18D-004 (6) li cc ' (1 . : : ,..,iir:,;- --
V '
1 ,
JUN - 1 198?
V
OEPL OF BUILDING INSPECTIONS
NORTHAMPTON, MA 01650
/ c „,„- ,'‘?
( 1 / /
tk-
¢. Aa?v - ;./ CITY OF NORTHAMPTON /z `� - V
' ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
- {
• - '71:±: � L � � NUI- cI riAMi' l UN, MA55A CkiUS ET'rS 0I060
t "` ��� M ( Ili) 584 - 0344
� ( J`'
• ``
May 28, 1982
Mr. William Krimsky
104 Damon Road
Northampton, ''RA 01060
Dear Mr. Krimsky:
At our meeting of May 19, 1982, the Board of Appeals made
certain suggestions to you for correcting your application. One
of these concerned the sub - paragraph defining the use of the
building. We stated to you that we thought you had filed under
the wrong paragraph. However, careful reading of the Zoning
Ordinance indicates that the section under which you applied is
correct, in that this property could best be defined under the
sub - paragraph, "PERSONAL AND CONSUMER SERVICE ESTABLISHMENT:
For the purpose of this Ordinance, personal
service estallishments shall include, but need
not be limited to, .... health clubs, and other
similar places of business, but not including
.... any establishment with a gross floor area of
more than ten thousand (10,000) square feet. ",
and not a private membership club as we suggested.
Yours truly,
Robert C. Buscher t, j ( --s / ,)
Chairman
/ V.) - ‘ i
DECISION OF
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
At a meeting held on May 14, 1986, the Zoning Board of Appeals of
the City of Northampton voted unanimously to grant the Finding request of
William and Judith Krimsky, 104 Damon Road, oI rthampton for the purpose
of extending their nonconforming use at 104 Damon Road, Northampton
(GI Zone). Present and voting were: Chairman Robert C. Buscher, Peter
Laband and Kathleen M. Sheehan.
The findings were as follows:
P. Laband, referring to Section 10.10 of the Northampton Zoning
Ordinance, found that the use is nonconforming and will not be
substantially changed; that the requested use bears a positive rela-
- tionship to the public convenience by providing this type of store
i in this area; that the traffic and pedestrian safety will be
unchanged; that there will be no change in the use of municipal
systems; that Article XI does not apply; and that the requested
use will not unduly impair the character of the district, as the
replacement of the existing building will improve the area drastically.
K. Sheehan found that the construction of a new building will not
be more detrimental than the existing building; that although the
ii new building will be slightly larger, it will not create undue
1i traffic congestion, as the parking area on the lot is adequate; that
i the use is listed under Section 9.3 (B) of the Northampton Zoning
gl Ordinance; that the requested use will not, overload municipal systems
i!
`) any more than the present use; that Article XI does not apply;
and that the requested use will not unduly impair the character of
1111 the neighborhood.
1 R. Buscher found that a more intensive use will not be more detriment
I to the neighborhood than the existing use, and that a new structure
■ will be beneficial to the area; and that the increased parking necessary
for the added floor area is adequately provided for on the lot.
1
. r
i C 4 - 9 Robert c. Buscher, Chairman
f
�
/U � 2 8 i � , __:P
L iIf 7 r,, -. a Peter Laband
t o --.416efee23.17.
Kathleen M. She an
I
I;
1y z
I
l!