENSTEIN, LLC ATTORNEYS AT LAW 12 Chestnut. Street Andover, MA 01810-3706 Tel: 9787475-4488 Fax: 978-475-6703 www.jbllclaw.com bob@jbllclaw.com Odtober 25, 2013 Merrimack College Atha: Attorney C. Alexa Abowitz, SVP and General Counsel 315 Turnpike Street North Andover, MA 01845 NOV [013 e BOARD OF APPEALS Re: Illumination of the Volpe Center Signage Dover Amendment Analysis Ladies and Gentlemen: Mark B. Johnson (MA, NH, DC) Donald F. Borenstein (MA, ME, NH) Kristine M. Sheehy (MA) Denise A. Brogna (MA, CA, NH) Lord S. Gill (MA) Bethany J. Raffa (MA, NH) Michael A. Klass (MA, NH) Nicholas J. Korbas (MA) Kathleen M. Heyer (MA) Of Counsel Robert W. Lavoie (MA, NH) Mary L. Cataudella (MA,, Rl) Paralegals Karen L. Bussell Danielle R. Corey Lianne Patenaude Ellen M. Melvin Maria C. Pember As requested, Johnson & Borenstein, LLC has reviewed Merrimack College's proposal to illuminate in a reasonable fashion the two (2) signs which have been installed on the College's newly expanded hockey and sports medicine facilities at the Volpe Center (the "Volpe Center Signs"). As we have discussed, although the College does unquestionably enjoy the benefit of the Dover Amendment (as incorporated into Massachusetts General Laws ("MGL") Chapter 40A, Section 3), the College has had a long history of working cooperatively with the Town of North Andover, particularly when it comes to constructing new facilities, major additions onto existing facilities, and significant rehabilitation of previously constructed facilities. Our analysis involves two principal areas of review. The first area involves a discussion of the now enlarged Volpe Center and its qualification for inclusion under the College's Dover Amendment status. Our Merrimack College October 25, 2013 Page 2 research confirms that the prevailing law in Massachusetts is that athletic facilities constructed by qualifying educational institutions have unquestionably been afforded appropriate coverage under the Dover Amendment. Our work on this matter also confirms that this is how North Andover and the College have mutually handled previous major athletic facility construction on the College campus. From early on in the interpretation and application of the Dover Amendment, Massachusetts Courts have continuously read and applied the Dover Amendment as including the construction and operation of collegiate level athletic facilities, including without limitation, hockey rinks. Massachusetts Courts early on recognized the important role that intercollegiate athletics plays in the education and development of the Commonwealth's college age students. In fact, the existing hockey rink facilities originally constructed in the Volpe Center, along with the newly expanded Volpe Center, certainly demonstrate the public policy values and public benefits underlying the original adoption and continued operation of the Dover Amendment. As a good neighbor and corporate citizen of North Andover, Merrimack College has made its hockey facilities available for use by North Andover's school age and other populations. This is yet another fine example of the general benefits of the Dover Amendment under which private educational institutions are able to raise and administer the large capital costs of educational and athletic facilities and share them with their host communities. This sharing in turns allows those communities to avoid their taxpayers from having to go out and duplicate, at tremendous taxpayer expense, the capital expense of facilities such as the Volpe Center and its proposed improvements. The second area of analysis our firm was asked to undertake is whether or not Merrimack College's Dover amendment status allows Merrimack College to illuminate the Volpe Center Signs. Like all Massachusetts municipalities, the Town of North Andover is entitled to regulate the eight (8) permissible areas of "bulk and height of structures and determining yard sizes, lot area, setbacks, open space, parking and building coverage requirements" under the Dover Amendment (MGL c.40A, s.3). Based upon the fact that the Town of North Andover has presented Merrimack college with no definitive authority allowing the Town of North Andover to prohibit the illumination of the Volpe Center Signs, it is our current viewpoint that signage is clearly not within the eight (8) permissible areas of "bulk and height of structures and determining yard sizes, lot area, setbacks, open space, parking and building coverage requirements" under the Dover Amendment (MGL c.40A, s.3). The exact wording of the Dover amendment is very clear: the statute clearly does not contain express language allowing municipalities to regulate signage. We trust that the foregoing discussion has been helpful at this time to Merrimack College in connection with this issue. Merrimack College October 25, 2013 Page 3 Should any further information or analysis be desired, please do not hesitate to contact us. Very truly yours, JOH>SON & BORENSTEIN, LLC *bert a oie RWL/mbf Ciofolo, Angela From: Maylor, Andrew Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 2:42 PM To: attymanzi@manzilaw.net Cc: Ciofolo, Angela; Bellavance, Curt; Thomas J. Urbelis; Brown, Gerald Al, As you know Merrimack is withdrawing their request for a variance. I can't imagine they don't have that right. This now becomes a matter for the zoning enforcement officer as to whether Dover applies regarding their new signage. My preference in matters involving Dover is to have the entity seeking Dover relief specify why think its applicable and have town counsel determine if it is appropriate so that the building inspector doesn't have to make legal judgments. With this in mind I responded to Felipe's email this morning with a request that he provide such an opinion from their attorney. When I receive that information I plan on providing it to Tom so that he can advise Gerry on how to proceed. If they do not comply with my request, Gerry will have to make a decision on whether Dover applies and town counsel may be asked to weigh in. Regards, Andrew W. Maylor Town Manager Town of North Andover 120 Main Street North Andover, MA 01845 Phone 978.688.9510 Fax 978.688.9556 Email amaylor@townofnorthandover.com Web www.TownofNorthAndover.com Please note the Massachusetts Secretary of State's office has determined that most emails to and from municipal offices and officials are public records. For more information please refer to: htto://www.sec.state.ma.us/ore/l)reidx.htm. Please consider the environment before printing this email. 1 Merriumack . f nY'rr- C Q L L Ero; G E North Andover, Massachusetts 01845, 978-837-5000 November 7, 2013 Dear Zoning Board of Appeals Members, The College seeks to withdraw, without prejudice, its variance request from Section 6.2 Signage the North Andover zoning bylaw. This matter was presented to the Zoning Board of Appeals on Tuesday October 8, 2013. Based on opinion from counsel, the College believes that the Dover amendment applies to this issue. The Dover Amendment carves out eight (8) permissible areas of regulation: "bulk and height of structures and determining yard sizes, lot area, setbacks, open space, parking and building coverage requirements." (M.G.L. c.40A S 3.) The statute does not contain express language allowing municipalities to regulate signage. Consequently, as it has done so in the past, the College will be guided by the spirit and language of the Dover Amendment, and will install and operate tasteful signage throughout the campus in the manner the College deems most appropriate. As always, the College appreciates its cooperative relationship with the Town and the partnership that we have built together. We trust this resolution will be in keeping with those principles. If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me on campus at (978) 837-5459 or via email (schwa rzf@merrimack.edu). Thank you. Sincerely, F#ippe hwarz, 1CP Assistant Vice President, Externa! Affairs cc: Andrew Maylor, Town Manager Curt Bellavance, Director of Division of Community Development Gerald Brown, Inspector of Buildings Ciofolo, Angela From: Maylor, Andrew Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 9:33 AM To: Schwarz, Felipe; Brown, Gerald; Ciofolo, Angela Cc: Bellavance, Curt Subject: RE: Merrimack College - Withdrawal Letter for ZBA Felipe, As I expressed in our telephone conversation, an opinion from your counsel as to the applicability of Dover should accompany your decision to withdraw the request for a variance. Please note, that the college is not being singled out in this regard. Recently, a religious organization referenced Dover in regards work being done at their facility and they provided a letter explaining the applicability of the Dover Amendment in that case. Regards, Andrew W. Maylor Town Manager Town of North Andover 120 Main Street North Andover, MA 01845 Phone 978.688.9510 Fax 978.688.9556 Email amavlorCo)townofnorthandover.com Web www.TownofNorthAndover.com From: Schwarz, Felipe[ma iIto: schwa rzKabmerrimack.edu] Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 9:23 AM To: Brown, Gerald; Ciofolo, Angela Cc: Maylor, Andrew; Bellavance, Curt Subject: Merrimack College - Withdrawal Letter for ZBA Gerry and Angela, Good morning. The College has decided to withdraw our variance request. Attached is our formal letter to the Board; I will put it in the mail too. You've very helpful through this process and I appreciate all your work. Thank you. Felipe R. Schwarz, AICP Assistant Vice President, External Affairs Merrimack College 315 Turnpike Street North Andover, MA 01845 (978) 837-5459 office (978) 857-1845 mobile schwarzf@merrimack.edu Please note the Massachusetts Secretary of State's office has determined that most emails to and from municipal offices and officials are public records. For more information please refer to: http://www.sec.state.ma.us/pre/preidx.htm. Please consider the environment before printing this email. 2 Ciofolo, Angela From: Albert P. Manzi III [attymanzi@manzi law. net] Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2013 8:12 AM To: Thomas Urbelis; Brown, Gerald; Bellavance, Curt; Maylor, Andrew; Ellen McIntyre Cc: Ciofolo, Angela Subject: ZBA. At the Nov 12 2013 regular meeting of the ZBA, the ZBA voted to: 1. Continue Merrimack College petition to the December meeting; 2) Engage Town Counsel and authorize the Chairman to work with Town Counsel on behalf of the ZBA with respect to the Merrimack College petition. Regards, APM III, Chairman Attorney Albert P. Manzi III Tel. 978-681-6618 Fax. 978-681-6628 Cell. 978-771-1553 www.manzilaw.net Please note the Massachusetts Secretary of State's office has determined that most emails to and from municipal offices and officials are public records. For more information please refer to: http://www.sec.state.ma.us/pre/preidx.htm. Please consider the environment before printing this email. I John T. Smolak, Esq. Smolak & Vaughan 21 High Street, Suite 301 North Andover, MA 01845 RE: North Parish Church Renovation and Addition Project Dear Attorney Smolak: As you identified in your June 7, 2013 letter, the proposed project would have a side yard setback of 8 feet, while the North Andover Zoning Bylaw requires 20 feet. As you know, the burden is upon the Church to prove that the local zoning requirements unreasonably impact the religious use. See Trustees of Tufts College v. City of Medford, 415 Mass. 753 (1993). The reasonableness of the local zoning requirement "will depend on the particular facts of each case." See Martin v. The Corporation of the Presiding Bishops of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter -Day Saints, 434 Mass. 141, 150 (2001). Therefore, could you please provide me with all of the "particular facts" relating to this proposed project which are applicable with regard to the impact of the local zoning requirements upon your client's religious use. Very truly yours, Gerald Brown Building Commissioner 1.16Freetown v. 'Zoning Bd. of Appeals of Dartmouth, 33 Mass. App. Ct. 415 (1992). 117 Planning Bd. of Braintree v. Department of Pub. Util., 420 Mass. 22, 26-27 (1995). The Court granted the exemption even though the department was not a "corporation." "[The) concern for public service applies to all utilities, not just those operated by corporations." ~t 118 Planning Bd. of Braintree v. Department of Pub. Util., 420 Mass. 22, 31 (1995). [ ? 