Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCorrespondence - 45 BEECHWOOD DRIVE 7/14/1996 To: North Andover Planning Board July 14, 1996 L-COM From: The residents of White Birch Estates Re: The construction of L-COM's new office/manufacturing/warehouse facilit y off of Beech Street. The residents of White Birch Estates would like to first thank the Planning Board Members and the owners and principals of L-COM for their patience and willingness to work through our concerns regarding the development and building of the large industrial facility abutting our residences. We would like to acknowledge and commend the efforts of L-COM to design and position a building that is sensitive to our residential development. We know that other owners/developers may not have been so caring, and we appreciate L-COM's efforts. To assure as best we can that our homes retain their value and that our lives are impacted as little as possible by the new L-COM building, and while trying to be reasonable in our approach towards the town industrial growth and supportive of L-COM's plans,we have complied a list of concerns and requests which we encourage the Planning Board to endorse. If the Board endorses our thoughts, we request that the Board puts all of the requirements in writing and stops construction and/or prevents occupancy of the building until all of the requirements are met. I. Concern: Noise. White Birch is affected by noise from several sources, including airplane traffic (we are in a landing/take-off path which frequently has planes passing directly overhead only 100-300 feet above the treeline), Route 125 car traffic, and the constant`grey' roar of turbines/condensers/unknowns from AT&T and/or the incinerator by AT&T(this noise being so prevalent, several residents have moved bedrooms to the opposite side of the house). The loss of trees to the new L-COM development will only intensify the existing noise by eliminating some of the natural sound barriers, and we therefore feel it is imperative that the new L-COM building add as little noise to the current problem as possible. Request: 1. Require that at a minimum the condensing units for the air conditioning be taken off the roof and placed on the far side of the building. 2. Request that the source for any other noise-generating equipment also be taken off the roof and placed as far from our homes as possible. 3. Require that L-COM only operates during agreed upon hours and that the flow of traffic (primarily shipping) falls into certain agreed upon hours. Require that if there needs to be a change to the agreed upon hours, especially in relation to the shipping hours,a public hearing be held so that we can once again be part of the process of compromise. II. Concern: View of Building. The homes of White Birch are located above the new L-COM building and the visual and potential financial impact of a 30,000sq/ft building cannot be under estimated. While our homes will be roughly 290 feet or more from the building,there is actual only 100-150 ft of mature growth trees acting as a buffer and these trees may offer little visual (and noise) protection, especially from mid-October through early May(7 months of the year). If our homes we level with the new building, the visual impact of the building would be x feet long by 15 feet high, but because we can see not only two sides of the building but also the entire roof,the visual impact of the building will be the square footage of the 2 sides plus 30,000 sq/ft of roof plus parking lot(s); as you can see,this is a significant difference from the pristine forest views we now experience. While it is true that what might of have been built could have been worse than what is being built, it is wrong to minimize the size and 1 impact of this new structure. Request: 1. Require that L-COM plant additional trees to minimize the visual (and noise) impact of the new building and parking lots. Require that the Planning Board, sometime between November(when the trees are bare)and May(before the trees bud), notify the residents of White Birch Estates and the owners of L- COM, walk the site and determine the nature and number of new plantings required to most effectively combat the problem. Request that a landscape architect be present to assure that the interests of both L- COM and White Birch are protected. (As the site is cleared, perhaps some of the trees/bushes can be transplanted, saving the developers as much money as possible) III. Concern: Parking. The current plan calls for two parking lots totaling roughly 75 spaces. One lot,the larger of the two and totaling roughly 50 spaces, is to be located on the far side of the building away from our homes. The second lot runs along the west (?) side of the building and is in view of our homes. In public testimony and in private conversations,the owners of L-COM have stated that they presently employee 33 people. They have stated that they plan to add, at most, 15 new employees over the next 5 years bringing the potential total number of employees to 48. The owners have stated that if they remain in this new location for more than 5 years(which they do not expect to do) and/or they experience unexpected rapid growth,they will: (1) move their entire operation to Haverhill where they currently own even larger parcels of undeveloped land, (2)build a two-story office building below the site currently in discussion and convert this proposed structure from office/manufacture/warehouse to all manufacture/warehouse, moving all the office personnel to the new two-story building (which will have it's own parking lots). The owners have stated that less than 1%of the business involves on-site sales, and that they seldom have more than 1 or 2 visiting vehicles on site on any given day. Based on this information, it is clear that the 2nd parking lot nearest our homes is unnecessary. Request: 1. Require that the 2nd parking lot not be paved until such time as it is necessary. Request that the second parking lot area be undisturbed until (if ever)additional parking is required, and that if additional parking is required, only those spots necessary to accommodate the need and realistic expected need be paved (not to exceed the total number of spots on the current plan). Request that a hearing be held if and when the additional spots need to be paved. 