HomeMy WebLinkAboutJim Holland - 7.14 public comments - Correspondence - 0 Prescott Street 7/14/2026 7/14/26,2:58 PM Town of North Andover Mail-Online Form Submittal:Contact the Zoning Board of Appeals
NORT, -( bf OVER
Massachu Terri MacNeil <tmacneil@northandoverma.gov>
Online Form Submittal: Contact the Zoning Board of Appeals
1 message
noreply@civicplus.com <noreply@civicplus.com> Tue, Jul 14, 2026 at 2:55 PM
Reply-To: noreply@civicplus.com
To: zoningemails@northandoverma.gov
Contact the Zoning Board of Appeals
Your Name Jim Holland
Your Email jimcholland@gmail.com
Subject Comment for 7/14 ZBA meeting
Message Dear Board of Appeals Members:
Attached, please find my comments for tonight's meeting.The
two other attachments are public records (1984 Board of
Appeals garage Special Permit).
Thank you,
Jim Holland
Attachments
Files must be less than 2 MB.
Allowed file types: txt doc pdf docx jpg gif png.
Attachment Number 1 July 14 2026 ZII3A commenl:s.pdf
Attachment Number 2 11.26,84 ZBA SP Garage.pdf
Attachment Number 3 1984•11-19.pdf
Email not displaying correctly?View it In yOUr I:xrowser„
https://mai1.google.com/mail/u/O/?ik=fObefc9b3b&view=pt&search=all&permthid=thread-f:1870717595658657730%7Cmsg-f:1870717595658657730&s... 1/1
Dear Members of the Zoning Board ofAppeals:
I am unable to attend the meeting tonight, but I would like to support the resident request
made at the last meeting for a building that is one story lower than the proposed building. This
sounds like a reasonable proposal.
I support the use of dust monitors at the site. This seems like a relatively low cost, and helpful
item tn use, especially during any demolition.
I would like to ask the Board to change some of the conditions to protect the town from
unexpected expenses. There are currently conditions where the applicant's responsibility for
reso|utionisvery |inoited (e.Q. condibonlO5b "|innitedtosignsondpavennentnnarNn&s"). This
could put the town at risk for paying for more involved upgrades if conditions turn out to be
worse than the applicant's projections (e.g, atrafOc light or intersection rannode|). It may also
encourage impact projections thatare |ov4becousethereis |itt|coesponsibi|ityifiheyiurnout
tobewrong.
In addition, | would like to ask the Board to review the prior meeting record for items that were
expressed as intentions. It is my understanding that there is nothing preventing a sale of the
property with a 40B permit. The town should have a more than the current applicant's
intentions on the project. Anevvovvnernoi8htnothavethesanneintenUons.
Finally, attached please find copies of the Board of Appeals records from the 1984 Special
Permit for the garage at the corner of Prescott and High Street. Residents had concerns then
regarding a multi-story parking garage at this site. The applicant ai that time agreed to limit the
garage height due after discussions with residents. Permission was required to use 15 feet of
the R-4 zone for the garage. In addition, conditions about the remaining part of the R-4 zone
were put into place ("remaining area in the R-4disirict be open and green, suitably landscaped,
not built upon, unpaved, and not parked upon"\.
Thank you for considering nOy comments and requests.
Sincerely,
Jim Holland
• I
DANIELILONO �ar4
'I'O�tf CLEi:.tt
M� P�
NOR H tiNDOVER � �.,0
DEC 1 a �� ��� iaaa:,��� . Any appeal shall be filed
'CHU B, within (20) days after the
date of filing of this Notice
TOMW of NORTH ANDOVRR In 'the Office of the Town
�ACHUSBTTS Clerk.
BOARD OF APPEALS
NOTICE OF DECISION '
Date . . . , November + 26'�„ 1;984 ,
Petition No.. . . . .S 7.-' SA•. ... . ..,
Date of Hearing..N ox a 01A a r..19.,. 19£i 4
Petition of N p.R T H, .A N.D.Q}1 . M X i.l S.M.L T Y . L.I.i~1 I:i:E D.