119 USGen New.England, Inc., D.T.E. No.: 03-83 (2004). "O.P.U. 95-59B (Jan. 8, 1998). r; ;<.121See § 12.10[Kl, infra, for a review of such facilities. r. 122 Save the Bay, 366 Mass, at 678. " `Substantial.evidence' means such evidence as a reasonable mind might acce t as adequate to support a .conclusion." Mass. Gen. L. ch. 30A, 1 6 See g R 9 PP § O• y Martorano v. Department of Pub. Util., 401 Mass. 257 (1987), for an excellent example of the application of this standard. See also Planning Bd. of Braintree v. Deparnnent of Pub. Util., 420 sr` 'Mass, 22, 30 31 (1995),which contains a description of the procedures to be employed by the r department at the hearing. 4 12 As used in this paragraph, the term "child care facility" shall mean a day care center or a school-age child care program, defined as, a "child care center" in Mass. Gen. L. ch. 15D, s. IA. 4�`i 12445 Mass. App. Ct, 818 (1998). 137 pogow $11%) 4.09 CHILD CARE FACILITIES EXEMPTIONS AND IMMUNITY § 4.09 i h [ Mass. Gen. L.ch. 40A, § 3 provides that: }y( 1- j "y :d 72 [n]o zoning ordinance or bylaw in any city or town shall prohibit, or require a to .j solid waste facility,116 and a municipal electric department.117 The exemption ng G �' under statute. may be obtained even post-construction:118 The Department of to ' _ r3 Public Utilities/De artment of Telecommunications and Energy has qualified an p tai regulations concerning and of structures and .. emissions control .project at an existing electricity general plant."' In Dispatch n. d= f. Communications of New England dIb/a Nextel Communications, Inc.,120 the he This provision was added by 1990 Mass. Acts 521. This act also added Mass. Department of Public Utilities reconsidered an. earlier decision and determined q+ ut 41. that providers of commercial mobile radio services were public service corpora - sonable regulations permitted by the exemption. In Petrucci v. Board of Appeals of i' 7- tions entitled to the protection offered by Mass. Gen. L. ch. 40A, § 3 121 Westwood324. the A eats Courtiulecl that a child care ficili is entitled to the �, On judicial review, the Court must decide -whether the determination of the same:protection afforded to religious and educational uses under § 3:'Thus, a child: `fit r ; ' ; Department of Public Works is "unsupported by substantial evidence," as set forth 4 in Mass, Gen. L. eh. 30A, § 14(7)(e).122 1.16Freetown v. 'Zoning Bd. of Appeals of Dartmouth, 33 Mass. App. Ct. 415 (1992). 117 Planning Bd. of Braintree v. Department of Pub. Util., 420 Mass. 22, 26-27 (1995). The Court granted the exemption even though the department was not a "corporation." "[The) concern for public service applies to all utilities, not just those operated by corporations." ~t 118 Planning Bd. of Braintree v. Department of Pub. Util., 420 Mass. 22, 31 (1995). [ ? 119 USGen New.England, Inc., D.T.E. No.: 03-83 (2004). "O.P.U. 95-59B (Jan. 8, 1998). r; ;<.121See § 12.10[Kl, infra, for a review of such facilities. r. 122 Save the Bay, 366 Mass, at 678. " `Substantial.evidence' means such evidence as a reasonable mind might acce t as adequate to support a .conclusion." Mass. Gen. L. ch. 30A, 1 6 See g R 9 PP § O• y Martorano v. Department of Pub. Util., 401 Mass. 257 (1987), for an excellent example of the application of this standard. See also Planning Bd. of Braintree v. Deparnnent of Pub. Util., 420 sr` 'Mass, 22, 30 31 (1995),which contains a description of the procedures to be employed by the r department at the hearing. 4 12 As used in this paragraph, the term "child care facility" shall mean a day care center or a school-age child care program, defined as, a "child care center" in Mass. Gen. L. ch. 15D, s. IA. 4�`i 12445 Mass. App. Ct, 818 (1998). 137 pogow $11%) 4.09 CHILD CARE FACILITIES i h [ Mass. Gen. L.ch. 40A, § 3 provides that: }y( 1- j "y :d { 4 A, [n]o zoning ordinance or bylaw in any city or town shall prohibit, or require a to .j i *` special permit for, the use of land or structures or the expansion of existing , t structures for the primary accessory or incidental purpose of operating a child t'' care facility; 123 provided, however, that such land or structures may be subject to reasonable the bulk height y 4, regulations concerning and of structures and - determining yard sizes, lot area, setbacks, open space, parking and building coverage requirements. This provision was added by 1990 Mass. Acts 521. This act also added Mass. (len. L. ch. 40A, § 9C, which prescribes standards for the application of the rea- sonable regulations permitted by the exemption. In Petrucci v. Board of Appeals of _ F Westwood324. the A eats Courtiulecl that a child care ficili is entitled to the same:protection afforded to religious and educational uses under § 3:'Thus, a child: 1.16Freetown v. 'Zoning Bd. of Appeals of Dartmouth, 33 Mass. App. Ct. 415 (1992). 117 Planning Bd. of Braintree v. Department of Pub. Util., 420 Mass. 22, 26-27 (1995). The Court granted the exemption even though the department was not a "corporation." "[The) concern for public service applies to all utilities, not just those operated by corporations." ~t 118 Planning Bd. of Braintree v. Department of Pub. Util., 420 Mass. 22, 31 (1995). [ ? 119 USGen New.England, Inc., D.T.E. No.: 03-83 (2004). "O.P.U. 95-59B (Jan. 8, 1998). r; ;<.121See § 12.10[Kl, infra, for a review of such facilities. r. 122 Save the Bay, 366 Mass, at 678. " `Substantial.evidence' means such evidence as a reasonable mind might acce t as adequate to support a .conclusion." Mass. Gen. L. ch. 30A, 1 6 See g R 9 PP § O• y Martorano v. Department of Pub. Util., 401 Mass. 257 (1987), for an excellent example of the application of this standard. See also Planning Bd. of Braintree v. Deparnnent of Pub. Util., 420 sr` 'Mass, 22, 30 31 (1995),which contains a description of the procedures to be employed by the r department at the hearing. 4 12 As used in this paragraph, the term "child care facility" shall mean a day care center or a school-age child care program, defined as, a "child care center" in Mass. Gen. L. ch. 15D, s. IA. 4�`i 12445 Mass. App. Ct, 818 (1998). 137 pogow $11%) s § 4.10 MASSACHUSETTS LAND USE AND PLANNING LAW care facility cannot be"subjected to a special permit�t z5 or sit e plan review; nor sari a`a`. facility be required to obtain a variance:`1Vltireover, resort to Mass Gen. L -ch: 40A, § 6, where the facility is proposed in a nonconforming structure, is not required. However, a municipality is free to impose reasonable local dimensional regula- tions, borrowing the test from Trustees of Tufts College v. City of Medford.127 For �t ; example, in Rogers v. Town ofNorfolk,1�8 the Supreme Judicial Court ruled that a zoning bylaw imposing a "footprint" limitation of 2,500 square feet was facially �'N valid. . § 4.10 DISCRIMINATION AGAINST DISABLED PERSONS Mass. Gen. L. ch. 40A, § 3 provides: <. Notwithstanding any :general or special law to the contrary; local land use and } health and safety laws, regulations, practices, ordinances, by-laws and deci- sions of a city or town shall not discriminate against a disabled person. impo- sition of health and safety laws or land -use requirements on congregate living arrangements among non -related persons with disabilities that are not imposed on families and groups of similar size or other unrelated persons shall consti- tute discrimination.129 This provision .was added by 1989 Mass. Acts 106. There are no reported t° decisions interpreting the exemption. However, it is likely that the scope of the exemption tracks the protection offered by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C., s. 12132, and the Fair Housing Act Amendments. (FHAA), 42, E U.S.C., S. 3604(f)(1)(b). "o t § 4.11 FAMILY CHILD CARE HOME Mass. Gen. L. ch. 40A, § 3 provides that a "[fJamily child care home and large family child care home, as defined in section IA of chapter 15D, shall be an allowable use unless a city or town prohibits or specifically regulates such use inits tzs However, the Land Court has ruled that where the child care facility will be situated in a new structure, rather than an existing structure as in Petrucci, a special permit may be locally required. This result turns on the words "or the expansion of existing structures" in the statute. The trial judge noted that similar language in the exemption for agricultural uses has.been interpreted by the appeals court to.permit local regulation. See Campbell v. Town of weymouth, Misc. Case No. 237269 (Land Ct. 1998). 126 Petrucci, 45 Mass. App. Ct. at 824: " 117 415 Mass. 753(1993). See § 4.01. 128432 Mass. 374, 383r' (..000). The Court also ruled that, as:applied to the proposed facility the limitation was: unreasonably restrictive because it significantly impeded the use.of the premises fora 4 SZ child care facility, td. at 385. The provisions of this amara h apply to ever cit or town, including,but not limited to, P b P PP Y Y city of Boston and the city of Cambridge. , sc. t 30See Granada House, Inc. V. City of Boston, C.A. No.: 96-6624-E (Suffolk Super. Ct. 1994.Zc 138 COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS APPEALS COURT OS -P-1.134 BAY FARM M014TEssORI ACADEMY, INC. VS. TOWN OF DUKBURY &- others . ' MEMORANDUM AND ORDER PURSUA14T TO RULE 1:28 Bay Farm Montessori Academy, Inc. (Bay Farm), is a nonprofit educational institution: As such, it falls under the protection of G. L. c. 40A, § 3, inserted by Sb. 1975, c. 808, § 3 (Dover Amendment), which provides: "No .zoning ordinance or by-law shall prohibit.,, regulate or -restrict the use -'f land or structures for . educational purposes ori. ' land owned 'or leased by a nonprofit educational corporation; provided, however, that such land or structures may be,subject to reasonable regulations concerning the bulk and height of structures, and determining yard sizes, lot area, setbacks, open space,. parkng'and.building coverage requirements." Bay Farm sought to construct a new athletic/multipurpose building and .a new academic building on'its existing campus in Duxhury.a. 'it applied to the planning board (board) for the town. i Planning. Board of Duxbury, David-Tearse, Selden Tearse, Mark Dunn.,: Kathy' Dunn, -Warren Richards, Christine Richards, Jay Cook, Kim Cook, Theresa Courtiss, and Kristen Boonisar', interveners, The interveners all are immediate abutters to Bay Farm.. 2 Bay Farm lacked indoor space for athletic. and theater arts programming, all -school assemblies, school social events, and graduation, ceremonies. Also, Bay Farm decided to construct a new academic building because .its current building was 150 years old, was difficult to maintain, and was no longer adequate to satisfy included anew its needs for academic space. The expansion plan �x of Dukbury .(bowfl) for site Plan approval, even though, Per the Dover Amendment, i* t did not believe it was required to do so. .After several public, meetings, ther boa, a denied Bay Farm s .aPPlicatioft.bas'ed. on Duxbuty,.s site plan review by-law (by-law). -The de.nial"of site plan approval tecluded Bay Farm arm from be . ginning its construction. Pursuant '_ to G. L. c. 40A, 9 17, Day Farm filed a three -count complaint in the Land court, appealing from the boards denial Of its application, in two separate decisions, the judge -!9;t;azitea_ summary judgment to Bay Farm on count I and count I:E.Iof the complaint. The town the b6ardi and the interveners (c011ectiVely, defendants) appeal. Discussion. The defendants challenge the :ju**dgerp determination that the by-law was facia1l.Y invalid when applied to an exempt use under the Dover Amendment They argue, collectively, that.. (1) the by-law was a valid exercise of municipal power,. (2) the judge should havedone a fact -specific analysis on the reasonableness of the by-law'8 regulations ih light of the Dover Amendment, and (3) Bay p arm's complaint should have. been dismissed for failure to exhaust a . dministrative .remedies. A. PLikbuty-site plan review 12y-laW. Section 615 of Duxbury, s site plan review by-law applies to educational institutions, like Bay Farm; and requires them to obtain -site parking and traffic circulation plan. 2 plan approval under certain circumstances listed in the b Y law. r in making its decision here, the board applied -the by-law to the. , activities and uses covered under the Dover Amendment-, As the w� judge determ%ned,.this was improper. under The...Bible Speaks v, Board of A eels of Lenox, 8 Mass. A PP. Ct. 19 x1979) . There, we'.'