HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-09-19 Planning Board Minutes Town ofNorth Andover
PLANNING BOARD
John Simons, Chaxirnian Eitnn Goldberg
Aaron Preston
Peter Baynton
Jennifer Luz Christine Allam,Associate
TuesdaE September 19 217 ? .na 12(i Main Street Town Hall NorthAndover,MA 0I845
1 Present: J. Simons,P. Boynton,J. Luz,E. Goldberg, A. Preston, C. Allen
2 Absent:
3 Staff Present: S.Egan,J. Enright, R. Oldham, B. Wolstromer
4
5 J. Simons, Chairman: The Planning Board meeting for Tuesday, September 19, 2017 was called to order at 7 p.m.
6
7 Oath of Office,Joyce Bradshaw: Administered oath to members and provided members a copy of the Open
8 Meeting Law Guide,Ethics Summary and Public Records Guide.
9
10 PUBLIC HEARINGS
11 CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: 0 Great Pond Road and 1193 Great Pond Road North Andover volar,
12 LLC:Application for a Land Disturbance Permit in connection with development of a 1.1 megawatt, ground-
13 mounted photovoltaic array over approximately 5 acres of a 33.26 acre parcel located across Great Pond Road
14 from the Brooks School. The property is located in the Residential 2 (R-2)Zone.
15 [Continued to the October 3, 2017 Planning Board ineetingl
16
17 NEW PUBLIC HEARING: 1.22 Foster Street North Andover Varsily Wireless Brian Grossman:
18 Application for Wireless Facilities Special Permit—Site Plan Review under sections 8.9 and 8.3, 10,3 and 10.31 of
19 the North Andover Zoning Bylaw. Applicant proposes to construct, operate and maintain a 130 foot monopole
20 tower(135 feet to tap of faux branches)with supporting equipment located in the Residential 1 (R-1)Gane.
21 R. Oldham: The Applicant is before the Board of Appeals for several variances. Our Town Engineer is reviewing
22 the stormwater report and Isotrope, the Wireless Review consultant,has provided an initial report.
23 J. Simons: What is the delta versus what the bylaw allows and what is the distance proposed versus the bylaw?
24 R. Oldham: The bylaw allows the height not to exceed 10 fit. above the height restriction of the zoning district and
25 that is 35 ft. and proposed monopole with the faux branches is 135 ft.The side setback proposed is 135 ft. and the
26 Bylaw asks for 600 ft. (Displayed locus.)
27 Brian Grossman Anderson [brie er LLP outside counsel to a licant-Varsit Wireless: Varsity Wireless is
28 proposing a monopine design pole camouflaged to appear as a pine tree. In addition to height and setbacks,we
29 applied for variance relief on paint color and the camouflage from the Board of Appeals.
30 J. Simons: Requested a photo of the pole and site.
31 B. Grossman: We don't have full photographic simulations yet. The total height is 135 ft.; it is designed to support
32 5 carriers;the facility will meet all relevant codes. The compound is 3,996 sq. ft.there is a 6 ft. stockade fence to
33 provide screening.
34 J. Simons: Is the lot that it's to be located on an existing residential lot?
35 B. Grossman Yes,it is;there is a house on the lot and there are houses on adjacent lots. The nearest commercial
36 area is very small; there are no existing available structures any carriers can co-locate.
37 J. Simons: You need to prove to us there is a gap in service.
38 B. Grossman: Displayed topographic map v. existing coverage v. gaps.
39 P Boynton: What sort of thresholds do you use to decide whether to use the large monopole versus the small.
40 antennae you recently installed on the top of telephone pales?
41 B. Grossman: The smaller antennae cover micro sites leaving pockets to be filled in;the larger poles propagate
42 much larger areas,particularly with taller trees.
43 P.P.Boynton: This macro tower provides additional coverage where people live along roads and also to the large
44 wooded area between the roads. In terms of demonstrating need,can you compare how many small antennae
45 you'd need to achieve your objective, perhaps not including the wooded areas, versus using a macro tower?
