HomeMy WebLinkAboutExhibits in Support of Application - Miscellaneous - 530 TURNPIKE STREET 4/15/2021 DAviS MALm &
DAcOSTI PC
' .
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
Howard P.Speicher
Julian J.D'Agostine
C.Michael Mahn
January 7, 2003 William F.Griilitr,Jr.
Robert Gerrard
VIA FACSINILE 978 688-9556 and First Class Mail John c.Serino
Gary
S.Matska
D.Robert Nicetta,Building Comm-Assioner Gah Ashton
North Andover Building Department
27 Charles Street John T.Lynch
North Andover,MA 01845 Carol R.Cohen
Howard P.Speicher
Re: 530 Turnpike Street Paul L.Feldman
Crary M,Feldman
Dear Commissioner Nicetta: George A.Hcwett
Laurance M.Johnson
I just received a copy of your denial of the building permit application for the Kenneth J,Micklewict
partial renovation and change of use for 530 Turnpike Street. As the issuance ThomasS.Fitzpatrick
of a building permit is a matter of great urgency to the owner and the tenant, I Whitten a.Nords,llf
would appreciate an opportunity to discuss the denial with you, and to ask you J,Gavin Cockfiela
to reconsider your decision denying the application,with possibly some Andrew D.Myers
modifications to the application, discussed below. Robert J.Galvin
Your denial was based on issues related entirely to parking, which were John D.Chambliss
detailed in eight numbered paragraphs,each of which is addressed below. Thontas Frimrdl
Robert J.Diettrich
1. "The applicant indicates 25 spaces in a parking easement." Section 8.1 Amy L.Fracassini
of the Zoning Bylaw allows required off-street parking to be located,". . . on Ann M.sobolewski
the same lot with such building or on a lot contiguous thereto, . ," The 25 siabhenSwmney
spaces are proposed on contiguous property as provided by the Bylaw. We Alice A.Kokodis
will be happy to show you a copy of the easement authorizing such parking. Emily H.Fournier
Kathryn I.Connors
2. "Medical Office Use/Uses, with unknown number of employees." We Joshua S.Grossman
will provide you with the number of employees, Neal J,Bingham
3. "An application indicating multiple possible uses." You correctly note I}arryll S.Townley
that the proposed medical use will not occupy the entire building. There is not
Harold R Davis,
of counsel
direct 617-589.3829 di■ecrfax 617-305-3129
emall hspeicher@davismalm.com
()NEBMY4NACE'B=0N*MA#02l08
617.367 2500 fax 617.513.6215
NYw w . ditvisI), a Im . : oni
D. Robert Nicetta,Building Commissioner DAvis MALm
January 7, 2003 Mc( sTiNE Pc.
Page 2
yet a proposed tenant for the rest of the building,however, this does not require denial of the
application. Otherwise,it would never be possible to occupy a building with vacant space.
There are two possible solutions to this problem,both of which are in conformity with the
requirements of the Bylaw:
A. Section 8,1.2 of the Bylaw provides for this situation as follows: "Where a use is not
indicated prior to construction or issuance of building permit,the number of parking
spaces provided shall be the maximum required."Utilizing this provision for the
unoccupied portions of the building, you can assume a use for the rest of the building
requiring the maximum nuirnber of parking spaces, such as rwtA for the balance of the
building. Using this method,and as is shown on the plans already submitted to you, we
believe the parking space requirement for the property, even assuming a maximum
requirement for the presently unoccupied space, is 127. The plan provides for 129
spaces.
B. There is no requirement that a certificate of occupancy cover the entire building. In
fact,it is typical with office building buildouts to issue certificates of occupancy for each
floor or tenant space as it becomes occupied. We propose that the present application be
treated as applying only to the space proposed to be occupied, with respect to
determining parking space requirements as well as with respect to the space itself.
Accordingly,only the number of parking spaces required for the presently proposed use
would be calculated. When an additional tenant or tenants are proposed,and a new
buildout for the additional space is applied for,the additional parking space requirement
can be calculated. If variances or other relief are required at that time, they can be
applied for then, This could be enforced by issuing a certificate of occupancy limited to
the parts of the building to be tenanted under the present application.
