Loading...
11A-025A upland road zoningDECISION OF THE 1 %W ZONING BOARD OF APPEA2K i i I At its meeting on January 7, 1981, the Zoning Board of Appeals for the (City of Northampton voted unanimously to grant the petition of Thomas and Katherine Tessier for a special permit to use their home, located at 19 Upland Road, Leeds, to distribute Amway Products. Based upon the evidence presented to the the Board made the follow - ling findings in regard to the special permit: 1. That the proposed use is listed in the Table of Use Regulations and is not a warehouse activity within the meaning of the Zoning Ordinance. 2. The proposed use bears a positive relationship to the public good in that it provides economic benefits to many people in the community. 3. That the proposed use would not create traffic congestion or impair pedestrian safety as long as deliveries were made no more than once a week during normal business hours. 4. The proposed use would not overload the municipal systems. 5. The proposed use would not impair the character of the neigh- borhood, nor would it be detrimental to the health, morals, or safety of the public. The special permit is, however, granted subject to the following condi- tions: I. That deliveries be made no more than once a week, during normal business hours, and that the truck making those deliveries be no larger than a six wheel vehicle; 2. That the special permit be limited to the. petitioners, and therefore, is not transferable; 3. That the special permit run for one year and be renewable each year thereafter, the time to commence on the day following the conclusion of the appeal period. If the decision is appealed and the Board's decision is upheld, then the time shall commence from the date of finding on the appeal. I r IC RVAIS, CHAIRMAN Deceased ( reb. 3, 19€?1) ARTHUR ZINKIN ROBERT BUSCHER r� f I N0RTHAMP*1� BOARD OF APPEALS Extension of Special Permit for Thomas and Katherine Tessier April 28, 1982 The Board of Appeals met on April 28, 1982, to consider the request of Thomas and Katherine Tessier for an extension of the special permit to use their home at 19 Upland Road, Leeds, for the distribution of Amway products. Present and voting were Chairman Robert C. Buscher, William Brandt, and Peter Laband. The Chairman, in explanation of the request, noted that the Tessiers had been granted a special permit by the Board on January 7, 1981, but the time period had been for one year only. In the meantime, the two members who had heard the case had left the Board. For the benefit of the two new members, he explained that the permit had been granted for one year because concerns had been raised at the hearing that expansion of the business could result in larger and more frequent deliveries to the home, thus creating traffic problems on Upland Road. The Board had voted to grant the special permit for one year so that, during that time, the effects of the business on the neighborhood could be measured. He noted that since the one -year time period had begun, there had been no complaints made to the Board. Mr. Tessier told the Board that the business volume had actually decreased. On a motion made and seconded, the Board voted unanimously to extend the special permit for an additional three years from the present date. The meeting was adjourned at 9:00 PM. Present, in addition to the Board members and Mr. and Mrs. Tessier, were Clare Fennessey, Clerk, and the press. Robert C. Buscher Chairman DECISION OF THT `mss ZONING BOARD OF AP..AALS i At its meeting on October 29, 1980, the Zoning Board of Ap- peals for the City of Northampton voted to grant the petition of Donald Anderson for a special permit to use a portion of his home ,for business use. Based upon evidence presented to the Board, the Board made the following findings in regard to the special permit: 1. The proposed use is listed in the Table of Use I Regulations. 2. The proposed use bears a positive relationship to the convenience or welfare, in that operating a cleaning business provides a necessary service. 3. The proposed use will not increase traffic nor impair pedestrian safety. 4. The proposed use will not impair the character of the neighborhood. 5. The proposed use will not overload the public utilities. The special permit is, however, granted subject to the follow -f ing conditions: 1. That Mr. Anderson continue to conduct his business f in the same manner as he had previously conducted it, that is, that there be no deliveries of items to be cleaned made by customers to the home. 2. That no sign be placed on the premises to adver- tize the business, but the signs now on the vehicles are permitted. 