. quashed a by -lacy that required site plan review for educational uses. The .Bible Sneaks, su ra at 34 (declaring that "those portions .. of the Lenox zoning by=law which impose the { requirements of a site plan, informational statement, and special permit before religious'.and educational institutions can expand their uses are in -Valid"). The rationale for that Bolding, t applicable here, was two'fold.. 'First, "'there( was] -nothing in - the language of G. L.. c. 4.0A, 9 3, which contemplates the requirement of site plans and informational statements as monitoring devices. for educational uses.Id, at 32. Second, these site plan requirements 'invest the board with a considerable measure of discretionary authority over an. educational i.nstitutionIs use of. its facilities and create a scheme of -land use regulations for•such•institutions which -is - antithetical to the limitations on municipal zoning power in this area prescribed by C. L. C. 40A, § 3.11 Id. at 33. See Trustees of Tufts Col_lec e_ V. Me_ dfOra., 41.5 Mass, 7S3,.7-65 (1993) (citing. The Bible Speaks, s_ pra, in holding .that the Land Court judge - Properly declared invalid the site.plan and sp-ecial permit 3 requirements of the ordinance as applied to any future, unspecified projects On Tufts cam us See also trustees of Boston e e V. Aldermen of Newto 58 Mass . .-App. Ct.. 194, 802 (.2003), While the defendants are correct that neither of these two bases quashed a site Plan revie�r provision that did not exist in Connection with a special permit requirement,.the judge here properly noted that the deertdants failed to point to an procedent-that suggests that a site Plan ProVisiorf'on'it8 own might be va" Ild In any event, we need not address the question whether under the'Dovet'Amendment, a site plan provision -might P& . ss muster in the con -text Of a different by-law scheme that is consistent with reasonable regulation relating to . -an educational use., i.e.,. One.t hat is limited to.11the bulk and height of structures and determining Yard sizes lot area, setbacks, open space, parlcing and building coverage, C. 40A, § 3.3 As this case has been presented to us, it has not been shown that the judge erred in granting summarY,judgmpnt to Bay Farm, or in observing that `[t1he legitimate municipal concerns manifested in local zoning by-laws are Properly served 3 We neednot address Day Farm's alt0rnati�re argument that the by-law is invalid because it imposes unreasonable . cret'onary-regulation. See Trustees of Tufts College v.* Medfor , 9UP—ra at 75-9-760.' �74, 378 (20-0o). ' ' h See also MO-tf-01k., 43.2 Mass. In their briefing here, the addressed or countered this defendants have -not i.6 argument with any . specificity., 4' y the involvement of. the zoning enforcement officer, rather than he exercise of discretion by an elected or appointed board." B. Exhaustion of administrative remedies.. The defendants, ist argument is that, pursuant to G: L. c. 40A, § 7, before bringing a ,case in the Land Court, Bay Farm should have filed .for a permit with the town's building inspector and then filed an appeal to the zoning board of appeals if the building inspector failed to grant them a permit. We disagree. The Land Court judge. had jurisdiction. under G. L. c, 40A § 17, to annul the board's decision and it was proper for Bay Farm to'directly appeal the decision to that court. See uinc .v. .Planning Bd. of Tewksbu�, 39 Mass. App. Ct. 17, 20 (1995) (Land Court had jurisdiction over property owner's appeal from town planning board's denial of request for site plan approval of a proposed shopping'eentez• expansion despite the fact that owner did not appeal. decision to town Is board of appeals). Judtzment affirmed. By the Court (Cohen, katzmann & Grainger, JJ,), Clerk Entered: September 16, 2009. ^A: """�.. ,"o-''�._..'�fi�:,; t"�t.. K�_;_�'?�„�,�,..f6:: S'�z..�.�'.�..- r�: YA'' .�.,aui. `..'irfir.�:.','C'�t". '.'.•2:.r..,. ?x�wo,+.x:.�:`+� ;:r:.G-4.. ,..'';._x ;:?�. ,�i� ^T^'.�:;"1 Fa ,.,..•...;'p, �°�';.^t•^.,;.,.R. '5,,.^•'fie .sly... ..n:e�a., 00 ON -; 00 co U. Cz. d Vi v V -C C rn bn ca U ai tn ei v ( > U O O ^ U ' --+ U .,• �, e� O .cd >, in U O w y I- v c w �. '� L p y chi .w c— '44 R. U•: Clr �' L= 3 n .moo v`o^y G} yj •-� O .. .+ V ' F C t• �.-� to t7 t3 Q O ccSLrU y rw d^nO r=. - - py '-oo0C U > vC o U vDOr sG o a n a cd i ."�. y n 'in u ^ C Cd y h � y o • n O O U O N '�j O_^ = c u� u cd U f p C c p 7 v o vCl cjC:'� ' •� 4::''�% C� .-� y c7 U O 6 ^ncl fabU O f3: N t7 N O O" ur O td uO .Ma�' vOff •^,0O wQk3 O`uatds: . �au1 mo 54 r- 0?sD�^rs ,0. � O ?71�.->a�^0 d�'_ O'D�w�t �cn 0) U � a c .0^n�y0 • iv w "CD o 'jvtG W 4) z cs C. nn cn4 r' o <d '- - O i B O ^ to -ocO Dr o nM��ny ci ' 5 '� M C p ,•nd � � ..O ��. v c � � O p ' H � � •� .O � � � � o .^ ci N � b a >, � a O¢ o al cn b0 eV t; u` k cC U • "�' ,~^', O\ 'V O U ... y "' ,.' Z'.— . O �., O, chi _ 41 r V p o- N O 4-i t� :7 .L U C ,U., }., 4 E' �. •Q�7 F" � .V� yt� �V uU �O �w:� .Ot..+ .�3. pOti .flN cUv01 'CoOO) f •�^+ + cJ v O bo EOti'•: CCn 0 p •t':4�7LU > C" cd y a oo" V . U t� 'C) O :C oo ;� •� • = p � v .fl 3-+ 04 N w U C2. W ,'a, � V :d0 o as (i :d O � cd " O c�3' V cOi @ O .L ~ .� p p O In p %c) 0 •� P� .f] C N yC's �� Q C •~ 0 O tz '4 `v' 0 yo El ri mo o. cn I ... 6n •��„ NIU '• �' L 0 v so. ;30 w :Lj w R b Dn N N 3 e� o w t` 1. y �.' o C O V U O yU.. `'� :n o `n � 'L o-) co cz 03 p O tr;g °r')Go"bL?onQc.u��aw� ��yuo �oa. C y e:, p= O A 'U., L' 0, = L^ it V `G V "� i V= cJs C •� raw, L 3 2 v s O� w m T U 0 o U � o i? v n• ib U O id O U M 'U �j• > cn O v y id 't1 c01 __ _ L p p `O' G GO fM' tTJJ U 9? _ c3 O p ii, +,�' fJ 3 Ws U „�,� "'� < U ' fry. .�J' 4. O 'tf "'•'. .N. U cd y _C +^•a l'3 .� VO' U cl C o y U 'isU 'y s. O •• U v •� ci,• U .tti a; '� .. UvU3vd-0=2o v3' -S o--00vnvr.t— .4u M4,us p r`.. y ' 0.d G s'U v " .- O c) J- u n U o ' cj RE u � e A s. y a ro rj C'C. l _t cn 3S00 D > .� e0ia .rLw.n °a'—Yj`"�o3a> fesR, tnr, '+ N C i 0. s v 12 In addition, the "informational statement' also requires the edu- � �{ rational institution to include an assessment of the probable impact r of its project on attendance in the public schools, increase in vehicular z traffic, increases in municipal service costs, load on public utilities or $j ublic safety, police and fire protection, the future demand for them, p , changes. in surface drainage, increased consumption of water and in- � u crease in refuse disposal. is The special exception provisions of the by-law are set forth in note 6, supra. aO #� (419 8 Mass. App. Ct.19 x 32 The Bible Speaks u. Board of Appeals of Lenox. " K master plan of the town, ... [or] any pertinent def ; ... regional plans."'ZThe requirement.of_a siteplan•and`thej y l.w.-.. ..--.. _..:Y pe of development prospec required by the informs - for itytus tional statement would be perfectly appropriate con- of proposed subdivisions under the Subdivision h b sideration Control Law, G. L. c. 41, § 81K et seq., or for the evalu; developments under the _ ation of cluster and planned unit zoning law, G. L. c; 40A, § 9, as appearing in c- 808,'§ 3. Y But there is nothing in the language of G. L.' c. 40A, § 3, E which contemplates the requirement of site plans and informational statements as monitoring devices for edu- rational uses, and it is quite obvious that an educational campus of the type under consideration in this case is neither a subdivision nor a project in the category of a cluster or planned unit development.. Section 9.18 in its of all of the reasonable .. s entirety goes beyond a collation bulk and dimensional requirements which a by-law can, legitimately impose on educational buildings and dis- hal tricts.'u The full impact of the requirements of § 9.18 must also be appraised in light of the provisions of § 6 of the by-law,, as the plaintiffs,ti which :makes educational uses, such dependent on the discretionary grant special exceptions By reliance of a spboard."on the permit by the board. r spelled out in the informational statement, the u =i criteria board is essentially attempting to exercise planning its own notions of land use e board functions and pursuing that those notions become F planning, and to the extent inconsistent with the presence or expansion of education-� 12 In addition, the "informational statement' also requires the edu- � �{ rational institution to include an assessment of the probable impact r of its project on attendance in the public schools, increase in vehicular z traffic, increases in municipal service costs, load on public utilities or $j ublic safety, police and fire protection, the future demand for them, p , changes. in surface drainage, increased consumption of water and in- � u crease in refuse disposal. is The special exception provisions of the by-law are set forth in note 6, supra. aO #� (419 The Board recognizes that in these particular circumstances, Merrimack College is an educational use as related to the so-called "Dover Amendment" contained in Mass. General Laws Chapter 40A, Section 3. The reasonableness of the zoning requirement in question as related to the Dover Amendment depends "on the particular facts of each case." See Martin v. The Corporation of the PresidingBishops ishops of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter -Da Ste, 434 Mass. 141, 150 (2001). The particular facts of this case are unique. The two signs in question have already been installed on Merrimack College's newly expanded hockey and sports medicine facilities at the Volpe Center. The variance request is to the internal illumination prohibition in Section 6.5.1 of the Zoning Bylaw for those existing signs. The signs are not adjacent to a public way, highway or private way. They face inward toward the campus and parking lot. Their illumination would not cause a distraction or annoyance to abutters or to persons operating motor vehicles on or off campus. There is no apparent public safety hazard caused by the illumination of the signs. The Board has received no opposition to this variance application. Therefore, in consideration of the particular factual circumstances here, the Board grants the variance from Section 6.5.1 for the two existing signs on the Volpe Center. a Town of forth Andover Town Clerk'rye Stamp ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS i%Aw.. ✓lfat zi 999, 6q C'&&m= �i6 ✓ ✓jifC9i1�YC, �%ICPr�J/lmllYE MW ezme'42 17eice� ✓lfrurganifEa�' pORTH q Q '11,eo '6*ati O o TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER — ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO G.L. c. 39, SECTION 23D OF PARTICIPATION IN A SESSION OF AN ADJUDICATORY HEARING WHERE THE UNDERSIGNED MEMBER MISSED A SINGLE HEARING SESSION [Note: Can only be used for missing one single hearing session; cannot be used for missing more than one hearing session.] " ` k6lk l " (name), hereby certify as follows: I am a member of said board. 2. I missed a hearing session on the matter of (!!l ice,, Ahld f I'C KLon f'4 which was held on DG f F, RD/ 3. 3. I reviewed all the evidence introduced at the hearing session I missed, which included a review of (initial which one(s) are applicable): a. b. audio recording of the missed hearing session; video recording of the missed hearing session, a transcript of the missed hearing session. This certification shall become apart of the record of the proceedings in the above matter. Signed this �_ day of ,/1JVWP '— ,20 Received as part o • e ecord of the above matter: Date: �! By: Position: 1600 Osgood Street, Building 20 - Suite 2035. North Andover, Massachusetts 01845 Phone - 978-688-9541 Fax - 978-688-9542 Web - xNtivw.townofiiorthandover.com Town of North Andover Town Clerk'rime Stamp ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MA ✓ tamza 99.!, oaf- G' & ffm 9&&*d'9 9#M-1 6q- A Y'UdXMhA, 6q. Qe�aeurle ✓yle�nr� ./llic/faeB.% ,�iponfa wW ✓f&rgarrtffa8 1=06W ,Lr 4hz RT14 TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER — ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO G.L. c. 39, SECTION 23D OF PARTICIPATION IN A SESSION OF AN ADJUDICATORY HEARING WHERE THE UNDERSIGNED MEMBER MISSED A SINGLE HEARING SESSION [Note: Can only be used for missing one single hearing session; cannot be used for missing more than one hearing session.] I,1D 4� ame), hereby certify as follows: I am a member of said board. 