4. "A variance is required pursuant to Section 8.1,Paragraph 7; an unobstructed driveway
of 25 feet wide." This driveway is a pre-existing lawfully nonconforming condition that has
been in place for over thirty years. Therefore,no variance should be required.
5. Variance for penetration of parking setback from Route 114,citing Table 2,Footnote 1.
Under the present application,you are correct that a variance would be required for adding
additional parking spaces in this area,although we note that most of the parking spaces in this
area are existing and are therefore grandfathered. However, we propose that under 3.B, proposed
above, we would not need these additional parking spaces, and could delay building these
additional parking spaces and applying for a variance until such time as we have identified
additional tenants.
fi[
k
E
D. Robert Nicctta, Building Commissioner DAvis M.Lm
January 7,2003 DAGosuNE P.c.
Page 3
6. "The parking plan does not indicate `snow dumps"'. Again, under 3.13, above, there
would be significant excess parking until an additional tenant is identified, so there would be no
need for designated snow removal areas. However,we will,if you deem it necessary, provide
you with a plan showing snow storage areas, and a snow removal plan.
7. Traffic study required because of 1988 Transportation Bond Bill. I am unfamiliar with
this requirement,and do not believe that a traffic study is required under any provision of the
Zoning Bylaw under these circumstances. It is possible that you are referring to Massachusetts
Highway Department requirements that might apply in the event we were to request a new curb
cut onto Route 114, but that is not the case here,since we,are uti!Wng the existing driveway and
curb cut. We respectfully request that you reconsider your decision in this regard.
8. Section 8.1,Paragraph 5,,requiring application to ZBA. This provision applies only to
situations where, "the Building Inspector is unable to identify a use with one(1) or more of the
uses" listed in the parking schedule in Section 8.1. If the proposed use is not adequately
described on the table in Section 8.1,and the building inspector consequently cannot determine
the parking requirement. This section does not apply here. We have clearly applied for a use
that is explicitly listed in the table as"Medical Offices". As for the rest of the building, we have
addressed that issue in paragraphs 3.A and 33, above.
I would appreciate an opportunity to discuss this matter with you,either by telephone or in
person. If some modifications are required to.the plan or the application so that it would
conform to your understanding of what could be issued without going to the ZBA, we would be.
happy to make such changes promptly. I look forward to hearing from you at your earliest
convenience,as this is a matter of great urgency to both Mr. McGarry and the proposed tenant,
Very truly yours,
Howard P. Spoicher
cc: John McGarry,Esq. (via facsimile)
JASFMCHERWk0ntryL5 D TwnpleWR1 k4seNGene 01-07-
01 doc
f
Page 2 of 4
,.* ,•I. Application for a VAIANC
�e..' � a;r3�ist^t'p 7:�r7:.'M`t�r:s�a+%.�" .s:�� w'
Y:�'?r. ,.�.��1`'� ��F��a.r - �. , �� 4S•'��p�= r S`2°� ;•f`'�f + �R3 S�'.F,y
•� :`r i- ?!h f� .5'ci sr::'L: 4h:rar`n.f+r-1,,,, -�` s: W3.i.ir:fit! q w ��1' ir-0; tr-i a wx
Zoning Board of Appeals
1. Petitioner: Name, address and telephone number:
John F. McGarry, Trustee of Pico Trust
401 Andover Street
North Andover, MA 01845 .978-686-1111
'The pe#€#loner steal€be entered an the legal notice and the decislpn as entered above.
2. Owners of Land: Name, Address and Telephone number and number of
years under this ownership:
a as above
Years Owned Land: 1 gors
3. Location of Property:
a. Street: 510-530 Turnpike street Zoning District GB
b. Assessors: Map number 25 _Lot Number: 64
c. Registry of Deeds: Book Number 2 3 g .._.Page Number: 89
4. Zoning Sections under which the petition for the Variance is made.
Table 2 footnote 1 . Parking within 50 foot buffer to Route 114 .
