HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981-04-23April 23, 1981
Regular Meeting
The Planning Board held a regular meeting on Monday evening,
April 23, 1981 at 7:30 p.m. in the Town Office Heeting Room
with the following members present and voting: Paul A. Hedstrom,
Chairman; (arrived late) Michael P. Roberts, Vice-Chairman;
john j. Burke; Vincent S, Turano~ and Erich W. Nitzsche.
Town Planner Susan St, Pierre and Highway Surveyor William Cyr
were also present.
Vice-Chairman Roberts opened the meeting at 7:45 p.m.
PLANS NOT REQUIRING APPROVAL (Form A's)
Lou Kmiec - Riverview/Ashland Streets
Mr. Kmiec present and stated that there are flaws in the G L.
Chapter 40 in regards to a possible re-zoning. He purchased
the property as I-S and the land is up for re-zoning at Town
Meeting. The lot is non-conforming as existing. He wants to
protect his use change for three years.
HOTION:
by Hr. Nitzsche that the plan of land located in North
Andover, Mass. prepared for Lou Kmiec dated April 16,
1981 be approved unUer Subdivision Control Law Not
Required.
SECOND: by Mr. Burke
VOTE : Unanimous motion carries.
Currier - Prescott Street
Attorney Eaton present. The plan does not meet the zoning re-
quirements - land is to be conveyed. He. presented a copy of
a decision from the Board of ~ppeals - Lots A and B are owned
by P. Currier. Mrs. Currier is selling the lot and conveying
Lot A to Albert. The new boundary line separates Lot A from
Lot B.
MOTION:
by Mr. Burke that the plan of land in North Andover
prepared for P. Currier and dated January 26, 1981
be approved under Subdivision Control Law Not Required.
SECOND: by Mr. Nitzsche
VOTE : Unanimous - motion carries.
April 23, 1981 -2~ Regular Meeting
PUBLIC HEARINGS - Articles for 1981 Town Meeting
Scott Follansbee - Re-zone Chickerin~ Road - R-5 to GB
The Clerk read the legal notice.
Attorney Reginard Marden was present, representing Scott
Follansbee, the petitioner.
The parcel is currently in one ownership. The sections zoned
R-5 and GB are shown on the plan and the zoning line runs
between them. The plan shows what can be done with the parcel
if both the GB and R5 are developed together. A 20,000 s.f.
building can be built on the GB part, but it would be better
to combine the two parcels. It would provide for a more
valuable building and generate more taxes. There are apartments
to the rear of the parcel (Meadowview) and the R-5 parcel could
be used for apartments or townhouses, but again, better to
combine into one lot. Atty. Marden does not feel that there
will be a detriment to town service.
Note: Chairman Hed~t. rom ~rrived here.,
Comments from audie~'ce:
Lou Kmiec asked - "Why not B1, B2, or B3 instead of GB?"
Atty. Marden replied - "To re-zone the smaller piece or the two
pieces together might be spot zoning and would not be approved
by the Attorney General. Also, the height requirements of B1
or B2 would limit the uses. The land abuts a GB zone."
Member Turano expressed concern with the broad nature of GB,
especially with the high school so close.
Atty. Marden feels that the type of use the petitioner wants
is less likely to create confestion and traffic.
MOTION: by )lr. Roberts that the Planning Board recommend favorable
action on the proposed re-zoning by Scott Follansbee.
SECOND: by Mr. Nitzsche
VOTE : In favor - 3 - Burke, Roberts, Nitzsche
Opposed i Turano
Motion carries.
David Rennie Re-zone Chickering Road (Florist)
The clerk read the legal notice.
Extend B1
April 23, 1981 -$- Regular Meeting
Rennie - continued
David Rennie and Don Boyle were present. They presented a plan
showing the existing port!on currently zoned B! and explained
what they propose to do with it. They showed where they would
like to extend the B! zone. It would make for a better parking
situation with better flow and a place to put their seasonal
business. Also pointed out was the fact that Mrs. Rennin,
David's mother, lives in the house on the property. Mr. Boyle
added that the Trustees of Reservations have no objection.
No one spoke in favor or opposition to the proposal.
MOTION: by Mr. Roberts that the Planning Board recommend favorable
action for Mr. Rennie's petition to re-zOne.
SECOND: by Mr. Turano
VOTE : Unanimous - motion carries.