2. I missed a hearing session on the matter of a�'f, 1 4 �V !/f/l/6f�C ��on �r which was held on OC go/ 3.- I reviewed all the evidence introduced at the hearing session I missed, which included a review of (initial which one(s) are applicable): a. b. C. audio recording of the missed hearing session; video recording of the missed hearing session; a transcript of the missed hearing session. This certification shall become apart of the record of the proceedings in the above matter. Signed this day of —,204 Received as part of the record of the above matter: - Date: �l 11112-- 3„ l _ LN Position: 1600 Osgood Street, Building 20 - Suite 2035. North Andover, Massachusetts 01845 Phone - 978-688-9541 Fax - 978-688-9542 Web - www.townofiiorthandover.com Town of North Andover ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Albert P. Manzi III, Esq. Chairman°F sty■° "ti Associate Members Ellen P. McIntyre, Vice -Chairman o= ° '` °°� Michael P. Liporto Richard J. Byers, Esq. Clerk '' p Doug Ludgin D. Paul Koch Jr., Esq. Deney Morganthal Allan Cuscia *�,, OR,T! � r•,�,�h Zoning Enforcement 0 �er Sso�.,sE Gerald Brown Legal Notice Notice is hereby given that the North Andover Board of Appeals will hold a public hearing in the North Andover Town Hall, 120 Main Street, North Andover, MA on Tuesday, October 8th, 2013, at 7:30pm to all parties interested in the petition of Merrimack College, Volpe Athletic Center for property located in the R-3 Zoning District at 315 Turnpike Street (Map 025/ Lot 21), North Andover, MA 01845. The Petitioner is proposing 2 signs at the Volpe Athletic Center. The provisions of Section "6.5 Prohibitions: 1 No signs shall be lit except by steady stationary light, shielded and directed solely at the sign. Internally illuminated signs are prohibited. A Variance is required from the Zoning Board of Appeals. . Application and supporting materials are available for review at the office of the Zoning Department located at 1600 Osgood Street, North Andover, MA, Monday, Wednesday and Thursday from the hours of 8:00-400, Tuesday from the hours of 800-5:30 and Friday from 8:00 to 11:30. Published in the Eagle Tribune on: September 24, 2013 October 1, 2013 By order of the Board of Appeals Albert P. Manzi III, Esq., Chairman cm�o�QWmo-•oomdDoo omamD=.a<D ,TM_ m09-000aocS�'N_DCON+°NOO-JN7NIRCNOa Z 1'�c�Ca°»miaViO m.,� 0ri 0 0 .0-00, o0�° �°`cN US om—o_wm°00.3Z�acoo . aoo .�3mmVmN�_.N DmmmmmDr �o o3�o�a�=� j9p�.i�o!oco sD 3 m,a®� 0 3 ° �' m ^m -<: o roNm$m wom 3� Dm m-0 ao o� 3g� �mv,v =oioo �vmw vo zm �cn ova �� inns - c �'DCD cl= �n m _ Cn 21 W ovsi acs9m+� m4?o3?mN Wim'=om0@0 --- -- �° INV = m NORTi1 Ati Zoning Bylaw Denial { p Town Of North Andover Building Department - �- 400 Osgood St. North Andover, MA. 01845 SSACH�S�` Phone 978-688-9545 Fax 978-688-9542 Street: U Ma /Lot: , ©O/ IoPtr�^ Applicant: c E ,' E kvaaf Request: ,,' �^ s,• Date: Piease be advised that after review of your Application and Plans that your Application is DENIED for the following Zoning Bylaw reasons: Zoning Remedy for the above is checked below. Item # Special Permits Planning Board Item Notes Site Plan Review Special Permit Item Notes A Lot Area F Frontage 1 Lot area Insufficient 1 Frontage Insufficient 2 Lot Area Preexisting 2 Frontage Complies 3 Lot Area Complies 3 Preexisting frontage 4 Insufficient Information 4 Insufficient Information B Use 5 No access over Frontage 1 Allowed G Contiguous Building Area 2 Not Allowed 1 Insufficient Area 3 Use Preexisting 2 Complies 4 Special Permit Required 3 Preexisting CBA 5 Insufficient Information 4 Insufficient Information C Setback H Building Height 1 All setbacks comply 1 Height Exceeds Maximum 2 Front Insufficient 2 Complies 3 Left Side Insufficient 3 Preexisting Height 4 Ri ht Side Insufficient 4 Insufficient Information 5 Rear Insufficient I Building Coverage 6 Preexisting setbacks 1 Coverage exceeds maximum 7 Insufficient Information 2 Coverage Complies D Watershed 3 Coverage Preexisting 1 Not in Watershed 4 Insufficient Information 2 In Watershed j Sign 3 Lot prior to 10/24/94 1 Sign not allowed 4 Zone to be Determined 1 2 Sign Complies 5 Insufficient Information 3 Insufficient Information B Historic District K I Parking 1 In District review required 1 1 More Parking Required 2 Not in district 2 Parkinq Complies 3 Insufficient Information 3 Insufficient Information 4 Pre-existing Parkin Remedy for the above is checked below. Item # Special Permits Planning Board Item # Variance Site Plan Review Special Permit Setback Variance Access other than Frontage 'Special Permit Parking Variance Frontage Exce tion Lot Special Permit Lot Area Variance Common Driveway Special Permit Height Variance Congregate Housing Special Permit Variance for Sin / Continuing Care Retirement Special Permit Special Permits Zoning Bo rd Independent Elderly Housing Special Permit Special Permit Non -Conforming Use ZBA Large Estate Condo Special Permit Earth Removal Special Permit ZBA Planned Development District Special Permit Special Permit Use not Listed but Similar Planned Residential Special Permit Permit for Sign R-6 Density Special Permit -Special Special Permit preexisting nonconforming Watershed Special Permit The above review and attached explanation of such is based on the plans and information submitted. No definitive review and or advice shall be based on verbal explanations by the applicant nor shall such verbal explanations by the applicant serve to provide definitive answers to the above reasons for DENIAL. Any inaccuracies, misleading information, or other subsequent changes to the information submitted by the applicant shall be grounds for this review to be voided at the discretion of the Building Department. The attached document titled "Plan Review Narrative" shall be attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. The building department will retain all plans and documentation for the above file. You must file a new building permit application form and begin the permitting process. Building_ epa men fficial Signature Application Received Application Denied Denial Sent: If Faxed Phone Number/Date: Plan Review Narrative The following narrative is provided to further explain the reasons for denial for the application/ permit for the property indicated on the reverse side: 91 - Item Reference._ Reasons for, Denial' Police Zoning Board Conservation IYb `•{;M\ ,^`�� .a \ ,'\\\Y •.� � e. i)�R�"` t N'l � ��i f�1 f-.� /�.`:�,`.�F'+,A:^'\ir Referred To: Fire Health Police Zoning Board Conservation Department of Public Works Planning Historical Commission Other BUILDING DEPT dun 15 06 03:23p NORTH ANDOVER 97868895 i Plan Review Narrative The following narrative Is Pro id a to further explain the reasons for denial for the building permit for the property indicated on the I erse side: Review Reasons'fo l b Bylaw f�rerrce Form Item Reference r A Variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals is required from the provisions of Section "6.5 Prohibitions: 1. No sign shall be lighted, except by steady, stationary ligh '` shielded and direcWd solely at the sign. internally lit signs are not allowed:' the Zonin B la 1/3 Secti 4.3. on-conformau Accessory Signs: Any non -conforming al recited prior e n of this provision, may be continued and No ttn shall; enla , reworded esigned, or altered in W uni a con to the prn�risions tttained ein. Any sign which has n ma ed to the ex t t the of repair or restoration will been y mag ed one-t ' (ti3) of the replac e 1 soft te date of destruction shall qot be repai t, restored or -alter s inconformity of this Bylaw." There is insuff t in ,' tnatio detetnti - he existing 51 -co or o the req encs or roof si tti the GB Zoning ct pet provisions of Section 6.6. , . Primary wa d roof signs a edx6 or part,o the architectural desi a buiilding shall in more than,ten ereent (10,%) of the din as determined y the building acre of the di ional ev r 8 frontage multi "ed b oor to coil' g height of the indivi l business or as specified in a icable sections of t " • aw." A dimensio :IV We inay be To: ha p.3 µoRrry � �R•ltin ���4�' �'TSRCNIIr'�4 TowN OF NORTH ANDOVER ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NAME: ADDRESS OF APPEAL: Procedure &Requirements for an Application. fora Variance Ten (10) copies of the following information must be submitted thirty (30) days prior to the first public hearing. Failure to submit the required information within the time periods prescribed may result in adismissal by the Zoninq Board of an application as incomplete.. The information herein is an abstract of more specific requirements listed in the Zoning Board Rules and Regulations and is not meant to supersede them.. The -petitioner will complete items STEP 1: ADMINISTRATOR PERMIT DENIAL: The petitioner applies for a Building Permit and receivers a Zoning Bylaw Denial forth completed by the Building Commissioner. STEP 2: VARiANCE APPLICATION FORM: n t:u nar• r le ..s n li 2.fen f to net ion fhP 'i eiitic 1— voi:ip.vte- an a l..p.%,...:.sn orrrl I Board of Appeals for a Variance. All information as required in items 1 through and including 11 shall be completed. STEP 3: PLAN PREPARATION: Petitioner submits all of the required plan information as cited in page 4, section 10 of this form. STEP 4: OBTAIN LIST OF PARTIES IN INTEREST: The petitioner requests the Assessor's Office to compile a certified list -of Parties in Interest (abutters). VARIANCE f3'Ut�14,Fri . Town Clark,TimeStamp STEP 6: SCHEDULING OF HEARING AND PREPARATION OF LEGAL NOTICE: The Office of the26hing Board. of Appeals schedules the applicant for a hearing date and prepares the legal notice for mailing to the parties in interest (abutters) and for publication in the newspaper. The petiiioher is notified that.the legal notice has been prepared and the cost of. the Party in Interest fee. STEP 7: DELIVERY OF LEGAL NOTICE TO NEWSPAPER The petitioner picks up the legal. notice from the Office of - the - the Zoning Board of Appeals and delivers the legal notice to the local newspaper for publication. STEP 8: PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS: The petitioner should appear in his/her behalf, or be represented by an anent or attorney. in the absence of any appearance without due cause on•behalf of the petition, the Board shall decide on the matter by using the information it has received to date. STEP 9: DECISION: After the hearing, a copy of the Board's decision will be sent to all Parties in Interest, Any appeal of the Board's decision may be made pursuant to Massachusetts General Law ch. 40A § 17, within twenty (20) days after the decision is filed with the Town Clerk. STEP 10: RECORDING THE DECISION AND PLANS. STEP 5: SUBMIT APPLICATION: The petitioner is responsible for recording certification of Petitioner submits one (1.) original and ten (10) Xerox the decision, the Mylar, and any accompanying plans at 1 copies of all the required information to the Town Clerk's the Essex County, North Registry of Deeds, 384 Office to be certified by the Town Clerkwiththe time and Merrimack St. Suite #304, Lawrence MA, 01.843 and date of fling. The original will be left at the Town Clerk's shall complete the Certification of Recording form and Office, and the 10 Xerox copies will be left with the forward it -to the Zoning Board of Appeals and to the 'Zoning -Board of Appeals secretary. Building Department. U:iaY'uYi aus==-`""°` i:'ik5k'a'orddrewa::iiz�F'•4S'n'Yids.r;.,:i7`ii3`RGirdtdS$u"5ra�E;aa"6ii:li'`Ymix*r.7.f:`� "uEr7so`sic3�s'3s9fii(�l'''G'E�!""' Y'i;ifia IMPORTANT PHONE NUMBERS: '978-688=9533 Office of Community Dev. & Services 1600 Osgood St., Bldg. 20, Suite 2-36 North Andover, MA 01845 ,978-688-9542 fax for Community Development offices 978-688-9545 Building Department 978-688-9541• Zoning Board of Appeals office North Andover Town Hall 120 Main Street 978-688-9501 Town Clerk's Office 978-688-9566 Assessor's Office PAGE 1 of 4 PAGE 2 OF 4 NORTH ANDOVER ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS application for a- VARIANC E Please com Tete alf.items`.1':+.1,� .K .:y l}." i.'1i.. `• 0'.'.. p I. PMitioner: *Name, *A)drpps and telephone number: ';�5 f TVk D *'_ *The petitioner shall be entered on the legal notice and the decision as entered above. 