Section 8. 1 (7) . Driveway Jess than 25 feet wide
*Refer to the Permit Lmnie!and Zoning By.LaW Plan ' was suppl€cd by the 9u11ding GommissWer
S. Describe the Variance request
Parkin Alan Route 114 to match setback an adjacent properta.es; dr-i.veway
to be 1.3.5 feet on southeast side of property; appeal of other reasons for
danaal in 12-26-02 Aenial.
'The abovo descrlptlon sha€!be used for the purpose at the legal nonce and d�Ision. Amore detalfed descrt tun(s
ZonEng hoard Rulas and l2egulat€ohs as cited on page 4 of this apAlicatlon,Falture by the applicant to clearly describe the€request may resthlt M
a decision that does not address tent of the applicant. The decision will be limited to the request by the appl#cant end will not Involve
additlonal items not Included above.
&a, Difference from Zoning By-Law requirements: Indicate the dimensions that will not meet cunettt
Zoning By-Law Requirements, (A and B are In the case of a lot split)
Lot Area Open Space Percent Lot Frontage Parking Minimum Lot set Back• o f harking driveway
Sq. Ft. Sq. Ft. Coverage Feet Spaces Front Side A Side 8 Rear width 2 5
A- N/A- -- -- _BIA % AA 1.27 50
8. _ %
Page 3 of 4 Application for a VARI NCE
::fti�a per{4• �
Zoning �Ioard of Appeals �
6. b. Existing Lot:
Lot Area Opera Space Percent Lot Frontage Parking Minimum Lot set Back
Sq. 1=t. Sq. Ft, Coverage Feet Spaces Front Side A Side B Rear driveway width
parking
—VIA N A N/A 56 _ALA N/A 14 N/A ELA N A 13. 5
C- Proposed Lot (S);
L t Area S . Ft open Space
maceCove Percent Lot Frontage Parking Minimum Lot set Back' driveway width
q rage Feet Spaces Front Side A Side 8 Rear
parking .
. 1LA % A— .J.72 .. 7. 5 i ce_ N/A 13.51
d. Required Lot: (As required by Zoning By-Law)
Lot Area Open Space Percent Lot Frontage Parking Minimum Lot set Back,, driveway width
Sq.Ft. Sq. Ft. Coverage Feet Spaces Front Side A Slde B Rear
N A N A N A % _21 A 1 parking
�•A KA.� NL A 25
7. a. Existing Buildings:
Ground Floor dumber of Total Use of
Square feet Floors Sq.feet Building*
9384 2 18, 764 Verizan (tele hone company)
1.332Q-- L—L-�. 194 0
•liaference uses from the Zoning By- Swe number of units in bulkling,
b. Proposed Buildings:
Ground Floor Number of Total Use of
Squarefeet Floors Sq.feet Building*
—IV-A—
N/A
•Reference Uses from the Zoning By.Law.State number of unite in building.
8. Petitioner and Landowner signature {s):
Every appAoatfon for a Variance shall be made on this form which Is the official form of the Zoning Board of Appeals. E a
the Town Cletus Office, it shall be the resp raWIfdy of tt►a petitioner to fumish all su doeumentatip Y ppllc3lion shall be flied with
application receiver!by the Town Cleric or the ZoningBoard of pP 9 n with this application. The dated copy of M
responsible for all expenses for fling and t I '� d° not absolve the applicant from this responsibllfly. The peiiltaner shall be
Regulations may result In t"a n ° Failure to comply with application requirements,as rated herein and in the Zoning Board Rotes and
tn$Board of this application as Incomplete.
