HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-01-02 Planning Board Minutes /,/b •!6
Town of North Andover
PLANNING BOARD
John Simons, Chairman •' Eitan Goldberg
Peter Boynton •, Aaron Preston
Jennifer Luz
Christine Allen,Associate
Tuesday January 2, 2018(aA 7 p.m. 120 Main Street Town Hall North Andover,MA 01845
1
2 Present: J. Simons,P. Boynton,J.Luz,E. Goldberg,A.Preston, C.Allen
3 Absent:
4 Staff Present: S.Egan,J. Enright,M. Gregoire,B. Wolstromer
5
6 J. Simons, Chairman: The Planning Board meeting for Tuesday,January 2,2018 was called to order at 7 p.m.
7
8 J.Enri t: Introduced new Staff Planner-Monica Gregoire.
9
10 Bond Release:
11 The Glade,Tom Zahoruiko:Request for a partial bond release for a 5-lot Definitive Subdivision in the amount of$11 K.The
12 Roadway bond was originally established in the amount of$33,250;partial release of$11K was issued in 2015;T.Willett
13 recommends$11,250 be released leaving$11K for conveyance,maintenance&repair and final as-built plans.
14 MOTION:E.Goldberg made a motion to approve the bond release in the amount of$11,250 for"The Glade"subdivision.J.
15 Luz seconded the motion.The motion was 5-0 unanimous in favor.
16
17 PUBLIC HEARINGS
18 CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: 122 Foster Street,North Andover,Varsity Wireless,Brian Grossman:
19 Application for Wireless Facilities Special Permit—Site Plan Review under sections 8.9 and 8.3, 10.3 and 10.31 of the North
20 Andover Zoning Bylaw. Applicant proposes to construct,operate and maintain a 130 foot monopole tower(135 feet to top of
21 faux branches)with supporting equipment located in the Residential 1 (R-1)Zone.
22 Lou Ferraro,Abutter, 188 Vest Way:Read the email he sent to the Board expressing his disappointment with the recent ZBA
23 approval of the cell tower project stating the area already has power and gas lines.Adding a cell tower will effect property
24 values.Noted that as an employee for an international global internet provider he relies on his cell phone,his cell service
25 works fine, and that he has never had a dropped call.
26 J.Enriaht: On December 20,2017 the ZBA approved(4-1)the requested variances before them.At the last meeting,the PB
27 requested confirmation from National Grid that they would not lease their assets for commercial purposes,specifically lease
28 land at 409 Foster St.The applicant submitted a letter from National Grid stating that they would not lease their assets for
29 commercial use.The Board received several more resident comments, an Opposition letter submitted by Atty.Robert F.
30 Murphy representing Albert P.Manzi IlI, 10 Foster St., a peer review letter submitted to the ZBA application,and a follow up
31 letter from the peer reviewer re: 409 Foster St.Previously we discussed January 13,2018 as the expiration date for the 150
32 day`shot clock'. The next regularly scheduled Planning Board meeting is Tuesday, January 16,2018.
33 B. Grossman,Atty.Varsity Wireless: Summarized extent of where the project is in the process and requested the Board grant
34 the Special permit relief for the facility;amended tower height is 110 ft.;97ft.(Verizon)& 107ft.(AT&T)total with
35 appurtenances for monopine faux branches bringing the ZBA granted variance height to I I5ft.
36 A.Preston: Requested clarification of the coverage maps regarding dropped calls.White areas are defined as having a signal
37 strength less than 95 decibel Mw;there's some signal or coverage there. Is there a statistical analysis of calls remaining or
38 dropping;what is the statistical likelihood of dropping calls?
39 B.Grossman: The carrier has a desired signal strength to ensure you don't get the dropped calls;when you fall below the
40 carrier design threshold,it's no longer reliable. They have statistical indicators they look at;calls,dropped calls,data,
41 throughput,latency,etc.goes into the overall analysis. In this case,data is below the reliability threshold for those carriers:If
42 it's not reliable all the time to a great enough value they call it inadequate service to meet customer demands and expectations.
