The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutP & L DEVELOPMENT CORP 0yonrh a F. AMILM 1655 ,. JA 1S 1CHU � VV KOO TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER •'�' j., �? a iw1 MASSACHUSETTS N��17 1 0 �� LERK G SOWN , `v NOR7H PryppYER �, BOARD OF APPEALS SpyQEoL® � NOTICE OF DECISION Date . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Petition No.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . r Date of Hearing. ftT.O! 1 . . . . . s Petition of . .P. & Le Develo t t�pr�. 8c i)i1 Premises affected . ffiorth #4 0_asg®vd St, at ehm a®rl1er tai' Old.C7 erk. . . . . . . . . . Referring to the above petition for a variation from the requirements of the. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .North.AW9ver . -;�rar. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . so as to permit. . :131 utmpbile .8er y►3 nmd. =1Ag.qs 4 t.im . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . After a public hearing given on the above date, the Board of Appeals voted to. . .. . . .the .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . and hereby authorize the Building Inspector to issue a permit to . .P..k L.. DeveloPRO04 Corp►. &0.Dil. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . for the construction of the above work, based upon the following conditions: Signed 8188 l. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dta1 T, �I.etx� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jah Ln Y Ts rxci�7.�ip�r 1ft. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Board of Appeals 3��•' ,� 2 �3 14 75 Is 7 y R. 1 1855 y: �•j� jr"�) ii_J I ILII Ea "7CHO na TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER JOHN I. LYONS cv`' TOWN CLERK MASSACHUSETTS y� NORTH ANDOVER �b BOARD OF APPEALS °E0 Z0 ti Nay 24, 1967 Petition NO. 1I-167 Osgood St./Old Clark Bd. North Andover, Mass. Jobn J. Lyons, Town Clerk Town Office Building P. & L. Development Corp. North Andover, Naas. & am Oil Comqxay Fear Sir: Upon application of the P. & L. Development Corp. and Sun Oil Company to the North Andover Board of Appeals for a variation under Section 4.4/+ of the North Andover Zoning By-Laws so as to permit an Automobile Service and Filling Station a public hearing was held on May 8, 1967 by the North Andover Board of Appeals. The hearing was geld in the Town Han facilities after having been advertised in the Lawrence Eagle Tribune on the dates April 22 and 29, 1967 and with all abutters duly notified by certified mail. The members of the Board present and voting wares James A. Deyo, Chairman; Arthur Drumeond, Secretary; Daviel T. O'Leary and John J. Shields. The applicants were represented by their Attorney, Harold Morley, Jr., Require. On calling the hearing to order, the Chairman of the Board explained that as the Board normally sat as five members and only four were present, the petitioner could defer his application if he so desired. It was also explained that granting the variance would require unanimous approval of the four members. Attorney Norley stated that he was willing to proceed. Attorney Morley pleaded the case for the applicants by stating that a variance was already in existence for the lot as had been granted by the Board ed May 20, 196/,,. Ede variance would be utilized should the present petition be denied. He further stated that the principle reason for the present petition up a repositioning of the proposed station so as to suit the architectural standards of the proposed tenant. He also stated that the developers of the lot had invested considerable monies in the lot including contributing to the cost of necessary sewer extensions. Attorney Morley also stated that the petitioners would be agreeable to an special restrictions the Board wished to impose as a condition to granting the variance. There were arguments raised by abutters against granting the variance. These consisted of the hazard of gasoline seepage into the water supply, increased traffic hazard in that the exits from the station were very near a potentially troublesome intersection, a gaudy or chrome area situated at an area of natural beauty, and two arguments concerning the legality of the hearing. These were to wits The application was for a variance wherein in his opinion it should have been for a Special Permit and also to have a hearing at all there must be on Pile a building permit rejection letter from the Building Inspector. This letter, while available, was dated April 25, some time after the application for a hearing was filed. . -2- Petition No. I1-167 May 24, 1967 The question was raised as to why a Mr. Cyr, a known abutter had not received official notion of the hearing. It was noted that it has been the practice for the Clerk of the Board of Appeals to secure the listing of abutters from the office of the Assessor and should their records not have been updated there was no other reasonable way to insure the accuracy of the notices. It is expected that there will be instances of this type with the rapid turnover of property and the lengthy proceedings in the legal world. It would be wholly =reasonable to assure that if a person is aware then other stadia of such a hearing that the absence of an official notice should have any effect on the legality of the hearing, A motion was made and carried that the petition be taken tinder advisement. Daring this period the previous variance granted was examined and the differences noted as being slight. It was also noted that permission to store gasoline underground is granted by the Selectmen as had been doter in this case. Traffic conditions are in the province of the Police Department who had not noted any objections to the proposed. Service Station. A motion made by Member Johan J. Shields to grant the petition: wan seconded by YAmber Daniel T. O'Leary and voted unanimously. The motion carried with it some conditions as will be cited, ' On the question of timing between application for a variance and a building peredt rejection letter from the Building Inspector, the present Rules and Regulations covering the details of the Board's activities state that the application for a variance must be made within thirty days from date of refusal of a building permit, etc. by an authorised Town official. One could quibble that the thirty day period could be before or after the *refusal*, however it is the intent that is to be considered. The Board was created to give relief from. Zoning By-Laws and const recognise the fallibility of the people with which it must deal. Again, on the question "'variance* versus "special permitn, the Board is Dot prepared to draw a fine line of distinction but pleads that it is the intent that is of major importance. It should be noted that the sOMcia1w application form bas pre-printed the word avariatimP with no space provided for alternate wording. The principle reasons for granting this petition are as follows: 1. To deny the petition would cause severe financial hardship to the applicant. 2. Given that a variance exists, granting this petition is almost a perfunctory matter satisfying a small change desired by the applicants. 3. The approval of this petition is contingent upon the applicant's meeting the following conditions: a. All portions of the lot not utilised for the activities of the ran station, in particular the enbankment bordering Old Clark Road, shall be graded so as to sustain four inches of loam. b. Not less than 100 hardy evergreen shrubs shall be placed an said enbankment. c, The green area shall be amintained so as to create a presentable appearance at all times during that period of the year when weather permits. I� Very truly yours, OF APPEALS JAD:aa amen ChairmanA. Dayes Chairman Oversized Maps on file with the Town