John Lon~veil - add to Zonin9 BS Law definition of Public Sanitary.
Landfill
The clerk read the legal notice.
Mr. Lonqveil was present. He stated that the land fill site has
been prepared without state or local by-laws governing what can
and cannot be put on the site.
He presented a list from the Highway Surveyor of material that has
been approved by the State and the Highway Surveyor and agreed
upon by the Land Fill Committee and incorporated it into his
petition. He feels that this will limit what materials can be
placed on the landfill site. He also presented a list of
materials on the land site, some of which are not on the petition,
He will ask to amend the article to include: garden waste, materials
to be re-cycled, He feels that there is no protection on the part
of the town.
Mr. Cyr spoke in opposition. He presented a conceptual plan (map).
Mr. Cyr feels that the original intent of the site (approximately
100 acres) was to accomodate waste generated within the community
that would not be acceptable at the Resource Recovery Plant. A
committee studied areas throughout the town and decided that this
was the best site to develop for landfill purposes. The intent
is to dispose of any and all approved items that would be
approved by the State as not being hazardous to the environment
or ground waters in the area. Cyr does not think this proposal
is necessary. He feels it is locking the town in. He also feels
that Mr. Longveil left out: wood, brush, glass, pine needles,
rakings, ashes, cellitecs, tile, masonite - and if we lock it
in with zoning, it is no good - we need flexibility.
April 23, i981 ~4~ Regular Meeting
Lon~veil - continued
Mr. Cyr asked for the chance to get it off the ground and if
problems develop later, they will be looked into. He further
stated that there has been some discussion about the State
taking the site for back-up, but he doesn't think it will
happen.
Nelson Parker, Campbell Road, asked "What is the objection
to adding another item at a later Town Meeting?"
Susan St. Pierre replied - "You would have to wait a whole year!"
Packer stated that other towns have had problems because they.
did not restrict what could go in and used Woburn as an example.
Mr. Longveil replied that the State has no Rules and Regulations
for a modified land-fill and the town has no zoning by law to
cover it.
Frank Gelinas added - "Everyone in town is concerned about the
safeguards of the land and there needs to be a vehicle to protect
the interests of the people. There presently exists a set of laws
governing land fills under the health laws. I have trouble
figuring out why the Zoning By Law is being mentioned here."
John Graham, Chairman of the Board of Selectmen informed the
Planning Board that the Landfill Committee voted to support
Mr. Longveil's article as amended.
Mr. Michael Schena added-~"Any time a proposal is put forth
about 'control' the town always says 'no' I have no faith
in the State. We spent $40,000 at the last landfill and did
what they (the State) said, and now we can only use a portion
of it"
Paul Betere, Forest Street "There does not seem to be any
guidelines in the State. You need some control that is enforceable"
Mr. Cyr - "I don't think we have a problem as far as restricting
permissable items".
Charles Salisbury, Member, Board of Selectmen - "The Selectmen a=
have been looking at this for years and we have supported Mr.
Longveil's suggestion, but we are opposed to putting it in the
Zoning By Law: 1) You can go to the DEQE; 2) The Board of Health
should have the control and they can change the list by a vote
of the Board"
MOTION:
by Mr. Roberts that the Planning Board make an unfavorable
recommendation on the proposed article at Town Meeting
with the notation that the Board agrees with the idea and
restrictions, but it is not a ZBL vehicle.
SECOND; by Mr. Burke
April 23, 1981 -5- Regular meeting
Lo.ngveil - continued
DISCUSSION: The Town Planner suggested that a member of the Planning
Board get involved on the Committee.
VOTE: In favor: 3 (Roberts, Burke, Nitzsche)
Opposed : i (Turano)
MOTION CARRIES
COMMERCE PARK - DECISION PRELIMINARY PLAN
MOTION:
by Mr. Burke to approve the Preliminary Subdivision Plan
entitled COMMERCE PARK OF NORTH ANDOVER BY JOHN CALLAHAN
AND ASSOCIATED AND DATED FEBRUARY 11, 1981 with the
following conditions:
As per the Board of Health letter dated April 6~ 1981,
results of percolation tests and soil survey tests
shall be shown on the plan. Percolation and soil
surveys shall be conducted on all lots prior to Board
of Health approval.
2. As per the Fire Department's letter, two triple outlet
hydrants shall be installed on the proposed road.
As per the Board of Public Works letter dated March 27,
1981, existing and proposed water mains and serVices
shall be shown on the plan.
