25C-085 ZBA 1989-01-04IVED
~ MA01060
... '-'-"'---"-"'~-r---
"
SDOlf3325 I'AS(, 0095
002065
DECISION OF
NORTHAMPTON ZONING'BOARD OF APPEALS
.."
t, At a meeting held on January 4. 1989, the Zoning Board of ~I Appeals of the, ;City of Nor-champtcn voted unanimously to GRANT
, the request of .James R. Tunstall. et a1 to modify a. Variance
whioh had been,qranted by this Board cn November 28, 1984, to
, allow the subs.titution of a Physical Therapy office as the
tenant in the building at 238 Bridge Street, replacing Hampshire
I· Office Products, the tenant specified in the 1984 Decision.
i. Present and vot.inq were Chai,nnan Robert C. Buscher. Dr. Peter
taband. and H. Sanford Weil, Jr.
I'
The findings were as fo110w&1
The Board reiterated all the findings in their decision
thaC was filed on December 11, 1984. Ch. Buscher and Dr.
Laband. who sat:. at this Public Hearing also sat at the 1984
Hearinq.
The Board found that the proposed tenant. a Physical
Therapy office, would be an appropriate one. It is agreed that
parking at this commercial site in a Residentia~ zone is awkward
and limited. The "by appointment only" nature of this tenant' s
bUsiness results in a low and predictable level of traffic on
the site.
f
The Board heard testimony that the leather business of Mr. \
Tunstall is evolving from retail to a higher deqree of ;t
Wholesale, resultinq in a decrease in traffic on the slte. i. ~ 1
The Board aqreed t.o expancl the list of qualified tenants to" i
those outlined in the following sections of the NOl':thampton
Zoning Ordinance:
II Section 5.2. Page 5-8. Pal':4graph 2 and 2(a). "Retail.
establishment.s. with maximum floor ~rea of 10.000 square feet
pe: floor for any single estabLishment. 5ell1ng general
1merchandise, including, bUt not l1l'II1ted to. dry goods. apparel
..t
I
..~ ,
,
-. ..,
.'
h
. ,
.:'.._-..·--~-·I·
NO~N ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
DECISION ON '1'!m APPLIC1.TION OF JAMES It. ,'l'UHSTAU., ET At.
PAGE TWO \
.,
f-'~ ,
, r~
II
and accessories, furnitUre and home turnishinqs. home equipment,
small WAres And hardware, and includinq discount. and limitee.
price variet.y stores.It SAle ot toad is specificAlly prohibited.
" 21 Section 5.2, Page SwlO, PAraqraph 12, "Miscellaneous
professional and business offices ane. services including, but
no~ limited to, medical, le~al. and other professional services
&r:.d tinance, bankinq, insurance and real estate otfice.I,I~ p r.
I' -Rober~ C. Buscher. Chairman
l!
j
i;
Dr. ?eter Laband
i; -; -/l1+--l'7~l-.....t-
M. San;ord Weil, Jr.
,I
I~
R&'!tiv:Jd 3t City C!~r!<', Officep
I')
r
I:I·
II
j'
i: CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK February 2, 1989
I'; I, Adeline Hurray, City Clerk of the City. of Northampton,
ber:by certify that the above Decision of,the Northampton
\ lon1ng Board of Appeals was filed in the,~f~ice of the City
Ii Clerk on January 12, 1989, that twenty days ~ve elapsed
\
1
llatter.
It
since such filing and that no appeal has/b~en filed i~is Iti . .'1J "'~ /' .. '~. ,./1 ... j !
Attest: , t::/t; /,·;/l~' (i n Gi,r~ 'J Adeline Murray, .'A
.. '. " ."{l. City Clerk Vi . ',:", City of Northampton 1
IInatfi;I rei 1989 au.:l.-o'c1ock at'd..:U..nri"'''-rz:M.. Rf'C'd enrd and eom'&, ,
-:...--..;II.,'llII••••a....a;.....·d1.1ua'_~."".:..,...:.~Q•.__.....t.""'t...... ~".,;c-...;$""",''''
-,..~.~.~--"
THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETI'S
Northamoton
C'ityorTo-n
BOARD OF APPEALS
Date: Oec~lTOer 11. • 1!S4
Certificate ofGranting of Varianceor Special Permit
(General Laws Chapter 4OA. Section 11)
The Board ofappeals ofthe Cityor Town of ~orthamDto"
hereby certifies that a Variance or Special Pe'mit bas been granted
To HOD r"',st{,hm<>s Tu"sta 1 J
Address 238 8,.ido~ Str~~t
City or Town .!I/crt'li'lmot:;n
affecting the rights of [he OW!ler -.\lith respect. to land or buildings al____.......----
~J8 BridGe Street. ~orthamoton
And the said Board of Appeals further certifies that tb~d~sion aua.::xd hereto is a uue and . . . mod lTlca t 10" '-d correct copy of Its dCClSlon granting said variance -speciU ~ic. :and that COPies of Sal
decision. and of all plans referred to in the decision. bave been ided with the plannins board and
the city ortown clerk.
