1972-10-17 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Barbieri Hearing 10/17/72 (cont.) ' At this point in the hearing the Chairman with the aid of the plot plan clarified the zoning problem. The present Europa Auto Imports, Inc. building is in a business zone. The proposed new addition would extend into the residential zone and of course, the zoning by-law does not permit a business in a residential zone. L' 1 -3 Prof. Wadsworth asked if it was just a parking lot that he was requesting. Chairman: It means going from a 2,000 sq. ft. building to a 5,500 sq. ft. building. The Chairman read the PREVIOUS PERMIT granted to Pasquali P. Barbieri. Chairman: This building (granted in the previous permit) would have been 50' x 50'. It extended into the residential district. Consideration was given to the land taking. Now he wants a building 50' x 70' adding 40% more to the size of it. Mr. Barbieri: The reason for going out that way would be to put an entrance to the side. There'd be a better access. There was discussion among members to the effect that there might be advantages with the new proposal with the entrance that would give better access to the building and because the Board could impose controls now lacking. The validity of the earlier permit was still in question. The one year time limit for building was not imposed on the permit granted in 1967. How long does a permit remain valid? Could Mr. Barbieri use the former permit to build the 50' x 50' building? Chairman: Is there anyone who would like to speak in favor of this petition? IN FAVOR: (two persons spoke in favor) Mrs. Joseph Graziano 162 North Street: I live across the street. I'm in favor. Paul Morascio, 653 Lowell Street: I'm in favor. Chairman: Anybody in opposition? OPPOSITION: (5 spoke and 19 expressed in writing their opposition) Mrs. Charles Ward 588 Lowell Street: I'm an abutter to an abutter. Five years ago when the original petition was heard I was in favor of it and I don't remember whether I was silent or whether I actually wrote a letter. You'd have to check the correspondence. The reason for not objecting then was because it was only a small family business involving some type of enter- prise and they had regular customers and they didn't really anticipate an expansion in the volume of business. The reason they wanted the extension on the building was that they could increase the automobile service that they would provide. I just want to say that you have already increased the auto- mobile service in the area by allowing the mobile station to be built just across the street. There's more than adequate automobile service in that area. I'm against the petition.