46 What's the alternative? It might even cast less and have less visual impact; but maybe it isn't achievable"? t
1
Town of North Andover
PLANNING BOARD
John Simons, Chairman • • Eitan Goldberg
Peter Boynton `� r�J/ Wo .Aaron Preston
Jen nzfer Luz ;,�fi Christine Allen,Associate
,
Tuesday Se tenrber 19, 20177 .m. 120 Main Street Torun .Full Nort{i AndoverAM 0184
47 B. Grossman: Agreed to develop that comparison for the hoard.
48 J. Simons: Address the height of this pole and why,?
49 B. Grossman: Varsity'Wireless already has a lease agreement with two providers AT&T and Verizon; the bylaw
50 provides for co-location availability. The topography of the area is varied; given the hills and valleys,we don't
51 want shadowing or blocking.
52 J. Simons: The area on Foster Street undulates, but it is not steep hills.
53 B. Grossman: The topography does vary by 10-20 ft,toward Boxford. Average tree height is between 60-75 It. and
54 the mean is between 56-89 ft. with an average overall top height 68-1.06 ft. Potential tree heights are 89-106 ft.
55 J. Simons: Is the location in the higher area?Is this the tallest tower in North Andover?
56 B. Grossman: Stevens Estate is 125 ft.,Johnson Rd is 110 ft.
57 J. Simons: Is the pole height affected by the number of carriers you want to locate there?
58 B. Grossman: AT&T is at 127 ft., Verizon is at 117 ft.,the bottom(3) carriers are at 107, 97 and 87 ft. The
59 intention is to co-locate 5 carriers.
60 J. Simons: How far is the pole from the nearest house that is not on the property?How far is the pole from the
61 edge of the right of way on Foster Street?
62 B. Grossman: It is 227 ft. from the nearest home not on the property and the pole is 173 ft. from the edge of the
63 right of way on Foster Street; the larger compound is 127 ft. from Foster Street,
64 P. Boynton: Are you required to provide co-location space for 5?
65 B. Grossman:Not specifically for 5;the bylaw expresses requirements for co-location or"as many as practical".
66 E. Goldberg: What is the arrangement with the property owner?
67 B. Grossman: There is a 20-50 year lease with the property owner.The lease includes access.
68 C.Allen: How many abutters are there?
69 B. Grossman: There are 6 or 7 that will be notified as being within 300 ft.
70 Tyler Munroe, abutter, 100 Foster Street: Spoke in favor of increasing coverage to this area.
71 Board: Scheduled balloon testing date for 9/23/17,with a rain date of 10/1/17.
72 [Continued to the October 3, 2017 Planning Board rrreeting]
73
74 DISCUSSIONS
75 Br•oolrs School: Insubstantial Change Request:
76 R. Oldham: Brooks School came before the Board for a Site Plan Review and Watershed Protection District
77 Special Permit for the construction of the Performing Arts Center. Over the course of construction their scheduled
78 was delayed. Brooks became concerned for the safety of the students who would be arriving soon for the
79 beginning of the school semester; foot traffic to and from that area would be detrimental to student safety with
80 trucks making constant deliveries to that location. They have requested an.Insubstantial Change to the original
81 permit. The Applicant has filed an RDA with Conservation;,they were issued a negative determination. I suggest
82 the Board consider several conditions such as: erosion control remain in place until the site is fully stabilized and
83 inspected by the Planning Dept.;there should be site monitoring for any storm event over 1.5 inches and reports be
84 provided to the Planning Board with photos(condition the same as Conservation);the site be hydroseeded and
85 stabilized on or before Oct. 31"and they follow up with the Planning Dept. regarding the access road as to
86 whether it will be used or brought back to its natural state.
87 P. Willoughby: According to Conservation,this site needs to be stabilized by Oct. 1.5`x'which we can accomplish if
88 the weather continues to be dry.