2. Request that any trees of significance in the proposed parking lot(s) are spared as possible and pratical. 3. Since parking lot 2 (the one nearest our homes) is unnecessary, request that lighting once proposed for that side of the building and for that lot not be installed until such time as it is necessary(if and when that proposed lot is paved). IV. Concern: Lighting. This concern is fairly obvious. Request: 1. Require that no light be added to the building on the side closest to our homes. 2. Require that all parking lot lights be turned off when not required (based on the owners'testimony, no lights would be necessary between the hours of 8pm and 7am). 3. Request that the Planning Board walk the site with the White Birch residents once the lights are up and running (but before the leaves are on the trees)to evaluate their impact and propose any necessary changes. V. Concern: Construction Noise. 7 out of 7 of the homes nearest the proposed building have young children (under 5) and/or home offices. Request: 1. Require that construction in the morning not begin before 7:30am. Request that outdoor construction not begin before 8:OOam. 2 These request were prepared prior to the Public Hearing on July 16, 1996,and we would like to reserve the right to make additional requests based upon any additional information which may come to light during the hearing on the 16th. We believe that like L-COM, we have tried very hard to be good neighbors and that we have worked with L-COM and the Planning Board with the best intentions and with a spirit of reasonable compromise. We thank you for your careful consideration of our requests and we would be most thankful for your full endorsement of our requests. As many of us as possible will attend the hearing on the 16th to address any questions you may have of us. Sincerely, Lee Babb and the residents of White Birch Estates. P.S. As required, I can be reached at: Lee Babb&Aileen Taylor 21 Cherise Circle 557-5696 3 own of North Andover 1 OFFICE OF D t'' E °'�00 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND SERVICES a �a 30 School Street North Andover,Massachusetts 01845 a, Ean.°°"�5 WILLIAM J. SCOTT �SSaCHU Director ' i MEMORANDUM -TO: Town Manager Robert J. Halpin FROM: Donna Mae D'Agata, Administrative Asst. RE: Lee Baab DATE: May 11, 1998 On April 27, 1998 the attached letter was sent to Mr. Lee Baab. Both William Scott and Kathleen Bradley Colwell feel the matter is closed. Attachment Cc: Kathleen Bradley Colwell, Town Planner BOARD OF APPEALS 688-9541 BUILDING 688-9545 CONSERVATION 688-9530 HEALTH 688-9540 PLANNING 688-9535 iI own of North OF NORTH OFFICE O 3�Oytt e +0 L COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND SERVICES � p x 30 School Street North Andover, Massachusetts 0 1.84 5 WILLIAM J. SCOTT SSACHUS� Director April 27, 1998 Mr. Lee Baab 21 Cherise Circle North Andover, MA 01845 Dear Mr. Baab: This letter is in reference to the Orchard Hill Industrial Development and your concerns regarding the site plan. Confirming my October correspondence, attached, the development meets the requirements of the site plan. Further, the developer has assured me that the roof will dull, as per the attached correspondence. Further, they cannot paint the roof due to warranty issues. The property owner currently complies with the site plan as per the attached letter from the site engineer. The Planning Board and Planning Department have concurred with the site compliance. At the completion of the Master Plan we will take into account and proceed with zoning amendments to address your prior letter recommending several points of site planning adjacent to neighborhoods. As an interim step, the Planning Board is requiring that a subsequent industrial development not use a roof similar to the one on the L-Com building. Thank you for your assistance in this matter. Sincerely, William J. Scott' Director Attachments (3) Cc: Kathleen Bradley Colwell, Town Planner BOARD OF APPEALS 688-9541 BUILDING 688-9545 CONSERVATION 688-9530 HEALTH 688-9540 PLANNING 688-9535 Town of North Andover o, tHORTH OFFICE OF �� �` `• •1. 