Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Miscellaneous - 521 SALEM STREET 4/30/2018
J521 SALEM STREET 210/038.0-0008-0000.0 I ' I i I 521 Salem Street Condominium Trust 521 Salem Street N. Andover MA 01845 Donald Pearson, Trustee Charlene Pearson, Trustee December 1, 2005 Mark Stein 521 Salem Street Unit 2 N. Andover MA 01845 Dc it N/1r. Stein, Pursuant to Paragraph 25 of the By-La s of the 521 Salem Stre Condominium "frust dated October 18, 2005, please consider this s ees written permission to alter the exterior of your unit in the following manner: J 1. To install an exterior vent, whether through the wall or the roof, not to exceed 12 inches in diameter, for the purposes of venting an indoor fireplace installed in the unit. Sinned this day of �r n, 'r , 2005 Dona earsoi , Trustee Charlene Pearson, Trustee 1 Town of North Andover NORTN OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND SERVICES 146 Main Street + 0 '• WII.LIAM J. SCOTT North Andover, Massachusetts 01845 ��s SgCNUSE Director January 16, 1998 Morris, Rogers&Phillips Attorneys at Law 10 High Street PO Box 1962 Andover MA 0 18 10 RE: 521 Salem Street Faxed Date: January 16, 1998 Dear Attorney Rogers : This letter is in reference to your letter of January 14, 1997 regarding the Pearson property. At this time I must concur with the initial interpretation of the Town that a Finding is necessary through the Zoning Board of Appeals. In accordance with Chapter 40A section 6 you are conducting an alteration,extension and structural change to a pre-existing non-conforming use. Such activity requires that the Zoning.Board determine that the extension or alteration is not substantially more detrimental than the existing non-conforming use. Your original building permit application gave no indication of the nonconformity of the property. While you may have discussed the matter with Mr. Surrette there is no clear written opinion that the Town should deviate from the above position. Therefore based on the above interpretation the Building Permit cannot be considered as valid until such time as the Zoning Board action is final. As such work should not continue on the site. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding this letter. I would recommend you contact Mary as soon as possible to engage in the process for a Special Permit Finding before the Zoning Board. Very truly yours, Robert Nicetta, Building Commissioner RN/jm cc: William Scott, Director Jan Richard BOARD OF APPEALS 688-9541 BUILDING 688-9545 CONSERVATION 688-9530 HEALTH 688-9540 PLANNING 688-9535 :r February 11, 1998 Mr. Robert Nicetta Building Department Town Of North Andover Town Hall 120 Main Street North Andover MA 01845 RE: 521 Salem Street, North Andover, MA North Andover Assessor's Map #038, Lot#08 Dear Mr. Nicetta, As promised at the February 10, 1998 meeting of the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals, please consider the following a formal request for documents pursuant to 950 C.M.R. for viewing and/or copying by me at the earliest possible moment. The documents I am requesting consist of any and all building or other permits, plans, notes letters/correspondence, memos records or paperwork of any kind, regardless of form or condition, in the control of the North Andover Building Department artment relevant to the above captioned address, from the year 1960 to the present date. I am fully prepared, in accordance with the requirements of 950 C.M.R., to pay the stated fee of$.20 cents per page for the requested copies, provided that the provisions of 950 C.M.R., 32.06 [2] are adhered to and do not prolong the request. If any questions arise, or clarifications needed concerning this request, I can be reached anytime at 978 851-5750. Thanking you in advance for 0 y� ( ) g y r y ur prompt attention, anticipated cooperation and compliance in this matter. Very truly yours, Thomas M. Camara 5 Washington Street Tewksbury, MA 01876 [pp[ ., . 1` 4 ( ^ f 4 lf^ F, Ij `{i iF s �I ` FEB 12 1998 Camara OWE @9 ft OD( i _ � •s �. mss` 5 Washington Street p DF y Tewksbury, MA 01876 D `'" • i 11 E' ti. - P 887 914 4 /9 5° h� � F�1A 1, _ 1 Mr. Robert Nicetta Building Department c . Town of North Andover Town Hall 120 Main Street North Andover MA 01845 0 S 8 4 s 214 Z s 1111111ilifi f11Bi141111141?13l'.1111111111 fill 1111111111I111d w TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND SERVICES 30 SCHOOL STREET NORTH ANDOVER, MASSACHUSETTS 01845 pORT►� William J. Scott Telephone(978)688-9531 ? Director ° FAX(978)688-9542 � - � s •��SSAC February 19, 1998 Mr. Thomas Camara 5 Washington .Street Tewsbury, MA 01876 Re: 521 Salem St. North Andover MA 01845 Dear Mr. Camara: The Building Department is in receipt of you letter dated February 11, 1998 requesting documentation on file for 521 Salem Street. The attached are copies of permits, correspondence,plans that are on file. The charge for 14 copies of paperwork and the plans is $12.00. Pursuant to your conversation with the secretary, you agreed to pick up the documents today or-Friday. i Very truly yours, Robert Nicetta,Building Commissioner BOARD OF APPEALS 688-9541 BUILDINGS 688-9545 CONSERVATION 688-9530 HEALTH 688-9540 PLANNING 688-9535 120 MAIN ST. 120 MAIN ST. 30 SCHOOL ST. 30 SCHOOL ST. 30 SCHOOL ST. P-tmJi1T No. APPLICATION FOR PERMIT TO BUILD — NORTH ANDOVER, MASS. PAGF 1 A" +40. U�� !LOT NO. I 2 RECORD OF OWNERSHIP IDATE (BOOK ;PAGE ZONE' I SUB DIV. LOT NO. I T LOCATION ` I � PURPOSE OF BUILDING OWNER'S NAMEOjyGl, d S U i� NO. OF STORIES SIZE ,. OWNER'S ADDRESS V' �/j,1��. '5BASEMENT OR SLAB ARCHITECT'S NAME&r �'�/` SIZE OF FLOOR TIMBERS 1STZX rY,� 2� ND (�16,V' „3r RD BUILDER'S NAMEA� SPANJY_ DISTANCE TO NEAREST BUILDING '` DIMENSIONS OF SILLS L/1/ P / --- DISTANCE FROM STREET L7 POSTS 7/` f DISTANCE FROM LOT LINES - SIDES. L-/OO RF.AR GIRDERS AREA OF LOT ' .� �,? C FRONTAGE /�� HEIGHT OF FOUNDATION - THICKNESS IS BUILDING NEW 11 /• ,G SIZE OF FOOTING r x V / % IS BUILDING ADDITION MATERfAL OF CHIMNEY ✓� ! �/v IS BUILDING ALTERATION C IS BUILDING ON SOLID OR FILLED LAND r j WILL BUILDING CONFORM TO REQUIREMENTS OF CODE / S IS BUILDING CONNECTED TO TOWN WATER _ VIC L J BOARD OF APPEALS ACTION. IF ANY IS BUILDING CONNECTED TO TOWN SEWER IS BUILDING CONNECTED TO NATURAL GAS LINE INSTRUCTIONS 3 PROPERTY INFORMATION LAND COST SEE BOTH SIDES EST. BLDG. C08 � p�)� PAGE 1 FILL OUT SECTIONS 1 - 3 EST. BLDG. COST PAER SQ. FT. EST. BLDG. COST PER ROOM PAGE 2 FILL OUT SECTIONS 1 - 12 SEPTIC PERMIT NO. • ELECTRIC METEPS MUST BE ON OUTSIDE OF BUILDING - 4 APPROVED BY ATTACHED GARAGES MUST CONFORM TO STATE FIRE REGULATIONS PLANS MUST BE FILED AND APPROVED BY BUILDING INSPECT R DATE FILED za SU iN0 INSP[CTOR SIGNATURE OF OWNER OR AUTHORIZED AGENT F E E lt� �"' �n2 OWNER TEL.x / S PERMIT GRANTED Coq CONTR.TEL.x I IT r�& 1 . 9 e 2 CONTR.LIC.x H.I.C.x 7J FORM U - LOT RELEASE FORM INSTRUCTIONS: This form is used to verify that all necessary appro Boards and Departments having jurisdiction have been obtained. Thi doesermits from the applicant and/or landowner from compliance with any applicable or oes nog relieve requirements. """'**APPLICANT FILLS OUT THIS SECTION I APPLICANT 6r �fs ll, PHONES_— LOCATION: Assessors Map Number S E ' PARCEL SUBDIVISION STREE �� -- LOT(S)— T J �� / ST. NUMBER USE ONLY i REC ENDATIONS O TOWN AGENTS: CONSEADMINISTRATOR RVATION DATE APPROVED DATE REJECTED � COMMENTS ( � ; TOWN PLANNER DATE APPROVED DATE REJECTED COMMENTS FOOD INSPECTOR-HEALTH DATE APPROVED DATE REJECTED S IC INSPECTOR- EALTH DATE APPROVED DATE REJECTED COMMENTS PUBLIC WORKS -SEWERIWATER CONNECTIONS DRIVEWAY PERMIT FIRE DEPARTMENT RECEIVED BY BUILDING INSPECTOR DATE . fh r r .t• e��' ref i T ��(��'�' �.'��! ��11_�' `. ,. PERK ,4T 1'✓ i,:Y h_ ..,� 1F�4 TtL QA' :1 4'1kFRY..7�li'` ,�r' f ;�;y.+s `Hi {�*'l� fi<c?*A•a� �i1,J{lXs,,'7'•M r!t �x$ _.,[,' rfP.`° .. �•t may:i X; ..1k tS? ... .. ......-w.. ........... ..?aYddRra.t S:,Csfv"hiv hr;r.� `J{re C,'unoi,cu.uutu%l� c Glituurltn;« li . a J p 4 `.0 - Y -;,Lea ;v. 3� ,k•.�:; 7 p Fit f 3� S. '24 .,k JWM A k. 4 IK - 4r. 3 K iK�>. ♦ t k •rY ,: as, �.�,, f �r! -1• r �Af3: ,fl:j Y .rti.'`u4e tw Yi L Y�r TAORT ONNM Of _ Andover . No. m sLAX dover, Mass., 19 w '94-COCHICHEWICK (,•9 �R�E D wpP`y ,1C.2 S E BOARD OF HEALTH PERMIT T D Food/Kitchen Septic System BUILDING INSPECTOR THISCERTIFIES THAT............................................................ PP4. .I��.. ��.o..�......................................................... Foundation has permission to erect..........40.Q1.1h.0W buildings on ......6..z..(...........S..14.tem.......... s...ro,.,. Rough to be-occupied as.................................: 4.1. . , Chimney provided that the person accepting this permit shall in every respect conform to the terthe application on file in ms Final this office, and to the provisions of the Codes and By-Laws relating to the Inspection, Alteration and Construction of Buildings in the Town of North Andover. PLUMBING INSPECTOR VIOLATION of the Zoning or Building Regulations Voids this Permit. Rough PERMIT EXPIRES IN 6 MONTHS Final UNLESS CONSTRUCTIONS ELECTRICAL INSPECTOR Rough ....................... .......... Service ... . .. .... .. .... . .. ... .. .. ... B DING INSPECTOR Final Occupancy Permit Required to Occupy Building GAS INSPECTOR Display in a Conspicuous Place on the Premises — Do Not Remove Fi ugh Fnal No Lathing or Dry Wall To BeDone .FIRE DEPARTMENT Until Inspected and Approved by the Building Inspector. Burner Street No. Smoke Det. MOR MAGE INSPECTION PLAN AT 521 SALEM S TREE NORTH ANDOVER MA. NO. ESSEX REGISTRY OF 11DEEOS.' BK. 3218 PG. 287 CERTIFI�'D T0.'NORTHMARK BANK PLAN N0 !1,878 SCALE.' I 40' DATE.' NOVEMBER 06, 1997 1OO.00 ... 68.99 W ON BL (� �_ LOT A► V 25,000 SE} ti 2 STY, \ r WD,FR. DWG.\ POR 112.22 NOTES-' SALEM STREET OF l) THIS /S NOT A PROPER T Y SUR VE Y, DO NOT USE THIS PL AN TO ESTABLISH PROPERTY LINES OR TO ERECT ANY STRUCTURE. 2>PROPERTY LINES ARE DETERMINED FROM COMPILED INFORMATION TO BE USED FOR MORTGAGE PURPOSES ONLY, � CERTIFICATIONS. BASED ON MY KNOWLEDGE, INFORMATION AND BELIEF, / HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE PERMANENT STRUCTURES INDICATED ARE LOCATED ON THE GRC UND APPROXIMATELY AS SHOWN AND ARE CONFORMING TO THE ZONING SETBACK REQUIREMENTS OF THE APPL IC.4&E MUNICIPALITY WHEN CONS TRUC TED OR MAYBE EXEMPT PER MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL LAW CHAPTER 40A, SEC7-10N7-AND THAT THE S TRUC TURE SHOWN /S ,NO T LOCATED IN A FL OOD HAZARD ZONE PER FEDERAL EA ECRGENC,-4f4NAGEME7VTA6En1�,y VAp COMMUNITY NO. 250098 EFFECTIVE DATE. 06-02-93 ZONE.' X ,JOHN ABAGIS B ASSOCIATE'S, PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVErv,-'S 137 CHANDLER ROAD, ANDOVER, MA. 11509) 698 -489;; APPLICANT.'PEARSON NO. 3271 ^' ATTORNEYS AT LAW r �DWAI�tO F. MORRIS• 10 HIGH STREET NEW HAMMNIRR OEM PO BOX 1962 iT[MEN H. ROGERS• 400 LAFAYETTE ROAD "M'EfER C. PHILLIPS" ANDOVER, MASSACHUSETTS 01810 PO box 804 ' RANCIB M. FUNARO** TELEPHONE 976f475-4141 HAMPTON.NH 03843404 M. PAUL IANNUCCIL LO* FACSIMILE 9761475.7479 „&MAW"d mPonin(o M&w A NN TELEPHONE 60311920.1700 . F�Aiiw�w/nwdribwan FACSIMILE 6031029-50" January 9, 1998 l�yK • Mr. Kenneth Surette, Building Inspector "st Town of North Andover wa� Town Hall 120 Main Street North Andover, MA 01845 Re: 521 Salem Street, North Andover, MA Dear Mr, Surette: ' This office represents Mr. Donald Pearson in connection•with his efforts to improve the property located at the above-referenced address. As you know, Mr. Pearson was given a permit to build by the Town of North Andover several weeks ago. He started work on the property, relying on the permit which he received. Several days later, however, you called to inform him that he would have to stop working because you were not aware that the home was actually a two-family dwelling, and hence Mr. Pearson would have to go before .i the Town in order to obtain a special permit. It is our opinion that Massachusetts General Laws Ch. 40A:6 exempts Mr. Pearson from having to appear before the Zoning Board,of Appeals, since he had lawfully begun work on the property. Mr. Pearson informed us that you called him today and agreed with J. our analysis of the statute. ; 3 Based on your conversation with Mr. Pearson today, it appears as though the Town has no objection to the improvements which he wishes to make to the property, and as a . consequence, he will not have to submit an application for a special permit. However, please contact this office immediately if this is not the case. Thank you very much for your cooperation. Very truly yours, . , MORRIS, ROGERS & PHILLIPS R>{ .JAN 1 31997 ;., Z�,�St;ph_ en H. Rogers ' w,. SHR/bib : . #{Nk. cc: Donald Pearson Town of North Andover t NORTH , OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND SERVICES 3 A 146 Main Street qL WHIJAM J.SCOTT North Andover, Massachusetts 01845 ��s,,,,, ;•�'�5 SAC Director must January 16, 1998 Morris, Rogers&Phillips Attorneys at Law 10 High Street PO Box 1962 Andover MA 0 18 10 RE: 521 Salem Street Faxed Date:January 16, 1998 Dear Attorney Rogers : This letter is in reference to your letter of January 14, 1997 regarding the Pearson property. At this time I must concur with the initial interpretation of the Town that a Finding is necessary through the Zoning Board of Appeals. In accordance with Chapter 40A section 6 you are conducting an alteration,extension and structural change to a pre-existing non-conforming use. Such activity requires that the Zoning Board determine that the extension or alteration is not substantially more detrimental than the existing non-conforming use. Your original building permit application gave no indication of the nonconformity of the property. While you may have discussed the matter with Mr. Surrette there is no clear written opinion that the Town should deviate from the above position. Therefore based on the above interpretation the Building Permit cannot be considered as valid until such time as the Zoning Board action is final. As such work should not continue on the site. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding this letter. I would recommend you contact Mary as soon as possible to engage in the process for a Special Permit Finding before the Zoning Board. Very truly yours, Robert Nicetta, Building Commissioner RN/jm cc: William Scott,Director Jan Richard BOARD OF APPEALS 688-9541 BUILDING 688-9545 CONSERVATION 688-9530 HEALTH 688-9540 PLANNING 688-9535 61!19/1948 17:38 5084 7 57479 STEPHEN ROGER'S ES PAGE 02 MORRIS, ROGERS & PHILLIPS ATTORNEYS AT LAW MORRIS" PO HIGH STREk'7 EDWARD F. MORR15 tiEw ww1APs..tQE DEF STEPHEN H- ROOERS* Pp Sox 1952 400 LAFAYETTH ROAD ANDOVER, MA56ACHUSETTS 01810 PETER C. PHILLIPS"" PQ843600A DQX 4 FRANCIS M. FUNARO** TELEPHONE 97Bt475.4141 HAMPron. NH O'Je4 M. PAUL IANNUGc1I_L4" FACSIMILE 13761478.7479 TELEPHONE 603!929^1700 -Admtlfad to pftW1 r.-en Moan,.4 NH FAG91A41 X 60J1929-SO49 •Admilted to PfaCt1C[in 14M". January 19, 1998 III Iver. Robert Nicetta, Building Department Town of North Andover Town Hall 120 Main Street North Andover, MA 01845 Re, 521 Salem Street, North Andover, MA Dear Mr. Nicetta: This office is in receipt of your letter dated Friday, January 16, 1998. As you know, it was sent to us via fax at 4,40 p.ni. Unfortunately, your decision leaves our client, Donald Pearson, in an even worse position than he was in before. On two occasions, the Town of North Andover has given our clientp ermission.to go forth with work at the above-referenced address. In reliance thereon, he has spent significant amounts of time and money, only to have the Town go back on its word and arbitrarily and illogically stop .him from working both times. Our client is also upset at the tact that you notified him of,your most recent decision an late Friday afternoon, knowing frill well that the application deadline for the next Zoning Board meeting is this Tuesday, January 20th, making it impossible for hien to gather the required materials in.time, especially in light of the fact that the Town offices were closed for the holiday today. This office is advising our client to continue work at his property, The Town of North Andover has damaged hien financially through a series of negligent acts. Our client has been an innocent victim during this whole ordeal, and it would be unjust for the Town to expect him to wait another month to have his case heard by the Zoning Board. It is our opinion that the Town of North Andover is clearly at fault here, and our client has given relief through legal action if this matter is not.rectified in a u the authority topursue 5 e a �' Y B manner satisfactory to him. Very truly yours, MORRIS, ROGERS & PHILLIPS Stephen H. Rogers SIT"ib cc. Donald Pearson JAN 7 0 M 01/19/98 18:31 TX/RX N0.7486 P.002 ■ ` -• - r Lot �,� �rs 4 Plan No. Lot No. Address Subd.No. ! � •�,1 #C �- ��l LAND VALUATION • y Area Rate Value 'A• tt13• \j Gni Front / R • ':' - ` ear 03 ♦Q� Cor.Enhancement BUILDING DESCRIPTION Total Area Value No.Stories Assr's Class ✓ Phys.Depr. Age Area / d 3 `5`. � N —R--em No. Rooms � � -' ' Net Land Value > Area Add't'ns ' O Condition +:r= Rent r BU DING VALUATION 0 N Exterlov Description Interior Description rod.Cost Depr. Cl.Sound Value Z Building RSP N Uw Exterior Walls Basement Desc. Plumbing Q -Cla boards None, None W Sing1e Dw9- P i ? No Baths • ;L -Double Dwg. Wood Shingles Part 3 J1 o.Toilets Duplex Dwg. Asbestos Shingles Full / ") --r--' Sidin -Cement Floor Tblodern Pl. 1 /�: /��Q ✓ Npartmentlldg Earth Floor -Old Style 1 Ay_,•. ,_%) f ct„re Bldg Face rick -_�- (y Q U'ilce Bldg• Common Brick Fin.Rooms Con.Block � Interior Walls Heating U. FactorY Warehouse Stucco -Plastered Stoves Z O Garage Roof Type Plaster Bd_ -Ho Air(g ray.)Z Construction Gable Composition Bd. Hot Air(forced) y -> /' S� COMPUTATIONS Brick Steam(1 pipe) �` - Y Y e_-7 O Q - R'ood Frame Hip Wood Steam(2 pipe) Steel Frame Flat HotWater(gray.) Brick Gambrel Hot Water(circ.) Brick enter Mansard Floors Z O Rei k Concrete Dormers Common -Coal Fired = Hard Wood Oil Fired - / l✓r;i 7c7a`1 Jr�Q Cin.Block Roof Covering Reinf.Con. Gas Fired r 1I] Mill Const Wood Shingles Concrete Slab Stoker37 a� O Foundations -Asphalt Shingles Lineoleum /l1�/.