The Board of Appeals also calls to the attention ofthe owner or appi1::mt that General Laws.
Chapter 4OA. Scaionl ~ (last paragraph) provides that no variance or spa:ial pennil. or any ex
tension. modifieation:or renewal thereof, shall take effect until a copy ofthedccision bearing the
certification of the town or city cl::rk that twCDty days have elapsed afto-the decision has been
filed in the office ofthe city or town clerk and no appeal has been riled or that. ifsuch appeal bas
been filed. that it has been dismissed. or denied. is recorded in the registry ofdeeds for the county
and district in which the land is locat.cc1 and indexed in the grantor indeX under the Rame of the
owner ofrecord oris rccordc:d and noted on the owner's certifICate oftide. The fee for sudI recor
dingorrqistcring shall bepaid by theowncr orapplicant. f ~ _
. ~, tee
rcR;im-~-
, ___ __•• f ______________________------
f
!; i~ it DECISION OF
%OHlRC BOARD or APPEALSII ,.
1\ " Ii
• 1
At a _etinl\ held on Noveaber 28. 1984. the Zooul loa" of Appeal. I
\1 of the Cit.y of Nortbampton voted unaoUDoualy to grant the vadance 1II04iflc_
tion requeat of ROP Truat, 238 Bridge Street. Northampton and 3.... :11 . Tunstall. Northveac Road. Westbampton t.o ua.e a portioo of the pl'embes at i
Ii
'ji,,! 238 Bridge Street. Northaaptoa for the retail ..le, wholesale. repair and . se~iog of leather garmenta and gooda io conjunction wiCh the existing whOle-I
slae/retaii office aupply atore. Present and voting were: Cbsi~n Roberc i
Bu.cber, William Brandt and Peter Labaad•
• The finding. vere as followa:! P. Laband, referring to Section 10.13. Page 10.8 of the Zoning•t Ordinance, found tbat the srructure i. unique because of its peculiarII shape and beiag situaCed in a primarily residential are. where it is .'I
the only buildiog like this in the area; that a hardship ._i$ta.. ,
nothing other than a buaineaa could uae the building; and there villIt be no substantial detriment to the public good or the use will notIi derogate fr~ the intent of the Ordinan~e. I
W. Brandt. referring to criteria for a variance. Section 10.13 andlII to the previous.decision granting in favor of the variance, stated thatl
the building pre~tea : ..nin8 having been used for business aince 19 GoO. ' II He found that the proposed use .would be a good uae for the building. ~!
but e~pres.ed concerns with the lack of adequate parking i£ the !
business evolves into a high volume retail store. He alao found that .j'I
II
the structure is unique; that a hardsbip exi..u .s the building baa
been on tbe marltet for a conaiderable amount of ti...e anc! would be
I
foreclosed if not sold; that the building =uat be used ur lay fallow;
and the use does not derogate from the intent of tbe Ordinance as
the building ca~not be used aa a residence.
II
R. Buscher concurred tbat the building is unique scd that it lS
a purely commercial atructure and not aDaptabLe to use aa a residence:
Chat while it is not the responsi~ility 01 the Board to sava someone
from bad ~usineS8 re$ults. according to tDe testimony 01 ~he realtor,
h Kr. Mur?by. the applicants have sought acd been unable to sell the
It buildl·ng. and thua a nar<lsh1p e",i"'tot. He stated t.tule "lee.use ther.,
Ii
.'II
(' vill be no expansion of spa~e or inereaoe or d~uare footase. the Hoard .
c ..nDO~ place restrietians on parit.J.ng. ~,
t HObert c. Buscner.Chairm&D ' . j
.••.•Af:, •it \lL 1halll '~;;;ndtI!
1!
11
il-,'I
!I'I
CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK 3anuary 2. 1985
'~. Adeline Murray. City Clerk of the City of Northampton.
~~eby certify that the above Decision of the Northampton
..... ' ;Cning Bo.&rd of Appeals was flle4.-t\",.~e Office of the City.
. C~erk an December 11. 1984, that.'.twent,'days have elapsed since
such filing and that no appea).'·.hu.: been. f1:~ed in this matter. ~~~~aJt~~<,
..... ,', ..' • City; Clerk
. ·5·' '., '.. C,ity,of Northampt:on
,;"
:~"'r·;C l~l!iat:.Idd~:r.i..;.£r;.!~~~~;t::~~::.i.~t':!~;!·~- -, ..
••f------,_... ,-_._---_.•.,--...., _.__...
~ _---------------