0 O A COMMUNTTY DEVELOPMENT AND SERVICES 30 School Street *o' ; North Andover, Massachusetts 01845 ''�q°^,• ° "'`cy WILLIAM J. SCOTT S'.ACHUStit Director October 6, 1997 Mr. Lee Baab 21 Cherise Circle North Andover, Massachusetts 01845 Dear Mr. Babb: This letter is in reference to your correspondence regarding EI-Com and your issues. First, I have contacted the builder Dutton and Garfield, they have informed me that the roof will dull after about 12 months. I have requested information from the manufacturer through the builder and anticipate a response within this week. The builder stated that the roof dulling will accelerate in a New England environment due to acid rains and other climatic factors. In reference to the lights, I have requested that the hours that the lights are on be reduced. The property owner will change the timer to have the lights off earlier than prior timing. In reference to the lighting issue, the owner informed me that when the facility opened, the security system was not engaged. He, therefore, left the lights on that evening. He informed me that this will not occur again. As you are aware, the applicant has performed within and exceeded the parameters of the Planning Board site plan requirements. They have moved the building further from the residential zone than required, thus providing a greater natural buffer. They have used motion sensitive lighting in the rear, therefore, no light should be on the back of the building. The applicant did not create a driveway around the back of the building. A circumfrential driveway is common for industrial buildings to allow a better access for deliveries, The lack of a driveway has lessened the impact of truck noise and substantially increased the required efforts for deliveries. When I receive the information regarding the dulling of the roof from the manufacturer, I will forward the information. Sincerely, William J. Scott Director Copy: Town Manager and Planning Board CONSERVATION-(978)688 9530 • HEALTH-(978)688-9540 PLANNING-(978) 688-9535 *nrtTT nvNr nFFTr-c ;"io BRA n5,ic - * n.-. C.. „n n ku0c :r c 1-91 0v4 ec..i . *i.,c \J,. Tr J '�'raT'FT Suder Manufacturing Company Research Center-Testing Lahoratory suTLFn 13500,Sons Road Grandview VO 6V030-2897 Phone: /816) 968-5731 Fax: (816) 965-5736 Cctobcr 29, 1997 :ti1r. Steven R. Wcbster 70 Flagship Drive North Andover'NtA 01945 Re:L-com Project-Galvalume(Al2n)Roof- Shiny Appearaucz-Ratc of Dulling Dear Steven, A1Zn is a metallic coating with appearance properties similar to plvani4c. When new it has a bright silvery metal appearance with an approximate gloss (light mfloction) level of 30% which is the same as typical medium gloss paint. Autornobvc paint has a high ;loss of approximately M. A1Zn will weather to a dull gray color with a gloss of 5 1,'0 or less. The weathering varies with the environmental conditions_ The dulling process occurs in less time in the northeast than other parts of the USA duc to the higher levels of airborne debris and acid rain. AL our e-\-posure site in Anaville Pen sytvarria, we sec significant dulling in less than one year and dulling to the 5°'0 gloss level in 1-2 years. Tf we can be of further service please call, Cordially yours. Charles A. 'viilburn Manager,Materials Research&testing C. Dave Evers -G o n of North Andover Oi NORTIy OFFICE OF �? ya' 6`6a00L COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES - A 30 School Street ^o North Andover, Massachusetts 01845 ��SSACNUS���y WILLIAM J. SCOTT Director April 27, 1998 Mr. Lee Baab 21 Cherise Circle North Andover, MA 01845 Dear Mr. Baab: This letter is in reference to the Orchard Hill Industrial Development and your concerns regarding the site plan. Confirming my October correspondence, attached, the development meets the requirements of the site plan. Further, the developer has assured me that the roof will dull, as per the attached correspondence. Further,they cannot paint the roof due to warranty issues. The property owner currently complies with the site plan as per the attached letter from the site engineer. The Planning Board and Planning Department have concurred with the site compliance. At the completion of the Master Plan we will take into account and proceed with zoning amendments to address your prior letter recommending several points of site planning adjacent to neighborhoods. As an interim step,the Planning Board is requiring that a subsequent industrial development not use a roof similar to the one on the L-Com building. Thank you for your assistance in this matter. Sincerely, William J. Scott Director Attachments (3) Cc: Kathleen Bradley Colwell, Town Planner BOARD OF APPEALS 688-9541 BUILDING 688-9545 CONSERVATION 688-9530 HEALTH 688-9540 PLANNING 688-9535 Town of North Andover f NORTH OFFICE OF o COMMUNTTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES p 30 School Street North Andover, Massachusetts 01845 q<HUSES�� WILLIAM J. SCOTT Director October 6, 1997 Mr. Lee Baab 21 Cherise Circle North Andover, Massachusetts 01845 Dear Mr. Babb: This letter is in reference to your correspondence regarding El-Com and your issues. First, I have contacted the builder Dutton and Garfield, they have informed me that the roof will dull after about 12 months. I have requested information from the manufacturer through the builder and anticipate a response within this week. The builder stated that the roof dulling will accelerate in a New England environment due to acid rains and other climatic factors. In reference to the lights, I have requested that the hours that the lights are on be reduced. The property owner will change the timer to have the lights off earlier than prior timing. In reference to the lighting issue, the owner informed me that when the facility opened, the security system was not engaged. He, therefore, left the lights on that evening. He informed me that this will not occur again. As you are aware, the applicant has performed within and exceeded the parameters of the Planning Board site plan requirements. They have moved the building further from the residential zone than required, thus providing a greater natural buffer. They have used motion sensitive lighting in the rear, therefore, no light should be on the back of the building. The applicant did not create a driveway around the back of the building. A circumfrential driveway is common for industrial buildings to allow a better access for deliveries. The lack of a driveway has lessened the impact of truck noise and substantially increased the required efforts for deliveries. When I receive the information regarding the dulling of the roof from the manufacturer, I will forward the information. Sincerely, William J. Scott Director Copy: Town Manager and Planning Board CONSERVATION-(978)688 9530 • HEALTH-(978)688-9540 PLANNING-(978)688-9535 *TIT ITT"IN!