�j f' 7 ?,�r� 77 / E• Concrete Asbestos Shingles Asphalt Tile Lighting 10 jr i Slate LiQhnQ P%fir-"/ 1- Con.Block Tar&c Gravel Attic Rooms -Electric -Ston• Metal PieNumber Gas 7% D `� Bric k Roll Asphalt Walls ro Poets Floors Miscellaneous 't %No.Fireplaces -- Aceesaory Bldgs. Area Const. Roof Floor TY pe Insulation Tiled Baths Wood Sash Metal Sash REMARKS 1 r IVRmr-'_JAI Lr�w EDWARD F. MORRIS" 10 HIGH STREET NEW HAMPSHIRc"r g STEPHEN H. ROGERS* PO BOX 1962 PETIER C. PHILLIPS" ANDOVER, MASSACHUSETTS 01810 400 LAFAYETTE ROAD PO BOX a" FRANCIS M. FUNARO" TELEPHONE 978/475-4141 HAMPTON.NH 038434304 M. PAUL IANNUCCILLO' FACSIMILE 978/475-7479 **Admiard to practice in Nary.A HH TELEPHONE 6031929-1700 •Admkwd to practice in Hare, FACSIMILE 6031929.5049 l January 14, 1998 I Mr. Robert Nicetta Building Department Town of North Andover Town Hall 120 Main Street North Andover, MA 01845 JAN J'01997 Re: 521 Salem Street, North Andover, MA Dear Mr. Nicetta: Here is a copy of the plot plan, and a copy of the deed to the above-referenced property, as you requested. Hopefully, they will help you in your efforts to work out this problem. I think it would be helpful if I give you a brief synopsis of the events leading up to today, for they highlight the hardship that the Town has subjected Mr. Pearson to thus far. As you know, Mr. Pearson was given a permit to build by the Town of North Andover on December 12, 1997, after he had submitted his application. Attached to the application for the permit to build was a.copy of the plan. In bold print the plan stated, in the lower left corner, "Proposed Addition & Remodeling to Existing Two Family House." After he received the permit, a copy of which I have included, Mr. Pearson purchased materials and began substantial work on the property, including the laying of a new foundation. f Several days later, however, Mr. Surette, the Building Inspector for the town of North Andover, called.to inform Mr. Pearson that he would have to stop working, because Mr. Surette was not aware that the home was actually a two-family dwelling, and hence Mr. Pearson would have to go before the Town in order to obtain a special permit. At this point, my partner and I visited Mr. Surette to discuss the matter. We showed Mr. Surette a copy of the plan which was included with Mr. Pearson's application, and brought to his attention the fact that the plan stated that the home was actually a two- family dwelling. Mr. Surette stated that he"must have missed it," but that there was nothing that could be done, and that Mr. Pearson would have to go before the Zoning Board for a special permit. Although upset that he was led to believe he could start work on his property, Mr. Pearson nevertheless decided that he would abide by Mr. Surette's , decision. Consequently, he hired a surveyor to start field work and to assemble the necessary plans and the mylar. The surveyor had finished approximately 3/4 of the work ? 'when Mr. Surette called Mr. Pearson last week. He told Mr. Pearson that, after thinking it over and doing some research, he felt Massachusetts General Laws Ch. 40A:6 exempted Mr. Pearson from having to appear before the Zoning Board of Appeals. He went on to g PP say that if this office wrote a letter to him and cited the relevant statute, he would take ! care of the issue so that Mr. Pearson could once again work to improve his property. Relying on Mr. Surette's words, Mr. Pearson contacted us and told us to look up the r statute and write Mr. Surette the letter which he had requested, which we did. We agreed I that the statute exempted him, for it states, "Except as hereinafter provided, a zoning ordinance orb law shall not apply to structures or uses lawfully in existence or lawfully ll Y i begun... Since Mr. Pearson began his work relying on a permit lawfully Y issued b the Town of North Andover, we feel that he is exempt Pt from having to obtain a special permit. The surveyor was then told to stop his work and bill Mr. Pearson for the time he had already spent on this particular job, which is a rather substantial amount. Because the Building Inspector for the Town of North Andover was the individual who was corresponding with Mr. p g . Pearson, he felt that he could rely on the authority and legality of what was being said. That brings us to g today, when you and I spoke on the telephone. I firmly believe that Mr. Pearson has been put in an extremely difficult situation because of the events which I have outlined. On two occasions he has relied on the words of the Building Inspector, and 1 on both occasions he has been informed that mistakes have been made on the part of that individual. Mr. Pearson has invested significant money and time into this project. Because f o the Town's negligence, he stands to lose even more. I hope that this matter can be settled quickly and fairly. Please contact me once you have had the opportunity to look over these materials. I' Thank you very much for your cooperation. i Very truly yours, is MORRIS, ROGERS & PHILLIPS Stephen H. Rogers i ! SHR/bib cc: Donald Pearson . i . i , I 1lJLiJ.iJ.G We, JOSEPH W. GERETY and JULIE A. GERETY, husband and wife as tenants by the entirety, both of Woburn, Massachusetts �I I in consideration of Two Hundred Three Thousand and 00/100 ($203,000.00)Dollars grant to D014ALD PEARSON and CHARLENE PEARSON, husband and wife as tenants by the entirety, both of 521 Salem Street, North Andover, Massachusetts, with QUITCLAIM COVENANTS, A certain parcel of land with the buildings and improvements thereon situated in North Andover, Essex County, Massachusetts shown as Lot "A" on a plan of land entitled, "Subdivision Plan ENGLISH CIRCLE IN NORTH ANDOVER, MASS. Drawn for Gene L. English", Scale V =40', Dated August 1989, Revised September 1989 by Merrimack Engineering Services 66 Park Street Andover Massachusetts 01810 and recorded with the Essex North District Registry of Deeds on January 23, 1991 as Plan# 11878 to which Plan reference is hereby made for a more particular i'ascription of said Lot "A' V$s F..iLf V rf•t1'97 91 Pv,3•4, Said Lot "A" contains 25,000 S.F., according to said Plan. Together with the right to use English Circle, as shown on said Plan, for all purposes for which streets and ways are commonly used ui the'Town of North Andover in common with all others entitled thereto. Subject to and with the benefit of any and all easements,'restrictions and conditions of record in so far as same are presently in force and applicable. For our title see Deed of Gene L. English, Trustee of Salem Street North Andover Trust, dated February 14, 1991 and recorded with said Registry of Deeds in Book 3218, Page 287. i Witness our hands and seals this ,31 day of October, 1997 OSE W. GERETY ' i JULIE A. GERETY i r J.., 1 1 A NORT own of r _ . Andover No. G /� m 0 _ LAKE dover, Mass., Z Z 19 9 j COCNICMEWICK ~:VA. S1 EDNA PERMI BOARD OF HEALTH Food/Kitchen Septic System THIS CERTIFIES THAT.............................. BUILDING INSPECTOR ............ .....1 �IQ.� ............................................................... has permission to erect.......... it! Foundatiorf-�� i� r 1. .1. .... buildings on ...... ,. S../'Ir.� -=-- G to be occupied as.. G ' Rough provided that the person accepting this permit shall in every respect conform to the.94 t ( Chimney this office, and to the provisions of the Codes and By-Laws relating to the Inspection, Alteration and�Constructioln of Buildings in the Town of North Andover. e in Final VIOLATION of the Zoning or Building Regulations Voids this Permit. PLUMBING INSPECTOR Rough PERMU EXPIRES IN 6 MONTHS Final UNLESS CONSTRUCTIONS ELECTRICAL INSPEC'T'OR Rough ......................... !........... ... ....... Service . .... .......... ................I.................. B DING INSPECTOR Occupancy Permit Required to Occupy Building Final GAS INSPECTOR Display in a Conspicuous Place on the Premises — Do Not Remove Rough y No Lathing or Dry Wall To Be Done °a' Until Inspected and Approved by the Building Inspector.ector. FIRE DEPARTMENT FBur 66 642 1LO i s 6-tal Service Receipt for Certified Mail No Insurance Coverage Provided. Do not use for International Mail See reverse SenttZ'-40"O' c h� Street&NumbeZ � PostOf'cp State & I Code r/U Postage $ J� Certified Fe Sas Special $_ Restrict X81 ery Fee � LO A Retum Re �winb*7 .Whom&Da7 a Retum Receipt Showing Q Date,&Addressee's Address 0 TOTAL Postage&Fees Is 7 V) Postmark or Date E O u- T i Stick postage stamps to article to cover First-Class postage,certified mall fee,and charges for any selected optional services(See front). 1. If you want this receipt postmarked, stick the gummed stub to the right of the return address leaving the receipt attached, and present the article at a post office service window or hand it to your rural carrier(no extra charge). 2. If you do not want this receipt postmarked,sticWlhe gummed stub to the right of the aqi return address of the article,date,detach,and retain the receipt,and mail the article. LO i 3. If you want a return receipt,write the certified mail number and your name and address rn on a return receipt card,Form 3811,and attach it to the front of the article by means of the '.gummed ends if space permits. Otherwise,affix to back of article. Endorse front of article a RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED adjacent to the number. Q 4. If you want delivery restricted to the addressee, or to an authorized agent of the G j addressee,endorse RESTRICTED DELIVERY on the front of the article. 5. Enter fees for the services requested in the appropriate spaces on the front of this receipt. If return receipt is requested,check the applicable blocks in item 1 of Form 385'1. 6. Save this receipt and present it if you make an inquiry. ' �r �a I Town of North Andover oTh OFFICE OF >!� �. • yet COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND SERVICES 30 School Street : 0 I= " • North Andover,Massachusetts 01845 � •4.d°•"'`� WHI IAM J. SCOTT �SS�CHustt Director March 30, 1998 Ms. Jane Richard 25 English Circle North Andover, Ma 01845 ;a Re: 521 Salem Street Dear Ms. Richard: In response to your correspondence of March 17, 1998 received on March 18, 1998. Please be advised of the following: 1, Building Permit#618 issued December 12, 1997 cannot be considered valid until such time as the Zoning Board of Appeals action is final. The Zoning Board of Appeals hearing has been continued until April 14, 1998. 2. Investigation reveals that the applicant of building Permit#75 issued March 13, 1998 used the phase"remodel"on his application. Conversation with local Inspector Surette reveals that the applicant desires to remodel the interior and maintain the exterior of the existing structure only. 1 am of the opinion that maintenance/repair and interior remodeling in order to protect structures are allowed in 780 CMR, the Massachusetts State Building Code. As such, I am also of the opinion that it does not violate Mass. General Law Chapter 40A, s.6 or section (s)9 and 10.11 of the North Andover Zoning By-Law. Pursuant to Section 10.4 of the North Andover Zoning By-Law, you may aggrieve this decision within thirty(30)days to the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals. Very truly yours, tt� i Robert Nicetta, Building Commissioner cc: Walter Soule, ZBA RN:jm , ! BOARD OF APPEALS 688-9541 BUILDING 688-9545 CONSERVATION 688-9530 HEALTH 688-9540 PLANNING 688-9535 I I SENDER: a ■Complete items 1 and/or 2 for additional services. I also wish to receive the w ■Complete items 3,4a,and 4b. following services(for an 1 y ■Print your name and address on the reverse of this form so that we can return this extra fee): card to you. ai -Attach this form to the front of the mailpiece,or on the back if space does not 1. ❑ Addressee's Address v permit. 1 ry ■Write'Return Receipt Requested'on the mailpiece below the article number. 2. ❑ Restricted Delivery N « ■The Return Receipt will show to whom the article was delivered and the date g, c delivered. . Consult postmaster for fee. 4)1 3.Article Addressed to: 4a.Article Number d d Ms Jane Richard 25 English Circle 4b.Service Type00 ?� rn North Andover MA 01845 ❑ Registered ertified oti W ❑ Express Mail ❑ Insured H G ❑ Retum Receipt for Merchandise [1COD `I a 7.Date of Delivery w M X 11 - d) ;,I F 5.Received By: (Print Name) 8.Addressee's Address(Only if requested w I ¢ and fee is paid) m H{ g 6.Signaf : (Addre or ent) IN X Ps Fo 811, ecember 1994 Domestic Return Receipt First-Class Mail ' UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE Postage&Fees Paid USPS Permit No.G-10 • Print your name, address, and ZIP Code in this box • NO. Andover Building Dept Town Hall 120 Main St North Andover MA 01845 I ~ 1 ' April 4, 1998 Mr. Robert Nicetta 146 Main Street " North Andover, MA 01845 1 Dear Mr. Nicettaj. Thank-you for your reply to my March 17, 1998 letter requesting you to tevoke the two i permits #618: Dec'97 and#75: Mar'981 issued to Donald Pearson regarding the property Pe � on 521 Salem St. I We share the opinion expressed in your letter that maintenance/repair in order to protect a structure is allowed in 780 CMR, of the Mass State Building Code. The work that's in- progress to add new windows and siding obviously are maintenance/repair. However, does the request in the application to remodel kitchens and bathrooms, which appears to be granted by the issuance of permit#75, qualify as maintenance/repair to protect the structure? 1 , As I mentioned to you over the phone on March 20, this is one of a number of questions iwe have regarding permit #75. I hope you can understand why, as a neighbors to 521 Salem St., we feel compelled to follow the permits issued to the property closely. As you recall, things were also not very clear surrounding the issuance of the first permit (#618 in Dec'97). Mr. Surette, the local inspector, claimed at the time he wasn't aware he was issuing a permit to a two-family home. A two-family home in this district can only exist as a pre-existing non-conforming structure/use. Under the circumstances, Mr. Surette's authority to issue such a permit is questionable. As you mentioned earlier this can only be done by Special Permit through Zoning Board action. To restate my point, had I not inquired at your office, the structure would be altered by now. It would now be a two- family rental property- a use not allowed in the district. This use would be substantially detrimental to the single-family character of our neighborhood. What's more, all of this would have occurred with total disregard to the procedures set forth in our town's Zoning by-laws. I There are other reasons we feel compelled to watch the matter closely. According to, correspondence between your office and Mr. Pearson's attorneys(January 14, 1998), Mr. Surette admitted to Mr. Pearson he"must have missed" the fact that the plan submitted with the application, stated"two-family dwelling". Therefore, the permit is invalid, nothing could be done about it, and Mr. Pearson would have to go before the Zoning Board for a Special Permit. Consequently Mr. Pearson hired a surveyor to start field work and to assemble the necessary plans and the mylar. Later, Mr. Surette called,Mr. Pearson and told him that after thinking it over and doing some research,,he felt Mass. General Laws Ch. 40A:6 exempted Mr. Pearson from having to appear before the Zoning Board after all. He went on to say that if Mr. Pearson's attorneys wrote a letter Whim and cited the relevant statue, he would take care of the issue so that Mr. Pearson could 1 ; 1 _ 3 APR 1998 • O once again work on his property. You can imagine our shock when we learned our town's local Inspector was completely circumventing the process set forth in our own Zoning Laws, and Mass. General Laws that he was hired to uphold. We couldn't help but wonder what would motivate him to do such a thing after he was informed that the applicant must go in front of the Zoning Board for a Special Permit?Does he feel any responsibility to the abutters of the property, or to any citizen in North Andover for that matter, when he gives a permit to alter a structure for a use not allowed in the Zoning District? Has he ever done this before? Again, the purpose of my phone call to you-on March 20, 1998 was to discuss specific questions I have regarding the second permit # 15 issued by Mr. Surette for this property. Unfortunately, you replied that I made myself very clear in my previous letter to you (on , March 17, 1998), and you would not discuss this any further with me. I expressed my dismay and wondered why, after simply expressing a different opinion, all my questions now have to be put in writing? Therefore, as you requested, could you please answer the following questions which bear on our decision to aggrieve Permit#75 to the Z.B.A.? As you know, we have to make this decision within 30 days of March 31, 1998. As an option which may save time in this matter, you may fax us your response (681-6433). r What was not clear on the application or stated on permit#75, was the request"to remodel kitchen and bath". Here are my specific questions: 1. Is the applicant now agreeing that the structure is in fact a single-family home? 2. And therefore is the purpose of the remodeling to rip out the kitchen and create a conforming structure and use? 3. If not, which kitchen and bath does the applicant plan to remodel? , 4. Why is this remodeling necessary to"protect the structure" as mentioned in 780 CMR of the Mass. State Building Code? 5. Is the applicant remodeling the kitchen over the"altered footprint" in the 2"d unit? 6. Or is the remodeling being done to the kitchen in the main house? 