Premises affected . A$r.4 3,)j 19hK. re.e t.. . . . . . . . .. ... . .'. .. .. .:. . .. . . . . . . .. . . ... . . ...
Referring to the above petition for a Iota"his xdqgitWcg ,S.p a c.i.,a 1,,P.e.rro i t
u,n d ex . SA c t.i,o n. .4,,. -P a.r a g,r,a p,h .4 .11. .(3.). ,o,f, t.h
so as to permit ."A . s i o", a f n. I-S z a
t•he. �Qnstr.4c.t.i9P. .0f. . , .a►��. .1�.v�I. .PP•r. 9. .o0g,k . .. . . . .. . .
After a public hearing given on the above date,the Board of Appeah voted to . .6.r. tt.t ... the r5
S.R a o.i.o I. .I?e,r ro 1,t . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . and hereby authorize tha BuL Ming Inspector to .issue a
permit to . .c p.n$ t.r.u c.t . the, .Ono. -1 e.v.e). .P a.r k i.n g. .d a c.k
for the construction of the above work, based upon the following conditions:
(see attached conditions)
Signed
. F'.ran.k . S.eri.o .dr ., . C.ha 1.rma.n ::;,,'{.�•,���•. .•� i
i l.i.a m. :J. . .5 u.l.; U.4 n. . . . . . . . . . .
ATTE9Tr Augu.sti,ne. M. . ,NI ,ker.&on. . o : t
A True Copy
Wal t.er.'.F.. .Sou.1.e .. . . . . .. . . . . ,
TownCferk Maurice. .S...
Board �f Appeals
RECEIVED
DANI£L LUNG
TOXIN CIE K
North Andover Mills Realty, Limited NpR yANp YSR
Petition No , 57- 184
November 26 , 1984 DEC 3
Conditipns of Approval for Special Permit:
1 . That all lighting be down - lighting. ,
2 . That the 'structure be restricted to no' more than a total of
two (2) levels .(ground level plus one) .
3. That the remaining area in the R.4 district be open and green ,
suitably landscaped, not built upon , unpaved, and not parked
upon.
4. That•all conditions shall meet with other• towi. Boards and
a,gen'cies under Site Plan Review prior to -the issuance of a
building permit.
,
a
I
i
t � Y
m
November 19, 1984
Regular Meeting
The Board of Appeals entered Executive Session' on Monday evening,
November 19, 1984 at 6:30 p.m. in the Board of Appeals office upon
a motion made by Mr . Vivenzio and seconded by Mr . Soule. Said
motion passed unanimously. The following members were present and
voting: Frank Serio, Jr. , Chairman; Augustine W. Nickerson;
Raymond A. Vivenzio, Esq. , and Walter F. Soule. The purpose of
the Executive Session was to discuss litigation brought against
the town and the Board by Mr. John Carter and Mr. Raymond Agler .
The Board came out of Executive Session at 7 ;30 p.m. when Chairman
Serio announced that the Board would reconvene for their regular
meeting in open session.
The BOARD OF APPEALS held a regular meeting on Monday evening,
November 19, 1984 at 7:30 p.m. in the Town Office Meeting Room.
The following members were present and voting: Frank Serio, Jr . ,
Chairman; William J. Sullivan; Augustine W. Nickerson; and Asso-
ciate Members Walter F. Soule and Maurice S. Foulds .
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Boddy, William - Variance - Belmont Street (continued
Mr . Soule read a letter from Attorney Mark Tay asking that the
petition be withdrawn without prejudice.
MOTION: by Mr . Nickerson to allow the petition to be withdrawn
without prejudice.
SECOND: by Mr . Sullivan
VOTE Unanimous motion carries
Boddy, William - Variance - Belmont Street
Mr. Soule read the legal notice.
Attorney Mark Tay made the following presentation to the Board:
- The petition was discussed at the last meeting.
- The appropriate sections of the Zoning By Law were not part of
the previous application and that error has been corrected.