43 P.Bourton: I read your letter and National Grid's response. Our consultant from Isotrope said in his experience National Grid
44 had accommodated these type of additional uses in the past;the letter clearly says, "no".Referred to the siting of the existing
45 power station project now located at Stevens Pond stating it took time(months)for the Town to engage with National Grid to
46 change their perspective;after successful discussions,the answer changed to"yes". Our consultant said the National Grid site
1
Town of North Andover
PLANNING BOARD
John Simons, Chairman *' Eitan Goldberg
Peter Boynton •, Aaron Preston
Jennifer Luz - Christine Allen,Associate
Tuesday January 2, 2018_(a 7 p.m. 120 Main Street Town Hall North Andover,MA 01845
47 for this project was"the ideal site"for your cell tower.Where you have been working with the property owner for a couple of
48 years;you've spent a week working with National Grid. (1)Is it possible to communicate longer with National Grid?The
49 basis of their rebuttal was the power system is critical infrastructure under the Department of Homeland Security definition.
50 DHS has 18 critical infrastructure sectors; one is power and the grid;another is communications;which includes cell towers.
51 There really is a like use here; critical infrastructure cell tower along with critical infrastructure power grid.
52 B. Grossman: We had conversations with National Grid going back for some time including the site assessment. There has
53 been a significant change in their policy as it relates to critical infrastructure;communications is not their business or
54 responsibility to safeguard or deal with;they protect the critical infrastructure of the utility.
55 P. Boynton: With a large entity like National Grid, investing time to pursue the question made the difference,as mentioned in
56 my example.You could make the argument by co-locating the cell tower critical infrastructure,National Grid could be in a
57 better position to seek the critical infrastructure protection funding due to co-located critical infrastructure;it is one example
58 how discussion over time can discover mutual interests that may not be apparent.When I listened to the ZBA meeting, one
59 abutter asked about the Johnson St.tower which is quite tall and does not have a Verizon or AT&T array. The asked if it
60 could provide any of the needed coverage for the gap.I heard our consultant respond he wasn't aware of this tower.I didn't
61 see in your report the analysis for coverage from the Johnson St.tower for this gap area. (2)Is there an analysis for the
62 existing Johnson St.tower, at the height of that tower,for that as an alternative for coverage?That tower is of substantial
63 elevation and it is not on your map.
64 B. Grossman:The overall top height wouldn't be available. It's not included but the overall distance from this site, and it's
65 not that far from the tower that AT&T and Verizon are on,would provide vastly redundant coverage.Neither carrier would
66 use the Johnson St.tower given where existing coverage is because it would interfere.
67 P.Boynton: Our concern is whether an alternative is viable in terms of being available and providing coverage for a gap.
68 That's an analysis we don't have;I don't have the analysis of potential coverage of the Johnson St.tower as a potential viable
69 The third question is,we started at 135 feet and we are down to 110 ft.My question goes to the 97+5 ft. Both AT&T and
70 Verizon have to be at or above 97 ft. or higher. That's a business concern of yours;a tower at 97 ft.+5 ft. still allows you to
71 hang three antenna arrays. (3.)Do we have an analysis of the existing proposed location of the tower at Foster St.with
72 coverage provided at 97 ft.? What degree of coverage do we achieve in addressing the gap by having 3 antennas at 97 ft. and
73 below?The original 135 ft.tower had enough height to hang 5 separate arrays-one above the other; 115 ft.had enough height
74 to hang 4 arrays;at 97 ft.+5 ft.you could presumably hang 3 arrays. What does the analysis say to what degree can we
75 address the coverage gap with an antenna that is limited to 97+5 ft.?That's an important piece to assessing coverage.
76 B.Grossman: You have the analysis for AT&T and Verizon at 97 ft.which is their minimum verified by your consultant. One
77 would reject the site as not meeting the coverage objective and they wouldn't build it; 87 ft. or below is a one carrier tower
78 and you have two that need it.
79 S.Kelleher,Varsity Wireless: The Johnson St.tower is 2+miles away and your consultant dismissed that as being a viable
80 alternative.
81 E. Goldberg:It is possible when building a new tower to increase the height if you plan for it in advance;you could return to
82 us for an increase in height in the future?
83 B. Grossman: Correct;we are seeking coverage for two carriers above 97 ft.;the variance is for 115 ft.
84 J.Luz: What is the gap in terms of customers served?How many additional customers would be served if this 115 ft.tower is
85 approved?
86 Martin(voice inaudible): 1704 residential population.
87 E. Goldberg:You are serving AT&T and Verizon customers with cell phones;road traffic as well.
88 P.Boynton: What is the range of error for that approximate 1704 population?Is that census based?According to our
89 consultant,it is accurate only to the closest 700?
