Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1968-10-29Tuesday - October 29, 1968 Special Meeting & Hearings The BOARD OF APPEALS held a special meeting on Tuesday evening, October 29, 1968 at 7:30 P.M. in the To,n Office Building. The following members were present and voting: James A Deyo, Chairman; Arthur Drummond, Secretary; Donald J. Scott, Daniel T. O'Leary, J. Philip Arsenault and Associate Member William Deyermond. There were 20 people present for the hearings of the evening. 1. HEARING: Alco Electronic Products, Inc. Mr. Drummond read the legal notice in the appeal of Alco Electronics Products, Inc. requesting a variation of Sec. 6.51 & 7.5 of the Zoning By-Law so as to permit the use of existing walls for the proposed building on the premises, located at the north side of Belmont Street, approx. 200 feet from the corner of Marblehead Street. Member Arsenault disqualified himself from sitting on this petition and Associate Member Deyermond sat in his place. Atty. Donald F. Smith represented the petitioner. He has an option to purchase lot "B" presently owned by Charles Cyr. This area is zoned Industrial "L", which requires 50,000 sq. ft. This is a lot of record before the Zoning By-Laws went into effect. There is a grontage on Belmont Street of 1Ol.ll feet. This is a very unusual situation. The lot is presently enclosed by a wall and has been there for many years. Socony-Vacuum owned the property years ago and the wall was there then. The buildings were in existence before the Zoning By-Laws and have been modernized. The wall is presently being used for storage. Alco wants to use the existing w~]ls and roof over the area and extend the use of the building presently there. It would not be feasible to place a building on the lot in any other way. The Nicetta lot adjoining has a building within 2 or 3 feet from the lot line. He thinks the variance should be granted because of the peculiar circumstances of the lot. A house could not be built on this lot. The wall is already there and this would be putting it to use. He doesn't want to change anything; he will leave the walls there and put a roof over. It would be in keeping with the area. The storage tanks are already there. Mr. Del Campo, the registered land surveyor and engineer, spoke and explained the plans of the building and just e×aetly what work would be done. The present walls are very. strong and have substantial footing. This type 'of foundation is de- pendable. Me explained the maps aud pictures shown to the Board, and the floor plan. The building will blend aesthetically with the area in general. The present building used by Alco is for light manufacturing of electronic products. This would be.used for storage in connection with the present business. Mr. Alfred Contarino, president of Alco Electronics, was also present and explained the functions of his business. He said many North Andover residents are employed by his firm now and that he ldkes North Andover and wants to expand his business and keep it here. Atty. James H. Eaton, III, representing Charles Cyr, owner of lot "B", spoke in favor of the petition, saying it would enhance the present industrial area by putting in a modern building and making more taxable property for the town. Speaking in opposition was Nicholas F. Nicetta, owner of the abutting lot. He looked at the plans presented by the petitioner. He said that the existing walls are 6" cinder blocks and would not meet the building requirements. He says it will October 29, 1968 - cont. decrease the value of the area. He doesn't think anyone will be hurt economically. He says the petitioner should abide by the requirements of the Zoning By-Laws. He plans to remove his building at some future date in order to meet the require- ments. Re thinks it is ridiculous and fantastic to utilize a fence. Robert Nicetta also spoke in opposition. He looked at the pictures and plans presented and said they were not as Atty. Smith had stated. He said that the pro- posed building would be within 6 inches of the Nicetta roof line. He said the present Cyr lot is a fire hazard. Mr. Del Campo tried to clarify several points of the construction and he discussed them with Robert Nicetta. Chairman Deyo asked the petitioner if he would be agreeable to conditions being placed upon their petition. Atty. Smith said they would abide with whatever the Board requires. Chairman Deyo asked Mr. Nicetta what he uses his building for. Mr. Nicetta said it was to garage his own business equipment. Atty. John JJ Willis spoke in favor of the petitioner, sa.v-lng he was familiar with the area and that Alco has done a very good job of improving the area which was at one time an objectionable area. The best use of this land is the use which Alco desires to make; there is no other use to which this land could be put. He would like to be recorded in favor. Atty. Eaton said that the lot is under option which makes it impossible to use as a single lot at present. They could use it if it was combined with the Alco property. It would be upgrading the area. Mr. Drummond made a motion to take the petition under advisement. Mr. O'Leary seconded the ~otion and the vote was unanimous. ~,. HEARING: Jane S. Watson (Earth Removal Permit) Mr. Drummond read the legal notice in the appeal of Jane S. Watson who re- quested a Special Permit under Sec. 5.1 & 5.2 of the Zoning By-Law so as to permit the removal or sand and/or gravel on the premises located at the north side of Salem Street; approx. 4,000 feet from the corner of Ingalls Street. Atty. John J. Willis represented the petitioner. Ne stated that the development of the area as a gravel pit would in no way be 9bjectionable by abutters as there were no homes in the immediate area; that the gravel/sand area abutted the new access road being built for the Sentinel Missile Base and that the gravel is to be used to construct the access road. The area to be developed covers several acres and ,11 provisions of the ZoningBy-Laws and such special conditions that the Board may request will be complied with in the operation and closing of the area. Excavation will be in the order of eight feet with some 40,OOOyards required for the immediate construction. John Roberts, Conservation Commission, questioned the terrain and was informed that it was open with no trees. Several people spoke but no specific objections were raised. Mr. Dr,~mond made a motion to take the petition under advisement. Mr. O'Leary seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. October 