`_(?FVTt v. `97RN hRA 0SA4 • -C nr nG tD0V AI C /^IQN 4QU 04.17 • *1AG N,fATN CT=T TTa'T 0 CHITIANN & SERGI, INC. PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS AND LAND SURVEYORS 160 SUMMER STREET HAVERHILL, MASSACHUSETTS 01830-6318- (508)373.0310 FAX: (508)372-3960 October 27, 1997 Ms. Kathleen Colwell North Andover Town Planner 9' 30 School Street `" North Andover, MA 01845 Re: Lot 2A Beechwood Drive (L-Com Facility) Dear Ms. Colwell, I hereby certify that the work performed on the above referenced lot is in substantial compliance with the Site Plan that was approved by the Planning Board, with the following exceptions: 1. Minor alterations were made to various pavement areas, as follows: A. The parking lot to the east of the building was extended approximately 10' to the northeast beyond what was shown on the approved plan. B. The parking lot to the north of the building was altered by eliminating one space in the northeast corner and by adding a small turnaround area at the eastern end of the parking lot. C. The pavement around the eastern and southern ends of the loading area behind the building has been constructed with slightly different configurations 2. A rip-rap slope and guard rail were installed along the edge of the driveway in the back of the facility, near the maintenance and loading area. 3 Stor nwater Infiltration Area "A", which was to have been installed in the parking lot to the north of the building, was relocated to the southwestern corner of the lot. This modification was presented for review to the Planning Department and to the Planning Board's consultant, Coler & Colantonio, Inc. Enclosed is a cop es " �F=� iih`.Plan prepared for the project. Please contact me if you have any question '`f ^ rdih €hi Ar aP ter. Ve 1 rs N 0.« _-3 w Phil* G. Christiansen Butler<Llanufacturing Company ReseaTch Center-Testing Lahoratory suit 13500 Bolts-Road Grandview ELM 64030-3897 Phone: (816) 968-5731 Fax: (816) 968-5736 October 29, 199-7 Mr_SteA en R. Webster 70 Flagship Drive North Andover MA 01845 Re:L-eom project-Galvalunte(A1Zn)Roof- Shiny Appearance-Rate of Dulling Dear Steven, A1Zn is a metallic coating with appearance properties similar to galvanize. When new it has a bright silvery metal appearance with an approximate gloss (light rcflection)level of 30%which iis/the same as typical medium gloss paint. Automotive paint has a high gloss of approximately A1Zn will weather to a dull gray color with a gloss of 5%or less. The weathcring varies with the environmental conditions.. The dulling process occurs in less time in the northeast than other parts of the USA due to the higher levels of airborne debris and acid rain. Ai our e-\Tosnrc site in Anaville Pennsyhrania, we sec sigmZiicant dulling in less than one year and dulling to the 5% gloss level in 1-2 years. If we can be of further service please cal 1. Cordially yours. Charles A. Milburn Manager,Materials Rcscarch&testing C. Dave Evers June 13, 1997 North Andover Planning Board, We would like to bring to your attention the view from above the new building located at 45 Beechwood Drive, owned by the L-Cam Corporation. Please refer to the enclosed photograph taken from the rear of 21 Cherise Circle. At the Planning Board hearings concerning this building project,we along with the rest of the neighbor- hood emphasized our concerns regarding the visual impact that this building would have on our neighbor- hood. Our concerns were centered primarily around the fact that our neighborhood is above the L-Com building and we would be looking down at 30,000+square feet of roof and probably 100,000+square feet of parking lot asphalt, which only months before was 150 year old forest. To soften the effects on the neighborhood, we(the neighborhood, the Planning Board and the developers of the land) reached mutual agreement on several specific points: we agreed that air conditioning units would be removed from the roof and put on the far side of the building (to minimize sound pollution), and that evergreen trees would be planted on the hill side between our neighborhood and the new building. While not specifically agreed upon,but clearly stated to us and understood by all in attendance,the Planning Board noted our other areas of concern and promised it would act to protect our interests. It is time to act! The building is just days away from completion and our neighborhood has some huge concerns regarding the project. Primary among them is the building's roof The roof is made of uncoated highly reflective aluminum. The roof produces a glare that makes it nearly impossible to look out our back windows on a. sunny day, and on cloudy days, the effect is only slightly less infuriating! This is NOT an exaggeration; the first thing visitors ask when they come into the neighborhood is "what is that ailien space ship doing back there"or"is that some sort of giant mirror back there?" During the summer,trees soften the effect to a still-unacceptable degree,but for the seven months a year that the trees are bare,our views are dominated by 30,OOOsq/ft. of shining,blinding, obnoxious aluminum. When