- Another problem is that this parcel was involved in a decision
in 1960 when the front setback requirements were dealt with
and granted. The problem is that the petition was faulty in
1960. It referred to commercial property rather than
industrial .
The petitioner purchased the property in July. The building
is a one story wood structure. The petitioner has put a brick
face on the building.
They are proposing the addition of a 24' x 30 ' extension on
the front of the lot. They are also proposing a 50 ' x 80 '
extension on the rear.
They are asking for front and side yard setback variances and
a front setback variance for the existing building .
Next door is zoned R-5. On the other side the existing
building is practically on the lot line.
He has cleaned up a dumping ground. He will plant trees as a
buffer and he has already planted 7 along the North Andover
Housing Authority lot line and in the back .
At the last meeting, the issues were 51 next to Nicetta and a
question came up about parking and they were able to assure
the Board that at the rear lot line there is plenty of space.
Also, an issue was tenants parking in the parking lot . They
cannot control the road situation but they will provide
parking for tenants and employees .
The proposed use will be light industrial . They will consider
the neighborhood. Any use will be consistent with the
neighborhood .
No one spoke in favor or opposition to the petition.
Member Nickerson asked "how many people will be working in the
building and Attorney Tay responded "approximately 10" .
Attorney Tay added that if the Board wishes to impose conditions,
Mr . Boddy will abide by them. He referred to footnote #2 of Table
2 of the Zoning By Law and stated that they can' t do it in the
front . In the back, it will be 30 ' - 35 ' in green.
MOTION: by Mr. Foulds to take the petition under advisement .
SECOND: by Mr. Nickerson
VOTE : Unanimous - motion carries .
New England Telephone - Variances - Flagship Drive and Turnpike
Street
Mr . Soule read the legal notices .
A letter from the Building Inspector dated 11/19/84 was read and
placed on file.
Mr . George Gagon, representing New England Telephone, made the
following presentation:
They want to bring telephone service to this part of town.
There are two problems - they want to place on two parcels of
land a pre-cast concrete but 10 1/2 by 15 x 9 1/2 feet high.
One will be placed on Flagship Drive and one on Turnpike
Street .
The telephone company will bring in the latest state of the
art telephone service. It will be a "light wave system" . it
will travel Route 114.
The cable will be smaller than a traditional cable. It can
process computer data. it is immune to electrical
interference.
This is a million dollar project .
If the petitions are granted, the industrial park on Route 114
and residential customers will beneift.
The variances are needed to provide the service.
The available data on population and real estate determines
the potential needed and how the project will be engineered.
The engineering work is about 90% complete .
Any alteration to their engineering plan will increase the
cost substantially. Most importantly, any change would impair
the possibility of bringing the service to this part of town.
It would set them back a minimum of six months .
It is in the public interest to anticipate the public demands .
Therefore, they are petitioning this Board for approval for
the equipment enclosures .
Letters from the land owners, Powder Tech (for Flagship Drive ) and
Wiley and Mary Richards (for Turnpike Street) , both dated Septem-
ber 17, 1984, were read and placed on file .
No one spoke in favor of either location.
Speaking in opposition to the Turnpike Street location were Mr .
Arthur Hardy and Mrs . Mary Lou Salois .
Mr. Hardy stated that he is the owner of the adjoining property
and that Mrs . Salois is his daughter and also an abutter . He
stated that granting the variance would make the lot non-con-
forming. Also, the building will abut his driveway. He said
that granting the variance will ruin his property.
Mr . Gagon stated that there is no driveway. The land near the
proposed but is barren with trees and brush and they will be 250 '
away from Mr. Hardy' s house. He added .that the work will be done
from Route' 114, once the cables are spliced, the activity will
be limited in the building . The maintenance will be very
limited (one technician to maintain it) . It will be monitored
from the central office. They have an alarm system.
Member Soule questioned if the ';-iut could be installed in an R-2
zoning district. To be investigated by the applicant.
MOTION: by Mr . Sullivan to take the petition under. advisement .
. SECOND: by Mr . Soule
VOTE Unanimous motion carries .