29, 1968 - cont. The Board then proceeded to discuss the hearings and vote. 1. Alco Electronics Products, Inc. During discussion it was noted that the requirements for setbacks were being quite severely compromised. Also that the question of the adequacy of the existing walls to carry an~ load could not readily be resolved. However, the walls were in existence and placing a roof over the area would not drastically alter the appearance of the area. Upon motion by Mr. 0'Leary, seconded by Mr. Deyermond, the petition was approved unanimously with certain conditions. The principal reasons for granting are as follows: 1. Granting the variance willnot deviate from the intent and purpose of the Zoning By-Laws. 2. Demying the petition would cause hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner. 3. The lot in question is zoned Industrial, however it is of such size that if re- quired setbacks were observed the remaining area would be insufficient to build a building of significance. ~. Special Conditions: A. The exterior of the existing wall a~ any parts that may need to be added shall be finished ~miformly with a suitable surface coating, stucco, masonry p~1~t, etc. B. There shall be no truck or vehicular exits opening on Belmont Street. C. The existing walls shall be examined by the Building Inspector prior to issuance of any building permit and any supplementary strengthening as he may feel necessary shall be included in the construction. 2. Jane S. Watson: The Board discussed the matter ~uud noted that there were no reasons in particular why a permit should not be granted. Mr. O'Learymade a motion to grant the special permit, seconded by Mr. Drummond and unanimously voted subject to conditions as follows: 1. The area to be developed into a source of sand and/or gravel is~ticUlarly suited for residential construction principally due to its being somewhat remote and not connected with all normal utilities. 2. Granting the permit will not be detrimental or injurious to the immediate neighborhood or aga4n~t the general interests of the public. 3. The petitioner's request is acceptable and to deny it would be doing an in- justice to the petitioner in not allowing him a reasonable use of his land. Conditions: A. That this permit shall be limited to one year and that upon application to the Board, without the need of a public hearing, with a report from the Building October 29, 1968 - cont. Inspector that the operation is satisfactory, a renewal may be granted. B. That the petitioner file with the Town of North Andover, a Performance Surety Bond in the amount of Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,0OO) with the stipulations that all provisions and requirements for operation and performance under such bond be subject to review and approval of Town Counsel. Also that all expenses attendant in the preparation and execution of said bond be borne by the petitioner. C. That all cut slopes be restricted to a maximum of 25 degrees. D. That all stones or boulders uncovered by excavation and not used, be buried. E. That excavation shall not be made within fifty (50) feet of the access read and within seventy-five (75) feet of a sms]~ brook rung through the area. F. That all sales and/or deliveries of said sand ann/or gravel be restricted to the use of the aforesaid access road and site and to the Town of North At, over. G. That all loam stripped from the area shall be stocked for use in restoring the area. A minimum of six inches of loam shall be applied in said restoration. 3. Pearl Currier (Walker Realty Trust) - Apartments: The Board discussed the petition and concluded that it represented a natural extension of an existing apartment complex and would permit use of essentially land-locked land. Mr. O'Leary made a motion to gr~nt the special permit, seconded by Mr. Drummond and unanimously approved with special conditions. The reasons for granting and the conditions are as follows: 1. Granting the special permit will not deviate from the intent and purpose of the Zo,~-g By-Laws. 2. Denial of the petition would cause severe hardship to the petitioner in not allowing reasonable use of her lend. 3. Granting this special permit will put into use a land-locked piece of land with no frontage on existing streets. Conditions: A. Extension of an 8-inch sanitary sewer to a manhole in front of building No. 3. Re-location of a 6-inch main as it is shown groingthrough a building. See also condition D. B. Installation of a fire detection and alarm system within each apartment building. The plans for this system shall be submitted to and have the approval of the Fire Chief of the Town of North Andover. C. The road or street servicing the bud_ldings sh~ll be m~i~tained as a private way end town acceptance shall not be sought. This m~ntenance shall include street lighting, plowing, rubbish collections and garbage disposal. The roadway sh~ll be no less than thirty feet of paved surface and the radius of any turnarounds or circles ending said roads shall be approved by the Fire Chief. October 29, 1965 - cont. D. The water and sanitary sewerage services sh~ll meet with the approval of the Board of Public Works. E. The approval of the Planning Board shall be obtained in regard to compliance with specifics of Section 4.73 (h) - (roadways), of the Zoning By-Laws. Assoc. Mem. Deyermond sat on this petitioninplace of Mr. O'Leary. The Board thoroughly discussed the petition and the plans presented. Mr. Deyermond made a motion to DENY the special permit; Mr. Arse~mult seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Members Deyo, Scott & Deyermond voted to den~ the special permit a~ members Dr~,mmond and Arsenault voted not to deny the permit. The reasons for denial are as follows: 1. The apartment complex would be detrimental to the area in which it was proposed. 2. The numbers of vehicles entering and leaving the proposed apartment complex would create serious and hazardous traffic conditions on existing r~adways. 5. FLATLEY: Mr. O'Leary sat on this petition. The Board thoroughly discussed the petition and the plans presented. They found the plans were incomplete - did not show sewers, etc. grades, drains, dimensions, distances, fire alarm system. They also have to meet state regulations for Rte. 114. They need a 50 foot buffer area. A letter will be sent to Atty. Willis requesting more complete plans e~ additional information. The Board ~ then consider the matter further on November 18th. The meeting adjourned at 11:30 P.M. JAD Chairman AD Clerk