90 Martin(voice inaudible): It is done by census tract. I absolutely disagree with your consultant, The range of error is no more
91 than 10%.
92 C.Allen:Many comments state that Varsity Wireless only builds cell towers. If you develop DAS systems can you tell us
93 about that?How do you choose one system over another for a community?
2
Town of North Andover
PLANNING BOARD
John Simons, Chairman • ' Eitan Goldberg
Peter Boynton •, Aaron Preston
Jennifer Luz
Christine Allen,Associate
Tuesday January 2 2018 7 .m. 120 Main Street Town Hall North Andover MA 01845
94 Chris Davis Varsity Wireless: Yes,we do own and operate DAS systems. We own one at the Prudential Ctr.Arena in N.J.
95 And we provide a similar system at the Philadelphia 76ers practice facility in Camden N.J.
96 B. Grossman:In terms of identifying appropriate solutions it is done by review of the area.Neighborhoods in this area don't
97 have telephone poles;the topography and morphology of this area helps determine whether a small cell system is appropriate.
98 This is a macro-site requiring broad based umbrella coverage.
99 Meg Amuan 242 Foster St.:According to your website,you strictly do indoor DAS. If you look at the coverage map some of
100 the towers further away from the Johnson St.tower reach close to the Boxford line already; it is worth modeling.Is the red
101 tower on this map in Boxford showing potential coverage?
102 C.Davis: We have not built exterior DAS yet.
103 B. Grossman:Yes we are showing coverage because Boxford. It is an anticipated site.
104 Richard Stanley, 65 Bridges Lane: Stated he is a 35 year resident and had worked as Police Chief for 25 years in No.
105 Andover.As a primary responder in all sorts of conditions,I never complained about my coverage. Since 2011,the NAPD
106 never had complaints about dropped coverage for emergency services. Since 2013,I have run a consulting firm from my
107 home and I depend on calls and have never had a problem.I drove by 68 Ridge Way and was horrified by the unsightly tower.
108 We bought our homes without the presence of a cell tower.The town has done a great job protecting our area with
109 conservation, etc. Varsity created this issue because that's what they do;build towers.
110 Rob Jones 643 So.Bradford St.: Mr.Boynton pointed to issues that have not been explored.This sets an extremely bad
111 precedent for the town.It will impact property values.There will still be gaps in coverage. This is an extreme blight on the
112 trails on Foster Farm and the Farnsworth Reservation.This is a corporate entity imposing a structure in the name of
113 competition as dictated by Congress.I implore you to deny this permit and I am disheartened by the lack of courage shown by
114 the ZBA.
115 Mark Johnson 440 Foster St.: To grant this,you need to show a need. There won't be growth within the 1704 population. It is
116 residential land with little land left for development.A better alternative in this historic area is pole toppers or light poles.No
117 one addressed potential major rainfall and water flow down the proposed access road.
118 Aaron Preston: At the initial application stages a stormwater review was provided.
119 B.Grossman:We received and responded to comments from the town engineer.
120 T.Zahoruiko, 1665 Great Pond Rd: Did we get an answer on the gap coverage addressed at 97 ft.+5 ft.?
121 B.Grossman. 97 ft.minimum is required for adequate coverage. You cannot place both at 97 ft.You cannot deny coverage
122 to the second carrier.
123 P.Bo +nom: The original tower proposal called for 5 carriers;it then went to four. Challenged substantial gap. (4.)Has there
124 been a dropped call analysis?I thought the Telecommunications Act included this in their 8 or 10 categories by which a Board
125 can determine a substantial gap or adequate coverage.
126 Chris Swiniarski,Atty.Verizon Wireless:Dropped call analyses are not relevant.We are trying to provide better service for a
127 mobile network,the transmission of data. It's irrelevant. We are trying to provide something better. The gap is not about
128 dropped calls.
129 B. Grossman:The Telecommunications Act says you can't prohibit the provision personal wireless services.Mr.Maxson has
130 verified the gap exists.
131 S.Egan,Town Counsel:It is not required,but courts have considered dropped call analyses. If there is other information that
132 addresses a similar issue that could be sufficient to make that determination.