the roof was first put on,we were informed by workers that the roof would be tarred and covered by stones (the darker the better from our perspective),but we have been subsequently told that the roof is finished and that L-Com has absolutely no plans to change the roof(this information is from a neighbor who indicated that they spoke directly with a member of L-Corn's management team,and confirmed by us today by speaking directly with the foreman, Dan). The appearance of the roof and the negative affects it has on our neighborhood is unacceptable! We made it very clear to the Planning Board and the Planning Board made it very clear to us that this building would only be approved for final occupancy if its appearance from our neighborhood was in line with what was promised—a 1-story building that would blend into its surroundings as seamlessly as possible; while we never directly questioned the look and material of the roof, it was crystal clear to everyone involved that the appearance of the roof was of critical importance to us! The roof, as is, does not blend into its surroundings vet there is no reason why it couldn't have been designed to do so. All over New England it is easy to see industrial buildings with green or brown metal roofs, or roofs painted in pleasing colors or covered in other non-reflective materials. Architects we have spoken with indicate that they can 1 not think of any compelling reason why this building was not designed and built with a roof that is more visually appealing. As is,this roof is visual pollution poisoning our neighborhood. We are not saying that we do not expect to see this building, we are only demanding that what we do see has been designed and built to impact us as little as possible and as is this roof does not satisfy our demands We ask that the Planning Board review the situation and inform us of how it intends to protect our interests, as promised, in this matter. Aileen and I,as well as others in the neighborhood,would be happy to meet with members of the Board and/or the architects to discuss acceptable solutions to this problem (and to review any other issues like the size and spacing of the evergreen`trees,' lighting, etc.). Aileen works for a graphic design firm that specializes in the architectural products industry and her firm has several clients that could possibly provide solutions to the problem and I am certain that they would be happy to consult with L-Com and/or the Board. Sincerely, Lee Babb&Aileen Taylor 21 Cherise Circle 508-557-5696 (home) or 617-729-9020(Aileen's work) Enclosure: 1 Polaroid photograph(w/Mr. Scott's copy) cc Mr. Bill Scott Town Selectmen Master Plan Committee Members P.S. In the past, we have asked Mr. Scott and others to give us a call to arrange meetings and/or let us know what was happening on a particular issue,but our requests for meetings and information have gone unanswered; it is true that on occasion someone from the Planning Board would make an impromptu visit to the neighborhood and discuss an issue in an off-handed way with whomever was around,but not once have we,Aileen and 1,been contacted in advance of these visits. This issue of the roof is VERY IMPORTANT TO US and others in the neighborhood,and the curtisy of appropriate advanced notification of any meetings or visits would be greatly appreciated. 2 Town of North Andover o 1 AORTN -1 OFFICE OF �a �',` • b�° o COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND SERVICES 30 School Street o North Andover,Massachusetts 01845 �9SSeCHUSEt`h WILLIAM J. SCOTT Director September 19, 1997 Mr. Steve Foster Dutton& Garfield, Inc. 70 Flagship Drive North Andover, MA 01845 Re: Lot 2A Beechwood Dear Mr. Foster: Yesterday I reviewed the tree planting to the rear of the building. My recollection of the meeting we had on site in May regarding the tree planting location is that the trees were to be planted in alternating rows creating a solid screen. It appears as though only one row of trees were planted. Please call me to discuss this issue. I can be reached at 688-9535. Very truly yours, Kathleen Bradley Colwell Town Planner cc. R. Rowen, Chair PB CONSERVATION-(978)688 9530 • HEALTH-(978)688-9540 • PLANNING-(978)688-9535 *PUILDINC OFFICE-(978)688-9545 • *ZONING BOARD OF APPFALS-;978)688-9541 • *146 MAIN STREET Town of orb Andover ri OFFICE OF �� `" r o °"°a° COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND SERVICES 30 School Street North Andover,Massachusetts 01845 A�ss�cwus�t�� WILLIAM J. SCOTT Director October 6 1997 Mr. Lee Baab 21 Cherise Circle North Andover, Massachusetts 01845 Dear Mr. Babb: This letter is in reference to your correspondence regarding EI-Cam and your issues. First, I have contacted the builder Dutton and Garfield, they have informed me that the roof will dull after about 12 months. I have requested information from the manufacturer through the builder and anticipate a response within this week. The builder stated that the roof dulling will accelerate in a New England environment due to acid rains and other climatic factors. In reference to the lights, I have requested that the hours that the lights are on be reduced. The property owner will change the timer to have the lights off earlier than prior timing. In reference to the lighting issue, the owner informed me that when the facility opened, the security system was not engaged. He, therefore, left the lights on that evening. He informed me that this will not occur again. As you are aware, the applicant has performed within and exceeded the parameters of the Planning Board site plan requirements. They have moved the building further from the residential zone than required, thus providing a greater natural buffer. They have used motion sensitive lighting in the rear, therefore, no light should be on the back of the building. The applicant did not create a driveway around the back of the building. A circumfrential driveway is common for industrial buildings to allow a better access for deliveries. The lack of a driveway has lessened the impact of truck noise and substantially increased the required efforts for deliveries. When I receive the information regarding the dulling of the roof from the manufacturer, I will forward the information. Sincerely, ✓ William J. Scott Director Copy: Town Manager and',Planninq Board CONSERVATION-(978)688 9530 6``HE`-LTH °'(978)688-9540 ® PLANNING-(978)688-9535 ,•* ...'",W,,OPr1f ,•. 