7. Is the remodeling on the bath being done on the non-conforming 2"d unit, 8. Or the is it for the"proposed" baths on the first floor as evident on the applicant's plans submitted with the first permit application. And again, how is this necessary to"protect the structure"? ' 9. When I asked to view the file in your office there were no plans submitted with the application for permit#75. How could Mr. Surette make any of the above i determinations and issue a permit without any plans? 10. Why were there no plumbing permits in the file if the inspector gave approval for remodeling a kitchen and bath? ' I For quite some time our neighborhood has been dealing with many questionable i alterations and uses occurring on this property, with no knowledge about who/what can I be done about it. The property was presented to the Planning Board as a single family home in1989 to be subdivided, which was finally recorded at the E.N.R.D. in 1991. (see II subdivision plan for English Circle at the Planning Board Office) According to the North Andover subdivision control laws, (sec. 7, I pg. 59, and sec. 11 C p.74) all lots within the subdivision, including ours, must conform with current Zoning By-Laws. This property lost its protected status, or grandfathered use, at that time(whatever the use was, is yet to be determined). The town has not had the opportunity to enforce the current Zoning Laws because no building permits were applied for since the property became part of a subdivision. Since the property recently sold and the new owner has applied for permits, the neighborhood finally has a chance to voice our concerns and ask some logical questions to learn if this property can be permitted to do the things it is requesting. Without proper enforcement from your office our town's Zoning Laws are rendered useless. (For example, I can't help but wonder if one lot in this subdivision is allowed to use their property as a two-family home can the other 3 lots do so as well?) , We are grateful that you were willing to help us in the past by looking into our complaint concerningpermit #618 and we hope that i p p you will again serve the citizens of this town by rin . answe g our questions regarding the second permit, #75, issued on March 13 1998. As P , You so graciously informed us in your previous correspondence, we are working under the provision of a 30 day appealperiod and hopeyou can answer in a timely manner.r r We admit that we are not zoning experts and need your imput before we decide whether to move ahead with our concerns to the Zoning Board. We realize'your job is to uphold the Zoning By-Laws, thereby ensuring that both the applicant's property rights, and the abutter's property rights are guaranteed. Surely you can understand why we need to ask so.many questions after what happened with the first permit Mr. Surette issued, and we do appreciate your patience. Thank-you in advance for taking the time to help us once again. Ver+trulY Y >,, F im and Jane Richard` English Circle No. Andover, MA Fax. #: 681-6433 cc: Walter Soule ZBA Robert Halpin, Town Manager I i , Town of North Andover t NORTH ° OFFICE OF O?O`io •,apoa COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND SERVICES 30 School Street ` � ^ • WILLIAM J. SCOTT North Andover, Massachusetts 01815 �9ss Ays0 tag 4 U Director March 30, 1998 Ms. Jane Richard 25 English Circle North Andover, Ma 01845 Re: 521 Salem Street Dear Ms. Richard: In response to your correspondence of March 17, 1998 received on March 18, 1998. Please be advised of the following: 1. Building Permit#618 issued December 12, 1997 cannot be considered valid until such time as the Zoning Board of Appeals action is final. The Zoning Board of Appeals hearing has been continued until April 14, 1998. 2. Investigation reveals that the applicant of building Permit#75 issued March 13, 1998 used the phase"remodel"on his application. Conversation with local Inspector Surette reveals that the applicant desires to remodel the interior and maintain the exterior of the existing structure only. I am of the opinion that maintenancetrepair and interior remodeling in order to protect structures are allowed in 780 CMR, the Massachusetts State Building Code. As such, I am also of the opinion that it does not violate Mass. General Law Chapter 40A s.6 or sections 9 and 10.11 of the North Andover Zoning By-Law. ( ) g Y Pursuant to Section 10.4 of the North Andover Zoning By-Law, you may aggrieve this decision within thirty(30)days to the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals. A Very truly yours, Robert Nicetta, Building Commissioner cc: Walter Soule, ZBA RN:jm II BOARD OF APPEALS 688-9541 BUILDING 688-9545 CONSERVATION 688-9530 HEALTH 688-9540 PLANNING 688-9535 March 17, 1998 Mr. Robert Niccetta and Mr.Kenneth Surette Building Dept. Town Hall 146 Main St. North Andover,MA 01845 V Dear Sirs: Pursuant to Mass. General Laws c. 40A s. 7,please consider this correspondence a formal request to revoke Building Permit#75(3/13/98)and#618(12/12/97)both issued to Donald Pearson owner/contractor relevant to property located at 521 Salem St.North Andover,a.k.a.Map 38 Lot 8. The revocation request is based upon the fact that: 1) the subject locus/structure is non-conforming,both as to use,front yard setback;and the structure as ' altered/modified as evidenced by plans submitted by Mr. Pearson to the building Dept.,exceeds the { structure's existing footprint,and j 2) the locuststructure is the subject of a pending and unresolved hearing before the Zoning Board which upon written notice to your office effectively halts any and all construction until a final judgment is rendered. In your letter to Attorney Rogers regarding 521 Salem St.,dated January 16, 1998 you stated"that a j finding is necessary through the Zoning Board of Appeals" ...and"the Building Permit cannot be considered as valid until such time as the Zoning Board action is final. As such, work should not continue on the site." You went on further to state"In accordance with Chapter 40A section 6 you are conducting and alteration, extension and structural change to a pre-existing non-conforming use. Such activity requires that the Zoning Board determine that the extension or alteration is not substantially more 1 detrimental than the existing non-conforming use." As you know Zoning Board action is not final and the hearing has been continued to April 14, 1998. Therefore there can be no legal basis for the issuance of Permit#75 on March 13, 1998 which states"This Certifies that Donald Pearson has permission to ALTER buildings on 521 Salem St.." Likewise,there is no valid basis for relying on Permit#618 to continue any alterations or modifications to the property. The issued building permits violate s. 9 and s. 10.11 of the North Andover Zoning by-law and Mass. General Law c. 40A s. 6 as interpreted by you,and current case law from the Mass. Appeals and Supreme Judicial Courts. See Willard v. The Board of Appeals of Orleans, 25 Mass. App. Ct. 15(1987),and Goldhirsh v.McNear,32 Mass. App. Ct. 455 (1992). Kindly notify us in writing of your decision within 14 days of this request. ! r S' cerely, �. Jim and Jan chard `,._Jolui and Paula Camarata 25 English Cr. 15 English Cr. No. Andover,MA 01845 No. Andover,MA 01845 cc:William Scott,Director Community Development Robert Halpin,Town Manager . t s April 4, 1998 Mr. Robert Nicetta 146 Main Street North Andover, MA 01845 Dear Mr. Nicetta, Thank-you for your reply to my March 17, 1998 letter requesting you to revoke the two permits [#618: Dec'97 and #75: Mar'98] issued to Donald Pearson regarding the property on 521 Salem St. We share the opinion expressed in your letter that maintenance/repair in order to protect a structure is allowed in 780 CMR, of the Mass State Building Code. The work that's in- progress to add new windows and siding obviously are maintenance/repair. However, does the request in the application to remodel kitchens and bathrooms, which appears to be granted by the issuance of permit#75, qualify as maintenance/repair to protect the structure? As I mentioned to you over the phone on March 20, this is one of a number of questions we have regarding permit#75. I hope you can understand why, as a neighbors to 521 Salem St., we feel compelled to follow the permits issued to the property closely. As you recall, things were also not very clear surrounding the issuance of the first permit (#618 in Dec'97). Mr. Surette, the local inspector, claimed at the time he wasn't aware he was issuing a permit to a two- family home. A two-family home in this district can only exist as a pre-existing non-conforming structure/use. Under the circumstances, Mr. Surette's authority to issue such a permit is questionable. As you mentioned earlier this can only be done by Special Permit through Zoning Board action. To restate my point, had I not inquired at your office, the structure would be altered by now. It would now be a two- family rental property - a use not allowed in the district. This use would be substantially detrimental to the single-family character of our neighborhood. What's more, all of this would have occurred with total disregard to the procedures set forth in our town's Zoning by-laws. There are other reasons we feel compelled to watch the matter closely. According to correspondence between your office and Mr. Pearson's attorneys (January 14, 1998), Mr. Surette admitted to Mr. Pearson he"must have missed" the fact that the plan submitted with the application, stated"two-family dwelling". Therefore, the permit is invalid, nothing could be done about it, and Mr. Pearson would have to go before the Zoning Board for a Special Permit. Consequently Mr. Pearson hired a surveyor to start field work and to assemble the necessary plans and the mylar. Later, Mr. Surette called Mr. Pearson and told him that after thinking it over and doing some research, he felt Mass. General Laws Ch. 40A:6 exempted Mr. Pearson from having to appear before the Zoning Board after all. He went on to say that if Mr. Pearson's attorneys wrote a letter to him and cited the relevant statue, he would take care of the issue so that Mr. Pearson could once again work on his property. You can imagine our shock when we learned our town's local Inspector was completely circumventing the process set forth in our own Zoning Laws, and Mass. General Laws that he was hired to uphold. We couldn't help but wonder what would motivate him to do such a thing after he was informed that the applicant must go in front of the Zoning Board for a Special Permit?Does he feel any responsibility to the abutters of the property, or to any citizen in North Andover for that matter, when he gives a permit to alter a structure for a use not allowed in the Zoning District? Has he ever done this before? Again, the purpose of my phone call to you on March 20, 1998 was to discuss specific questions I have regarding the second permit# 75 issued by Mr. Surette for this property. Unfortunately, you replied that I made myself very clear in my previous letter to you (on March 17, 1998), and you would not discuss this any further with me. I expressed my dismay and wondered why, after simply expressing a different opinion, all my questions now have to be put in writing? Therefore, as you requested, could you please answer the following questions which bear on our decision to aggrieve Permit 975 to the Z.B.A.? As you know, we have to make this decision within 30 days of March 31, 1998. As an option which may save time in this matter, you may fax us your response (681-6433). What was not clear on the application or stated on permit #75, was the request"to remodel kitchen and bath". Here are my specific questions: 1. Is the applicant now agreeing that the structure is in fact a single-family home? 2. And therefore is the purpose of the remodeling to rip out the kitchen and create a conforming structure and use? 3. If not, which kitchen and bath does the applicant plan to remodel? 4. Why is this remodeling necessary to "protect the structure" as mentioned in 780 CMR of the Mass. State Building Code? 5. Is the applicant remodeling the kitchen over the"altered footprint" in the 2"d unit? 6. Or is the remodeling being done to the kitchen in the main house? 7. Is the remodeling on the bath being done on the non-conforming 2nd unit, 8. Or the is it for the"proposed" baths on the first floor as evident on the applicant's plans submitted with the first permit application. And again, how is this necessary to"protect the structure"? 9. When I asked to view the file in your office there were no plans submitted with the application for permit#75. How could Mr. Surette make any of the above determinations and issue a permit without any plans? 10. Why were there no plumbing permits in the file if the inspector gave approval for remodeling a kitchen and bath? For quite some time our neighborhood has been dealing with many questionable alterations and uses occurring on this property, with no knowledge about who/what can be done about it. The property was presented to the Planning Board as a single family home in1989 to be subdivided, which was finally recorded at the E.N.R.D. in 1991. (see subdivision plan for English Circle at the Planning Board Office) According to the North Andover subdivision control laws, (sec. 7, I pg. 59, and sec. 11 C p.74) all lots within the subdivision, including ours, must conform with current Zoning By-Laws. This property lost its protected status, or grandfathered use, at that time(whatever the use was, is yet to be determined). The town has not had the opportunity to enforce the current Zoning Laws because no building permits were applied for since the property became part of a subdivision. Since the property recently sold and the new owner has applied for permits, the neighborhood finally has a chance to voice our concerns and ask some logical questions to learn if this property can be permitted to do the things it is requesting. Without proper enforcement from your office our town's Zoning Laws are rendered useless. (For example, I can't help but wonder if one lot in this subdivision is allowed to use their property as a two-family home can the other 3 lots do so as well?) We are grateful that you were willing to help us in the past by looking into our complaint concerning permit 9618, and we hope that you will again serve the citizens of this town by answering our questions regarding the second permit, #75, issued on March 13, 1998. As you so graciously informed us in your previous correspondence, we are working under the provision of a 30 day appeal period and hope you can answer in a timely manner. We admit that we are not zoning experts and need your imput before we decide whether to move ahead with our concerns to the Zoning Board. We realize your job is to uphold the Zoning By-Laws, thereby ensuring that both the applicant's property rights, and the abutter's property rights are guaranteed. Surely you can understand why we need to ask so many questions after what happened with the first permit Mr. Surette issued, and we do appreciate your patience. Thank-you in advance for taking the time to help us once again. Very truly yours, i jJand Jany chard 25 English Circle No. Andover, MA Fax. #: 681-6433 cc: Walter Soule, ZBA Robert Halpin, Town Manager p R 0 W R 0FRCF CF TOW Ml��AiNAC R April 4, 1998 Mr. Robert Halpin Town Manager Town Hall ` 146 