Si natu r
Type above name Is) hefe
APPLICATION OF JOHN F. McGARRY, TRUSTEE OF
PICC TRUST
510-530 TURNPIKE STREET
John F. McGarry is the owner of the property located at and known as 510-530 Turnpike Street
(Route 114). The property is the site of two long-standing buildings used for industrial and
office purposes. The property is located in the General Business (GB) Zoning District. The
building at 510 Turnpike Street has long been occupied by Verizon Communications and its
predecessors. The building at 530 Turnpike Street was the location of a light industrial use, and
is presently proposed to be the location of medical offices offering MRI and other medical
imaging services. A portion of the building at 530 Turnpike Street will remain vacant until
another tenant can be. found. The applicant has Applied to the Planning Board for site plan
approval of changes in the configuration of the parking scheme for the property, and has applied
for a building permit for tenant improvements and improvements to the exterior of the building
at 530 Turnpike Street. The building commissioner issued a denial of the building permit
application dated December 26, 2002, for reasons all related to parking on the property. The
applicant, by this petition, appeals certain aspects of the building commissioner's decision, and
requests the issuance of a variance with respect to the driveway width requirements of Table 2,
footnote I of the Zoning Bylaw, and with respect to Section 8.1 (7), for the setback of parking
spaces from Route 114.
The applicant intends to lease 9140 square feet of the building at 530 Turnpike Street for medical
offices as described above. The proposed use of the property for medical offices is allowed as a
matter of right. As shown on the accompanying plan, the number of parking spaces required for
the combined uses on the property is 127, and the number of spaces provided is 129. This
calculation assumes the maximum requirement (retail) for the presently unoccupied space in the
building at 530 Turnpike Street, in accordance with the requirements of Section 8,1 of the
Zoning Bylaw.
The denial issued by the building commissioner was incorrect, and should be annulled, in several
respects, as follows:
1. The first reason given for denial was that, "The applicant indicates 25 spaces in a parking
easement." However, this is perfectly acceptable under the Bylaw. Section 8.1 of the Zoning
Bylaw allows required off-street parking to be located, ". . . on the same lot with such building or
on a lot contiguous thereto. . ." The 25 spaces are proposed on contiguous property, within an
casement, as provided by the Bylaw.
2. The second reason for denial was, "Medical Office Use/Uses, with unknown number of
employees." Contrary to this reason for denial, the number of employees, nine, is shown
explicitly on the plan submitted with the application, and with this petition.
3. The third reason for denial was, "An application indicating multiple possible uses." The
building commissioner correctly noted that the proposed medical use will not occupy the entire
APPEAL
510-530 Turnpike Street
Page 2
building, There is not yet a proposed tenant for the rest of the building. However, this is
permissible under the Bylaw and is explicitly provided for under the Bylaw. Otherwise, it would
never be possible to occupy a building with vacant space. The Bylaw provides a procedure for
calculating the required number of parking spaces when there are multiple uses and one or more
uses are unknown: Section 8.1.2 of the Bylaw provides for this situation as follows: "Where a
use is not indicated prior to construction or issuance of building permit, the number of parking
spaces provided shall be the maximum required." Utilizing this provision for the unoccupied
portions of the building, one assumes a use for the rest of the building requiring the maximum
number of parking spaces, such as retail for the balance of the building. Using this method, and
as is shown on the plans already submitted, the parking space requirement for the property,even
assuming a maximum requirement for the presently unoccupied space, is 127. The plan provides
for 129 spaces.
4. The fourth reason for denial is, "A variance is required pursuant to Section 8.1,Paragraph
7. an unobstructed driveway of 25 feet wide." This driveway is a pre-existing lawfully
nonconforming condition that has been in place for over thirty years. Therefore, no variance
should be required. However, in the alternative, the applicant has petitioned for a variance for
this condition, along the southeast side Of the property.
5. The fifth reason for denial is the commissioner's conclusion that a variance,is required
for penetration of the required 50' parking setback from Route 114, citing Table 2,Footnote 1.
Under the present application,a variance is required for adding additional parking spaces in this
area, although we note that the applicant proposed to match the setbacks of the parking spaces on
the adjacent properties along Route 114.
6. The sixth reason for denial is, "The parking plan does not indicate 'snow dumps"'
Section 8.1 of the Zoning Bylaw does not contain a requirement for designation of snow storage
areas. This issue may be addressed by the Planning Board in the site plan review process, but it
is not a proper ground for denial of a building permit application since it is not a requirement of
the Bylaw.