1n7pN rpc OcA a *antvrrir.nn�F!Tr+')F AY'Dvnr,R �O^RN�QP ncna c *�,��. §.".:�.Ir? ,T3zr,'rm / Town ®f North Andover t NORTH q OFFICE OF ��o COM MUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND SERVICES 0 p 30 School Street North Andover Massachusetts 01845 �q °^�•�o-�'' �y WILLIAM J. SCOTT SSACHUS�� Director Ocotber 10, 1997 Mr. Stephen E. Foster Dutton & Garfield, Inc. 70 Flagship Drive North Andover, MA 01845 Re: Lot 2A Beechwood - Site Plan Review Bond Dear Mr. Foster, I have reviewed your request for the release of the bond held by the Planning Board for both site plan review and the roadway. Prior to release of the site plan bond, the applicant must submit a letter from the architect for the project stating that the building has been constructed in conformance with the approved plans. I would also like to meet with you on site to review the landscaping and final layout of the site. I am available Wednesday afternoon or Thursday morning of next week. If everything looks good I will schedule you for the October 21, 1997 meeting. I will also recommend release of any 593 Account money that may be left to cover consultant costs. The DPW will review your request for the release of the roadway bond. The Planning Office will need their recommended bond release by the end of the day on Tuesday October 14, 1997 in order for this request to be placed on the October 21, 1997 agenda. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to call me at 688-9535. Very truly yours, Kathleen Bradley Colwell Town Planner cc. R. Rowen, Chairman PB - CONSERVATION-(978)688 9530 ° HEALTH-(978)688-9540 ° PLANNING-(978)688-9535 *BUILDING OFFICE-(978)688-9545 • *ZONING BOARD OF_APPFAT,S_10781 688-9541 ° *146 MAIN STREET Mr. Bill Scott Director of Planning Town of North Andover October 21, 1997 Dear Mr. Scott, Work has required that I travel frequently these past two weeks and I apologize for the delay in responding to your letter dated 10/6/07 regarding L-Com's continuing failure to bring their new building into compliance with what was promised at public hearings. Unfortunately,your letter is factually in,error and your cheerleading about how L-Com went above and beyond in the design of its facility only further tears at our patience as a neighborhood. If I can PROVE that L-Com has NOT `gone above and beyond' and has,in actuality, failed to even met some of the minimum requirements put before them,will you swear to take-up OUR cause with all your energy and all of the resources available to you and your office? For the record (and for your benefit so you don't mistakenly cheerlead for the wrong cause again)it is essential that you know that many of the features of the L-Com building that you and most of the Planning Board seem all too willing to attribute to `good neighborly cooperation and caring' were in fact driven by cost and practical considerations and not out of concern for our neighborhood. Fact:in the parking lot prior to the initial Planning Board hearing,the owners of L-Com, their architects, and their engineers stated without hesitation that the overriding and primary reason for moving the location of the building back approximately 50 feet from its initial placement was because the initial location-was set too deeply into the ridge/hill and that building there would require the construction of a rather massive retaining wall which would be excessively costly. Fact: during a walking tour of the site conducted by the site engineers,it was again stated that the building was being moved because of the cost of building on the side of the hill. They also mentioned that water tables were a concern. Only in passing was the altered location noted to also benefit us. To each of your other points concerning the"over and above efforts" of the owners and builders of L-Com I can supply specific counter points based on the direct statements of those very same people. So before you sanctify the actions of the owners and builders L-Com,don't tell me their motives are pure and done in my best interest because they themselves have told me otherwise! Before someone tells you they are an angel make sure they aren't telling everyone else they are sinners. Fact: Our neighborhood provided little opposition to the construction of the new building;in fact, the Planning Board noted that we were actually far less hostile,far less demanding than average and no where near as "troublesome" as our neighbors on Bradford Street were when our development was being built. We never opposed the actual construction of the building or its basic design,even though special variances were required to get the building approved. Our concerns with the new building were specific and clearly stated. Our concerns were noise from trucks and air condensers,visual impact