Main St. North Andover, MA 01845 Dear Mr. Halpin, We are abutters to property currently in front of the Zoning Board for a Special Permit. We are writing to request a meeting with you regarding our relationship with the Building Department. In the process of preparing for the Z.B.A. hearing we ran across some issues we need to discuss with you. The purpose of our request has nothing to do with the outcome of the hearing, but the process we have been going through trying to obtain information. We believe it would be helpful if we bring you into the loop about how the Dept. is issuing permits. Enclosed you will find an information packet regarding events between our neighborhood and the Building Department. Some of the information is long and a bit tedious to read, especially the Report submitted to the Z.B.A.. If you wouldn't mind looking it over, specifically our letter to Mr. Niccetta dated April 4, 1998, it may be helpful before we meet. We will call your office to set up a time that is convenient for you. Thank-you in advance for your time and help in this matter. Sincerely, I Vim and Jane Richard ATTORNEYS AT LAW 'C'tOWARD R. MORRIS'S 10 HIGH STREET OrmPAEu N. ROGERS* PO BOX 1962 PETER C:PHILLIPS'• ANDOVER. MASSACHUSETTS 01810 400 LAIAY9rM ROAD PO BOX 804 ".FRANCIf M. FUNARO" TELEPHONE 9781475-4141 HAMPTON, NH 03643604 M. PAUL IANNUCCILLO* FACSIMILE 97814715-7479 �Mirr�r pb Mar.i NN TELErHONE d03192W 1700 . January 9, 1998 Mr. Kenneth Surette, Building Inspector Town of North Andover Town Hall 120 Main Street North Andover MA 01845 Re: 521 Salem Street, North Andover, MA Dear Mr. Surette: This office represents Mr. Donald Pearson in connection.with his efforts to improve the j property located at the above-referenced address. As you know, Mr. Pearson was given a Y g► permit to build by the Town of North Andover several weeks ago. He started work on the property, relying on the permit which he received. Several days later, however, you called to inform him that he would have to stop working because you were not aware that the home was actually a two-family dwelling, and hence Mr. Pearson would have to go before the Town in order to obtain a special permit. It is our opinion that Massachusetts General Laws Ch. 40A:6 exempts Mr. Pearson from having to appear before the Zoning Board,of Appeals, since he had lawfully begun work on the property. Mr. Pearson informed us that you called him today and agreed with our analysis of the statute. Based on your conversation with Mr. Pearson today, it appears as though the Town has no objection to the improvements which he wishes to make to the property, and as a consequence, he will not have to submit an application for a special permit. However, please contact this office immediately if this is not the case. '; Thank you very much for your cooperation. Very truly yours, 2 MORRIS, ROGERS & PHILLIPS .JAN 1 31997 �. Z---, Stephen H. Rogers SHR/bib cc: Donald Pearson Ill;1`Jr'1b'Jb 1 _to4r _ r'4r� ,ft'-n PrauE >j MORRIS, ROGERS & PHILLIPS ATTORNEYS AT LAW 10 HIGH STREET NEw WAMP.1.H1RE OFICEF EDWARD F- MORRIS** PO sox I"z STrLFHEN W- RO6ERS* 400 I.AFAVETTE ROAD ANDOVER, MAGGACMUSETTS 01810 "DQX 904 PETER C. PHILLIPS"" PC*' M. FUNARO*` TELEPHONE 976/479"141 HAMPron. NH 09e43804 M. PAUL IANNUCGILLQ* FACSIMILE 97814715.7479 TEL.EPMON£6031929-1700 •t4"jt1ad ro pwilcr ra Mare..f N14 FAc31MILL 6031929.9049 •AdmiWd nr pr+�cuce!n M�+r.• January 19, 1998 M.T. Robert Nicetta, Building Department Town of North Andover Town Hall 120 Main Street North Andover, MA 01845 Re: 521 Salem Street, North Andover, MA Dear Mr. Nicetta: This office is in receipt of your letter dated Friday, January 16, 1998. As you know, it was sent to us via fax at 4:40 p.zn. Unfortunately, your decision leaves our client, Donald Pearson, in an even worse position than he was in before. On two occasions, the Town of North Andover has given our client permission to go forth with work. at the above-referenced address. In reliance thereon, he has spent significant amounts of time and money, only to have the Town go back on its word and arbitrarily and illogically stop him from working both times. Our client is also upset at the fact that you notified him of your most recent decision on late Friday afternoon, knowing Hill well that the application deadline for the next Zoning Board meeting is this Tuesday, January 20th, making it impossible for him to gather the required materials in time, especially in light of the fact that the Town offices were closed for the holiday today. This office is advising our client to continue work at his property. The Town of North Andover has damaged hun financially through a series of negligent acts. Our client has been an ituiocent victim during this whole ordeal, and it would be unjust for the Town to expect him to wait another month to have bis case heard by the Zoning Board. It is our opinion that the Town of North Andover is clearly at fault here, and our client has given us the authority to pursue relief through legal action if this matter is not.rectified in a manner satisfactory to him. Very truly yours, MORRIS, R(X_*k R$ & PHlLLIPS 40 Stephen H. Rogers SHR/bib cc: Donald Pearson JAN 2 0 %T 01/19/98 18:31 TX/RX N0.7486 P.002 TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND SERVICES M30 SCHOOL STREET NORTH ANDOVER, MASSACHUSETTS 01845 William J. ScottO NORTH Telephone(978)688-9531 Director p FAX(978)688-9542 SS�CHUS February 19, 1998 Mr. Thomas Camara 5 Washington Street Tewsbury, MA 01876 Re: 521 Salem St. North Andover MA 01845 Dear Mr. Camara: The Building Department is in receipt of you letter dated February H, 1998 requesting documentation on file for 521 Salem Street. The attached are copies of permits, correspondence,plans that are on file. The charge for 14 copies of paperwork and the plans is $12.00. Pursuant to your conversation with the secretary, you agreed to pick up the documents today or Friday. Ii Very truly yours, I � I � Robert Nicetta, Building Commissioner � C i I i i BOARD OF APPEALS 688-9541 BIJUDINGS 68R 9545 CONSERVATION 6811-9530 HEA1;111688-9540 PLANNING 688-9535 120 MAIN ST. 120 UUN ST. 30 SCI1001,Sl'. 30 SCHOOL ST. 30 SCHOOL ST. i� EED We, JOSEPH W. GERETY and JULIE A. GERETY, husband and wife as tenants by the entirety, both of Woburn, Massachusetts in consideration of Two Hundred Three Thousand and 00/100 ($203,000.00)Dollars grant to DONALD PEARSON and CHARLENE PEARSON, husband and wife as tenants by the entirety, both of 521 Salem Street, North Andover, Massachusetts, with QUITCLAIM COVENANTS, A certain parcel of land with the buildings and improvements thereon situated in North Andover, Essex County, Massachusetts shown as Lot "A" on a plan of land C1..6 entitled, "Subdivision Plan ENGLISH CIRCLE IN NORTH ANDOVER, MASS. Drawn for Gene L. English", Scale V = 40', Dated August 1989, Revised September 1989 by N Merrimack Engineering Services 66 Park Street, Andover, Massachusetts 01810 and recorded with the Essex North District Registry of Deeds on January 23, 1991 as Plan# 11878, to which Plan reference is hereby made for a more particular t'cscription of said s Lot "A". r t�' 1';# ��.3:q� Said Lot "A" contains 25,000 S.F., according to said Plan. 1 Together with the right to use English Circle as shown on • l g 8 sa 1 Plan, for all purposes for which streets and ways are commonly used ui the Town of North Andover in common with all others entitled thereto. Subject to and with the benefit of any and all easements, restrictions and conditions of record in so far as same are presently in force and applicable. For our title see Deed of Gene L. taglish, Trustee of ovalem Street, North Andover Trust, dated February 14, 1991 and recorded with said Registry of Deeds in Book 3218, Page 287. Witness our hands and seals this s 1 day of October, 1997 ! /j A;Ll OSE W. GERETY i �ocr IS, 12o�t S !���11► s JULIE A. GERETY P 'a�i1T No. APPLICATION FOR PERMIT TO 84UILD = NORTH ANDOVER, MASS. PACE. 1 'A" +40. LOT NO. Ci Z RECORD OF OWNERSHIP DATE (BOOK ;PAGE oo/ ZONE' I`ll I SUB DIV. LOT NO. LOCATION PURPOSE OF BUILDING OWNER'S NAME O^ NO. OF STORIES SIZE OWNER'S ADDRESS �+ BASEMENT OR SLAB ARCHITECT'S NAME t- , / 512E OF FLOOR TIMBERS 1ST q`X JH/ ZY ND C•( +'`. „3RD /��� BUILDER'S NAME T- SPAN / `� ,✓V jL� !K �_ DISTANCE TO NEAREST BUILDING DIMENSIONS OF SILLS DISTANCE FROM STREET O ` POSTS DISTANCE FROM LOT LINES - SIDES y`� JL/00 REAR GIRDERS AREA OF LOT ' .� („1 C FRONTAGE /�'7 HEIGHT OF FOUNDATION - THICKNESS IS BUILDING NEW /• SIZE OF FOOTING v �/ / X IS BUILDING ADDITION MATERIAL OF CHIMNEY G7 O IS BUILDING ALTERATION C IS BUILDING ON SOLID OR FILLED LAND WILL BUILDING CONFORM TO REQUIREMENTS OF CODE 14e IS BUILDING CONNECTED TO TOWN WATER BOARD OF APPEALS ACTION. IF ANY IS BUILDING CONNECTED TO TOWN SEWER /lO IS BUILDING CONNECTED TO NATURAL GAS LINE INSTRUCTIONS 3 PROPERTY INFORMATION LAND COST SEE BOTH SIDES EST. BLDG. COS � ��)t'' PAGE 1 FILL OUT SECTIONS 1 - 3 EST. BLDG. COST F&R SQ. FT. EST. BLDG. COST PER ROOM PAGE 2 FILL OUT SECTIONS 1 - 12 SEPTIC PERMIT NO. • ELECTRIC METEPS MUST BE ON OUTSIDE OF BUILDING aft APPROVED BY ATTACHED GARAGES MUST CONFORM TO STATE FIRE REGULATIONS PLANS MUST BE FILED AND APPROVED BY BUILDING INSPECT R DATE FILED co �� ■U IND INSPECTOR SIGNATURE OF OWNER OR AUTHORIZED AGENT / FEE �' n2 OWNER TEL.rY PERMIT GRANTED S• CONTR.TEL.x 1.. 9 92 CONTR.LIC.N lCe 2. 7i H.I.C.x FORM U - LOT RELEASE FORM INSTRUCTIONS: This form is used to verify that all necessary Boards and Departments having jurisdiction have been obtained. This does noL relieve from the applicant and/or landowner from compliance with any applicable or rdoes nog relieve egwrements. APPLICANT FILLS OUT THIS SECTION APPLICANT PHONE �� LOCATION: Assessors Map Number PARCEL SUBDIVISION s LOT (S) _ i• STREET ST. NUMBER OFFICIAL USE ONLY i REC ENDATIONS O TOWN AGENTS: CONSERVATION ADMINISTRATOR DATE APPROVED I DATE REJECTED COMMENTS TOWN PLANNER DATE APPROVED DATE REJECTED COMMENTS FOOD INSPECTOR-HEALTH DATE APPROVED T DATE REJECTED S IC INSPECTOR- EALTH DATE APPROVED DATE REJECTED COMMENTS PUBLIC WORKS -SEWER/WATER CONNECTIONS DRIVEWAY PERMIT FIRE DEPARTMENT RECEIVED BY BUILDING INSPECTOR DATE 1 It raoF � - loom fir. Raw FAUTIoni >+ 7 k YL 1 r,• ,�.,.�}'J • .-�• }e 1 t i t ��.`�.' _,;�tf._� .i :5:...,..J hal• kj Iv�eff 4' • - 1 V:1 KI. tAOR Town of Andove r 0 No. -t 0 CHLARE dower, ver, Mass., 19 0 ICHEW CK BOARD OF HEALTH Food/Kitchen PERMIT T Septic System THIS CERTIFIES THAT BUILDING INSPECTOR Foundation .. has permission to erect.......... .0..0.1110W buildings on ......> ............S ... .......... Rough to be occupied as......... A46 .40.........0. ....................... Chimney provided that the person accepting this permit shall In every respect conform to the term i6 application on file in this office, and to the provisions of the Codes and By-Laws relating to the Inspection, Alteration and Construction of Final Buildings In the Town of North Andover. PLUMBING INSPECTOR VIOLATION of the Zoning or Building Regulations Voids this Permit. Rough PERMIT EXPIRES IN 6 MONTHS Final S ELECTRICAL INSPECTOR 0,0, UNLESS CONSTRUCTIONS Rough ......................... ............. .... ... 'E"INSPECTOR T-0**R**' Service ING Final Occupancy Permit Required to Occupy Building GAS INSPECTOR Display in a Conspicuous Place on the Premises — Do Not Remove Rough No Lathing or Dry Wall To Be Done Final Until Inspected and Approved by the Building Inspector. FIRE DEPARTMENT Burner Street No. Smoke Det. i MORTGAGE INSPECTION PLAN AT 52/ SALEM S TREE NORTH ANDOVER MA. NO, ESSEX REGISTRY OF DEEDS.' 8K. 3218 PG. 287 PLAN NO. l I,878 CERTIFI4'D T0.'NORTHMARK BANK SCALE.' 1 40DATE.' NOVEMBER 06, 1997 J00.00 68.99 t a!N V BL - �_ - LOT V \ 25,000 SF} ti 2 STY. # WD.F\ DWG, � POR 112.22 STREET' NOTES_' SALEM O l) THIS /S NOT A PROPER T Y SUR VE Y, DO NO T USE THIS PL A N TO ESTABLISH PROPERTY LINES OR TO ERECT ANY STRUCTURE. 2>PROPERTY LINES ARE DETERMINED FROM COMPILED INFORMATION TO BE USED FOR MORTGAGE PURPOSES ONLY Pv CERTIFICATIONS' BASED ON MY KNOWLEDGE, INFORMATION AND BELIEF, / HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE PERMANENT STRUCTURES INDICATED ARE LOCATED ON THE GROUND APPROXIMATELY AS SHOWN AND ARE CONFORM/NG TO THE ZONING SETBACK REQUIREMENTS OF THE ADPL/C. 6L E MUNICIPALITY Y W L HEN CONS TRUC TED OR MAY BE EXEMPT PER MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL LAW CHAPTER 40A T SECTION 7, AND THAT THE S r RUC TURF SHOWN /5 ,NO T LOCATED IN A FL 0 O HAZARD ZONE PER FEDERAL EMERGENC, MANAGEMENTAGEn�r,.wp, COMMUNI T Y N0. 250098 EFFECT/VE DATE. 06-02-93 ZONE, X JOHN ABAGIS 8 ASSOCIATES, PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVE-rv,-'S 137 CHANDLER ROAD, ANDOVER, MA. 1508) 698 -489; APPLICANT.-PEARSON NO. 3271 ffMiARD F. MORRIS" 10 HIGH STREET'. NEW HAMPSHIRIF-OFFICV BTEP14EN H. ROGERS* PO BOX 1962 PETER C. PHILLIPS" ANDOVER, MASSACHUSETTS 01810 400 LAFAYETTE ROAD ' PO box 804 FRANCIS M. FUNARO" TELEPHONE 978/475-4141 HAMPTON, NH 03843.ao4 Ms PAUL IANNUCCILLO' FACSIMILE 978/475-7479 NAd wed a pocwe u Mass d NH TELEPHONE 6031929.1700 •Adrwrdap akeAmUam FACSIMILE 6031929-15049 I January 14, 1998 Mr. Robert Nicetta, Building Department Town of North Andover Town Hall 120 Main Street North Andover, MA 01845 JAN /#697 Re: 521 Salem Street, North Andover, MA Dear Mr. Nicetta: Here is a copy of the plot plan, and a copy of the deed to the above-referenced property, as you requested. Hopefully, they will help you in your efforts to work out this problem. I think it would be helpful if I give you a brief synopsis of the events leading up to today, for they highlight the hardship that the Town has subjected Mr. Pearson to thus far. As you know, Mr. Pearson was given a permit to build by the Town of North Andover on December 12, 1997, after he had submitted his application. Attached to the application for the permit to build was a copy of the plan. In bold print the plan stated, in the lower left corner, "Proposed Addition & Remodeling to Existing Two Family House." After he received the permit, a copy of which I have included, Mr. Pearson purchased materials and began substantial work on the property, including the laying of a new foundation. Several days later, however, Mr. Surette, the Building Inspector for the town of North Andover, called to inform Mr. Pearson that he would have to stop working, because Mr. Surette was not aware that the home was actually a two-family dwelling, and hence Mr. Pearson would have to go before the Town in order to obtain a special permit. At this point, my partner and I visited Mr. Surette to discuss the matter. We showed Mr. Surette a copy of the plan which was included with Mr. Pearson's application, and brought to his attention the fact that the plan stated that the home was actually a two- family dwelling. Mr. Surette stated that he"must have missed it," but that there was nothing that could be done, and that Mr. Pearson would have to go before the Zoning Board for a special permit. Although upset that he was led to believe he could start work on his property, Mr. Pearson nevertheless decided that he would abide by Mr. Surette's decision. Consequently, he hired a surveyor to start field work and to assemble the necessary plans and the mylar. The surveyor had finished approximately 3/4 of the work i when Mr. Surette called Mr. Pearson last week. He told Mr. Pearson that, after thinking it over and doing some research, he felt Massachusetts General Laws Ch. 40A:6 exempted Mr. Pearson from having to appear before the Zoning Board of Appeals.'He went on to say that if this office wrote a letter to him and cited the relevant statute, he would take care of the issue so that Mr. Pearson could once again work to improve his property. Relying on Mr. Surette's words, Mr. Pearson contacted us and told us to look up the statute and write Mr. Surette the letter which he had requested, which we did. We agreed that the statute exempted him, for it states, "Except as hereinafter provided, a zoning ordinance or bylaw shall not apply to structures or uses lawfully in existence or lawfully begun..." Since Mr. Pearson began his work relying on a permit lawfully issued by the Town of North Andover, we feel that he is exempt from having to obtain a special permit. The surveyor was then told to stop his work and bill Mr. Pearson for the time he had already spent on this particular job, which is a rather substantial amount. Because Building Inspector for the Town of North Andover was the individual who was corresponding with Mr. Pearson, he felt that he could rely on the authority and legality of what was being said. That brings us to today, when you and I spoke on the telephone. I firmly believe that Mr. Pearson has been put in an extremely difficult situation because of the events which I have outlined. On two occasions he has relied on the words of the Building Inspector, and on both occasions he has been informed that mistakes have been made on the part of that individual. Mr. Pearson has invested significant money and time into this project. Because of the Town's negligence, he stands to lose even more. I hope that this matter can be settled quickly and fairly. Please contact me once you have had the opportunity to look over these materials. I! Thank you very much for your cooperation. Very truly yours, MORRIS, ROGERS & PHILLIPS i Stephen H. Rogers f SHR/bib cc: Donald Pearson A Lot Ass's Lot No. • Subd.No. Plan No. Address r _ \,' LAND VALUATION Oma:l•- �u i - t *1 # ) Area Rate 7v-,i_u, 3y _ M• ���3• �j Gni Front _.. ..