4. In accordance with the Highway Surveyor's letter dated
April 6, 1981:
a) Road width shall be 30 feet with 4 foot graveled
shoulders.
b) Hottop thickness shall be 3" binder and 2" finish coat.
c) The proposed cul-de-sac shall be extended to the
end of Lot 3.
Approval from the Mass. D.P.W. regarding curb cut and
drainage. A permit to enter the State Drainage System
accompanied by supporting drainage calculations must
be submitted at the time of the Definitive Subdivision
submission to the Planning Board.
The Definitive Subdivision Plan shall be accompanied
by drainage calculations regarding the cul-de-sac
drainage and any retention area·
The Definitive Subdivision Topographic plans must
include a proposed site grading plan. Drainage cal-
culations will reflect pavement, building, and green
areas,
April 22, 1981 -6- Regular meeting
COM)IERCE PARK - continued
Note:
The developer should be aware of the fact that although
the drainage system is required by the Planning Board's
regulation, approval of such subdivision will not relieve
him of responsibility to other property owners upon
whose land he discharges water, directly or indirectly.
SECOND: by tlr. Roberts
VOTE : Unanimous in favor of the motion.
LAKESIDE (Foxhill Road) - Bond Release
Member Turano abstained
Letters from John Tuttle and Highway Surveyor read.
MOTION:
SECOND:
VOTE :
by Mr. Roberts that the Plannign Board re)ease $8,000.00
per the Highway Surveyor's recommendation.
by Mr. Burke
Unanimous in favor of the motion
PRESCOTT VILLAGE --Bond Release
Member Turano abstained.
Letters from John Turtle and the Highway Surveyor were read.
MOTION:
SECOND:
VOTE :
by Hr. Reberts that no monies be released.
by Hr. Burke
Unanimous in favor of the motion.
ROCKY RIDGE (Monteiro Way) Bond Release
MOTION:
SECOND:
VOTE :
by Mr. Burke to release $5,000.00
by Mr, Roberts
Unanimous in favor of the motion.
GILMAN LANE
Member Turano abstained.
April 23, 1981 -7- Regular meeting
GILHAN LANE continued
Mr. Pat Cone present. Discussion about the Planning Board never
receiving a reply from Town Counsel about a public hearing, Mr.
Hedstrom does not want to sign the covenant wants a reply from
Town Counsel.
MOTION: by )lt. Roberts to accept the covenant as submitted by
Packard Medical Pharmacy, Inc..
SECOND: by Mr. Burke
Motion and second withdrawn.
MOTION:
by Mr. Roberts to authorize the Chairman of the Planni'ng
'Board to approve and sign the covenant pending Town
Counsel's recommendation.
Motion withdrawn.
MOTION: by Mr. Roberts to accept the covenant subject to Town
Counsel's opinion on the status of the subdivision.
SECOND; by Mr. Burke
Motion carries unanimously.
RECOMMENDATIONS TO TOWN MEETING
McPhee, Harold - Brown's Court - new plan submitted.
MOTION: by Mr. Roberts that the Planning Board recommend
favorable action at Town Meeting.
SECOND: by Hr. Nitzsche
Discussion about "spot zoning" and Town Planner St. Pierre noted
that the parcel abuts "R"
Motion carries unanimously.
Gordon, James Turnpike Street
MOTION: by Mr. Roberts that the Planning Board recommend favorable
action at Town Meeting.
SECOND: by Mr. Burke
VOTE : In favor 3 - Roberts, Burke, Nitzsche
Opposed - 1 Turano
April 23, 1981 -8- Regular Meeting
Connol~y, Dennis Turnpike Street
MOTION: by Mr. Turano that the Planning Board recommend favorable
action at Town Meeting.
SECOND: by Mr. Nitzsche
VOTE : In favor 2 - Burke, Roberts
Opposed - 2 - Turano, Nitzsche, Hedstrom
Motion fails - Planning Board will recommend unfavorable action.
Giles, C. Lincoln, So. Bradford St.
MOTION: by Mr. Turano to recommend favorable action at Town Meeting.
SECOND: by Mr, Burke
VOTE : In favor - 1 - Turano
Opposed - 3-- Roberts, Burke, Nitzsche
Motion fails - Planning Board will recommend unfavorable action.
The meeting adjourned at 10:30 p.m.
Jean E. White, Secretary