Prevenau, Gertdude and Ducker, Daniel Variance - Bacon Avenue
Mr . Soule read the legal notice.
Attoreny William Bellino made the following presentation:
- The petitioner (Preveneau) has conveyed the property to Atty.
John McGarry, as trustee of Mill Trust.
- They are seeking a variance for frontage and area.
- The proposal is to take the four lots (184-187) , of which a
dwelling exists now on Lot 186, and cut them in half, making a
total of two lots . This would allow approximately 90 feet of
frontage for each parcel and approximately 9, 500 square feet
in area for each .
- They seek the variance as it would be a substantial hardship
to the petitioner and owners if this were not granted due to
the fact that the petitioner would be taxed on all four lots
with only one house.
- It will not be a detriment to the public good.
- It will be consistent with the lot sizes in the area. There
are several lots of 4, 500 square feet . Directly behind the
proposed lots , there are several lots of the same area.
- It will not be a derogation of the Zoning By Law. Other
variances have been allowed.
No one spoke in favor .
Speaking in opposition were Mrs . Cardello and Mrs . Carlson.
Mrs . Carlson questioned who will live in the houses and Attorney
Bellino responded that they don ' t know yet .
Mrs . Cardello stated that there is no sewage. She questioned if
it goes in, will she have to pay for it. Attorney Bellino told
her she would not - the rights will not go through her property.
Mr. DeFellipo recently purchased the property of the Greater
Lawrence Revolving Loan Fund and asked if the lots could perc
if they decided to go with septic systems.
Chairman Serio asked Atty. Bellino if they would object to a
condition that the homes must be on sewer and Atty. Bellino
stated that they would not .
A letter from Mr . Ferraro dated 11/19/84 was read and placed on
file. In the letter , he stated that he objected to a two-
family dwelling.
MOTION: by Mr . Foulds to take the petition under advisement .
SECOND: by Mr . Soule
VOTE Unanimous - motion carries ,
McLay, John - Variance - Middlesex Street/Norman Road
Mr. Soule read the legal notice.
Mr. McLay was at the hearing and made the following presentation:
- The property has been in his family for over 60 years . His
daughter wants to construct a house .
- His mother lives in the house on Middlesex Street and the
proposal is to build one on a 4, 500 square foot lot fronting
on Norman Road.
- Variances from the setback requirements , lot area, and
required frontage are being sought .
Most of the houses in the area are built on 4, 500 square foot
lots . The lots on Norman Road have 6, 000 square feet .
The proposed dwelling will be a two story of approximately 24'
x 40 ' . It will have a 10 foot setback on one side and 16 feet
on the other side .
He has talked to the abutters and no objections have been
forwarded to him.
No one spoke in favor or opposition to the petition .
A letter from the Building Inspector dated 11/19/84 was read and
placed on file.
Chairman Serio asked Mr. McLay if he would object to a condition
that only a single family dwelling could be placed ont the lot
and Mr . McLay said he would not .
Mr. Sweeney' s daughter asked if she could build on her vacant lot
and Chairman Serio informed her that she would have to file an
application with the Board.
MOTION: by Mr . Sullivan to take the petition under advisement.
SECOND: by Mr . Foulds
VOTE Unanimous - motion carries .
. ................
North Andover Mills Realty Special Permit - High Street
Mr . Soule read the legal notice.
Mr . Martin Spagat and Mr . Ted Levi were present and Mr . Levi made
the following presentation:
- They want to construct a one level parking deck. The land is
zoned I-S and R-4. They are asking to go about 15 feet into
the R-4 zone .
- The deck was originally designed as a multi-level deck and
could have been constructed without Board of Appeals approval
but they felt that the one level would be aesthetically better
for the neighbors .
- In order to have enough parking, they need to use 15 feet of
the R-4 zone. It is due to the topography that they need the
deck. The one level will keep it low.
No one spoke in favor or opposition to the petition but Mr. Paul
Kochis of Prescott Street stated that be is in favor of the one-
level as opposed to the multi level deck. lie added that the
owners told the neighbors that the lighting will be down lighting
and that landscaping will be done .