�. - n• • ear D Jf tz Cor.Enhancement •( •� F BUILDING DESCRIPTION Total Area Value Age No.Stories Assrss Class ✓ 3 Phys.Depr. > In Rem No. Rooms Area /,!, .` - O 'S` Net Land Value 0 Condition r..t: Rent Area Add't'ns —' 0 0 Exterior Description Interior Description BU DING VALUATION Z (n Building Rleprod.Cost Depr. Cl.Sound Value U) L w Eaterior Wall• Basement Deac. Plumbingone :? Noney1 g. -Gla boards None No B3thq • -Doul 1 le DDwz- Wood Shingles "Part '�� ? No.Toilets l a Duple: D w[• Asbestos Shingles Full r Modern PL 1 �— `�� { ✓ 1 Siding -Cement Floor W .%partment D Earth Floor -Old Style 1 a -� .- 7 LA Q St Bldg. CummoocBrick Fin_Rooms �- (i UtRes Bidg• _ Coe.Block - - -_-- Factory Interior Watts Heating ` � war.-house St co, -plastered Stoves ' Z O Gane Roof Type Plaster Bd. -Hot Air(I Roof Construction Gable Composition Bd. Hot Air(torted) v . "� �/ �� COMPUTATIONS Brick Steam(1 pipe) ��-'- 1" 'Y/.3-7LL- --' O 0 - W-,d Frame Hip Wood Steam(2 pipe) Steel Frame Flat HotWater(gray.) ,��. 2 Brick Gambrel Floors Hot Water(circ.) Q Brick�'roeer Mansard Co ommon -Coal Fired =/ Y F�y� ��_•.� 7 Z O Rein(.Concrete Dormers Ho ard Wood Oil Fired C.n.Block l✓,r ,y_)a rl rl- M Mill Const. Root Shingles Re Concrete Con_ Cas Fired O Wood Shingles Concrete Slab Stoker / / � �� / ./ � ��� 3 2 L ! Foundations -As halt Shingles Lineoleum /,1 f' 7 j,•r_/-I /37 Asbestoe Shinges Asphalt Tile t `� 3 t Concrete Slate LI ht(ng 1r ' C Coe.Block PiY _Stone Tar dt Gravel AcNc Rooms -G�tric 7 Brick Metal Number _7/ Pleas Roll Asphalt Walls _ � Posta Floors Miscellaneous �No.Fireplaces -r ry Bldgs. Area Coost. Root Floor Type Insulation ; Tiled Baths �l Wood Sash Metal Sash REMARKS DONALD AND CIiARLENE PEAIZSON, SPECIAL PERN11'f APPLICATION 521 SALEM S'I721.ET. N. ANDOVER MAP 038, LOT U8 1 FACTS 1. A title perusal of the property in question, 521 Salem St., (aka assessor's map 38, lot 8) along with that of another affixed parcel (Lot 1), not relevant to this inquiry, indicates that the subject locus, in it's former configuration, was the genesis of a four(4) lot subdivision proposed by Gene L. English, Trustee of Salem Strcet North Andover Trust, recorded Aug. 5, 1988, Essex North Registry of Deeds (E.N.R.D.) at Book 2782, Page 70. 2 The four(4)lot plan and roadway located between 535 and inclusive of 521 Salem Street, N. Andover, MA, entitled "Subdivision Plan, English Circle, in North Andover, Mass. drawn for Gene L. English", Scale 1" = 40', dated August 1989, Revised September 1989, by Merrimack Engineering Services, 66 Park Street, Andover MA 01810 was approved with eighteen (18)conditions by the N. Andover Planning Board on February 15, 1990, and recorded with the E.N.R.D. on January 23, 1991 as Plan # 11878. An "Order of Conditions" in the name of Gene L. English, from the N. Andover Conservation Commission (DEQE file # 242-497), was issued in conjunction with the subdivision and recorded on 2/14/91 at E-.N.R.D. Bk. 3218, Pg. 295, and modified at Bk. 3218, pg. 303. 3. After the "English Circle" subdivision approval, 521 Salem Street (map 38, lot 8), illustrated as lot 'Won E.N.R.D. recorded subdivision plan # 11878, was sold by English as trustee of N. Andover Salem St. Trust, to Joseph and Julie Gerety, for consideration of $240,000.00 on Feb. 14, 1991 and recorded that day at E.N.R.D. Bk. 3218, pg. 287. 4. On October 31, 1997, the Geretys sold lot "A", 521 Salem St. as described on plan # 11878, to the present owners, Donald and Charlene Pearson, who currently reside at 1030 Jolurson Street, N. Andover MA 01845. See E.N.R.D. Bk. 4897, Pg. 332. 5. The comer lot, which purports to contain an area of 25,000 sq. ft., has 112.22' of frontage on Salem Street, a radius of 39.27' to English Circle, which it borders for a distance of 134.36', including the access driveway, to the rear lot line shared with lot # 3 for a distance of 188.99', then along a stone wall 155.24' back to Salem Street. See Lot "A", E.N.R.D. plan # 11878. Note the lack of structure or•setback dimensions on plan. 6. The locus contains an alleged two family, wood frame, Three (3) story dwelling, with two (2) story apartment(total area and number of rooms unknown), and cement block garage; the time frames for which the original structure construction and/or additions are dependent on for compliance with applicable zoning by-law and applicant's purported non-conforming status are unknown, nor are they stated anywhere in the record to date. 7. On or about December 12, 1997, Pearson received a building permit to add a 15'x 20'family room over die garage, and construct a 10' x 12'kitchen addition, apparently not in accordance with sec. 10.11 of the N. A. ZBL. 8. Neither the subdivision plan (#11878), nor the Pearson purveyed, mortgage inspection plan, certified to Northinark Bank, dated November 6, 1997, by John Abagis and Associates, Professional Land Suiveyors, 137 Chandler Road, Andover MA, submitted with his (Pearson's) Building Permit application, evidences dimensional criteria as to accurate location, structure sizes and/or setbacks from property lines necessary to audit compliance with the applicable Zoning by-law mandates. See building permit application and sec. 10.11, of the North Andover Zoning By-Law (N.A. ZBL). 9. On or about January 16, 1997, Building Coninussioner, Robert Nicetta, afler a complaint and information put forth by Mrs. Jane Richard of•25 English Circle, informed Pearson's Attorneys, Morris, Rogers and Phillips, 10 Iligh St., P.O. Box 1962, Andover, MA 01810, that based on Pearson's lack of non-conforming status information on his permit application, he was reverting back to the Town's original interpretation that a G.L. c. 40A, s. 6 Zoning Board finding is necessary for the instant building permit to remain valid. 10. On or about, January 21, 1998, Pearson, apparently of his own volition, filed an application form with the 'Zoning Board of Appeals for a par. 1.(b) Special Permit pursuant to Section 9, paragraphs 9.1 and 9.2 of the N.A.'ZBL, rather than a par. 1.(c) request as a party aggrieved, for a review of a decision ofthe Building Inspector or other authority. No other relief was requested from the Zoning Board on the face of this application. 11. The property is located it a Residence three (3) Zoning District, which prohibits two family dwellings, allows for "Family Suites" by Special Permit, presumably from the Zoning Board of Appeals, and requires a minimum of 25,000 square feet of area with tl125 feet of frontage, with 30 foot front and rear yard set backs. See N.A. ZBL tables 1 & 2. Note: Sec. 7.3 requires buildings on corner lots to meet set back criteria on both streets. 12. Notwithstanding the absence of the required dimensional criteria on the above referenced plans, a casual measurement with jcommon ruler, of the site's Salem St. front yard set back as defined in the N.A. ZBL, mi Pored against the plan's illustrated scale, indicates that the set back dues not meet the Y (3U requirement of thirty feet. See N.A. ZBI, q ) sections 7:1.3.3 ( By-Law compliance after subdivision to be eligible for building permits) and 10.11 (Building ermit plans to show compliance with and/or� g P P o relief from Zonis or P g other applicable Town By-Laws). A question arises as to why the structures are not dimensioned or set backs indicated on E.N.R.D. Plan # 11878 in light of ZBL section 7.1.3.3. and most Planning Board's Subdivision rules and regulations requiring these specifications for existing structures shown on preTuninary or definitive subdivision plans. 13. On his Jan. 21st. Special Permit application, Pearson evidences a 25,000 sq. fl. lot area with a 112 foot of frontage, thirteen (13) feet short of the N.A. ZBL requirement of 125 feet. The application spaces set aside for existing and required front, side and rear set back criteria as well as zoning district were left blank. The dimensions listed on the building permit form (application) appear to be ambiguous, even with a common ruler/plan scale measurement and were not supported on any fried plan as of that date (Jan. 21, 1997). e 14. The application is erroneous in that: a. Accurate, factual information necessary for an informed decision is missing. b. Abutters list not in compliance with G.L. c. 40A, s.11. (Lacking notification to statutory "Parties In Interest" as defused in G.L. c. 40A, ss. 9 & 11) C. The requested relief is inadequate under the N.A. ZBL. d. The requested relief is inadequate under G.L. c. 40A, ss. 6, 9 and 10. e. The relief necessary to grant.Pearson's requests is beyond the powers of the Zoning Board pursuant to the N.A. ZBL and G.L. c. 40A, ss. 6, 9 and 10. 11 RELEVANT ISSUES 15. In order to properly adjudicate Pearson's application, the Zoning Board of Appeals and Pearson, must address the following pertinent issues and/or questions: a. What is the true nature, of the current uses enjoyed at 521 Salem St./map 38, lot 8? b. When, by what method, and under what conditions, did the existing uses and/or modifications/alterations legally become established? C. Is the subject locus and/with its attendant structures and/or uses entitled to the benefits of G.L. c. 40A, ss. 6, 9 and N. Andover 'Zoning By-Law sections 9, 9.1 and 9.2 regarding non-conforming lots, structures and uses? d. Even if qualified as "Non-Conforming" under the above referenced statutes and By-Laws, are the locus, structures, and/or uses entitled to the granting of the relief requested by the Pearson Building and Special Permit applications under G.L. c. 40A, ss. 6, 9 and the North Andover Zoning By-Law? e. Is a G.L. c. 40A, s. 6 fuid ng, as indicated in Commissioner Nicetta's 1/16/98 letter to Pearson's Attorneys, adequate zoning relief for the instant dilemma; or would Special Permits and/or Variance pursuant to sections 9 & 10 respectively, of C. 40A, be required under c. 40A, and the North Andover Zoning By-Law to cure all of the lot's infirmities? f. Would the granting of the above referenced relief; amount to a "Use Variance"; and if so found, does the North Andover Zoning By-Law authorize Use Variances? g. Did the Feb.15,1990, Planning Board approval of the four lot English Circle sub- division, extinguish all nonconforming rights to newly created Lot "A" (Map 38, Lot 8)? 3 4 III ARCUMENT 16. The E.N.R.D. recorded facts, Pearson's applications, and relevant evidentiary materials obtained from N. Andover and other pertinent records, speak for themselves in regard to the question of current nonconforming status and relief required and/or available to bring the subject locus into compliance with the N.A. ZBL regarding Use, Front Yard Setback and Frontage requirements. See ZBL tables 1 & 2 and N.E.R.D. plan #11878. 17. The burden of proving Nonconforming Status protection is on one claiming the exemption. As stated in Derby Refining Co. v. City of Chelsea, 407 Mass. 703, 711; SSS N.E. 2d 534 (1990), "Occupant of property, as one seeking protected status, has the burden of establishing compliance with factors relevant to valid nonconforming use determination based on predecessor's prior use". See also Cape Resort Hotels v.Alcohol Liscense Bd. of Falmouth, 385 Mass. 205, 219 (1982);Building Inspector of Chatham V. Kendrick, 17 Mass.App. Ct. 928,929 (1983). 18. Nonconformities that were not lawfully created will not be sanctioned and become an unprotected(use), rather than lawful nonconforming uses. See Martin v. Board of Appeals of Yarmouth, 20 Mass.App. Ct. 972 (1985) and Mark Bobrows1d, Handbook of Mass. Land Use and Planning, 1993, revised 1997, section 6.1. 19. Two 1991 appellate decisions addressed prerequisites and procedures for the modification of nonconformitics. Blasco v. Bd. O A eats o lVincl ndon 31 Mass. A .f PP .T � PP Ct. 32, and Shrewsbury Edgemere Assoc. Limited Partnership .A ea v. Bd. .o� PPls of Shrewsbury, 409M . 37 Mass. 317. In Blasco, the Court clarified the relationship between G.L. c. 40A, s. 6, paragraph 1, and local ordinances and By-Laws. hn Shrewsbury, the funding requirement of the statutes second sentence was amplified. See Bobrowski, supra at 6.3. 20. The two cases taken together suggest and/or provide that G.L. c. 40A, s. 6: a. Provides for the minimum tolerance that must be afforded lawful nonconforming uses, existing buildings and structures. b. Provides for maximum local control of nonconformities. C. Allows that a municipality has the power to regulate or prohibit nonconfonmities and allow changes if the requisite findings may be issued. d. Allows that nonconfonmities may be modified only if permitted by the local ordinance or By-Law; resort to the statute will not overcome local silence on the matter. See Bobrowski, supra, ss. 63, 63.1, 63.2, 64, and cases cited therein. 21. The North Andover Zoning By-Law, sec. 9, NON-CONFORMING USES and sequel, squarely address the instant 521 Salem St. scenario both as to the grandfather statute, G.L. c. 40A, s.6, and existing case law as examined and illustrated in section six (6) of Professor and Attorney Mark Bobrowski's, Handbook of Mass. Land Use and Planning Law, cited herein, and which I understand is a reference guide used by the North Andover Building Department. 22. N. Andover ZBL Section Nine (9), dissected for better assimilation provides that: a. The first sentence (N.A. ZBL, sec.9.1) states that, "Arty nonconforming building, structure or use as defined herein, which lawfully existed at the time of the passage of the applicable provision of this or any prior By-Law or any amendment thereto, may be continued subject to the provisions of this By-Law" The first part of the second sentence of sec. y.l provides that "Any lawfully nonconforming building or structure and any larfclly nonconforming use of building or land may be continued in the same kind and mariner and to the same extent as at the time it became lawfully nonconforming". (Emphasis supplied) These portions of the text, read together, comply with the mandates of G.L. c. 40A, s. 6, regarding the minimum standard of tolerance to be afforded nonconformities at the local By-Law level; and would entitle Pearson to continue his alleged nonconforming use of the property, as it was prior to the disqualifying By-Law change, it ithout major alteration, upon proof of nonconforming eligibility status based on predecessor's prior lass ul use. See discussion at paragraphs nos. 16..17& 18 above. (Emphasis Supplied) b. The second portion of the second sentence provides that " [b)ut such building or use shall not at any time be changed, extended or enlarged except for a purpose pennitted in the zoning district in which such building or use is situated, or except as may be permitted by a Special Permit or otherwise by die North Andover Board of Appeals" (Emphasis Supplied) This text, in it's plain language, limits change, extension and enlargement of non- conforming uses, structures and/or land to only those(uses of land and/or structures) pernulted in the applicable (Residence 3) district. Two-Family Dwellings are no longer allowed in Residence 3, Zoning Districts, and tine use regulation table does not list the use as available by Special Permit for the District. See paragraphs 16, 17& 18 above, Blasco v. Bd. OfAppeals of Winchendon, 31 Mass. App. Ct. 32, and Shrewsbury Edgemere Assoc. Limited Partnership v. Bcl of Appeals of Shrewsbury, 409 Mass. 317. C. The third sentence of sec. 9.1, states that, "Pre-existing nonconforming structures or uses, however, may be extended or altered, provided that no such extension or alteration shall be permitted unless there is a finding by the Board of Appeals that such change, extension, or alteration shall not be substantially more detrimental than the existing non- conforming use to the neighborhood". This text, as it relates to nonconforming single and two frilly structures is discussed at length in section 6.6 of Bobrowski, supra. The gist of the discussions results in S 0 the proposition that in following the statute, and it's interpretive case law to date, the Board of Appeals must review all proposed changes to existing nonconforming single or two family structures, and in so doing must identify the particular respects in which tine existing structure does not conform to the requirements of the present By-Law and then decide, whether or not the proposal would intensify the existing nonconformities or result in additional ones. If the answer to that question is in the negative, the applicant will be entitled to the issuance of a Special Permit (or Building Permit, depending on the local By- Law governing provisions) under the second "except" clause of G.L. c. 40A, s. 6, and any implementing By-Law. If the conclusion is otherwise, the applicant will be required to show that the change will not be "substantially more detrimental than the existing non- conforming structure or use to the neighborhood". See Bobrowski, sec. 6.6, supra; Fitzimonds v. Board of Appeals of Chatham, 21 Mass. App. Ct. 56, 57 1985 Willard v. Board ofApPeals ofOrleans, 25 Mass. App. Ct. 15, 21 22 (798 7);, t'aoldhrrsch v. McNear, 32 Mass. App. Ct. 455, 461 (1992) and Shrewsbury Edgemere, supra. d. The last paragraph of sec. 9.1 has no relevance here. The subdivision of the locus in question from the primary parcel probably had the effect of extinguishing all original lot nonconforming status, notwitlLstanding By-Law sec. 7.1.3.3 which should have prevented any building permit to issue in the first instance. See also sec. 10.12 of the N.A. ZBL. CONCLUSIONS 23. Based on the above, G.L. c. 40A, s. 6, 9, 10, & 11, relevant case law, and the Zoning By-Laws of the Town of North Andover as amended, it would appear that: a. The assailable application and plans, devoid of criteria expedient for a proficient, tenable decision on the issue, coupled with the ambiguous notice performance mentioned at par. 14, b. above, has the effect of removing the application from the Board's jurisdiction, and would cause any relief based thereon, to be null, void and without effect. b. The Special Permit application assumes nonconfonming status and legality of existing amenities at 521 Salem St, presently owned by the Pearsons, but the lot's history and chain of attendant events to date, scrutinized against N. Andover ZBL time frames I casts serious doubt on Pearson's ability to shoulder their burden of proof and establish entitlement based on predecessor's prior use. Even if nonconforming status is established, the requested relief, without more, is wanting at law to bring the locus into harmony with the N.A. ZBL. C. On face value alone, the last part of the second sentence of N.A. ZBL sec. 9.1, prohibits any and all expansion of this yet to be validated, legal nonconforming use based on the exclusion of two-famil dwellirn s in this articular Residence 3 Zone; and not Y t; P , even available pursuant to a Special Permit as requested by the applicant. In short, the desired relief is unobtainable absent a prohibited use variance. 