2. Owners of Land: -Name, Address, telephone number, and number of years tinder this 3. Location of Property: a. Street: ✓fin (� Zoning District: • b. Assessors: iiia number: Lot Number: c. Registry of Deeds: Book Number: Page Number: 4. Zoning Bylaw Section(s)* under which the petition for the Variance is -made. 'Refer to the Zoning Bylaw Denial and Pian Review Narrative form as supplied by the Building Commissioner. !- r% _ .. .. .. The above description shall be used for the purpose of the -legal notice and decision. A more detailed description is required pursuant to the Zoning Board Rules and Regulations as cited on page 4, section 9 of this application. Failure by the applicant to describe the request clearly may result in a decision that does not address the intent of the applicant. The decision will be limited to the request by the applicant and wtll' not involve additional Items not included above. 6 A. Difference from Zoning Bylaw requirements: Indicate -the dimension (s). that will not meet current Zoning Bylaw Requirements. (Lines A and B are in case of a lot split) Lot Area Open Space Percentage Lot Frontage .Parking Sq. Ft. Sq. Ft. Coverage Feet . Spaces Front Side A Side 'B Rear A. B. NORTH ANDOVER ZONING BOARD -OF APPEALS application for a v ARAN C E 6 B. Existing Lot: Lot Area Open Space Percent Lot Frontage Parking Minimum Lot Setback Sq. Ft. Sq. Ft. Coverage Feet Spaces Front Side A Side B Rear 6 C. Proposed Lot(s); Lot Area Open Space Percent Lot Frontage Parking Minimum Lot Setback Sq. Ft. Sq. Ft. Coverage Feet Spaces Front Side A Side B Rear 6 D. Required Lot: (As required by Zoning Bylaw & Table Z) Lot Area Open Space Percent Lot Frontage Parking Minimum Lot Setback Sq. Ft. Sq. Ft. Coverage Feet Spaces Front Side A Side B Rear 7A. Existing Building(s): Ground Floor Number of Height Total . Use of Number Square feet Floors Sq. feet Building* of Units** *Reference Uses from the Zoning Bylaw & Table 1. State number of units in building(s). 713. Proposed Building(s): Ground Floor . Number of Height Total Use of • Number Square feet Floors Sq. feet Building* of Units** *Reference Uses from the Zoning Bylaw & Table 1. **State number of units in building(s). 8. Petitioner and Landowner signature(s): Every application fora Variance shall be made on this form, which is the official form of the Zoning Board of Appeals. Every application shall be filed with the Town Clerk's Office. It shall be the responsibility of the petitioner to furnish all. supporting . documentation with this application. The dated copy of this application received by the Town Clerk•or the Zoning Board of Appeals does not absolve the applicant from this responsibility. The petitioner shall be responsible for all expenses for filing and legal notification. Failure to ply with application requirements, as cited herein and in the Zoning Board Rules and Regulations may result in a dismiss y thq ZoniBoa application as incomplete. Tvpe above name(s) here:Z- PACE 4 OF 4 9. WRITTEN DOCUMENTATION Application for a Variance must be supported by a legibly written or typed memorandum setting forth -in detail all facts relied upon. When requesting -a Variance from the requirements of MGtA ch. 40A, Sec. 10.4 and the North Andover Zoning By-laws,. all dimensional requirements - shalf be- clearly identified and factually supported.. All points, A -F, are required to be addressed with this application. A. The particular use proposed.for the land or structure. B. The circumstances relating to soil conditions, shape or topography of such* land or structures -especially affecting the property for which the Variance is sought which do -not affect generailythe zoning district in which the property is located. C. Facts which make up the substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, which results from literal enforcement of the applicable. zoning restrictions with respect to the land or building for which the variance is sought. D. Facts relied upon to support a finding that relief sought will be desirable and without substantial detriment to the public good. E. Facts relied upon to support a finding that relief sought may be given.without nullifying or - substantialiy derogating from the intent or purpose of the Ordinance. F. Submit RDA.from Conservation Commission when Continuous Buildable Area is applied for in ZBA. application. 10. PLAN OF LAND -Each application to the -Zoning Board of Appeals shall be accompanied by the following described plan. Plans must be submitted with this applicatiorr to the Town Clerk's Office and ZBA secretary at least thirty (30) days prior to the public hearing before the Zoning Board of appeals. A set of building elevation plans by a Registered Architect may be required when the application involves new construction/conversiont and/or a Proposed change in use. 10. A. Major Projects Major projects are those, which involve one of the following whether existing or proposed: T) five (5) or more parking spaces, II) three (3) or more dwelling.units, IIT) 2,000 square' feet of building area. Major Projects shall require, that in addition to the 1013 & 10C features, that the plans show detailed utilities, soils, and topographic information. *10. B. *Plan Specifications: VARIANCE 1) Size of plan: Ten (10 ) paper copies of a plan not to exceed 11"x17", preferred scale of 1"=40' 11) One (1) Mylar, with one block for Regisfry Use Only, and one block for five (5)-ZBA signatures & date. III) Plan shall be prepared, stamped and certified by a Registered -Professional Land Surveyor. Please ndte that plans by. a Registered Professional Engineer, Registered Architect, and/or a Registered Landscape Architect.may be required for.Major Projects. *10 C. *Required Features On Plan: n Site Orientation shall include: 1. north point 2. zoning district (s) 3. names of streets 4. wetlands (if applicable) 5. abutters of property, within 300' radius 6. locations of buildings on adjacent properties Within 50' from applicants proposed structure 7. deed restrictions, easements. .R) - Legend & Graphic Aids shall Include: 1. Proposed features in solid lines & outlined in red 2. Existing features to be removed in dashed lines 3. -Graphic Scales 4. Date of Plan. 5.. Title -of Plan .6. Names addresses acid phone numbers of the applicant, owner or record, and land.surveyor. .7. Locus 10 D. Minor Projects Minor projects, such as decks, sheds, and garages, shall require only ti ie plan -In f0ri-nation as indicated with, an. asterisk (*). In some cases further information may be required. 11. APPLICATION FILING FEES '11. A. Notification fees: Applicant shall provide a check or money order to: "Town of North Andover" for the cost of first class, certified, return receipt x # of all parties in interest identified in MGLA ch. 40A §11 on the abutter's list for the legal notice check. Also, the applicant shall supply first class -postage stamps x the # of parties of interest on the abutter's list for the decision mailing. `11. B. Mailing labels: Applicant shall provide four (4) sets of mailing labels no larger than 1"x2-5/8" (3 copies for the Legal, and one copy for the Decision mailing). 11. C.- Applicant shall provide a check or money order to: `Town of North Andover" per 2005 Revised Fee Schedule. � A Variance once granted by the ZBA will lapse in 1 (one) year if not exercised and anew petition must be submitted.- NORT#j Zoning Bylaw Review Form o m p Town Of North Andover Building ��SSncHuS� 1600 Osgood St. Bldg 20 Suite 2-36 Request: North Andover, MA. 01845 Date: Phone 978-688-9545 Fax 978-688-9542 Department Street: 315 Turnpike Street Ma /Lot: Map 25 Lot 21 Applicant: Merrimack College /Vol a Center, Felipe Schwartz Request: Internally lit signs 2 Date: August 14,2013 Please be advised that after review of your Application and Plans that your Application is DENIED for the following Zoning Bylaw reasons: Zoning R-3 Kemedy for the above is checked below. Item # Special Permits Planning Board Item # Item Notes Site Plan Review Special Permit Item Notes A Lot Area F Frontage 1 Lot area Insufficient 1 Frontage Insufficient 2 Lot Area Preexisting 2 Special Permit Non -Conforming Use ZBA 3 Lot Area Complies 3 Preexisting frontage 4 Insufficient Information 4 Insufficient Information B Use 5 No access over Frontage 1 Allowed G Contiguous Building Area 2 Not Allowed 1 Insufficient Area 3 Use Preexisting 2 Complies 4 Special Permit Required 3 Preexisting CBA 5 Insufficient Information 4 Insufficient Information C Setback H Building Height 1 All setbacks comply 1 Height Exceeds Maximum 2 Front Insufficient 2 Complies 3 Left Side Insufficient 3 Preexisting Height 4 Right Side Insufficient 4 Insufficient Information 5 Rear Insufficient I Building Coverage 6 Preexisting setback(s) 1 Coverage exceeds maximum 7 Insufficient Information 2 Coverage Complies D Watershed 3 Coverage Preexisting 1 Not in Watershed 4 Insufficient Information 2 In Watershed j Sign 3 Lot prior to 10/24/94 1 Sign not allowed X 4 Zone to be Determined 2 Sign Complies 5 Insufficient Information 3 Insufficient Information E Historic District K Parking 1 In District review required 1 More Parking Required 2 Not in district . 2 Parking Complies 3 Insufficient Information 3 Insufficient Information 4 Pre-existing Parkin Kemedy for the above is checked below. Item # Special Permits Planning Board Item # Variance Site Plan Review Special Permit Setback Variance Access other than Frontage Special Permit Parking Variance Frontage Exception Lot Special Permit Lot Area Variance Common Driveway Special Permit Height Variance Congregate Housing Special Permit X Variance for Sign 2 signs Continuing Care Retirement Special Permit Special Permits Zoning Board Independent Elderly Housing Special Permit Special Permit Non -Conforming Use ZBA Large Estate Condo Special Permit Earth Removal Special Permit ZBA Planned Development District Special Permit Special Permit Use not Listed but Similar Planned Residential Special Permit Special Permit for Sign R-6 Density Special Permit Special permit for preexisting nonconforming Watershed Special Permit The above review and attached explanation of such is based on the plans and information submitted. No definitive review and or advice shall be based on verbal explanations by the applicant nor shall such verbal explanations by the applicant serve to provide definitive answers to the above reasons for Any inaccuracies, misleading information, or other subsequent changes to the information submitted by the applicant shall be grounds for this review to be voided at the discretion of the Building Department. The attached document titled "Plan Review Narrative" shall be attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. The building department will retain all plans and documentation for the above file. You must file a new permit application form and begin the permitting process. :2�43_ Building Department fcial Signature Application'Received Application Denied Denial Sent: If Faxed Phone Number/Date: Plan Review Narrative The following narrative is provided to further explain the reasons for DENIAL for the APPLICATION for the property indicated on the reverse side: Item Reasons for Reference Reasons for Denial & Bylaw Reference A Variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals is required from the provisions of Section "6.5 Prohibitions: I No signs shall be lighted except by steady stationary light, shielded and directed solely at the sign. Internally lit signs are not allowed " of the Zoning Bylaw Referred To: Fire Health Police X Zoning Board Conservation Department of Public Works Planning Historical Commission Other Building Department I /z g 5 f o / k m 2 / W S CL \ \ / § \ % i f k ƒ� &Z * � _ $tea \ LU 0 < k \ < _ u 4 � \ \ < ) z \ � W \. < 00- z< <_ �0 �0 0= \Co zi «2 /\ k / g 5 f o / k m 2 / c a � CL mk e CD / ) ƒ ( a � ) \ \ 0 _ \ \ / } e u - .- < 3 e = R § 2 & 2 e \ $ / 3 E + k / g 5 f o / k m 2 / c a � CL mk e CD / ) ƒ _ � u / 0 / LLJ � 0 � I \ LLJ � 0 � w 0 � B � / / .§ ( \ A # _ � u / 0 / 4)/ / / / ƒ k2 / A/ ¢ §\ 2 k< 3 2% 2 \ § w k m_ � « ! / LL- G r- \ z \ b \ m & 2 \ < E \ / / % \ ; \cr 2 ƒ LUEto LAJ a: o ¥ � k R . 