7. The seventh reason for denial is that the building commissioner has concluded that
pursuant to the 1988 Transportation Bond Bill, a traffic study is required. The Zoning Bylaw
contains no such requirement, and consequently this was not a valid ground for denial.
8. The eighth reason for denial is based on the building commissioner's determination,
pursuant to Section 8.1 (5),that he cannot adequately determine the correct characterization of
the uses on the property for the purpose of calculating the correct number of parking spaces.
However, Section 8.1 (5)applies only to situations where, "the Building Inspector is unable to
identify a use with one (1) or more of the uses" listed in the parking schedule in Section 8.1. 1f
the proposed use is not adequately described on the table in Section 8.1, then the building
inspector consequently cannot determine the parking requirement. This section does not apply
here. The applicant has clearly applied for a use that is explicitly listed in the table as "Medical
i
APPEAL
510.530 Turnpike Street
Pa e 3
Offices". The other uses on the site are either existing office uses (the Verizon building) or are
assumed to be the maximum retail requirement pursuant to Section 8.1.2. The application should
not have been denied on this basis.
With respect to the proposed variances for setback of parking from Route 114 and driveway
width on the southeast side of the property, the proposed variances meet all of the conditions for
the granting of variances.
A. There are circumstances relating to soil conditions, shape, or topography of the land or
structures and especially affecting such land or structures but not affecting generally the zoning
district in general. In particular, the configuration of the two existing buildings on the property
and their existing setbacks, along with the existing setbacks of parking on the adjacent parcels,
justifies the granting of the variance because the shape and topography of the property, including
the existing buildings, precludes a narrower driveway on the southeast side of the building and
precludes a greater setback from Route 114.
B. Owing to the circumstances described above especially affecting such land or structures but
not affecting generally the zoning district in general, a literal enforcement of the provisions of
this Bylaw will involve substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the applicant. Denial of
the requested variances will preclude use of existing, longstanding commercial buildings in a
commercial district, for allowed uses,
C. Desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and without
nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent or purpose of the Bylaw. The proposed
variances are consistent with the parking setbacks on adjacent properties and provide sufficient
access and asthetie setbacks from Route 114.
For the reasons stated above, and others that will be presented at the hearing, the applicant
respectfully requests that the Board annul the decision of the building commissioner as requested
above and grant the requested variances to allow for the use of the property with the parking
space configuration shown on the submitted plan.
John F. McGarry,Trustee of Pico Trust
By his attorneyeh
Howard P. r
DAVIS, MALM&D'AGOSTINE,P.C,
One Boston Place
Boston,MA 02108
(617)367-2500
1:UPE1CHCRIMCGWyX530 T"A MR1
1cucXBDAApplicat10a.D0C
EXHIBIT B
2003 Site Plan
{00193847;v1}
M-,LUeTwT,d[R.�Lr
.� -- - - - ---- ---- --- - --- '^ - -
a=].�"1H I==W OF P=
-�r'-e re�rn.`raarrakr
_ 1_ AT �.
wAr• '^"..�..'^—^E ""' `� , 4' p`
I r.p mAY awr
4
` PAWWfG F�rdANo
7r 7r .q. 1�1Ra'
�~ q Q M IF !! y/ Y�11 JO A � < PAwgovp R{4�ML'O l SPALL PrR JOa Ar. -
LOCATION MAP
/ `-"� m ►AlKJni wrae�o.cs rAa�a '
pAxx!PLOOR or- .1 df,
8 'Aw;M"Rra --J EA PrR�cc 8r.
P q i$/ P-4Ji L J-]II7 Pa
Tout YORTN AYDa1}{
+ -
'f� �J P14J I SPAce PrR 6NPLOYRE�'1 rNPFOYlR 9pACE8 11�11'4 GaAtD
PAMPW-RWOu -X4.7 ArAMo
E
Y p Y n m >t tt a T] L 7F �] PJ I aRO55 FLCOR AREA FSOO 9.P.
i PARKO/G Reaµ orD-I YACr F R"a a,p,
"oo ar./aGO w KY
PAN$**Awaw/A-Y.a YA�'i1
JR�?Ll Jl�4gzA-7C
PRM rLOOw AREA..$FA SP, .