6 d. Any finding, that alteration and/or enlargement of this alleged two-family structure and use would not be substantially more detrimental to this firmly established single family neighborhood than the purported existing nonconforming use, would be totally erroneous and inconsistent with sound Zoning practice, which in the opinion of most Zoning and Planning authorities, is that the objectives of Zoning would be furthered by the eventual elimination of nonconformities in most cases. e. Such is the case here. It's obvious from the text of Section Nine, and rather distinctly in the wording of the second part of the second sentence of sec. 9.1, regarding enlargement of nonconformities no longer allowed in a particular district, that elimination of the right to alter and/or expand nonconforming two-fancily dwellings in Residence 3, Zoning Districts was the intent of the Zoning By-Law and is further evidenced by the omission of expansion via a Special Permit vehicle per ZBL, Use Regulation Table 1. f. Pearson has yet to put forth and authenticate the historical and factual data attendant to the nonconforming status, burden of proof he shoulders, and if failing to do so, dependent on the Board's frrudings, the worst case resulting scenario would be, the status-quo prior to the building permit, possibly a single family dwelling with in-law apartment, or at the least, a simple single family dwelling, easily incorporated into the neighborhood environment. The applicants, Donald and Charlene Pearson, have ample, viable use of their property within the confines of the General Law, Chapter 40A, and the Zoning By-Laws of the Town of North Andover; they are lawfully, not entitled to more. g. Approval of the instant application in it's present ambiguous form, tentative status and other concomitant probative detriments, would be repugnant to G.L. c. 40A , and the North Andover Zoning By-Law; in excess of the authority, of the Board of Appeals, and in all probability, would not survive appeal to the Superior or Land Courts if challenged by an aggrieved abutter pursuant to G.L. c. 40A, s. 17. With all due res ec the P � abutters, James and Jane Richard, 25 English Circle, based on the above, request the North Andover Board of Appeals to deny the Pearson application relevant to 521 Salem Street. Respectfully submitted by: Dated: February ,1998 tie ichard -Ja�es Rich rd rr • l�5 English Circle North Andover MA 01845 (978) 794-4630 7 i DONALD AND CIIAIZLENE PEARSON. SPECIAL PERMIT APPLICATION 521 SALEM ST7ZEET. N. ANDOVER MAI' 038, LOT 118 1 FACTS 1. A title perusal of the property in question, 521 Salem St., (aka assessor's map 38, lot 8) along with that of another affixed parcel (Lot 1), not relevant to this inquiry, indicates that the subject locus, in it's former configuration, was the genesis of a four(4) lot subdivision proposed by Gene L. English, Trustee of Salem Street North Andover Trust, recorded Aug. 5, 1988, Essex North Registry of Deeds (E.N.R.D.) at Book 2782, Page 70. 2 The four(4) lot plan and roadway located between 535 and inclusive of 521 Salem Street, N. Andover, MA, entitled "Subdivision Plan, English Circle, in North Andover, Mass. drawn for Gene L. English", Scale 1" = 40', dated August 1989, Revised September 1989, by Merrimack Engineering Services, 66 Park Street, Andover MA 01810 was approved with eighteen(18) conditions by the N. Andover Planning Board on February 15, 1990, and recorded with the E.N.R.D. on January 23, 1991 as Plan # 11878. An "Order of Conditions" in the name of Gene L. English, from the N. Andover Conservation Commission (DEQE file # 242-497), was issued in conjunction with the subdivision and recorded on 2/14/91 at E.N.R.D. Bk. 3218, Pg. 295, and modified at Bk. 3218, pg. 303. 3. After the "English Circle" subdivision approval, 521 Salem Street (map 38, lot 8), illustrated as lot "A' on E.N.R.D. recorded subdivision plan # 11878, was sold by English as trustee of N. Andover Salem St. Trust, to Joseph and Julie Gerety, for consideration of $240,000.00 on Feb. 14, 1991 and recorded that day at E.N.R.D. Ilk. 3218, pg. 287. 4. On October 31, 1997, the Geretys sold lot "A", 521 Salem St. as described on plan # 11878, to the present owners, Donald and Charlene Pearson, who currently reside at 1030 Johnson Street, N. Andover MA 01845. See E.N.R.D. Bk. 4897, Pg. 332. 5. The corner lot, which purports to contain an area of 25,000 sq. fl., has 112.22' of frontage on Salem Street, a radius of 39.27' to English Circle, which it borders for a distance of 134.36', including the access driveway, to the rear lot line shared with lot # 3 for a distance of 188.99, then along a stone wall 155.24' back to Salem Street. See Lot "A", E.N.R.D. plan # 11878. Note the lack of'structure or setback dimensions on plan. 6. The locus contains an alleged two family, wood frame, Three (3) story dwelling, with two (2) story apartment (total area and number of rooms unknown), and cement block garage; the time frames for which the original structure construction and/or additions are dependent on for compliance with applicable zoning by-law and applicant's purported non-conforming status are unknown, nor are they stated anywhere in the record to date. 7. On or about December 12, 1997, Pearson received a building permit to add a 15' x 20'family room over the garage, and construct a 10' x 12'kitchen addition, apparently not in accordance with sec. 10.11 of the N. A. ZBL. 8. Neither the subdivision plan (#11878), nor the Pearson purveyed, mortgage inspection plan, certified to Northmark Bank, dated November 6, 1997, by John Abagis and Associates, Professional Land Suiveyors, 137 Chandler Road, Andover MA, submitted with his (Pearson's) Building Permit application, evidences dimensional criteria as to accurate location, structure sizes and/or setbacks from property lines necessary to audit compliance with the applicable Zoning by-law mandates. See building permit application and sec. 10.11, of the North Andover Zoning By-Law (N.A. ZBL). 9. On or about Januaiy 16, 1997, Building Conuiissioncr, Robert Nicetta, aAer a complaint and information put foilli by Mrs. Jane Richard of 25 English Circle, informed Pearson's Attorneys, Morris, Rogers and Phillips, 10 Iligh St., P.O. Box 1962, Andover, MA 01810, that based on Pearson's lack of non-cotif ornung status information on his permit application, he was reverting back to the Town's original interpretation that a G.L. c. 40A, s. 6 Zoning Board find ng is necessary for the instant building permit to remaiti valid. 10. On or about, January 21, 1998, Pearson, apparently of his own volition, filed an application form with the 'Zoning Board of Appeals for a par. 1.(b) Special Permit pursuant to Section 9, paragraphs 9.1 and 9.2 of the N.A.'ZBL, rather than a par. 1.(c)request as a party aggrieved, for a review of a decision of the Building Inspector or other authority. No other relief was requested from the Zoning Board on the face of this application. 11. The properly is located fit a Residence three (3) Zoning District, which prohibits two family dwellings, allows for "Family Suites" by Special Permit, presumably from the. Zoning Board of Appeals, and requires a mitumum of 25,000 square feet of area with 125 feet of frontage, with 30 foot front and rear yard set backs. See N.A. ZBL tables 1 & 2. Note: Sec. 7.3 requires buildings on corner lots to meet set back criteria on both streets. 12. Notwithstanding the absence of the required dimensional criteria on the above referenced plans, a casual measurement with I common ruler, of the site's Salem St. front yard set back as defined in the N.A. ZBL, mirrored against the plan's illustrated scale, indicates that the set back does not meet the requirement of thitly (30)feet. See N.A. ZBI, sectioaS 7:1.3.3 ( By-Law compliance after subdivision to be eligible for building permits) and 10.11 (Building permit plans to show compliance with and/or relief from Zoning or other applicable Town By-Laws). A question arises as to why the structures are not dimensioned or set backs indicated on E.N.R.D. Plan # 11878 in light of ZBL section 7.1.3.3. and most Planning Board's Subdivision rules and regulations requiting these specifications for existing structures shown on prelininary or definitive subdivision plans. 13. On his Jan. 21st. Special Permit application, Pearson evidences a 25,000 sq. ft. lot area with a 112 foot of frontage, thirteen (13) feet short of the N.A. ZBL requirement of 125 feet. The application spaces set aside for existing and required front, side and rear set back criteria as well as zoning district were left blank. The dimensions listed on the building permit form (application) appear to be ambiguous, even with a common ruler/plan scale measurement and were not supported on any filed plan as of that date (Jan. 21, 1997). 14. The application is erroneous in that: a. Accurate, factual infonnation necessary for an informed decision is missing. b. Abutters list not in compliance with G.L. c. 40A, s.11. (Lacking notification to statutory "Parties In Interest" as defined in G.L. c. 40A, ss. 9 & 11) C. The requested relief is inadequate under die N.A. ZBL. d. The requested relief is inadequate under G.L. c. 40A, ss. 6, 9 and 10. e. The relief necessary to grant Pearson's requests is beyond the powers of the Zoning Board pursuant to tine N.A. ZBL and G.L. c. 40A, ss. 6, 9 and 10. 11 RELEVANT ISSUES 15. In order to properly adjudicate Pearson's application, the Zoning Board of Appeals and Pearson, must address the following pertinent issues and/or questions: a. What is the true nature, of the current uses enjoyed at 521 Salem St./map 38, lot 8? b. When, by what method, and under what conditions, did the existing uses and/or modifications/alterations legally become established? C. Is the subject locus and/with its attendant strictures and/or uses entitled to the benefits of G.L. c. 40A, ss. 6, 9 and N. Andover Zoning By-Law sections 9, 9.1 and 9.2 regarding non-conforming lots, strictures and uses? d. Even if qualified as "Non-Conforming" under the above rcicrenced statutes and By-Laws, are the locus, structures, and/or uses entitled to the granting of the relief requested by the Pearson Building and Special Permit applications under G.L. c. 40A, ss. 6, 9 and the North Andover Zoning By-Law? e. Is a G.L. c. 40A, s. 6 finding, as indicated in Conin issioner Nicetta's 1/16/98 letter to Pearson's Attorneys, adequate zoning relief for lie instant dilemma; or would Special Permits and/or Variance pursuant to sections 9 & 10 respectively, of C. 40A, be required under c. 40A, and the North Andover Zoning By-Law to cure all of the lot's irfirrnities? f. Would the granting of the above referenced relief; amount to a "Use Variance"; and if so found, does the North Andover Zoning By-Law authorize Use Variances? g. Did the Feb.15,1990, Planning Board approval of the four lot English Circle sub- division, extinguish all nonconforming rights to newly created Lot "A" (IVlap 38, Lot 8)? 3 III ARGUMENT 16. The E.N.R.D. recorded facts Pears ' on s applications, acid relevant evidentiary materials obtained from N. Andover and other pertinent records, speak for themselves in regard to the question of current nonconforming status and relief required and/or available to bring the subject locus into compliance with the N.A. ZBL regarding Use, Front Yard Setback and Frontage requirements. See Z,BL tables 1 & 2 and N.E.R.D. plan #11878. 17. The burden of proving Nonconforming Status protection is on one claiming the exemption. As stated in Derby Refining Co. v. City of Chelsea, 407 Mass. 703, 711; SSS N.E. 2d 534 (1990), "Occupant of property, as one seeking protected status, has the burden of establishing compliance with factors relevant to valid nonconforming use determination based on predecessor's prior use". See also Cape Resort Hotels v.Alcohol Liscense Bd. of Falmouth, 385 Mass. 205, 219 (1982);Building Inspector of Chatham v. Kendrick, 17Mass.App. Ct. 928,929 (1983). 18. Nonconformities that were not lawfully created will not be sanctioned and become an unprotected (use), rather than lawful nonconforming uses. See Martin v. Board of Appeals of Yarmouth, 20 Mass.App. Ct. 972 (1985) and Mark Bobrowski, Handbook of Mass. Land Use and Planning, 1993, revised 1997, section 6.1. 19. Two 1991 appellate decisions addressed prerequisites and procedures for the modification of nonconformitics. Blasco v. Bd. OfAppeals of Winchendon, 31 Mass. App. Ct. 32, and Shrewsbury Edgemere Assoc. Limited Partnership v. Bd. of Appeals of Shrewsbury, 409Mass. 317. In Blasco, the Court clarified the relationship between G.L. c. 40A, s. 6, paragraph 1, and local ordinances and By-Laws. In Shrewsbury, the funding requirement of the statutes second sentence was amplified. See Bobrowski, supra at 6.3. 20. The two cases taken together suggest and/or provide that G.L. c. 40A, s. 6: a. Provides for the minimum tolerance that must be afforded lawful nonconforming uses, existing buildings and structures. b. Provides for maximum local control of nonconformities. C. Allows that a municipality has the power to regulate or prohibit nonconfo rmities and allow changes if the requisite findings may be issued. g q duigs d. Allows that nonconformitics may be modified only if permitted by the local ordinance or By-Law; resort to the statute will not overcome local silence on the matter. See Bobrowski, supra, ss. 6.3, 6.3.1, 63.2, 64, and cases cited therein. 21. The North Andover Zoning By-Law, sec. 9, NON-CONFORMING USES and sequel, squarely address the instant 521 Salem St. scenario both as to the grandfather statute, G.L. c. 40A, s.6, and existing case law as examined and illustrated in section six (6) of Professor and Attorney Mark Bobrowski's, Handbook of Mass. Land Use and Planning Law, cited herein, and which I understand is a reference guide used by the North Andover Building Department. 