0\ \_ = za $ - K 2 % 3� �0 3� / - w< K 0 �< �§ zv \7 A± (n §/ /§LLI �K zE 3< �< 7_ < kLu w /ƒ /\ w ¥.a Z �d g} \LLJ / < #f � �& <\ Iz I� 7\ z:2 /z0 LJLLJ V) V) � < Ij ' we �m \m C\ CL0/ix 3LLI 3\0 $\ §k\ 32 o>LLJ V)e \®b k� 5 / k / o\� w Ln \$ woc 22 . ZZ Z3 2 0 < CL eo- 900 2 �§ W7~ § kin kk< U K 5 I 0 OD Roll Barresi & Associates Merrimack College I Sign Type 20 August 2013 Athletics Complex Building Signs Athletics Complex ID Description: 18"H x 2" deep fabricated stainless steel lettering with diffused LED halo illumination, stud mounted to masonry wall. Fonts: Minion Semibold 0 em/1000 Elevation Scale: 1/16"=1'-0" Elevation 1/8" = V-0., main entrance to Atnietic Complex 961.0 20.01 Finish: #4 Horizontal Brushed Stainless Steel Lettering stud mounted to masonry wall with 1" stando Coordinate power with Owner. ° _ � ---- ------ ---- --- ----- ----- -__—_—------- -_—__-____ r RnBoz,��A�von�p Merrimack Sign Type 21 ---- Uod961.0 August 2013 | Athletics Complex Building Signs Illuminated Logo 21.01 Description: Fabricated Internally LED Illuminated logo with translucent face and painted sides. Colors: Refer to Layout Drawing Sides painted mmatch umGoumoa| 'Eumpoane|uae' nO3n'1or / � Logo mextend beyond Roll Barresi & Associates Merrimack College Sign Type 21 961.0 August 2013 Athletics Complex Building Signs iIlluminated Logo 21.02 m bo 11'-4" Translucent Gray Blue 3M Scothcal "Evening Blue" 3630-317 Translucent Dark Blue 3M Scothcal "European Bluse" 3630-137 Layoutl/2" = V-0" Translucent Yellow 3M Scothcal "Yellow" 3630-015 Translucent White 3M Scothcal "White" 3630-20 Abutter to Abutter ( ) Building Dept. ( ) Conservation ( X ) Zoning ( ) This certifies that the names appearing on the records of the Assessor Office as of Certified by: Date s" Town of North Andover Abutters Listing REQUIREMENT: MGL 40A, Section 11 states in part "Parties in Interest as used in this chapter shall mean the petitioner, abutters, owners of land directly oppositeon any public or private way, and abutters to abutters within three hundred (300) feet of the property line of the petitioner as they appear on the most recent applicable tax list, not withstanding 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." Subiect Property: MAP PARCEL'S Name Address 15 13/14/&67 Merrimack College Turnpike Street, North Andover, MA 01845 Abutters Properties Map Parcel Name Address 25 16-3A Fang Liu 3 Alcott Way, North Andover, MA 01845 25 16-4A Daniel Mariani 4 Alcott Way, North Andover, MA 01845 25 16-5B Parthpan Sundararajan 5 Alcott Way, North Andover, MA 01845 25 16-66 Erica Clausen 6 Alcott Way, North Andover, MA 01845 25 16-7B Allison Mader 7 Alcott Way, North Andover, MA 01845 25 16-8B Joseph Sarbella 8 Alcott Way, North Andover, MA 01845 25 16-9B Louise Mullaney 9 Alcott Way, North Andover, MA 01845 25 16-10C Valerie Moran 10 Alcott Way, North Andover, MA 01845 25 16-11C Leslie Aznoian 11 Alcott Way, North Andover, MA 01845 25 16-12C Robert Cerchione 12 Alcott Way, North Andover, MA 01845 25 16-13C Paula Griffiths 13 Alcott Way, North Andover, MA 01845 25 16-14C Michael Provenzano 14 Alcott Way, North Andover, MA 01845 25 16-15C Karen Beats 15 Alcott Way, North Andover, MA 01845 25 16-16D 16 Alcott Way Nominee Trust 16 Alcott Way, North Andover, MA 01845 25 16-17D Elaine Lewin 17 Alcott Way, North Andover, MA 01845 25 16-18D Denise Goldberg 18 Alcott Way, North Andover, MA 01845 25 16-19D Paul Chabot 19Alcott Way, North Andover, MA 01845 25 16-20D Stuart Goldstein 20 Alcott Way, North Andover, MA 01845 25 16-21 D Josephine Martell 21 Alcott Way, North Andover, MA 01845 25 16-22E Leslie Grewal 22 Alcott Way, North Andover, MA 01845 25 16-23E John Redington 23 Alcott Way, North Andover, MA 01845 25 16 24E Nicholas Triantafilou 24 Alcott Way, North Andover, MA 01845 25 16-25E John Mahoney 25 Alcott Way, North Andover, MA 01845 25 16-26E Peter Nawfel 26 Alcott Way, North Andover, MA 01845 25 16-27E Shelia Byers 27 Alcott Way, North Andover, MA 01845 25 16-28 E Jill McNamara 28 Alcott Way, North Andover, MA 01845 25 16-29E Susan Robinson 29 Alcott Way, North Andover, MA 01845 25 16-30F Anastasia Randall 30 Alcott Way, North Andover, MA 01845 25, 16-31 F Sarah Jones 31 Alcott Way, North Andover, MA 01845 25 16-32F Xunshan Luo 32 Alcott Way, North Andover, MA 01845 25 16 33F Jacqueline Paquette 33 Alcott Way, North Andover, MA 01845 25 16-34G Merrimack College 315 Turnpike Street, North Andover, MA 01845 25 16-35G Patrick Lee 35 Alcott Way, North Andover, MA 01845 25 16-36G Shelia Serrao 40 Morton Street, Andover, MA 01810 25 16-37G Robert McKinnon 37 Alcott Way, North Andover, MA 01845 25 16-38G Jeanne Shattuck 38 Alcott Way, North Andover, MA 01845 25 16-39G Robert Kirk 39 Alcott Way, North Andover, MA 01845 25 35 & 66 AIMCO/TTA MS 235 P.O. Box 111397, Carrollton TX 75011-1397 25 39 & 42 Trombly Realty Corporation 142 Sutton Street, North Andover, MA 01845 25 69-10,11,14,16,17 M&B Realty Associates 575 Turnpike Street, North Andover, MA 01845 25 69-12 Rolls Realty Trust 40 Sugarcane Lane, North Andover, MA 01845 25 69-21 & 23 Teresa Burtoff 65 Monadnock Drive, Westford, MA 01886 25 69-22 & 24 Michael Gogjian 575 Turnpike Street, North Andover, MA 01845 25 69-25 Joan Gitlin, MD 116 Bradford Street, North Andover, MA 01845 25 69-26 & 28 Ober Family Trust 739C Main Street, Boxford, MA 01921 25 69-27 Prakash Realty Trust 575 Turnpike Street #27, North Andover, MA 01845 25 79 Eastwest Realty P.O. Box 1766, Fort Lee, NJ 07024 47 14 Robert Leland, Jr 312 Turnpike Street, North Andover, MA 01845 47 15 Linda Farnum 379 Farnum Street, North Andover, MA 01845 47 31 Debroah Snow 1 Berkeley Road, North Andover, MA 01845 Page 2 of 2 This certifies that the names appearing on the records of the Assessor Office as of Certified by: Date s" Abutter to Abutter ( ) Building Dept. ( ) Conservation ( X ) Zoning ( ) This certifies that the names appearing on the records of the Asses ors OfCe GS Of Certified by,� Date Town of North Andover Abutters Listing REQUIREMENT: MGL 40A, Section 11 states in part "Parties in Interest as used in this chapter shall mean the petitioner, abutters, owners of land directly oppositeon any public or private way, and abutters to abutters within three hundred (300) feet of the property line of the petitioner as they appear on the most recent applicable tax list, not withstanding 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." Subject Property: MAP PARCEL'S Name Address 25 13114467 Merrimack College Turnpike Street, North Andover, MA 01845 Abutters Properties Map Parcel Name Address 24 8 Stephen Mc Kallagat 3 Wilson Road, North Andover, MA 01845 24 28-1B Labusa Inc. 108R Merrimack Street, Haverhill, MA 01830 24 28-29 NEOS, LLC 203 Turnpike Street #G2, North Andover, MA 01845 24 28-3A,3B,4A,6A,11A,100A NAOP,LLC 93 Union Street, Newton, MA 02459 24 28-5 & 5A Tallman Eye Associates 451 Andover Street #5, North Andover, MA 01845 24 28-7A 451 Andover Street, LLC 451 Andover Street #G7, North Andover, MA 01845 24 28-8A Heritage Drive Investments LLC 80 Heritage Drive, Lowell, MA 01853 24 28-1008 & 120B NANO Properties, LLC 203 Turnpike Street #100, North Andover, MA 01845 24 28-105A NA Property, LLC 446 Dudley Road, Newton, MA 02459 24 28-1 10A,120A,125B,1 30A NAOP,LLC 93 Union Street, Newton, MA 02459 24 28-1158 230 Turnpike Street Suite 115 LLC 203 Turnpike Street #115, North Andover, MA 01845 24 28-125A Suite 125 Real Estate LLC 451 Andover Street #125, North Andover, MA 01845 24 28-150A & 160A David Hassey 291 Dutton Street, Lowell, MA 01852 24 28-165A,185A,190A,195A NAOP,LLC 93 Union Street, Newton, MA 02459 24 28-170A Caridad Hernandez 451 Andover Street #170A, North Andover, MA 01845 24 28-200A,201A,202A,205A,206A NAOP,LLC 93 Union Street Suite 315, Newton MA 02459 24 28-200B Saints Medical Center One Hospital Drive, Lowell, MA 01852 24 28-207A & 208A RJJ Real Estate, LLC 451 Andover Street #208A, North Andover, MA 01845 24 28-209A GB & Moe LLC 65 Menadnock Drive, Westford, MA 01886 24 28-210A,211A,213A,214A NAOP,LLC 93 Union Street, Newton, MA 02459 24 28-300A Wachtel Realty LLC 451 Andover Street #301A, North Andover, MA 01845 24 28-200B,305A,315A,330A NAOP,LLC 93 Union Street, Newton, MA 02459 24 28-335A,400B,401B,402B NAOP,LLC 93 Union Street, Newton MA 02459 24 28-403B,406B,407B NAOP,LLC 93 Union Street, Newton MA 02459 24 28-404B 203-204 Turnpike Street Realty Trust 203 Turnpike Street #404, North Andover, MA 01845 24 29 Robert O'Neil 3 Radcliff Drive, Andover, MA 01810 24 30 Whoville Holdings, LLC 477 Andover Street, North Andover, MA 01845 24 31 A&C Realty Trust 247 Newbury Street, Danvers MA 01923 24 32 Thompsons Resturant, Inc P.O. Box 155, North Andover, MA 01845 24 44 George Hanna 9 Tiffany Road, Salem, NH 02079 24 45 Patricia Sifferlen 46 Wilson Road, North Andover, MA 01845 24 46 Alexander Szczapa 10 Meadow Lane, Atkinson, NH 03811 24 47 Gregory Tomashevsky 21 Wilson Road, North Andover, MA 01845 24 50 Frederick Gorham 10 Cochran Street, Methuen, MA 01844 24 51 Lisa Pearce 6 Tolland Road, North Andover, MA 01845 24 52 Robert Lurvey 19 Tolland Road, North Andover, MA 01845 24 53 William Sahlas 11 Tolland Road, North Andover, MA 01845 24 54 Abram Bekker 51 Tolland Road, North Andover, MA 01845 24 55 Jeffrey Adeque 12-14 Berkley Road, North Andover, MA 01845 24 56 Matthew Wilson 200 Elm Street, Andover, MA 01810 24 69 Thomas Lizotte Jr 17 Highland Terrace, North Andover, MA 01845 24 73 Louise Perry 6 Berkley Road, North Andover, MA 01845 24 75 Peter Bolis 26 Tolland Road, North Andover, MA 01845 24 80 Jesse Lane 24 Berkley Road, North Andover, MA 01845 25 12 Rite Aide Corportation 30 Hunter Lane, Camp Hill, PA 17011 25 16-1A Michael McAndrew 1 Alcott Way, North Andover, MA 01845 25 16-28 Changkuo Yeh 25 Woodlea Road, North Andover, MA 01845 Town of Andover Andover Town Hall 36 Bartlett Street, Andover MA 01810 Pagel of 2 This certifies that the names appearing on the records of the Asses ors OfCe GS Of Certified by,� Date Albert P. Manzi III, Esq. Chairman Ellen P. McIntyre, Vice -Chairman Richard J. Byers, Esq. Clerk D. Paul Koch Jr., Esq. Allan Cuscia Town of North Andover ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Associate Members Michael P. Liporto Doug Ludgin Deney Morganthal Zoning Enforcement Offu er Gerald Brown Legal Notice Notice is hereby given that the North Andover Board of Appeals will hold a public hearing in the North Andover Town Hall, 120 Main Street, North Andover, MA on Tuesday, October 8th, 2013, at 7:30pm to all parties interested in the petition of Merrimack College, Volpe Athletic Center for property located in the R-3 Zoning District at 315 Turnpike Street (Map 025/ Lot 21), North Andover, MA 01845. The Petitioner is proposing 2 signs at the Volpe Athletic Center. The provisions of Section "6.5 Prohibitions: 1 No signs shall be lit except by steady stationary light, shielded and directed solely at the sign. Internally illuminated signs are prohibited. A Variance is required from the Zoning Board of Appeals. Application and supporting materials are available for review at the office of the Zoning Department located at 1600 Osgood Street, North Andover, MA, Monday, Wednesday and Thursday from the hours of 8:00-400, Tuesday from the hours of 800-5:30 and Friday from 8:00 to 11:30. Published in the Eagle Tribune on: September 24, 2013 October 1, 2013 By order of the Board of Appeals Albert P. Manzi III, Esq., Chairman ooaam E..