L PARYLMG RC 4wo -F sA 1%PER A?DO N
e�►rxam+�s�r � Rioa�,�ar..a-7i6
/
rnVOffc AA1rA J/.r A* PAfA1F`wear[ea-sIr rAawa R CElVED
fi0ay rO ,r0 1P,A `ss N x Y A7 .► A ql .e Tr... w +
YY57007
AO n- /RE ST.-0"a Act"
t 3 ao TWNr,cE Jr.-x4 arAua "MRw Cw
MM A' ! no nrxrJa ar. ."o sPAtxs
Fn.nwN Ar.-n"seA A
;"T+wkF1CL Ar.-JCU,r , '
lwOAa KOAf/KA R'kY y.F.
ieO r+NeNPisR SY.-71ia Wr s
� �T/eNT LaFY YP. ^L, OL4 SPAf25- m Wall,
S t�
L'� o T,Y Ipgy mArwi �r•T' _�S of.Q6NiG"
:. Mir' � ." m aPAcv ve eeer wuuoca]u
�ro�ni PPArwro roR 7�S+Te rrcr PIAw
rre a.ar�z&*°
� -------------------- -- - 74NfN4 lNPO/tllAT10N
ar' d �'l n w I. � �J� �a�' is �•,oT +w w� u rJ n n ar �,ar.Rw..,�
- a rJrtT Q
` - ....._{ •• —_ y �+ _ ••_ - CRAPfIiC SCAIE
tNTFr rrrER -
o..re
LrAs Www,AW Yify♦Y-MY M A•w,MR
(y�T)
ROUTE /M !TURNPIKE STR• ET3 �-`F %f� """" "''Y0 RAM
ROCORDEA PROPERTY OgWr PARElNL PLAN OP PROPERTY LOCAT$A A7 PWFESE+ONAL Lk[4kLCR3 ANO LAND&l VEYOR3,
>wco TRusr SIO f S-SO TURNPIKE' STREET c4R -y-leN i mcd lA E C1iL}
101 ANDOVER ,STREET NORI-N ANDOVER, MA 1L0 SUPfMER'STREET
NORTH ANDOVER. MA 01C15 HAVERN'tL,MA OW30 '� ogre c- NrAo
EXHIBIT C
2003 Site PIan Special Permit
{00193847;v1}
Town of North Andover ; ,�
4 y
Office of the Planning Department �� `=° ''''
Community Development and Services,.Division
27 Charles Street ,,�""�ti.;+
� ,mob�'�h
North Andover, Massachusetts 01845 ';• ?s�c►o :.
http://www.townofnorthandover.com
Planning Director: T 1�woods@townofnorthandover.com P (978) 688-9535
J. Justin Woods ATTRO (978) 68$-9542
N
A True Copy 4;
This is to certify that twenty(20)days NOTICE OF DECISION "` 0 i` r i '"C)�;
have elapsed from:date of declslon,filed cc --;- r,
wiemtfill�o
f110 ppeal. Town'Clerk =--
haw SENT USPS VIA CERTIFIEDle 063 MAIL T c, '
T6wn CM RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTEDolll ` y-
Pico Trust—530 Turnpike Street
Site Plan Special Permit °
The public.:heariV-oh the above-referenced applications were closed by the North Andover Planning Board
on February 18,2001-Present were Planning Board Vice Chair Alberto Angles,Clerk Richwd'Nardella,
Members Felipe Schwarz°and George,'Wlute,Associate Member-James''Phinney,Planning Director J.!Justin
Woods, And•Planning'Assistant Debbie Wilson: John McGarry of-Pico Trust as well-as Karl Dubay,ofMHF
Design appeared on behalf of the petitioner.