133 T.Zahoruiko:At 97 ft. is the gap largely addressed by at Ieast one carrier?
134 B.Grossman:Both have demonstrated that 97 ft.is their minimum height.
135 C. Swiniarski: Federal law directly addresses this clearly.The regulation by a state or local board or authority can't
136 unreasonably discriminate against providers of functionally equivalent services.
137 [Varsity Wireless requested a 5 minute break]
138 J. Enri ht: Gave a brief update during the break on the Master Plan.]
139 B. Grossman: We think we have provided enough information yet understand there are still questions.Varsity Wireless
140 requested a formal continuance to carry the public hearing to close at the January 16,2018 meeting,in order to address these
3
Town of North Andover
PLANNING BOARD
John Simons, Chairman Eitan Goldherg
Peter Boynton •, Aaron Preston
Jennifer Luz Christine Allen,Associate
Tuesday Januarp 2 2018 64 7 .m. 120 Main Street Town Hall North Andover MA 01845
141 issues(ultimately to January 25,2018 to file a decision).Varsity requested the town's wireless consultant,Mr.Maxson attend
142 that meeting.
143 [Board agreed to continue the public hearing to hear additional information]
144 J.Enright: We are in need of additional escrow funds for peer review.
145 C.Allen: Suggested limiting public comment at the meeting on January 16,2018.
146 MOTION:P. Boynton made a motion to accept the Applicant's request to extend the public hearing to January 16,2018. J.
147 Luz seconded the motion, The vote was 5-0,unanimous in favor.
148 B. Grossman: Clarified P.Boynton's four questions to be answered at the next meeting. 1)National Grid discussion,2)Were
149 the Johnson St.Tower to be considered as a potential alternative-as compared to this coverage-seeing both sites and
150 redundancy and interference 3)Studying the 97 ft.,whetber at 97 ft. for one;does it bring a gap from the definition of
151 significant to less than significant-demonstrate the cumulative impact of only having one of the two, i.e. a quantitative
152 percentage for the 1700 residents plus or minus the error rate is 4)Provide us with a dropped call analysis.5)(Per A.Preston)
153 Do you have plans to develop Winter St. and cover that area given that it's adjacent?
154 [Applicant requests a Continuance to the January 16,2018 Planning Board meeting date]
155
156 CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: 21 High Street(formerly known as 1 High Street RCG North
157 Andover LLC:
158 Application for a Site Plan Review Special Permit and a Planned Development District Special Permit under sections 8.1, 8.3,
159 10.3, 10.31 and 1 I of the North Andover Zoning Bylaw. The Applicant proposes to construct a 59,440 SF building
160 containing 51 units of residential apartments,along with parking and associated improvements. The property is located in the
161 I-S Zoning District.
162 [Continued to January 16, 2018 Planning Board meeting. Not heard]
163
164 DISCUSSIONS
165 Potential Special Town Meeting Zoning Bylaw Amendments: (Summary)
166 -Citizen Petition to prohibit the following uses within all zoning districts: all types on non-medical"marijuana
167 establishments"(consistent with General Law chapter 94G, §3(a)(2)),-including marijuana cultivators,independent
168 testing laboratory,marijuana product manufacturers,marijuana retailers or any other types of licensed marijuana-
169 related businesses.
170 -New zoning bylaw Section 8.13 to provide for the siting of specific Allowed Marijuana Uses which relate to or
171 involve marijuana as regulated by General Laws chapters 94C,App. §1-1,941 and 94G and to repeal zoning bylaw
172 Section 8.13:Temporary Moratorium on Recreational Marijuana Establishments and Retailers.
173 -Amendment to the Town's Zoning Map to include the Marijuana Overlay District.
174 J.Enright:At the last meeting,we discussed the potential zoning for the Special Town Meeting scheduled for January 30,
175 2018.That discussion led to the posting of a notice for the public hearing for zoning zoning amendment articles in the Eagle
176 Tribune. The notice printed on December 26,2017&January 2,2018. The public hearing is scheduled to open on January 9,
177 2018.Tonight,we have provided you with a red-lined version and a clean version of the draft bylaw for the MOD and a map
178 article as well. If you are comfortable with these,I recommend you vote this evening to move these articles to the BOS
179 meeting on January 8,2018 for inclusion in the Special Town Meeting warrant.The BOS will open and close the Warrant that
180 night.Because this Board will likely not make recommendations prior to the Warrant print date it will print with"To Be
181 Made at Town Meeting"for the Planning Board Recommendation.
182 J. Simons: We have substantive edits to make tonight and we have process questions this evening.Likely,there's going to be
183 two articles on the warrant.