Mr. Spagat and Mr. Levi responded that they have no objection to
the requests of the neighbors .
A letter from the Fire Chief and Town planner was read and placed
on file.
Mr . Leonard Windle asked about the traffic emptying on to High
Street . He asked if they could run a right-of-way to Chickering
Road.
Mr . Spagat responded that they are trying to do that. It will run
out to Chickering Road down the B&M. The selectmen are focusing
on the Sutton Street access .
MOTION: by Mr. Foulds .to take the petition under advisement .
SECOND: by Mr. Soule
VOTE Unanimous - motion carries
Cooper, Margaret and Joyce - Variance - Salem Street
Mr . Soule read the legal notice.
Joyce Cooper was at the hearing and made the following presenta-
tion:
As stated in the application, they are seeking relief from the
requirements of Section 7. 3 in order to construct a garage .
The existing driveway is there and if they had to build the
garage in another location they would have to construct a new
driveway. This location is the most accessible to the side
door .
There was a shed in the location at one time and they are
trying to preserve the carriage shed.
No one spoke in favor or opposition to the petition.
MOTION: by Mr . Foulds to grant the petition as requested .
SECOND: by Mr . Nickerson
VOTE Unanimous - motion carries
DECISIONS
NYNEX - Special Permit - Boston Hill
Decision to be rendered on December 10, 1984. The five members
needed to vote are not present tonight .
Boddy, William - Variance - Belmont Street
MOTION: by Mr. Foulds to grant the variance subject to the foll-
owing conditions:
1 . That the proposed addition of 24 by 30 feet be elimi-
nated and that the second proposed addition of 80 by
50 feet be extended to 100 by 50 feet .
2. That a 15 foot grassed buffer zone on the Northeast
side of the lot be maintained from the street all the
way back .
3. That the plan be revised to show the correct zoning
designation and the changes outlined above .
4. That the uses under Section 4. 132, paragraphs 8, 10
and 11 are prohibited.
SECOND: by Mr . Nickerson
VOTE Unanimous - motion carries
New England Telephone - Variance - Flagship Drive
MOTION: by Mr . Sullivan to grant the variance as requested
SECOND: by Mr . Soule
VOTE - Unanimous - motion carries
New England Telephone - Variance - Turnpike Street
The Board will visit the site and render a decision on 12/10/84.
No. Andover Mills Realty - Special Permit - High Street
MOTION: by mr . Foulds to grant the Special Permit subject to the
following conditions:
1. That all lighting be down lighting.
2. That the structure be restricted to no more than a
total of two ( 2 ) levels (ground level plus one) .
3. That the remaining area in the R-4 district be open
and green, suitably landscaped, not built upon, un-
paved, and not parked upon.
4. That all conditions shall meet with other town Boards
and agencies under Site Plan Review prior to the
issuance of a building permit.
SECOND: by Mr . Soule
VOTE : Unanimous - motion carries
Preveneau, Gertrude - Variance - Bacon Avenue
MOTION: by Mr . Sullivan to grant the variance subject to the
following conditions:
1 . That only a single family dwelling be constructed
on Lot A.
2. That both the existing dwelling on Lot B and the
proposed dwelling on Lot A be tied into the municipal
sewer system.
SECOND: by Mr . Foulds
VOTE In favor - 4 (Serio, Sullivan, Nickerson, Foulds )
Opposed - i (Soule )
Motion carries
McLay, John - Variance - Middlesex Street/Norman Road
MOTION: by Mr . Foulds to grant the variance subject to the
following conditions :
1. That only a single family dwelling be placed on the
new lot.
2. That the plans be revised to show suitable off street
parking.
SECOND: by Mr . Soule
VOTE Unanimous - motion carries
..........
MINUTES - 10/15/84
MOTION: by Mr . Soule to accept the minutes of 10/15/84 as written.
SECOND: by Mr. Sullivan
VOTE : Unanimous - motion carries
The meeting adjourned at 11 :15 p.m.
ank Serio Jr . airman Jea� EE.chit cr
Y