3. That chemicals not be disposed of in any drain nor on the property. 4. That the use be limited to that for which appli- cation was made. II ERVAIS, CHAIRMAN i i OMAS BRUSAWAY ROBERT BUSCHER �nARD O'� REPEALS Public on Application of Donald Anderson nctober 29, 1980 -be oard of Appeals held a public hearing permit �?ctober 29, 1980, f Donald Anderson for a special permit to use a on the request o_ sn Eric P. Gervais portion of his hOCretfo °orders at 7:00 Thomas .mhThomas Brushway an hearing Robert called the he TDYesent. ruscher were also ,_ 7ail' ^'he Chairman read t'_1e public notice, as published in the � October 15 and nctober 22, and the requirements "aT npshire razette on o the Ordinance. for a special hermit accordina t Heal. ?Te informed those present of their right of appeal. -, a "R ap Street, reet, explained that he rents Donald Anderson, Ll- "orth ast three years, has operated one half of a duplex home, and for the P consists of cleaning "; of the a cleaning business from lls,r'floors and The o carpeting, ration rpeting, and 99 u?Iolstered furniture, a rare occasion, an item work is done at the clients homes. on since he has been in business n to his hone for cleaning, but his has occurred no more than twos times. thesbusiness and u be take t and only primarily be use . d to d the paper o to receive phone calls. T'e has no secretary or bookkeeper,�P said occasionally would have one e galize e the businessthe hask o been operating that he is only seeking to legall for the past three years. Tn answer to questions from the Board, he said Y truck and a van which he uses in the business are removed when the vehicles ematerials, although aus,Jin ess use; truck two or that he usually picks up his own makes a delivery to his home peeda °n once hsecleaning thre that the chemir_als and waxes u flam and are disposed of at the City land fill. *position. - o ne r_resent spoke in favor nor in op, le Street, an abutter, said that ,john TTarrington, 224 T orth •a P he had no objections to the proposal, Provided that the applicant does not e:cpand the use. ^'he Chairman assured him that the sr�ecial permit, if granted, .would be limited to the activity presently before the Board. At this point, a motion was made and seconded to vote on the matter. The Chairman found that the use is listed in the "able ublic u con- 'ecti co Regulations- that t 1' n a that theluseeis r not o.-�� P veni.ence or welf are, and will be no more ob7ec- to the neighborhood at the present ransed; that there is no evidence tionable if the special permit is g ir p edestrian safety; that the proposal will increase traffic nor impa (over; N%011 ..i that, since no additional em:loyees are anticipated, there will be no overloading of public utilities; and that the proposal will not impair the character of the neighborhood. r 'r. 7?rushway agreed with these findings. T7e stated that he would have no objections to the proposal, provided that there '-)e no expansion and that the business continue to operate as it presently does. ­r. T'uscher found that the use is listed in the Table of T7 se Regulations; that it bears a positive relationship to the public good, in that this type of business provides a necessary service; that, based on evidence presented, it will not create traffic con - aestion nor will it impair pedestrian safet that public utilities will not be overloaded, sine ci:emical and other wastes will be disposed of at the land fill, not in the sewer syste,:,; and that the operation, as described by the applicant, will not impair the char- acter of the neighborhood. Tie recommended that the following conditions be placed on the special permit- (1) that "r. Anderson continue to conduct his business in the same manner as he has previously conducted it, that is, that there be no deliveries of items to be cleaned made by customers to the home; (2) that no sign be plar on the premises to advertise the business, but the si7ns now on the vehicles are permitted; (3) that chemicals not be disposed of in any drain nor on the property; and (4) that the use be limited to that for which application was made. Teased on the 'loard's findings, the special permit was unani- mously approved, subject to those restrictions recommended by 'r. T'uscher. . The hearing was adjourned at 7:30 Pr'. Present, in addition to the 74 oard members and those mentioned, were Clare Pennessey, Clerk, and seven interested citizens. ervais ..h a_ m - 2 -