Nardella made, and Schwarz seconded, a motion to grant the Site Plan Special -Per'mif"tapei•mit the
applicant to modify. the.exterior,of the existing byilding and.modify the-.parking plan. .This Special
Permit was requested by John McGarry of Pico,Trgst,.401 Andoyer Street,.North Andoyer, MA 0.1, 45. The
original:application,,exclttding;revised.documentati.4n, as cited herein,, was filed with the PIpping Board on
November 15, 2002 with subsequent submittals on file. The applicant submitted a complete application, which
was noticed and reviewed in accordance with.8.3 and 10.3 of"the Town of North Andover Z&jing'Bylawv and
MGL Chapter 40A,I ection V. The motion to approve was subject to the FINDINGS OF FACTS and
SPECIAL CONDITIONS set forth in Appendix A to this decision.
The Planning Board voted on the motion by a vote of 5 in fdvor to 0 against. A special permit issued by a
special permit granting authority requires a vote-of at-least four members of a five-member board. See MGL
Chapter 40A, Section 9 and Section.10.3(5)-of the Town of North Andover Zoning Bylaw. Accordingly, the
Applications for the Site Plan Special Permit is'approved with conditions:'' '
The applicant is hereby notified that should the applicant disagree'with this dectsion,'the applicant has
the'right;trader MGL Chapter 40A,S.ection"'I7;-to appe.016 this decision withln twenty-days after the
date this decision has beenfiled-vdth the-Town Cler]{
Respectfully Submitted:
J. Woods,PiariL�ing Director
for'the North Andover Planning Board: Voted:
John Simons,Chairman .''Y-N-Abst-NIA
Alberto Angles, Vice-Cha'ir nan Y-N-Abst-N/A
Richdrd'Nardella;-Clerk, Y-N=Abst-NIA
George White Y-N-Abst-N/A
Felipe Schwarz Y-N-Abst-NIA
James Phinney,Associate Member Y-N-Abst-N/A
BOARD OF APPEALS 688-9541 SUILDTNO 688=9545 CONSERVATION 688-9530 HEALTH 688-9540:'PLANNING•688-9535
Pico Trust— 530 Turnpike Street
Site Plan Special Permit
February 21, 2003
Page 2 of 3
Appendix A
Site Plan Special Permit
The Planning Board makes the following findings as required by the North Andover Zoning Bylaw Sections
8.3:
FINDINGS OF FACT:
1. The use will not result in any nuisance or serious hazard to vehicles or pedestrians.
2. The ZBA granted a setback variance to permit the proposed parking along Route 114 to match the existing
conditions on adjacent properties.
3. Existing travel lanes will be improved by the plan.
4. There will be minimal alteration to the existvig site and structure as a result of the proposed changes.
5. Finally the Planning Board finds that this project generally complies with the Tovm of North Andover
Zoning Bylaw requirements as listed in Sections 8.3 and 10.3 but requires conditions in order to be fully in
compliance, The Planning Board hereby grants an approval to the applicant provided the following
conditions are met:
SPECIAL CONDITIONS:
1) No portion of the premises may be used for a restaurant or any other food related retail or preparation
business or a convenience store as there would not be adequate parking.
2) Snow removal may be scored on the landscaping islands to the extent possible, but shall be trucked off site
whenever snow exceeds onsite storage capacity.
3) Prior. to the endorsement of the plans by the Planning Board, the applicant must comply with the
following conditions:
a) The plan shall be modified to show that parking space# 115 shall be eliminated and painted no
parking to comply with the ZBA approval.
b) A bond in the amount of$5,000 shall be posted for the purpose of insuring that a final as-built
plan showing the location of all on-site structures and parking. The bond is also in place to insure
that the site is constructed in accordance with the approved plan. This bond shall be in the form
of a check made out to the Town of North Andover. This check will then be deposited into an
interest-bearing escrow account.
4) Prior to the start of construction, a construction schedule shall be subrritted to the Planning Staff fir the
purpose of tracking,the construction and informing the public of anticipated activities on the site.
5) Prior to FORM U verification(Building Permit Issuance):
a) The final site plan mylars must be endorsed and three (3) copies of the signed plans must be delivered
to the Planning Department.
b) A certified copy of the recorded decision must be submitted to the Planning Department.
6) Prior to verification of the Certificate of Occupancy,the applicant must submit a letter from the architect
or engineer of the project stating that the construction and operations substantially comply with the plans_
referenced at the end of this decision as endorsed by the Planning Board.