89 MOTION: E. Goldberg made motion to approve the Insubstantial Change for Brooks School Performing Arts
90 Center project,providing the conditions set forth be incorporated into the site plan for 1160 Great Pond Rd. R
91 Boynton seconded the motion. The vote was 5-0,unanimous in favor.
92
2
i
Town of North Andover
PLANNING BOARD
John Simons, Chairman • • Eitan Gotclberg
Aaron Preston
Peter Boynton
Jennifer Luz
„ !% , Christine Allen,Associate
Tuesilay September 19 2017 k 7 p.m. 120.Main.Street Torun Hall North Andover, .MA 0.1845
1
93 East Mill/West Mill:
94 David Steinberg, Principal,RCG: Provided an update on RCG development plans for the East Mill. In short,this
95 fall RCG intends to begin permitting of a new building on the site adjacent to the pond,per the approved Planned -
96 Development District(PDD) Special Permit.Phase 2 incorporates a proposed 4-story, 51 unit residential-one, two 1
97 and three bedroom clapboard sided rental apartment building bordering Sutton.Pond. West Mill has completed 39
98 residential units and leased 75-80% commercial space. We have a diverse set of industries on site,we are
99 improving the infrastructure and working on site improvements; the power lines remain in discussion with
100 National Grid.
101 J. Simons: I tend to prefer the design of the buildings that are already on site versus generic garden style
1'02 apartments.
103
104 1600 Osgood Street/MMOD Discussion,Hooks Johnston
105 D. Leary:Noted the aquifer underground and wells will be stress tested;the water table will be analyzed;4
106 monitoring wells will be utilized. These wells were already permitted.
107 E. Goldber Will there be any MEPA review through the state?
108 D. Learn: We can provide you with answers to that.
109 J. Simons: The proposed campus/innovation center use-is that separate from the cultivation use?
110 D. Leary: The vast majority of those permits could take place today without special permitting.
111 H. Johnston: If you read the state bylaw, we would have to follow the good handling regime and the condition of
112 operation. Any entity using cannabis would need a license overseen by the special permitting granting authority. t
113 Innovation tenants would have a separate arrangement.
114 J.Luz: The vision is for a large cultivation center then a hub of separate entities working off the cultivation center
115 that are independent would have to go through their own process. j
116 J. Simons: The model is-"other crops"; can you point us toward an example of a 500K sq. ft. agricultural facility?
117 I'd like to know how they permitted it.
118 D. Leary: We can do that; greenhouses come to mind.Our model is uniquely predicated on indoor cannabis plants;
119 facilities with larger growing rooms inside.Automation differs mostly at this scale with regard to harvest and
12.0 nutrient delivery systems.
1.21 BOARD: Expressed general satisfaction with regard to the scheduled site visit and presentation.
122 J. Simons: Our due diligence process continues, do you have to provide full pro forma financials to the State?The
123 capital requirements for this project are enormous. It's not in our domain but it's a risk factor, i.e. something that.
124 starts and may not finish;we need to know the risk profile; we may need to set a substantial bond.The building
125 may be suitable,but requires enormous capital investment; if you run into a cash/flow bind,we have a problem.
126 We also need to craft a quality bylaw; we are not done working on that and unsure how long it will take.
127 D. Learn: (Presented the case for fall zoning) We have lost several potential tenants and are missing opportunities
128 in the absence of zoning. We continue to have future prospects and are on track for special permitting to be filed
129 by Town Meeting. We propose the front building would be the non-licensed areas or 450K sq. f1.;the cultivation
130 center would be 1.1 million sq. ft, The new law has a list of things that have to be addressed. The regulatory risks
131 are on the developer v. the town. r
132 J. Simons: Is the timing more of an issue for the innovation center or for the lead time for equipment for the
133 cultivation center and the time to market with product?
13,4 D. Learn: We believe we are on track to do a Special Permit if there is a Special.Town Meeting in the fall. We {
135 could be in operation rather quickly.In the State,there are I'10 granted licenses under the medical statute and
136 approx. 200 pending applications. They are all making decisions about their growing facilities after the new law
137 rolls out. Our business model is to find retailers;both medical and recreational. The key to supply agreements is
138 zoning.