> P-0:3 a� ^mom - � sy p ZD =Z ��O�O?.i°f1N 33. toajDNt1 N+ 0 NSpwN'm a;"40aa0.Z .L,o�mc�o�vco <-.nmiyoR, cA yo �o a Do51 °a �==fm7&NID0.aoDoGvnmO N0j65,ISDaD 0 7D51A aNN�-0Nu•yNO °Nca5� aco oO"cov -yyym r 0 6 0 fiw0 Mm�<O a m -0D ova:ID0 00 L 3 m36Z�� � Ogya0 O CD UD'wfl NN N5.ZN , CD f` ° RF4LShrW4F is Z€ s MO -0 i 'i 40 & y _ -- m>mO O p N ® oZm - M unEN =P Kam m S 48817Loq' a `" t " W i g i. rn m $In M N R i a m o C9 i. O 0 mCD CD n to CD m CD F : o 1 � � r a J m N m . m r rCD F— C-) C _ 1� 0 O C `'t cin O C m v �C Z€ s MO -0 i 'i 40 & y _ -- m>mO O p N ® oZm - M unEN =P Kam m S 48817Loq' a `" t " W i g i. rn m $In M N R i a m o C9 i. O 0 mCD CD n to CD m CD F : o 1 � � r a J m N m . m r Ciofolo, Angela From: Maylor, Andrew Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 2:42 PM To: attymanzi@manzilaw.net Cc: Ciofolo, Angela; Bellavance, Curt; Thomas J. Urbelis; Brown, Gerald Al, As you know Merrimack is withdrawing their request for a variance. I can't imagine they don't have that right. This now becomes a matter for the zoning enforcement officer as to whether Dover applies regarding their new signage. My preference in matters involving Dover is to have the entity seeking Dover relief specify why think its applicable and have town counsel determine if it is appropriate so that the building inspector doesn't have to make legal judgments. With this in mind I responded to Felipe's email this morning with a request that he provide such an opinion from their attorney. When I receive that information I plan on providing it to Tom so that he can advise Gerry on how to proceed. If they do not comply with my request, Gerry will have to make a decision on whether Dover applies and town counsel may be asked to weigh in. Regards, Andrew W. Maylor Town Manager Town of North Andover 120 Main Street North Andover, MA 01845 Phone 978.688.9510 Fax 978.688.9556 Email amaylor@townofnorthandover.com Web www.TownofNorthAndover.com Please note the Massachusetts Secretary of State's office has determined that most emails to and from municipal offices and officials are public records. For more information please refer to: hftp://www.sec.state.ma.us/ore/preidx.htm. Please consider the environment before printing this email. Merry.iumack.�� C O L L E G E North Andover, Massachusetts 01845. 978-837-5000 f;``•`,;7r November 7, 2013 Dear Zoning Board of Appeals Members, The College seeks to withdraw, without prejudice, its variance request from Section 6.2 Signage the North Andover zoning bylaw. This matter was presented to the Zoning Board of Appeals on Tuesday October 8, 2013. Based on opinion from counsel, the College believes that the Dover amendment applies to this issue. The Dover Amendment carves out eight (8) permissible areas of regulation: "bulk and height of structures and determining yard sizes, lot area, setbacks, open space, parking and building coverage requirements." (M.G.L. c.40A S 3.) The statute does not contain express language allowing municipalities to regulate signage. Consequently, as it has done so in the past, the College will be guided by the spirit and language of the Dover Amendment, and will install and operate tasteful signage throughout the campus in the manner the College deems most appropriate. As always, the College appreciates its cooperative relationship with the Town and the partnership that we have built together. We trust this resolution will be in keeping with those principles. If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me on campus at (978) 837-5459 or via email (schwa rzf@ merrimack. edu). Thank you. Sincerely, Fe ipe Schwarz, CP Assistant Vice President, External Affairs cc: Andrew Maylor, Town Manager Curt Bellavance, Director of Division of Community Development Gerald Brown, Inspector of Buildings Albert P. Manzi III, Esq. Chairman Ellen P. McIntyre, Vice -Chairman Richard J. Byers, Esq. Clerk D. Paul Koch Jr., Esq. Allan Cuscia Town of North Andover ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Associate Members Michael P. Liporto Doug Ludgin Deney Morganthal Zoning Enforcement Offi! er Gerald Brown - Legal Notice Notice is hereby given that the North Andover Board of Appeals will hold a public hearing in the North Andover Town Hall, 120 Main Street, North Andover, MA on Tuesday, October 8th, 2013, at 7:30pm to all parties interested in the petition of Merrimack College, Volpe Athletic Center for property located in the R-3 Zoning District at 315 Turnpike Street (Map 025/ Lot 21), North Andover, MA 01845. The Petitioner is proposing 2 signs at the Volpe Athletic Center. The provisions of Section "6.5 Prohibitions: 1 No signs shall be lit except by steady stationary light, shielded and directed solely at the sign. Internally illuminated signs are prohibited. A Variance is required from the Zoning Board of Appeals. Application and supporting materials are available for review at the office of the Zoning Department located at 1600 Osgood Street, North Andover, MA, Monday, Wednesday and Thursday from the hours of 8:00-400, Tuesday from the hours of 800-5:30 and Friday from 8:00 to 11:30. By order of the Board of Appeals Albert P. Manzi III, Esq., Chairman Published in the Eagle Tribune on: September 24, 2013 3 i� � '-m Q 7 -w� N" Q T y. N fD N'•• T W w 7 "� �-Cm r w _ .�.i. - tf� io OD W Do O N- W vv-Itn. >L4M0E'o O ZD�Z o»W �_ .om O«�m o eDOW17 i >,.wwooaac�OwDg•o3Q�om�lae'o���3I CL o0 OQm 'O7 �_ 7V 0�O 0..N"�N SO 70 AQa OOC (D m_° � o w< a�0 ��^^� W D„�j_�-0 7 C vm o-��' 08 I'D W'D°/ m� Z�'m �mto ° xm?o o Qo opo SCD 0Nw=o.:5-cARw:5'56r .> pvoyam�ci®� �N� Qa MOOwW°mD 05'(5' O��»°O-mom x�Wm 4, N.0 10 �O. 2.' Dyf' W 77 .0 NQ00CL- NO.W c o �� m QCO � QI-D Ca < W �' (nO v OR as _3�CmM so°O cy-�co°7o�-oW-!20o_m.i�of°o�. O O CD So <O' 0WC-D9 - NN.W.� ONS=D7 0 3��ID o a cD �m °goy oi�ia lamm�a�sv D. -o 00@cch za:: 337r XTN 7' Z3 5 3'-W�(nZW K 3d 0r CL 3 Q�o3�0 oa 60-60. H so ON ov,°��°CDST (D . CD am N- zmmoSLE.7= &� -5 I gW688a W ci w D� a; Q�a3cQ 1 �M0 3o p ZD�Z c0 O.O0 OQ(D y'p7 W ..p O>-IO•N!' li�a0 OO A•0�p. -111�7<D 4! D,_0(O D� �:N N 0 W o l W MN' 3GO Q�O� °' D00 a 7 Q.O 3.2..0..o0m � �D�im ° x@ ?o o Qp 0 a Fr CL `G ' N -• y 'C 0-p N W N' I'D g!,,,) ' O O O. V 0 0 0 ID 0 O (p O 0 7 0 p W O O N 0" 2: =. G 0,a DN QW dy(n����-'00QW�070 OM ID I)o CT o owcy��°�oOO ( 0 -OS -O: aO D0v -5 oN uNn�vom��ErD=maa'-9 w'D moQ'm (Df-mO v m 6=@ (D cooa?(D'n 3a5mr �3?gw 0�X�6,C.: -r CL -=o1O..o'sj G �O:0Qa�m�Z NNf�W' .�O?ypQ. f�om0 =m Town of North Andover Town Clerk Time Stamp ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS CIffwd J. Atanai 939, &q. &aAmm T (1 NORTIi C.GGCib J..MC9Ftf1�11e, vlCPr�[CC!/lfll(X�Z OF %,%.E D 0..J aue 9Ca& Yt. Mm ewaa L Z r o (bele iate, 7pADH.1TED ✓If"aet J. 4ada 9SSAC S `.haw# .NI(iVanihd Da tg&o &d9in Date g Town of North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals 1600 Osgood Street North Andover MA 01845 Please be advised that I have agreed to waive the time constramts�for the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals to make a decision regarding the granting of a Variance - Special Permit Comprehensive Permit (40B) Finding For property located at: / 5 STREET: MAP: J-5 PARCEL: TOWN: North Andover, MA 01845 TO MEETING DATE(S) A cv s NAME OF PETITI SIGNED: (o# p"etitioer's representative) 1600 Osgood Street, Building 20 - Suite 2035, North Andover, Massachusetts 01845 Phone - 978-688-9541 Fax - 978-688-9542 Web - www.townofnorthandover.com IJ Facility Description 1. Current or prior use of facility: College . 2. Is the facility owner -occupied residential with 4 units or less? ❑ Yes [ No 3. Facility Owner: r/I College — Same _ New AdOpss Cilyrrown Zip rode relephone 4. Facility's Owner's On -Site Manager: Name Address Cile/%wn Tip code Telephone 5. General Contractor: Name Address CiryAbwn Zip code Telephone Ametican Interstate LnS AVWCMA1114422002 7/9/03. ronrraclor's Workers Comp. Insurer PolkyI Exp Dare 6. What is the size of the facility? 500 (sq ft) 1 (# of floors) Asbestos Transportation and Disposal 1. Transporter of asbestos -containing waste material from site to temporary storage site (if necessary) to final disposal site: 0. Certification The undersigned hereby states, under the penalties of perjury, that he/she has read the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Regulations for the Removal, Containment or Encapsulation of Asbestos, 453 CMR 6.00 and 310 CMR 7.15, and that the information contained in this notification is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge and belief. Samuel J. Nigro III Print Nrme didhariied Signalw Ogle Note: Contractor must sign this President ` Dudley Services Inc. 781-643-4328 form for DU Posiliayrille Represenlirg TehPhare notification purposes PO Box 132 Arlington,MA 02476 Adctess Oy, Town Zip cede Fee exempt (City, Town, district, municipal housing authority, owner -occupied residential of four units or less) ? 071no Sticker # (from front of form): Narre Address Clty/rown Zip code Te%p4011e 2. Transporter of asbestos -containing waste material from removal/ temporary storage site to final disposal site: _,T.O.B. Rolloff Inc. PO Box 6037 Nae Adeess Chelsea, MA 02150 1-617-387-1495 Note: Transfer ciKew? Zip code relephone Stations must 3. Refuse transfer station and owner (if applicable): comply with the Solid Waste Division regula-, a Address tions 3 10 CMR 18.00 PyAown Ip code Telephone 4. Final Disposal Site: Waste Mgmt,of NH Turnkey Landfill ImvionName owners Name 90 Rochester Neck Rd. Address Rochester, NH 03867 800-847-5303 CiIY/rown Zip code Telephone 0. Certification The undersigned hereby states, under the penalties of perjury, that he/she has read the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Regulations for the Removal, Containment or Encapsulation of Asbestos, 453 CMR 6.00 and 310 CMR 7.15, and that the information contained in this notification is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge and belief. Samuel J. Nigro III Print Nrme didhariied Signalw Ogle Note: Contractor must sign this President ` Dudley Services Inc. 781-643-4328 form for DU Posiliayrille Represenlirg TehPhare notification purposes PO Box 132 Arlington,MA 02476 Adctess Oy, Town Zip cede Fee exempt (City, Town, district, municipal housing authority, owner -occupied residential of four units or less) ? 071no Sticker # (from front of form): INSTRUCTIONS. 1. All sections o1 this form must be completed in order to comply with the Department of Environmental Protection notification requirements of 310 CMR 7.15 (fen working days piinrnnfthrallon is required n1 any sbalemenl pro%ab: and the Department of Labor and Industries nolification requirements of 453 CMR 6.12 (IAA days P/inrnol7licafinn is required niAfvr abafemeNPmjPC/9A0?1 ✓ lhan IhrA' tinea/ of square leeQ. 2. Submit Original Form To: Commonwealth of Massachusetts Asbestas Program P.O.B. 120087 Basten, MA 02112- 0087 3. This form maybe used for notilying the U.S. Environmental Noteclion Agency Region I of asbestos demotillon/ renovation operalions subject to NESHAPS (40 CFR Subpar, M). Rev. 6/92 Commonwealth of Massachusetts Asbestos Notification form — ANN%71 91 Asbestos Abatement Description 59016 1. Facility location: TPS a f B Merrimack college --315 murnngike ,;- Name Adinrss No. Andover, MA 01845 978-837-5000 t DEC0 clly/rnxn - Zipmde Telephone t UL, 1 _ Trailer in rear of_Monican Dorm. — Whar Is Ibe MorAslle Ircalin177 building name, /, wing, k0f, -71 2. Is the facility occupied? ❑ Yes J No 3. Asbestos Contractor: �1 __peri Seryj,ce-a_Tnc. -43 Dudley St. Name Address 2 4 7 6 _.-_ 7 81=6 4 3 ,4 3 2 8 -- C•i!✓, rrxn Zip '.ode Telephone __ AC 00 OL/ IIMM l f nnliad TypelxidlenA'�ln/1 Samuel J. Nigro III AS032802 4. On -Site Project Superviso r/Foreman: Sovann Ouk AS54214 Saveth Ouk AS030356 Orl Cedi6ralion/ 5, Project Monitor: _nvir��aff- Eng AM 60297 None 01 /Oe lili afinn 9. Asbestos Analytical Lab: Rnyirncafe Eng AA000131 Name OUFerlliialion / 7. Project start datl °Oe—nddateh!?4- /'�specificworkhours (Mon. -Fri.) .(Sat.Sun.) 8. What type of project is this? (circle one): demoorn rerun ennuannn nrnalem/— a>�/\�' 9. Describe the asbestos abatement procedures to be used (circle): glambag enclosure lul/cnnra/rrrmrd cbanup exapsulalinn rsposalonly alMr(expkin/ / G -s 10. Is the job being conduEted ❑ indoor snt ndorsnt`utdoors ? 11. Total amount of each type of Asbestos Containing Materials (ACM) to be handled on pipes or ducts (linear ft.)._ - or other surfaces (square ft.) to be removed, enclosed or encapsulated: linear/square feet boilec breaching, duct, lanksudace coatings... _/ Thermal, Solid croePiPe Lrrsulal/nn...... corruga/edorlayered,mperpipeinsu/a/inn.... _J insula/ingrnrrenr.................. tori'-nn/irepmoling..................... _J lrawPl/sprayrrcnalings............... clolhs. wvtvlabuts..................... _/ Iransileboard,, wallboard............. —� ar 01.1 ss dbe;.................... _/ 12. Describe the decontamination system(s) to be used: Containment harrier with clean room usinggslt;ve vGv tem and HVPA vacuum work ;;rima sealed off and nlacarde 13. Describe the containerization/disposal methods to comply with 310 CMR 7.15 and 453 CMR 6.14(2)(g): ..1),et^asbes-ri;oz--parkeA i n Annhl a 6, mi 1 nnl bags 1 ahel pd 14. For Emergency Asbestos Abatement Operations, the DEP and DLI officials who evaluated the emergency Nacre NDfP OaleofAulnai.alim 114341 / Nave n 01/O�cal Title Ogle n/Aulhairarim rYa"er / 15. Do prevailing wage rates apply as per M.G.L. c. 149, § 26, 27, or 27A - F to this project? ❑ Yes xNo v Town of North Andover a 14ORTN OFFICE OF°,."