7) Prior to the final release of security, A final as-built plan showing final construction and location of the
building and parking spaces shall be submitted to and reviewed by the Planning Staff.
a)ARD OF APPEALS 688-9541 BUILDING 688.9545 COINSliRVK1 I0MU-9530 HGAIAT1688.9540 1'LAATNING 688.9535
Pico Trust— 530 Turnpike Street
Site Plan Special Permit
February 21, 2003
Page 3 of 3
8) Any stockpiling of materials (dirt, wood, construction material, etc.) must be shown on a plan and
reviewed and approved by the Planning Staff. Any approved piles must remain covered at all times to
minimize any dust problems that may occur with adjacent properties. Any stock piles to remain for longer
than one week must be fenced off and covered.
9) All site lighting shall provide security for the site and structures however it must not create any glare or
project any light onto adjacent residential properties.
10) The contractor shall contact Dig Safe at least 72 hours prior to commencing any excavation.
11) The provisions of this approval shall apply to and be binding upon the applicant, its employees and all
successors and assigns in interest or control.
12) Any action by a Town Board, Commission, or Department that requires changes in the plan or design of
the building as presented to the Planning Board, may be subject to modification by the Planning Board.
13) Any revisions shall be submitted to the Town Planner for review. If these revisions are deemed substantial,
the applicant must submit revised plans to the Planning Board for approval.
14) This Special Permit approval shall be deemed to have lapsed on two years from -the date the permit was
granted unless substantial use or construction has commenced" Substantial use or construction will be
determined by a majority vote of the Planning Board.
15) The follo.,ing information shall be deemed part of the decision:
Plan: Office Building
530 Turnpike Street
Prepared for: John McGarry
Prepared by: Landry Architects
389 Main Street, Salem,NH 03079
Sheet Cl Titled: Proposed Parking Plan
Dated: 11/15/02, last revised 1/28/03
Sheet A2.1 Titled: Proposed Exterior Elevations
Dated: 10/7/02, last revised 12/4/02
Plan: Landscape Plan
530 Turnpike Street
Prepared for: John McGarry
Prepared by: Huntress Associates,Inc.
17 Tewksbury Street, Andover,MA 0 18 10
Sheet Ll Titled: Landscape Plan
Dated: 1/30/03
oc. Conservation Administrator
Director of Public Works
Health Administrator
Building Inspector
Police Chief
Fire Chief
Engineer
Abutters
Assessor
DPW
t30.XRD OF AITEALS 688-9541 BUILDING 688.9545 CONSERVATION 688-9530 HEALTH 689.9540 PLANNrNG 688.9535
EXHIBIT D
Updated Site Plan with Drive Thru
(00193847;vl)
9
I,
-do I
II L ya 3
EXI577NC
CROSSROADS
PLAZA
i
SW
nw 530 TURNPIKE SrREEf
aP�rxc aueaxc
570 TURNPIKE STREET YSNRod rcos./- I
LMS RxG DvkPwc
�,xm.noPx n ,woo•Ps:�urnl I � [
1
I �
I
GRAPHIC SCALE 1—
ROUTE t1 4 (TURNPIKE STREET)
aoox.�oa ��C�70g1�11-I&C'Slf UV'�
SALEM FIVE "^N N&SE° ITE PLAN
DRIVE UP WINDOW 'GO su"'E"�:`�` INC"
ene.hWa Omn T+uxwC.nrce:MEbsiA::.lana:c.P.�r NA ,G�0.VNMf�S,SEEI
'Y}�T1PNPf�^..TgFkT tniq almxd:p Pmlecs Nare0.:F9M Onbggnow Gw�vM:bn IUVEf.MU.��0485p H
N9AM AN0[1v[A,M0."�84C1g19E1TJ FE4
3W n�wx.w.q Gvsdo.nuP,]R T.I:NM}�0v:avY P.w.R+m 9Tomo A'19]B-S]3-39Gf1 \ x��O.M gawgw, � ...- �_J �__ ,�-�.
..........................................................