184 E.Goldberg: Since there was an initial marijuana bylaw Iast year.We need to vote whether this is"substantially different".If
185 we are comfortable with where we are,I recommend we vote now prior to submission to the BOS.
4
Town of North Andover
PLANNING BOARD
John Simons, Chairman •' Eitan Goldberg
P •, Aaron Preston
Peter Boynton
Jennifer Luz
Christine Allen,Associate
Tuesday January 2, 2018(a), 7 o.m. 120 Main Street Town Hall North Andover,MA 01845
186 S.Eg : That is the legal standard. It is appropriate to make that decision now;this Board needs to vote favorably on this in
187 order for it to go to Town Meeting.Defined"substantially different"at the request of the Board. (Board deliberated on the
188 definition)
189 P.Boynton: Questioned the definition, "substantially different"or"of a different character".Does that address process,
190 location, etc.? Suggested a matrix format comparison to determine"substantially different" of"different character";
191 considering the 10 subjects;districts,purpose,boundaries,prohibited uses,permitted uses, location, dimensional siting
192 review, application requirements and findings.Agreed that this received a lot more work than last time. Stated he was less
193 concerned about all the time,work and effort we put into this than he is about this not being the right time or venue.Public
194 engagement is critical because of the scale and scope. The town has voted this down twice. Sending our good work forward
195 should be based on more than just a sense of process.
196 J. Simons: The dilemma is the applicant can submit all the work we've done here as their article. I'd prefer to do this in May,
197 allowing for a broader feedback process.It's more convenient for people,but the applicant has chosen to accelerate the time
198 frame.This article is thorough and complete. It may not be quite as good as if we waited until May.It's substantially different
199 in length and thoroughness-the article is 20 pages long,the last one was a single page.We've done a very thorough job. It's
200 very comprehensive and very much a model to other towns.
201 J.Luz: Where we are now since July is substantially different than what we started with. The presentations have been j
202 thoughtful,questions have been asked. We can assure ourselves that if there is a bylaw that goes into place this is a smart way
203 to site any marijuana business in our town;I feel confident this is more thoughtful. It is a significantly more different
204' document than anything that existed in May.
205 E. Goldberg:The amount of work we accomplished since July is substantial. What we started with and where we ended up is
206 substantially different. The last one amended the medical marijuana bylaw only,established a district and boundaries which
207 were similar,similar definitions,there were no sales to thepublic from the facility depending on floor size.It was not as
208 thorough as this. I do think this article is substantially different. It encompasses the whole town.It is thoughtful,deliberate,
209 exacting.It calls out water use,electrical use and odor;requiring plans in advance.
210 C.Allen:This is a substantially more encompassing bylaw,it doesn't just address this facility.It covers more ground. There
211 are maps,it takes into account proximity to school&daycare locations,research,etc. Which weren't explored the last time.
212 Where can we sell,grow,research?How much more can we cover?
213 D.Torrisi,67 Settlers Ridge Rd.:Expressed concern as to why the Board isn't waiting for the state regulations to be finalized
214 and go to Town Meeting in May.In January,we could very well have a weather situation,residents travel to Florida;the
215 proponents will have a great turnout;it's not going to be reflective of the town.I'm not convinced that the April 1 deadline
216 should be driving this.The warrant article they filed has no substance at all. They can't do anything without the zoning.
217 They're doing this under the medical marijuana statute;the existing law. They want a Provisional Certificate of Registration
218 by April 1. They haven't demonstrated they can get to this deadline,they don't have a chance. Where are they dispensing
219 their product?They can't get anything. They're in the siting profile stage.As a vertical license(medical marijuana)they are
220 only talking about the cultivation facility;where are they dispensing the product?The applicant owes the Town and this
221 Board information.
222 M.Rosen:Mr. Torrisi is here tonight as the Executive Director of the Commonwealth Dispensary Association(CDA).They
223 are trying to protect First Mover Advantage for the registered medical marijuana dispensaries to help give them a head start.