22. N. Andover.ZBL Section Nine (9), dissected for better assimilation provides that: a. The first sentence (N.A. ZBL, sec.9.1) states that, "Arty nonconlorming building, structure or use as defined herein, which lawfully existed at the time of the passage of the applicable provision of this or any prior By-Law or any amendment thereto, may be continued subject to the provisions of this By-Law" The first part of the second sentence of sec. 9.J provides that "Any lawfully nonconforming building or structure and any lawfiully nonconforming use of building or land may be continued in the same kind Y and manner and to the same extent as at the time it became lawfully nonconforming". (Emphasis supplied) These portions of the text, read together, comply with the mandates of G.L. c. 40A, s. 6, regarding the minimum standard of tolerance to be afforded nonconformities at the local By-Law level; and would entitle Pearson to continue his alleged nonconforming use of the property, as it was prior to the disqualifying By-Law change, 34th out major alteration, upon proof of nonconforming eligibility status based on predecessor's prior lmrfal use. See discussion at paragraphs nos. 16,17& 18 above. (Emphasis Supplied) b. The second portion of the second sentence provides that " (b)ut such building or use shall not at any time be changed, extended or enlarged except for a purpose permitted in the zoning district in which such building or use is situated, or except as may be permitted by a Special Permit or otherwise by die North Andover Board of Appeals" (Emphasis Supplied) This text, in it's plain language, limits change, extension and enlargement of non- conforming uses, structures and/or land to only those(uses of land and/or structures) permitted in the applicable (Residence 3) district. Two-Family Dwellings are no longer allowed in Residence 3, Zoning Districts, and the use regulation table does not list the use as available by Special Perinit for the District. See paragraphs 16, 17& 18 above, Blasco v. Bd. OfAppeals of Winchendon, 31 Mass. App. Ct. 32, and,5hrewsbury Edgemere 4ssoc. Limited Partnership v. Bcl. of Appeals of Shrewsbury, 409 Mass. 317. C. The third sentence of sec. 9.1, states that, "Pre-existing nonconfornrirg structures or uses, however, may be extended or altered, provided that no such extension or alteration shall be permitted unless there is a finding b P the Board o g y f APP g Appeals that such change, , extension, or alteration shall not be substantiallymore detrimental than the existing non- g conforming use to the neighborhood". This text, as it relates to nonconforming single and two fimidy structures is discussed at length in section 6.6 of Bobmwski, supra. The gist of the discussions results in i a the proposition that in following the statute, and it's interpretive case law to date, the Board of Appeals must review all proposed changes to existing nonconforming single or two family structures, and in so doing must identify the particular respects in which the existing structure does not conform to the requirements of the present By-Law and then decide, whether or not the proposal would intensify the existing nonconfornnities or result in additional ones. If the answer to that question is in the negative, the applicant will be entitled to the issuance of a Special Permit(or Building Permit, depending on the local By- Law governing provisions) wider the second "except" clause of G.L. c. 40A, s. 6, and any implementing By-Law. If the conclusion is otherwise, the applicant will be required to show that the change will not be "substantially more detrimental than the existing non- conforming structure or use to the neighborhood". See Bobrowski, sec. 6.6, supra; Fitzimonds v. Board of Appeals of Chatham, 21 Mass.App. Cl. 56, 57 (1985); Willard v. Board of Appeals of Orleans, 25 Mass. App. Ct. 15, 21, 22 ("1987); Goldhirsch v. McNear, 32 Mass.App. Ct. 455, 461 (1992) and Shrewsbury Edgemere, supra. d. The last paragraph of sec. 9.1 has no relevance here. The subdivision of the locus in question from the primary parcel probably had the effect of extinguishing all original lot nonconforming status, notwithstanding By-Law sec. 7.1.3.3 which should have prevented any building permit to issue in the first instance. See also sec. 10.12 of the N.A. ZBL. CONCLUSIONS 23. Based on the above, G.L. c. 40A, s. 6, 9, 10, & 11, relevant case law, and the Zoning By-Laws of the Town of North Andover as amended, it would appear that: a. The assailable application and plans, devoid of criteria expedient for a proficient, tenable decision on the issue, coupled with the ambiguous notice performance mentioned at par. 14, b. above, has the effect of removing the application from the Board's jurisdiction, and would cause any relief based thereon, to be null, void and without effect. b. The Special Permit application assumes nonconforming status and legality of existing amenities at 521 Salem St, presently owned by the Pearson, but the lot's history and chain of attendant events to date, scrutinized against N. Andover ZBL time frames, casts serious doubt on Pearson's ability to shoulder their burden of proof and establish entitlement based on predecessor's prior use. Even if nonconforming status is established, the requested relief, without more, is wanting at law to bring the locus into harmony with the N.A. ZBL. C. On face value alone, the last part of the second sentence of N.A. ZBL sec. 9.1, prohibits any and all expansion of this yet to be validated, legal nonconforming use based on the exclusion of two-family dwellings in this particular Residence 3 Zone; and not even available pursuant to a Special Permit as requested by the applicant. In short, the desired relief is unobtainable absent a prohibited use variance. l7 •o d. Any finding, that alteration and/or enlargement of this alleged two-family structure and use would not be substantially more detrimental to this firmly established single family neighborhood than the purported existing nonconforming use, would be totally erroneous and inconsistent with sound Zoning practice, which in the opinion of most Zoning and Planning authorities, is that the objectives of Zoning would be furthered by the eventual elimination of nonconformities in most cases. e. Such is the case here. It's obvious from the text of Section Nine, and rather distinctly in the wording of the second part of the second sentence of sec. 9.1, regarding enlargement of nonconformities no longer allowed in a particular district, that elimination of the right to alter and/or expand nonconfornitng two-family dwellings in Residence 3, Zoning Districts was the intent of the Zoning By-Law and is further evidenced by the omission of expansion via a Special Permit vehicle per ZBL, Use Regulation Table 1. f. Pearson has yet to put forth and authenticate the historical and factual data attendant to the nonconforming status, burden of proof he shoulders, and if failing to do so, dependent on the Board's findings, the worst case resulting scenario would be, the status-quo prior to the building permit, possibly a sur le f i ydwellin with tlin-law apartment, or at the least, a simple single family dwelling, easily incorporated into the neighborhood environment. The applicants, Donald and Charlene Pearson, have ample, viable use of their property within the confines of the General I.aw, Chapter 40A, and the Zoning By-Laws of the Town of North Andover; they are lawfully, not entitled to more. g• Approval o f the instant application in it's resent ambiguous form , tentative status and other concomitant probative detriments would be repugnant to G.L. c. 40A, and the North Andover Zoning By-Law; in excess of the authority of the Board of Appeals, and pp in all probability, would not survive appeal to the Superior or Land Courts if challenged by an aggrieved abutter pursuant to V.L. c. 40A, s. 17. With all due respect, the abutters, James and Jane Richard, 25 English Circle, based on the above, request the North Andover Board of Appeals to deny the Pearson application relevant to 521 Salem Street. Respectfully submitted by: Dated: February ,1998 LL III• Z&_4a. re Richard GSL _ ;Janes Rich d • (,�5 English Circle North Andover, MA 01845 (978) 794-4630 I � Location .� No. Date fr✓ �. � NOItTIy TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER 3? � BOG 10 ,' y Certificate of Occupancy $ �'�s'••°•'c�' Building/Frame/Frame Permit Fee $ s�cNust 9 Foundation Permit Fee $ Other Permit Fee $ TOTAL $ Check # oaf 1 r `\ r f 13 . 3 6 Building InspeciDK CERTIFICATE OF USE & OCCUPANCY Town ®f North Andover Building Permit Number X;� Date e5 or?12 — D 0 THIS CERTIFIES THAT THE BUILDING LOCATED ON Z a/ MAY BE OCCUPIED AS APSi de- ,r le- IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE MASSACHUSETTS STATE BUILDING CODE AND SUCH OTHER REGULATIONS AS MAY APPLY. CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO 60 ADDRESS A p ♦ 4 # 'S ""sem Building Inspector r , ! -- - Town o v rte over No. ,, �. orth�Andover, Mass., 19 1.KE ' CO Chi C NES4 iCK �` 7r 0 BOARD OF HEALTH PERMIT T D Food/Kitchen Septic System THISCERTIFIES THAT............................................................................................................................................................... BUILDING INSPECTOR Foundation Jr has permission to erect........................................ buildings on .............................................................................................. Rough ;il : ;;fes. r�' .iAq to be occupied as ....................................................................... Chima n � � "���� provided that the person accepting this permit shall in every respect conform to the terms of the application on file in Final F' this office, and to the provisions of the Codes and By-Laws relating to the Inspection, Alteration and Construction of / z � � Buildings in the Town of North Andover. PLUMBING INSPECTOR VIOLATION of the Zoning or Building Regulations Voids this Permit. ough &I P �.. '� I S, ll , � ' 1`J ter. ��LESS CONS C,,�F Y STA-FTS ELE AL INSPEC ............................................................ ..................................................... Service BUILDING INSPECTOR Final) J f OC;-upancy Permit Required to Ocao BuildingGAS INSPECTOR r, Display in a Conspicuous Place on the Premises — Do Not Remove ,FFinin, � No Lathing or Dry Wall To Be Done Until Inspected and Approved by the Building Inspector. FIRE EPARTMENT Burner Street No. Smoke Dec. PER31IT *r?r_ APPLICATION FOR PERMIT TO BUILD — NORTH ANDOVER, MASS. PAGE �a.10=• �� LOT NO. 2 RECORD;OF OWNERSHIP (DATE BOOK iPAGE - ~ SUB DIV. LOT NO. LOCATION 1 � PURPOSE OF BUILDING r. OWNER'S NAME /!; NO. OF STORIES SIZE d Ire, O F% _ rtes/ 7 7l / OWNER'S ADDRESS r BASEMENT OR SLAB i E�3r �1 nSr� C41t 1/ ARCHITECT'S NAME&Z art ` (' SIZE OF FLOOR TIMBERS IST.gx�z 2ND aRD J L ,✓v -� BUILDER'S NAME DSPAN yrs il:l/ � �4 n0 P1 I f— DISTANCE TO NEAREST BUILDING DIMENSIONS OF SILLS DISTANCE FROM STREET OT- 40 POSTS DISTANCE FROM LOT LINES -SIDES/�D - �)dO RF.AR GIRDERS AREA OF LOT ' �j (f FRONTAGE //� /HEIGHT OF FOUNDATION - THICKNESS /Q IS BUILDING NEW J IG SIZE OF FOOTING �' ✓\�/ / X IS BUILDING ADDITION 7 < MATER:AL OF CHIMNEY ! 4."'p—c IS BUILDING ALTERATION G� IS BUILDING ON SOLID OR FILLED LAND WILL BUILDING CONFORM TO REQUIREMENTS OF CODE3,1f s' IS BUILDING CONNECTED TO TOWN WATER BOARD OF APPEALS ACTION. IF ANY IS BUILDING CONNECTED TO TOWN SEWER /JO IS BUILDING CONNECTED TO NATURAL GAS LINE INSTRUCTIONS 9 PROPERTY IN ORMATION LAND COST SEE BOTH SIDES EST. BLDG. COSTS PAGE 1 FILL OUT SECTIONS 1 - 3 EST. BLDG. COST F&R SQ. FT. EST. BLDG. COST PER ROOM PAGE 2 FILL OUT SECTIONS t - 12 SEPTIC PERMIT NO. ELECTRIC METEPS MUST BE ON OUTSIDE OF BUILDING k_ 4 APPROVED BY ATTACHED GARAGES MUST CONFORM TO STATE FIRE REGULATIONS PLANS MUST BE FILED AND APPROVED BY BUILDING INSPECT R DATE FILED BY INa INSPECTOR SIGNATURE OF OWNER OR AUTHORIZED AGENT • l F E E �" / OWNER TEL.# PERMIT GRANTED CONTR.TEL.# c UUU '-Z...9 CONTR.LIC.# 199 H.I.C.# � 7.s i FORM U - LOT RELEASE FORM INSTRUCTIONS: This form is used to verify that all necessary approvals/permits Boards and Departments having jurisdiction have been obtained. This does no lif0m eve c' the applicant-and/or landowner from compliance with any applicable or re uiremen 4 ts. "'"****APPLICANT FILLS OUT THIS SECTION APPLICANT 6e PHONE_ LOCATION: Assessor's Map Number ).s PARCEL SUBDIVISION 7 LOT(S) I. STREET _ oC 5 t ST. NUMBER i OFFICIAL USE ONLY REC ENDATIONS OF TOWN AGENTS:. Co... VATION ADMINISTRATOR DATE APPROVED DATE REJECTED COMMENTS sp fu TOWN PLANNER DATE APPROVED DATE REJECTED COMMENTS FOOD INSPECTOR-HEALTH *" � DATE APPROVED DATE REJECTED IC INSPECTOR- EALTH DATE APPROVED DATE REJECTED COMMENTS PUBLIC WORKS -SEWER/WATER CONNECTIONS DRIVEWAY PERMIT FIRE DEPARTMENT } RECEIVED BY BUILDING INSPECTOR DATE r ,r. M , l" .^41 �,P tT4tMOW PIP . c�� t F a ., R rrs �, 7sjy Pol t It + t. jk R. �� ,rc, t;�ir., r r,, rrrnn'r "�9a� ��3�'i�`':�, ''i F�,_ 5 �g+'�'•:h+ ;stk#p! �,N �'�!- n l .. ,.. 1+ - ra.w.,.w.M.•�.*»•.we.w�r+�.. .�w+r"""'»^`" t y,� n+. i � e ( a� P D6PAATRENT OF PUBLIC SAFETQ 3 zy, t, CONST UCTION SDPERVISOR LICBNSB ti ;: Birthdate: �`. ko y Hub up we :.„ i .. , � + ,� • t i0i10i195a f �� � "'`° �,,7 DS 050929 1011011998 ' Restricted To: 00 + '�� �. + •� PARSON { .• e r� �i� ,r :+F t 4 a DONALD A 1030 JOHNSON ST 3 1845 0 !ll } MOVER,A MA N AN r �.� x 'r �. r F F-j�t�f�� � � r •r � Y»t». s f �• ! �AORT f_ o = o ,_ _ - � over No. G /P * _ * s dover, Mass., o � C /Z /'00 19 9'? OCMICH W'CK iV'�w ED- v `G BOARD OF HEALTH PERMIT T Food/Kitchen Septic System THIS CERTIFIES THAT........................ BUILDING INSPECTOR� ,r.�}.R•.�'.�.. Foundation has permission to erect..........4.4.01h.0W buildings on ......�. ... ..........S..I'T.I... .I..!�.........,5.. ..... Rough to be occupied as.................................:0-0`640-A)........4..J..1E.se......6.h �' .. .....l 1. Chimney provided that the person accepting this permit shall in every respect conform to the terms the application on file in Final this office, and to the provisions of the Codes and By-Laws relating to the Inspection, Alteration and Construction of Buildings in the Town of North Andover. PLUMBING INSPECTOR VIOLATION of the Zoning or Building Regulations Voids this Permit. Rough Final PERMIT EXPIRES IN 6 MONTHS , ELECTRICAL INSPECTOR UNLESS CONSTRUCTIONS Rough ... ............. .... .. .... Service.. .. .... ..... ....... ..... B DING INSPECTOR Final Occupancy Permit Required to Occupy Building GAS INSPECTOR Display in a Conspicuous Place on the Premises — Do Not Remove Rough Final No Lathing or Dry Wall To Be Done Until Inspected and Approved by the Building Inspector. r DEPARTMENT Burner Street No. Smoke Det. a 1 1 MOR TG,4GE INSPECTION PLAN AT 521 SALEM S TREE NORTH ANDOVER MA. NO. ESSEX REGISTRY OF DEEDS11 11 .' BK. 32/8 PG. 287 CERTIFI�V T0.'NORTHMARK BANK PLAN NO, 11j878 SCALE.' I"_40 DATE.' NOVEMBER 06, 1997 /00.00 ... . 88 99 � - G BL • �_ • LOT Q' 25,000 SFS ti \Tle, _ '" DWG.\ �j POA rt ' 12 9WZ 1. ., ..�.• _ r w 112.22 NOTES_ SALEM STREET � /) THIS /S NOT A PROPER T Y SUR VE Y, DO NO T USE THIS PL A N TO ESTABLISH PROPERTY LINES OR TO ERECT ANY STRUCTURE- 2)PROPERTY LINES ARE DETERMINED FROM COMPILED P� INFORMATION TO 8E USED FOR MOR TGAGE PURPOSES ONLY. CERTIFICATIONS.- BASED ON MY KNOWLEDGE, INFORMATION AND 8ELIEF, f HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE PERMANENT STRUCTURES INDICATED ARE LOCATED ON THE GRGUND APPROXIMATELY AS SHOWN AND ARE CONFORMING TO THE ZONING SETBACK REQUIREMENTS OF THE ADPL ICQBL E MUNICIPAL/T Y WHEN CONS TRUC TED OR MAY BE EXEMP T PER MASSA CHUSE T TS GENERAL LAW CHAPTER 40A, SECTION 7, AND THAT THE STRUCTURE SHOWN IS ,NOT LOCATED INA FLOOD HAZARD ZONE PERFEDERAL EMERGE-NC:'MANAGEMENTAGEnA�-?','�lAo COMMUNITY NO. 250098 EFFEC Tl VE DATE. 06-02-93 ZONE,'X .� JOHN ASAGIS & ASSOCIATES, PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYO,-'S j 137 CHANDLER ROAD, ANDOVER, MA. i508) 688 -48_9 ,,; APPLICANT.'PEARSON NO. 3271 wT ttiocation (<` No. �� Date . -6o ,.ORTN TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER 3? : o� F A ` Certificate of Occupancy $ 'J f Building/Frame Permit Fee $ s�CHus Foundation Permit Fee $ Other Permit Fee $ a TOTAL. $ `/V Check # !� 13 " 37 Building Inspdc"tor CERTIFICATE OF USE & OCCUPANCY Town ®f North Andover Building Permit Number Olid Date THIS CERTIFIES THAT THE BUILDING LOCATED ON MAY BE OCCUPIED AS ✓�\�.5 i�--� C `2- IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE MASSACHUSETTS STATE BUILDING CODE AND SUCH OTHER REGULATIONS AS MAY APPLY.. CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO ADDRESS • s • � y 4c MUS Building Inspector sea -� Town o ` ortY over No. = _„ o19 AWAndover,over, Mass., BOARD OF HEALTH Food/Kitchen PERMIT T LD Septic System BUILDING INSPECTOR THISCERTIFIES THAT............................................................................................................................................................... Foundation has permission to erect........................................ buildings on .............................................................................................. Rough , 5 tobe occupied ied as........................................................................................................................................................................ Chimney provided that the person accepting this permit shall in every respect conform to the terms of the application on file in Final this office, and to the provisions of the Codes and By-Laws relating to the Inspection, Alteration and Construction of - 13�4ildings in the Town of North Andover. PLUMBING INS6ETO t VIOLATION of the Zoning or Building Regulations Voids this Permit.PSS _ ELECTRICAL gNSPE � ' N ............ Service a BUILDING INSPECTOR -- OCC 3Cxr,L y ��'�"rn.it Requi e to 1C Bui ung GAS INSPECTOR Conspicuous Place on the Premises _ Do Not Remove Rough Display Cons P Y in a P Fil 0 No Lathing or Dry Wall To Be Done a a Until Inspected and Approved by the .Building Inspector. FIRED PARTMENT Burner \ Street No. Smoke Det..` e' ;17,- I ONVPVYd �NN�iO -7A//VtycY0 7 W-9 NHOT V-79 ;9 dl13d N 0.77 kV3 .-- bZ ao I I �N ti 9N1 js/x� �f„Ob,lFoZF N � 670YVH-)I Y so �fN 1 i DATE OF HEARING J ' DATE OF APPROVAL PLAN OF LADE) /N NORTH ANDOYER, M PREPA RED FOR DONA L D CHARL ENE PEARSON 1030 JOHNSON STREET NORTH ANDOI/ER, MA. SCALE I" = 40' DATE: JANUARY 25, 1998 0' 40' 80' 120' 160' i� GRAPHIC SCALE /N FEET PREPARED BY JOHN ABA 615 4e ASSOCIATES PROFE55IONA L L AND. SURVEYORS 137 CHANDLER ROAD, ANDOVER, MA. NO. 3123 N_o 2211 �� Date .......................... NORTq TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER p PERMIT FOR WIRING ,SSACHUS� This certifies that ....`. ........: ...-.-.--_.�--�1................................................... has permission to perform ..`. ............................................................ ......................................................... wiring in the building of?. ..:.. ?'--A' ..." ',"".-" ..................................... f cif c,� _ `� V .. ,North Andover,Mass. Fee`/4............... Lic.No.44'.. ............... ................... .................. ELECTRICAL INSPECTOR WHITE:Applicant CANARY: Building Dept. PINK:Treasurer I TRE00WQNWE4L7H01iAf4F.'�CffU + S Office Use only DEPARTMENTOFPIIBLICSAFM Permit No. � G/ BOARDOFFIREPREVEM ONREG(ILATIOAN-27C71RIZO occupancy&Fees Checked .�.. j a APPLICATIONFOR PERMIT TO PERFORM ELECTRICAL WORK ALL WORK TO BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MASSACHUSSTS ELECTRICAL CODE,527 CMR 12:00 (PLEASE PRINT IN INK OR TYPE ALL INFORMATION) Dat (/ Town of North Andover To the Inspector of Wires: The undersigned applies for a permit to perform the electrical work described below. Location(Street&Number) 2 Owner or Tenant Owner's Address Is this permit in conjunction with a building permit: Yes[ErNo (Check Appropriate Box) Purpose of Building tv p /< r k Utility Authorization No. Existing Service !d�_ Amps•/Zr//Z44 Volts Overhead Underground M No.of Meters / New Service 1 DO Amps/7r/ 21/OVolts Overhead Underground 0 No.of Meters Number of Feeders and Ampacity Location and Nature of Proposed Electrical Work W�e� ,&✓ AW4 4- 4-/i ';� No.of Lighting Outlets No.of Hot Tubs No.of Transformers Total KVA No.of Lighting Fixtures Swimming Pool Above Below Generators KVA ground eround No.of Receptacle Outlets No.of Oil Burners No.of Emergency Lighting Battery Units No.of Switch Outlets No.of Gas Bumers No.of Ranges No.of Air Cond. Total FIRE ALARMS No.of Zones Tons No.of Distals No.of Heat Total Total No.of Detection and Pumps Tons KW Initiating Devices No.of Dishwashers Space Area Heating KW No.of Sounding Devices t# No.of Self Contained Detection/Sounding Devices No.of Dryers Heating Devices KW LocalMunicipal Other Connections No.of Water Heaters KW No.of No.of Signs Bailasis No.Hydro Massage Tubs No.of Motors Total HP OTHER• Irwancecmaage Ptasuarttotherequitarets >u Laws Q drateaamatLmbthyh�strxmPrhymdudmgCartp�e Co►e�a�or rmalt val�lt YES NO limeshn9aidvalidpmofaf tothe0>limYES NO ff}cuha%cdvdWYESpkmmdc e#WtypeofWWrd ebydiednthe INSU11 RANCE BOND O`IHER (Pl=Spe y) d Fedvai<aeclfE7ectricalwadc$ 3f46�� f f �d w�b�t 3!©/' r�,�r,i�I�,�a >z�t, 3 / 5 FW u,, �� �(/6 ft 4�_ signed arderSie P�rtalties afpajtay. Y FIRMNAME Lit�seNa � S Liarlsae 7,/L U. 1 �a 1��.�s G f C�4�G Sl�1�L1tE L10Q19CN0 Btsa=Td.Na 77 7 — 3 y Z/ le 7 New f 4 5 /�ywc !s e� s ! G. �' AkTel.Na I OWNER'S INSURANCE WAIVER,Ia mvatethatthe Lumsed=not the mmxeawsage artssv AviialepwJe tasm*mWby Ntsodizem t.=rSLaws 1 aodthatmysigtr�aemihspeu�apphca6a�wai�s�tacpmarrrd. /� (Please check one) Owner Agent rf Telephone No. PERMIT FEE$ �br I N° 2229 Date...��..�... 41 � `":°�"�0 TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER oA PERMIT FOR WIRING �i �,SSACMUS� �7' This certifies tha ....... -'.?...............................'r .:.. .. ............................... -� has permission to perform ..: ........................... -4r- ' ............. wiring in the building of !% a ."- ......................................... .J% at. ...... N ................................. .North Andover,Malo iee/d............... Lic.N05" ..... . ..... ELECTRICAL INSPECTOR l� i i 1 WHITE: Applicant CANARY: Building Dept. PINK:Treasurer L THEODMMOAWE4LTHOFM4SS4CfftlS'E77S Office Use only DEPARTMENTOFPUBLIMFM Permit No. v�. BOARD 0FFIREPREYEM0NRWM4TI0ASS 527CMR 12 UV4 Occupancy&Fees CheckedPPUCATION FOR PERMIT TO PERFORM EL CTRICAL WORK ALL WORK TO BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MASSACHUSSTS ELECTRICAL CODE,527 CMR 12:00 (PLEASE PRINT IN INK OR TYPE ALL INFORMATION) Date - Town of North Andover To the Inspector of Wires: The undersigned applies for a permit to perform the electrical work described below. Location(Street&Number) Owner or Tenant O ( S p Owner's Address Is this permit in conjunction with a building permit: Yes J No (Check Appropriate Box) Purpose of Building Utility Authorization No. +� Existing Service .___ Amps 110 / -q�OVolts Overhead Underground ID No.of Meters t New Service Amps / Volts Overhead Underground ID No.of Meters Number of Feeders and Ampacity L.ocat' and Nature of Proposed Electrical Work No.of Lighting Outlets No.of Hot Tubs No.of Transformers Total KVA No.if Lighting Fixtures �� Swimming Pool Above Below Generators KVA ground 'round No.of Receptacle Outlets 1 q No.of Oil Burners No.of Emergency Lighting Battery Units No.of Switch Outlets No.of Gas Burners No.of Ranges No.of Air Cond. Total FIRE ALARMS No.of Zones Tons No.of Disposals No.of Heat Total Total No.of Detection and Pumps Tons KW Initiating Devices No.of Dishwashers Space Area Heating KW No.of Sounding Devices No.of Self Contained Detection/Sounding Devices No.KDryers Heating Devices KW Local Municipal Other % Connections No.of Water Heaters KW No.of No.of -1 Signs Bailasis No.Hydro Massage Tubs No.of Motors Total HP OTHER Uk e- �� W I<�tC,ve� �JC`A�� COD WI C(Nkk �( �F ©47 it tiwz`> �ewo��� eX�5�0� C` ���Qe��o�'G ooe-�, C XkC, n p 1A coa hstrd=Co�aa Ptasuant9�ti,etecgmana� Ga�aiLaws Ihaw aomattLiabtldyhstr=PbhcymdudngCa,#* CoArdWcritsstmfl l t YES � NO Iha\,eabTutbdvaWpreofofsarrtetothe0ffm YES [D NO r Ifyu hawdrdxd YES,plezerdc*thetypecf=caWbydt dcrgthe Wpupri*INSURANCE © BOND u011I RR a cP&mSpacify) Expitatim Date n Estirnmied VahiedUmbical Wctk S WctkiDSWd t 7 htspectenD&Rec esied Rao w(C Fatal LJ�� signed urrder�iePtr�es ofperjtay FIRM NAME �Ec� �y OJt .c-C Li=wNa 7330�? r L t-Ce a GoJoec Sigmw °- Lioa>seNo r 3(030 z� //-- &&.essTd.Na 1g G-s AWms— - �eQ b od Alt.TeLNa OWNER'SMJJRANCEWAIVER;Iamawatethatt cLiomsedoestx t ethei wm= txzabst qri datasm*zedbyM=whzezGenaalLaws andthatmy seonthispmniappkafimvAiwsdisracpiatirtt. (Please check one) Owner ® Agent Telephone No. PERMIT FEE$ i 3369 Date....'... .`.... . ........ N0RTM TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER Of PERMIT FOR GAS INSTALLATION �9SSACHUSEtth This certifies that . . ! °�f . . .,a!�� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . has permission for gas installation . e?lfl�<,-�... . ... . . . . . . . . in the buildings of . . /3.7 1':`?:,,,?',x.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . at . . . . . . . ., North Andover, Mass. Fee. lat.'. . Lic. No.. I/ . . . . . . .�.� t� ... . . . . GAS INSPECTOR WHITE:Applicant CANARY: Building Dept. PINK:Treasurer MASSACHUSETTS UNIFORM APPLICATION FOR PERMIT TO DO GASFITTING (Print or Type) fin ' Massachusetts Date JI f0 � ermit # 3 3'C 9 Per it Fee Building Location V/ S� i4-��' Owner , Name ISdA) s Type of Occupancy 4.4� New Renovation (] Replacement [] Plans Submitted: Yes[] No O a H W n X Z ¢ N N N U � F. z rn ¢ yr ¢ o v+ _ W W ¢ O U H O J N W m x a Z O u ► a r¢ Z ? O z, W U Wa ¢ o ¢0 cc m0 0 w < y W n ti d 4 W W N Z a S ¢ ¢ W ¢ W O W N r Yt ¢ V t Z J - Z f W W O > LL F U J W Z a W a C - f" N m Z O Z W O S a W > ¢ W 7 Z a Q a ¢ = 0 0 r a D 3 O 0 J O ¢ > O a H O SUB—BSMT, BASEMENT 1ST FLOOR 2ND FLOOR t 3RD FLOOR 4TH FLOOR —FE STH FLOOR GTHFLOOR 7TH FLOOR 8TH FLOOR Lid. Installing Company Name__�f P�tnM,��reo Check one: Certificate Address /6 & -Gt�7 G I 1 Corporation 6/ t7 ar nershlp Business Tel oneZFy—�. �S'���� [ I Flim/Co. Name of Licensed Plumber or Gas Fitter INSURANCE COVER I have a curren 1 ty insurance policy or its substantial equivalent which meets the requirements of MGL Ch. 142. Yes No fl If you have checked yes. please Indicate the type coverage by checking the appropriate box. A liability Insurance pollcy� Other type of Indemnity I Bond O OWNER'S INSURANCE WAIVER: I am aware that the licensee does not have the Insurance coverage required by Chapter 142 of the Mass. General Laws. and that my signature on this permit application waives this requirement. Check one- Owners i Agent (] Signature of Owner or Owner s Agent I hereby certify that all of the details and information I have submitted lot entered)in above pplicat are tr an accurate to the best of my knowledge and that all plumbing work and installations performed under the permit iss for this appiic n compliance with a pertinent provisions of the Massachusetts State Gas Code and Chapter 142 of the Ge r Laws eyT o of License Plumber ignature o Licen m et or as it Title _ Gaslitter P s or License Number Cit /Town Journeyman — MhRC7VE6 iaFFfZ�U�F�RL�Ti ----- Inspection Date Requested BELOW FOR OFFICE USE ONLY FINAL INSPECTION SKETCHES PROGRESS INSPECTIO FEE NO. APPLICATION FOR PERMIT TO DO GASFITTING I I NAME & TYPE OF BUILDING I LOCATION OF BUILDING PLUMBER OR GASFITTER it I LIC. NO. l I PERMIT GRANTED DATE 19 I GASINSPECTOR J J3 J Date.A_,... :'....... i MORTH TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER pF 4t�ao �e,'1�p 3? ,• a p PERMIT FOR GAS INSTALLATI01 m F A SACHUSEt a .r This certifies that . . . ... . . . .1. . . �`... . . .� . . . . . . . .��,. . .i,. . ko has permission for gas.installation . . . . . r� _:-:. . . . . . . Y� . -. . . ti in the buildings of). .( -.,:. ::4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . at . . . . . . . . . . .. North Andover, Mass. Fee. ._�f . . . . Lic. No.�f.%J/ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .l GAS INSPECTOR WHITE:Applicant CANARY:Building Dept. PINK:Treasurer c 3 > V/ MASSACHUSETTS UNIFORM APPLICATON FOR PERMIT TO DO GAS FITTING Type or print) Date NORTH ANDOVER,,.S MASSACHUSETTS �___� z Building Locations a 1 'Sa � bfA �l I� Permit# Amount S 3O i c Owner's Name Pe 01,C Oh New❑ Renovation ❑ Replacement Plans Submitted ❑ :C i1 C • m cn U z E- C z c_ =c = z z C a "' cn SUB -BA SEMI ENT B A S E v1 E NT IS"T'. FLOOR 2N D . FLOG R 3R D . FLOG R 4"r5 FLOG R ST 11 . FLOOR 6 T It . F L O O R 7T If FLOG It 8T 5 . FLOOR (Print or type) / Check one: Certificate Installing Company Name ❑ Corp. Address 0--plrtner. Business Telephone 9,1ZC- I? 7<--?) ❑ Firm/Co. ime of Licensed Plumber or Gas Fitter INSURANCE COVERAGE Check one: I have a current liability Insurance policy or it's substantial equivalent. Yes ❑ No❑ If you have checked ves'please indicate the type coverage by checking the appropriate box. Liability insurance policy ❑ Other type of indemnity ❑ Bond ❑ Owner's Insurance Waiver. I am aware that the licensee does not have the Insurance coverage required by Chapter 142 of the Mass.General Laws,and that my signature on this permit application waives this requirement. Check one: Signature of Owner or Owner's Agent Owner ❑ Agent ❑ i hereby certify that all of the details and information I have submitted(or entered) in above application are true and accurate to the best of my knowledge and that all plumbing work and installations performed under Permit Issued for this application will be in compliance with all pertinent provisions of the Massachusetts State Gas Code and Chapter 142 of the General Laws. Bv: Signature of LicensedPI er Or er Tale ® Plumber City/Town ® Gas Fitter License Number 2-1`vlaster APPROVED(oHrice uSE ONi.v; ❑ Journeyman N° 4347 6 MOR7M •�4, TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER o . % PERMIT FOR PLUMBING ,SSAcmUS� / This certifies that !���. . .f� r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . has permission to perform . . .P(7 ya 1l� , plumbing in the buildings of . . . r° at. . .a� /. . . . . !`. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ., North Andover, Mass. C� Fee. U. "-.Lic. No.. 1.l C? 2 ! �- . . . �,�. . :. . . . . /PLUMBING INSPECTOR WHITE: Applicant CANARY: Building Dept. PINK:Treasurer MASSACHUSETTS UNIFORM APPLICATION FOR PERMIT TO DO PLUMBING (Print or Type) a Massachusetts Date,3-/d oW Permit # �3Y7 Permit Feet, Building Location ,So2/ &S"/ In 51- Owner's Name 4 A)' Type of Occup y � New ❑ Renovation ❑ Reolacemenl ❑ Plans Sjbmlfle, Yes D tic C1 FIXTURES Z N __ Z Y a F H J 1 N O Z = > W W Y J N I l Q U N 7 0 G ¢ O Z N a C ¢ = H Z O Z N d O — W H t► I ¢ U. _ — = 1— J �> ~ V W N Y < N — tl — 3 X ¢ < _ ¢ tl 0 < — a = O Co Cc In W ¢ t W — ° a N = ¢ d ¢ W W W ~ ~ W 3 O ° 3 J H ¢ H Q { r V Q S 3 = a Z = F- Y d O < W W Y W W O Q X Q H < Q S N y d a O a J J Q ¢ ¢ ¢C a O < 1,- 3 Y J m N O p ! 12 = h- N W C7 n ° < 3 ¢ m O •� I SUB—BSMT, r BASEMENT IST FLOOR / 2ND FLOOR / 3RD FLOOR 4TH FLOOR STH FLOOR 6TH FLOOR 7TH FLOOR STH FLOOR —±± Installing Cornpa Name V-12 Check one Certificate Address �� Corporation edo arrtnershlp Business T ephone 17740 Firm/Co. Name of Licensed Plumber or Gas Fitter INSURANCE COVERAGE: I have a current liability insurance policy or Its substantial equivalent which meets the requirements of MGL Ch 142 Yes i� No ❑ If you have checked fees, please Indicate the type coverage by checking the appropriate box. A liability Insurance policy Other type of Indemnify FJ Bond ❑ OWNER'S INSURANCE WAIVER: I am aware that the licensee does not have the Insurance coverage required by Chapter 142 of the Mass General Laws, and that my signature on this permit application waives this requirement Check one Owner`_I Agent ❑ Signature of Owner or Owner s Agent I hereby certify that all of the details and informalior I have submitted(cr entered)in abo' aDDI cahon are true nd accurale to the best of my knowledge and that all plumbing work and installations performed under the permit ill lop,this appli I n compha wit II pertinent provisions of the Massachusetts Slate Gas Code and Chapter 142 of the Ge al Laws By TYDe of License r-�Plumber Sigriature o icense 2i Title _ � G lumber or as ter /l aster License Number _ ClW/Town Journeyman n MIFK E 7F- - inspection Date Requested ;:�:..a.�,kyr:'7�V•t+�k�'�.-ox"�-i+wf'6r•�`"-*"'�...�.k..,,.. ,.� -�..4w:..,`�-...-.^t.�;�.. .Y,. a...w F- /�2• Z Date. . . . . .� . . . ti 3887 a HpRTN °f< -`° •�"p TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER S PERMIT FOR PLUMBING At ,SSACMUS� This certifies that'�?'Yf,�.l.'�F. --• has permission to perform . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .o N plumbing�hb.u.ildi.ngs of . . . . . . . . . . . . ata/. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . North Andover, Mass. Fee .^. . .Lic. No. . . . PLUMBING INSPECTOR WHITE: Applicant CANARY: Building Dept. PINK:Treasurer f ' r MASSACHUSETTS UNIFORM APPLICATION FOR PERMIT TO DO PLUMBING s (Print or Type) 1210 Massachusetts Date-/a2-// 199f Permit# 7 Pe mit Fee Building Location ;/ S a(ieK S )'-Owner's Namear-Slf M-4 f W lj o y S -P_. Type of Occupancy New ❑ Renovations Replacement ❑ Plans Submitted: Yes ❑ No O FIXTURES _Z ZN Z 19 < I- N J > V < Z W W W 9 J N I N 0 Q ft N Z tlt < C I < ' ~ Z O Z N a 0 J to N N = jr < W H Z 11 �, < 3 X cc m Q w O O W < N = z < W N O CC J Z G W 0 J LL t- r c ; J ¢ �. < Y L6 Iz W = < Y 3 0 Z 3 Y L O < W IL Y W ~ O > I- O = a go �" z 0 0 y Z t W O v I < F < < = N N < < 0 < J j < ¢ ¢ a < O < F- 3 � SUB—BSMT. BASEMENT 1ST FLOOR II 2ND FLOOR 3RD FLOOR 4TH FLOOR STH FLOOR 8TH FLOOR TTH FLOOR 8TH FLOOR Installing Comp/ any Name r+LICr !(//3Z a h'' Check one: Certificate `/(�' � rs — � Address � C� .4 ❑ Corporation ' artnershlp ' Business Telephone_ Firm/Co. Name of Ocensed Plumber or Gas Fitter INSURANCECOVE AGE: I have a current I lity Insurance policy or its substantial equivalent which meets the requirements of MGL Ch. 142. Yes No ❑ If you have checked yes. p��ther he type coverage by checking the appropriate box. A liability Insurance policy type of Indemnity❑ Bond ❑ OWNER'S INSURANCE,WAIVER: I am aware that the licensee does not have the Insurance coverage required by Chapter 142 of the Mass. General Laws. and that my signature on this permit application waives this requirement. Check one- Signature of Owner or Owner s Agent Owner[] Agent ❑ I hereby certify that all of the details and information I have submitted(or entered)in abo pplication ccurale to est rt� knowledge and that all plumbing work.and installations performed under the permit Is for this a is n I in complia athe wi all/ pertinent provisions of the Massachusetts State Gas Code and Chapter 142 of the G Laws By T e or License: f lumber Signature o rcense mer r as Title Gpt tiller i astr License Number t City/Town Journeyman APP Inspection Date Requested