of the building especially from the roof, lighting, hours of operation, size of the parking lots, and what will happen when L-Com moves out of the building in 2-3 years as they have previous stated they will do if business goes well. While some of the design changes, 1 regardless of motivation,may have benefited our neighborhood, the fact is that other `features' go directly against what was promised in the Planning Board hearings and have harmed our neighborhood. In your letter you suggest that we accept the horrible silver roof because it may become less shiny over time, and then tell to us be thankful for the fact that we don't also have 18 wheelers circling in our backyards. In my opinion, which should be yours also, successful building and community design should never ask residential abutters of industrial properties to saci7fice an arm to save a leg. There were—and are—solutions to our concerns, solutions that are entirely within the realm of promises that flowed freely from the supporters of L-Com during the Planning Board hearings. But back to the point. As I stated at the head of this letter,I can prove that L-Com has NOT built their new headquarters to the requirements of the Planning Board and to the standards promised to our neighborhood in statements made in public hearings. Therefore to facilitate this process,I would like to take up Mr. Halprin on his offer to meet with you and me to iron out what the town is going to do to bring L-Com into compliance with their obligations. Towards that end,I will deliver a copy of this letter to his office and ask that his staff works with you to arrange a meeting time and place that is convenient for the two of you. I will adjust my schedule accordingly. Again, if I can demonstrate just one point where I am right and you, the Planning Board and L-Com are wrong,I will expect that the town stops making us fight for every inch and instead takes up our cause with all its resources; I feel we are owed that much. Sinc rely, A bb 21 Cherise Circle 557-5696 (t) 557-5703 (f) leebabb@mediaone.net P.S. If you honestly believed in the L-Com snow job, I find that kind of refreshing. As you can probably imagine,I am often accused of being too trusting, too idealistic,too gullible, and it is gratifying in a sort of distorted way to find a kindred spirit! Cc Mr. Halprin, Town Manager 2 Town of orth Andover , AORTH OFFICE OF 3�o•�`�.o °'•�°L COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 0 A 30 School Street WILLIAM J.SCOTT North Andover,Massachusetts 01845 SSAcHUS���y Director October 22, 1997 Ms. Roberta McGowan Assistant Treasurer 120 Main Street North Andover, MA 01845 Re: Bond release for Beechwood Hill Dear Ms. McGowan, The North Andover Planning Board held a regular meeting on October 21, 1997. At that meeting the Board members voted unanimously to RELEASE the remaining balance plus interest for these accounts. Applicant : L-Com 1755 Osgood Street North Andover, MA 01845 Type of Bond: Form G Performance Bond Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, Amy . C ongris Planni B and Secretary CONSERVATION-(978)688 9530 • HEALTH-(978)688-9540 • PLANNING-(978)688-9535 _.._. *. -- _ _ , 1ph MAN.,WILDING n;? APPFAi 4-M 16RR-9S4J. TTFTj1FIC1o $ - d (,j2 -Zi4A Town of North.Andover OFFICE OF �� yam'" °•s °4 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND SERVICES � p 30 School Street 090 _ • .� North Andover,Massachusetts 01845 �9SS„cNUS�t�� WILLIAM J. SCOTT Director Mr. Lee Babb 21 Cherise Circle North Andover Mass. November 13, 1997 by Fax : 557-5703 Dear Mr. Babb; In reference your request for a meeting I have scheduled a meeting with the Town Manager on Tuesday November 18'h at 9:30 am. In reference to your letter I would point out that regardless of the intention or motivation of the company to move their building further from the residential properties the fact remains that the impact would be far greater if they had not proposed the plan in this manner. The coincidence that such action was a cost savings to them does not remove the benefit to the neighborhood. would ask that in future correspondence you refrain from attributing incorrect statements to myself and or my correspondence such as indicating that I informed you to be "thankful for the fact that we don't have 18 wheelers...". look forward to your providing myself and the Town Manager with information regarding the possible non-compliance of L-Com. Based on my review of the minutes, discussions with the Planner, and discussions with the representatives of L-Com it appears that they have complied. However if any of those parties have missed issues which you may be able to provide further information I look forward to our conversation. Sincerely, William J. Scott - CONSERVATION-(978)688 9530 • HEALTH-(978)688-9540 • PLANNING-(978)688-9535 *BUILDINGOFFICE-(978)688-9545 • *ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS-(978)688-9541 • *146 MAIN STREET November 20, 1997 Mr. Bill Scott f f` Director of Community Development North Andover, MA V 1 ..r Dear Bill, As you and I have recently discovered, there are several new commercial /industrial buildings —in various stages of development— that will be visible to varying degrees from the Cherise Circle neighborhood. The plan for at least one of these buildings calls for the roof to be constructed of the same silver metal used on the L-Com facility which has been at the heart of much consternation and frustration. How could this be allowed to happen! Again!! Since the spring/summer of 1996, our neighborhood has repeatedly appealed to the Planning Board to