3
Town of North Andover
PLANNING BOARD
John Sinions, Chairinan Eitran Goldberg
Peter BoJ/noting
Aaron Preston
Jennifer Luz
Christine Allen,Associate
T uesda Se tember 19, 2017k 7 .m. 120 M ain Street Town Hall,.North Andover 117A 01845
139
140 Framework for recreational/Commercial Marijuana Zoning Bylaw
141 S. Egan presented a framework of the future bylaw. J. Enright presented maps showing a 500 and 1,000ft. buffer
142 from residential districts. The maps demonstrate the locations of dayeares, libraries and schools; areas where
143 children congregate, Doted was that in some non-residential zoning districts/overlays residential structures are
144 allowed. Also noted,was that there are other `places where children congregate' in non-residential zoning districts
145 which are not identified on the snaps such as; dance schools, gymnastic schools etc. S. Egan explained that the
146 Board may recommend a bylaw that prohibits all uses or so ne uses. If there is a type of use recommended to be
147 prohibited or limited in Town, she recommended a General and Zoning Bylaw article be put forth. The BCS will.
148 decide whether or not to put forward a General Bylaw prohibiting or limiting uses.
149 BOARD: Discussed design of the future bylaw and creating various districts versus potential overlays. State
150 statute defines five uses: (1)independent testing laboratory, (2)marijuana cultivation, (3)product manufacturing,
151 (4) marijuana retailer and(5) craft marijuana cultivator cooperative. J. Luz suggested calling out research&:
152 development since it is an anticipated use. Board discussed transition and whether the original bylaw would be
153 deleted or phased-out. Simplicity and clarity were stressed as being important goals for the future bylaw. Board.
154 requested a hypothetical timeline for the pre-town meeting tasks.
155
156 Master Plan 1 date:
157 J. Enright: The draft of existing conditions is prepared and we have asked for your review and comment. The
158 feedback deadline is October f, 2017. RKG hopes to present a final draft two weeks prior to the public forum on
159 November 2,2017. The marketing blitz begins September 22, 2017,All minutes and agendas are on the website.
160
161 Review Proposed 2018 Planning Board Meeting Schedule
162 Planning Board Schedule for 2018 was confirmed with administrative amendments
163
164 MINUTES APPROVAL
165 MOTION: P. Boynton made a motion to approve the September 5,2017 minutes. E. Goldberg seconded the
166 motion. The vote was 5-0,unanimous in favor.
167
168 ADJOURNMENT
11.69 MOTION: P. Boynton made a motion to adjourn the meeting. The motion was seconded by J. Luz. The vote was
170 5-0, unanimous in favor. Meeting adjourned @ 10:30 p.m.
171
172 MEETING MATERIALS:Planning Board Meeting Agenda September 19,2017;DRAFT Planning Board Minutes September 5,2017;04LI of-Office
173 J ec;Bradshaw:Summary of Conflict of Interest,Public Records Guide Open Meeting Law,Acknowledgement of Grath and Forms;CONTINUED
174 PUBLIC HEARING,0 Great Pond Road and 1193 Great Pond Road North Andover Solar,LLC:Site Plans Revised 201708,LOCUS,20170731 Brooks
175 Solar Visual Study-Interactive PDF,NEW PUBLIC HEARING, 122 Foster Street,North Andover Vgrslt�w ureCess,Brian Grossman: wireless
176 Review_170914,Site Plans,Narrative,LOCUS,Varsity'wireless Presentation for the Town of North.Andover Planning Board 9/19/17;Brooks School:
177 Watershed RECORDED,Site Plan RECORDED,Insubstantial Change Request,hrsubstan6al Change Plans;East Mil]/west Mill:PDD,Letter to PB,9-14-
178 17,RCG Planning Board Presentation 9/1.912017;1600 Osgood Street/MMOD Discussion,Hooks Johnston:"water Consumption,The Deck Rev 3,The Deck
1.79 Rev.3 Edits,The case for fall zoning,Golder 090617 Report;framework for Recreational Commercial Marijuana Coning Bim:Section 8.12 MMOD,
180 Section 8.3 Site Plan Review Special Permit,Memo re:Framework Marijuana zoning Bylaw,Liquor License,General Law c.941,General Law c.940,
181 Framework for RecreationaVCommercial Marijuana Bylaw,Chapter 55 of Acts of 2017 marijuana statute,Permitted Uses by Special Permit;Proposed 2018
182 Planning Board Meeting Schedule.
4