•� •1�ao COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND SERVICES 103 p 30 School Street WII LIAM J. SCOTT North Andover, Massachusetts 01845 Ac►+u et�y Director NOTICE OF DECISION C= Any appeal shall be filled within (20) days after the date of filling this Notice o in the Office of the Town " Clerk. =� Date August 19 1998 Date of Hearing July 21, 1998, August 18, 1998 Petition of Merrimack College Premises affected 315 Turnpike Street Referring to the above petition for a special permit from the requirements of the North Andover Zoning Bylaw Section 8.3 (site plan review) so as to allow to construct a 28, 000 SF assembly hall. After a public hearing given on the above date, the Planning Board voted to APPROVE the SPECIAL PERMIT - SITE PLAN REVIEW based upon the following conditions: CC: Director of Public Works Building Inspector Natural Resource/Land Use Planner Health Sanitarian Assessors Police Chief Fire Chief Applicant Engineer Towns Outside Consultant File Interested Parties Richard S.Rowen, Chairman Alison Lescarbeau, V. Chairman John Simons, Clerk Richard Nardella Joseph V. Mahoney Planning Board CONSERVATION - (978) 688 9530 - HEALTH - (978) 688-9540 - PLANNING - (978) 688-9535 * BUILDING OFFICE - (978) 688-9545 - *ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS - (978) 688-9541 - *146 MAIN STREET Town of North Andover OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND SERVICES TILLIAM J. SCOTT Director August 19, 1998 Ms. Joyce Bradshaw Town Clerk 120 Main Street No. Andover, MA 01845 384 Osgood Street North Andover, Massachusetts 01845 Re: Site Plan Review/315 Turnpike Street (Merrimack College) Dear Ms. Bradshaw, H"o T1� The North Andover Planning Board held a public hearing on Tuesday evening, July 21, 1998 at 7:30 p.m. in the Department of Public Works Conference Room, upon the application of Merrimack College 315 Turnpike Street, North Andover, MA 01845 requesting a'special permit under Section 8.3 Site Plan Review of the North Andover Zoning Bylaw. The legal notice was properly advertised in the North Andover Citizen on July 1 and July 8, 1998 and all parties of interest were duly notified. The following members were present: Alison Lescarbeau, Vice Chairman, John Simons, Clerk, Alberto Angles, Associate Member and Richard Nardella. Kathleen Bradley Colwell, Town Planner, was also present. The petitioner was requesting a special permit to allow for the construction of a 28,000 SF assembly hall. The location of the project is 315 Turnpike Street (Rt.114) and is in the Residential - 3 (R-3) Zoning District. Doug Hartnet & John Hollywood of Sasaki and David Breen of Merrimack College were present to represent 315 Turnpike Street. Mr. Hartnet stated that this is for the Cultural Arts Center which will contain 600 seats and is 28,000 SF. Mr. Hartnet stated that this site is to create an academic core. Mr. Hartnet stated that all utilities will be connected to the utility corridor and they are looking to tie into Andover's sewer. Mr. Simons had questions in regards to the parking. Ms. Lescarbeau asked where people will park for this building. Mr. Hartnet stated that they will park in the upper Volpe lot. Ms. Lescarbeau asked what the total number of parking spaces are. Mr. Hartnet stated that there are 1363 with some additional. Mr. Nardella questioned why they are hooking up to Andover's sewer line. Mr. Breen explained why they are hooking up to Andover's sewer. Mr. Angles asked what they are doing for lighting. Mr. Hartnet stated that there will be a canopy lighting and they also have a lighting plan but, it is not completed yet. Ms. Lescarbeau asked if they had an elevation plan. Mr. Hartnet showed the Board the elevation plans. Mr. Nardella asked if the college has a formal and informal relationship with the Town. Mr. Breen stated that it is informal. Mr. Breen stated that we have had the Town Meeting before. :,BOARD OF APPEALS 688-9541 BUILDING 688-9545 CONSERVATION 688-9530 HEALTH 688-9540 PLANNING 688-9535 Mr. Simons asked what the top of the building is made of. Mr. Breen stated that it was made of concrete. On a motion by Ms. Lescarbeau, seconded by Mr. Simons, the Board voted unanimously to close the Public Hearing and have staff draft a decision. The North Andover Planning Board held a regular meeting on August 18, 1998. The following members were present: Richard S. Rowen, Chairman, Alison Lescarbeau, Vice Chairman, John Simons, Clerk, Alberto Angles, Associate Member, Richard Nardella and Joseph V. Mahoney. Kathleen Bradley Colwell, Town Planner was also present. On a motion by Mr. Nardella, seconded by Mr. Angles, the Board voted 5 -1 to approve the site plan review decision for 315 Turnpike Street as amended. Attached are the conditions. Sincerely, Richard S. Rowen, Chairman North Andover Planning Board 315 Turnpike Street (Merrimack College — Cultural Arts Center) Site Plan Review- Special Permit The Planning Board herein approves the Special Permit/Site Plan Review for the construction of a 28,000 SF cultural arts center. The Douglas J. Hartnett, agent for Merrimack College, 315 Turnpike Street, North Andover, MA 01845, requested this Special Permit on June 22, 1998. The Planning Board makes the following findings as required by the North Andover Zoning Bylaws Section 8.3 and 10.3: FINDINGS OF FACT: 1. The specific site is an appropriate location for the project as it is located on the campus of the existing Merrimack College. 2. The use as developed will, not adversely affect the neighborhood as the project is located in the center of the existing Merrimack College campus. 3. There will be no nuisance or serious hazard to vehicles or pedestrians. 4. The landscaping approved as a part of this plan meets the requirements of Section 8.4 as amended by the Planning Board, of the North Andover Zoning Bylaw. 5. The site drainage system is designed in accordance with the Town Bylaw requirements. 6. The applicant has met the requirements of the Town for Site Plan Review as stated in Section 8.3 of the Zoning Bylaw. 7. Adequate and appropriate facilities will be provided for the proper operation of the proposed use. The facility will be connected to the municipal sewer system in the Town of Andover. Finally the Planning Board finds that this project generally complies with the Town of North Andover Zoning Bylaw requirements as listed in Section 8.35 but requires conditions in order to be fully in compliance. The Planning Board hereby grants an approval to the applicant provided the following conditions are met: SPECIAL CONDITIONS: 1) Prior to the endorsement of the plans by the Planning Board, the applicant must comply with the following conditions: a) The final plan must be reviewed and approved by the DPW,. engineering consultant, and the Town Planner and subsequently endorsed by the Planning Board. The final plans must be submitted for review within ninety days of filing the decision with the Town Clerk. b) A bond in the amount of five thousand ($5,000) dollars must be posted for the purpose of insuring that a final as -built plan showing the location of all on-site utilities, structures, curb cuts, parking spaces, topography, and drainage facilities is submitted. The bond is also in place to insure that the site is constructed in accordance with the approved plan. As this project involves the expansion of an existing non-profit organization in North Andover at this location the Planning Board will allow an alternate form of security to be posted. The form of security must be acceptable to the Planning Department. 2) Prior to the start of construction: a) A construction schedule shall be submitted to the Planning Staff for the purpose of tracking the construction and informing the public of anticipated activities on the site. b) During construction, the site must be kept clean and swept regularly. 3) Prior to FORM U verification (Building Permit Issuance): a) The Planning Board must endorse the final site plan mylars and three (3) copies of the signed plans must be delivered to the Planning Department. b) One certified copy of the recorded decision must be submitted to the Planning Department. c) In accordance with N.A.D.P.W. policy, this project may require 2:1 mitigation of the existing infiltration/inflow from the receiving sewer system. The mitigation may take the form of actual work performed or a fee paid to the DPW. 4) Prior to verification of the Certificate of Occupancy: a) The applicant must submit a letter from the architect and engineer of the project stating that the building, signs, landscaping, lighting and site layout substantially comply with the plans as referenced at the end of this decision as endorsed by the Planning Board. b) The building must have commercial fire sprinklers installed in accordance with the North Andover Fire Department. 5) Prior to the final release of security: 2 a) The Planning Staff shall review the site. Any screening as may be reasonably required by the Planning Staff will be added at the applicant's expense. b) A final as -built plan showing final topography, the location of all on- site utilities, structures, curb cuts, parking spaces and drainage facilities must be submitted to and reviewed by the Planning Staff and the Division of Public Works. 6) Any stockpiling of materials (dirt, wood, construction material, etc.) must be shown on a plan and reviewed and approved by the Planning Staff. Any approved piles must remain covered at all times to minimize any dust problems that may occur with adjacent properties. Any stock piles to remain for longer than one week must be fenced off and covered. 7) In an effort to reduce noise levels, the applicant shall keep in optimum working order, through regular maintenance, any and all equipment that shall emanate sounds from the structures or site. 8) The hours for construction shall be limited to between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on Saturday. 9) Any plants, trees or shrubs that have been incorporated into the Landscape Plan approved in this decision that die within one year from the date of planting shall be replaced by the owner. 10) The contractor shall contact Dig Safe at least 72 hours prior to commencing any excavation. 11) Gas, Telephone, Cable and Electric utilities shall be installed underground as specified by the respective utility companies.. 12) No open burning shall be done except as is permitted during burning season under the Fire Department regulations. 13) No underground fuel storage shall be installed except as may be allowed by Town Regulations. 14) The provisions of this conditional approval shall apply to and be binding upon the applicant, its employees and all successors and assigns in interest or control. 15) Any action by a Town Board, Commission, or Department, which requires changes in the plan or design of the building, as presented to the Planning Board, may be subject to modification by the Planning Board. 3 16) Any revisions shall be submitted to the Town Planner for review. If these revisions are deemed substantial, the applicant must submit revised plans to the Planning Board for approval. 17) This Special Permit approval shall be deemed to have lapsed after (7s i0 kcn (two years from the date permit granted) unless substantial use or co tru ion has commenced. Substantial use or construction will be determined by a majority vote of the Planning Board. 18) The following information shall be deemed part of the decision: a) Report titled: Application for Site Plan Review — Special Permit Merrimack College 315 Turnpike Street North Andover, MA 01845 Cultural Arts Facility — Site Plan Approval Prepared by: Sasaki Associates, Inc. Dated: June 22, 1998 b) Plan Titled: Merrimack College 315 Turnpike Street North Andover, MA 01845 Cultural Arts Facility — Site Plan Approval Prepared by: Sasaki Associates, Inc. 64 Pleasant Street Watertown, MA 02172 Dated: June 22, 1998 Sheets: SU -1 Existing Conditions Plan C1-1 Layout, Materials and Landscape Plan C2-1 Grading, Drainage and Utilities Plan Cc. Director of Public Works Building Inspector Health Administrator Assessors Conservation Administrator Drainage Consultant Planning Board Police Chief Fire Chief Applicant Engineer File 4