control the negative impact of all the new commercial/industrial construction around our neighborhood, and we have repeatedly pointed out that the selection of roofing material like the kind used on the L-Com building is the worst possible material in terms of impact on our neighborhood! We beg that the Planning Board immediately adopt a standing policy that any and all structures planned for construction along either side of Route 1.25, roughly between Bradford Street to the north and Holt Road to the south be reviewed specifically for their potential impact on our neighborhood. If after the review it is deemed possible that either at that moment or at some time in the fixture a building might be visible from our neighborhood, then that building must be designed to have the least possible impact on our neighborhood. Part of this Low Impact Design would include but not necessarily be limited to: Roofing Material - if metal, then it must be green in color - if gravel, dark stones must be used - etc. Lighting - no lighting source be visible - lights be similar in intensity and color to those currently in the Senior Center parking lot - the hours the lights (interior and exterior) operate be limited to the hours of operation of the facility 1/3 Noise Generating Equipment - no noise generating equipment located on the roof - all noise generating equipment be located on Route 125 side of the building Parking Lots - lots be limited in size to the smallest lots allowable be law (requests for larger lots should be denied unless extra care is taken to screen the lots from our view), or smaller if conceded to by the develop - lots be located, if possible, on the `far' side of buildings - lots are screened from view by the planting of a mixture of affordable as well as more mature growth trees Landscaping - as each new building goes in, and more and more of the forest separating our neighborhood from Route 125 is lost, the impact of not only the new construction but also older construction is compounded. Therefore, extensive screening landscaping between the new construction and our neighborhood must be required. This must include mature growth trees and shrubs, and not just new and small shrubbery. Early Notification - a selected member of our neighborhood be notified by the Planning Board and/or other town committees whenever a hearing is planned for a building in the Low Impact Design sensitivity area outlined above - a member of our neighborhood be invited to join the Planning Board as an advisor whenever there are hearings concerning the Low Impact Design sensitivity area outlined above Legal Changes - the Town immediately changes any zoning requirements and the like so that the changes recommended above become legal obligations on the part of developers. We have seen the Master Development Plan for our town. We know, understand, and accept that if this Town is to remain viable and provide all of us with decent schools, clean water, police and fire services, etc., then our Town must grow its commercial and industrial tax base to support our rapidly growing population. We also know that this growth will, to a disproportionate degree, take place in our end of Town, specifically between the Haverhill town line, the river/495, downtown/airport, and our neighborhoods in the Bradford Hill area. Our neighborhood and the surrounding area is being asked to absorb almost all of the Town's commercial and industrial growth for the next decade and beyond. It seems to us that our rather modest requests are more than fair and should be accepted (after thorough input from experts like yourself and refinement) and implemented immediately. Our neighborhood is going to experience meaningful increases in air, noise and aesthetic pollution and an increase in traffic and the frustrations related to that. At the same time, we 2/3 must also live with the very real possibility of decreases in our property values. The very least the Town can do for usinWdemand that developers who hope to make money at our expense are required k` 8o above and beyond their {vomd practices in protecting the character and beauty of our neighborhood. Wc are not trying to crush development ioour uzea, we are only trying to prevent more bad buildings like l.-C000 from being built. Our request seems more than fair Wuuand wo hope that you agree. We look to you and ask � that you take u strong and visible leading role in this oObz1, and we ayynro you that we will do our part in seeking the support ofthe oViecUoeo and the t0vvu ozuuagoc. Perhaps u walking tour of our uogbh0dznod some weekend afternoon in the near future with you, the Planning Board, the Selectmen, the Town Manager, and all of us in White Birch Estates and the surrounding neighborhoods of Settler's Ridge, Hickory Hill, French Fozou, etc. is 8 good vvuy to kick this effortoffl7 Here's to good community planning! Sincerely, Lee Babb & Aileen Taylor 2lCheri6eCircle 557-5696 (A 557'5703 (O lenb4bb@muediaOoo.nct co 7bv/u SoIeutcouu Master Plan Committee Planning Board Conservation Committee ruwlUeoUul homeowners ivaffected area | � � 3/3 ALBACADO LTD. PARTNERSH North Andover, MA 'OVI'845 978-682-6936 February 9, 1999 Kathleen Bradley Colwell Town Planner, Town of NorthAndover 30 School Street North Andover, MA 01845 Reference: Beechwood Drive/Acceptance as a Public Way Dear Kathleen, We have been informed that Beechwood Drive has been accepted as a public way in North Andover. Please advise when the balance of the bond money being held in escrow will be released. Sincerely, " d Mr. Edward /Caselden/kbs Trustee a� C:i,bs La1 f\