224 They are trying to protect the current dispensaries.He doesn't want us to have that chance. We think we can and we are in
225 active negotiations with two communities. If we don't get it done,we lost.It's why we started last summer and why we called
226 this January meeting.We hope by April 1 we will have a license.
227 D.Torrisi:As a 49 year resident,former Selectman,former State Rep. and current School Committee member, if I thought
228 this were a legitimate proposal I'd be encouraging them and support it.My fear is I think they're just going for the
229 recreational wholesaler and that's it. They've never been vetted.If they are credible,we'd know where they were going to
230 dispense.I believe you should wait.The draft regulations could change by March.Why rush it if this can wait until May?
231 M.Rosen:His organization is actively advocating as a Capitol Hill lobbyist.They attend the same meetings and sessions we
232 are.As markets open up,the dollar amount people think they're going to get for cannabis sold short term is a fallacy. The
5
Town of North Andover
PLANNING BOARD
John Simons, Chairman Eitan Goldberg
P •, Aaron Preston
Peter Boynton
Jennifer Luz - Christine Allen,Associate
Tuesday Jan uary 2 2018 A 7 P.m. 120 Main Street Town Hall North Andover MA 01845
233 model we are looking at is being able to grow,cultivate and manufacture at an efficient cost. We have a vacant building which
234 fits the bill. We are legitimate and real.
235 Karen Blake, 15 Caroline Way: These folks have demonstrated amazing detail.This has been studied for a year now. We have
236 an opportunity here to put this before the people. This is an operation that has indicated its legitimacy.This is above board,
237 you have visited the facility and site,talked to the growers and professionals who were brought in from the Netherlands.It's
238 time now to let the people vote instead of this constant delay. It is time to vote.
239 (Suzanne Egan, Town Counsel, J. Enright&Board ran through various non-substantive edits to the bylaw. Board discussed
240 acceleratedprocess, concern over the potential turnout at the Special Town Meeting and two potential motions)
241 Rosemary Smedile,BOS: I'm listening to Atty.Rosen,Atty. Torrisi and the Board,there seems to be one consensus here,that
242 you all know that this process is rushed.A cold January night may not give this proj ect the turnout it deserves. What is the
243 harm in waiting for a fair and honest hearing?The townspeople have voted no on two different venues. They have a right to
244 be heard. This is not a little moving of the line,this is huge. It is new,nationwide and statewide.Do your fellow citizens the
245 fairness they deserve. The Pianning Board could vote no and require a fair hearing in May. I want to see this to the finish Iine
246 and let the people of North Andover have a fair and honest say.
247 J. Simons: Hypothetically,the applicant could take this article and put it on the warrant.We are in a difficult position.You are
248 asking us to take a public policy role that is really outside the jurisdiction of the Planning Board.There is going to be a zoning
249 article on the warrant. Should it be ours or not?
250 J.Luz: There is already going to be another zoning bylaw on the warrant in January to ban any marijuana. We have worked
251 really hard on this and it would be unthoughtful not to put his before the Town. There was substantial support for this project,
252 more than 50%of the vote;the town deserves the opportunity to weigh in on both options;this needs to be on the warrant.
253 P.Bo,no: I agree this is thorough and it should go before the Town,but is it going before the Town in an off cycle,dead of
254 winter meeting. This is a dilemma for me, I'm concerned it will go before a portion of advocates which isn't a fair
255 representation of the Town.
256 J. Simons:Let's say we place this on the BOS agenda to be included on the warrant.We have our public hearing and we
257 choose to vote favorably or unfavorably on that article.Then it's voted on at Town Meeting. If we don't put anything on the
258 BOS agenda,the identical article will be placed on the warrant anyway-we'll have the public hearing and we make a
259 favorable or unfavorable recommendation.We don't get to vote on the timing.
260 Angela Reinke,24 Upland St.: Some of the social media sites are just getting started.To have people come out in January you
261 will get a thin slice.A Iot of people don't know about this.I need time to make this decision.This was voted down already.
262 We need ample time to go to Town Meeting,read the articles;it is difficult to rush into a decision by January 30.
263 J. Simons: That's an argument for the BOS.Under state law, if someone wants a Special Meeting they are allowed to do that.
264 The applicant submitted their petition with signatures.By state law we have no choice in the matter. Within 45 days we have
265 to hold the Special Town Meeting. State law requires a public hearing about the zoning amendment. We'll have 3.
266 D.Leary,26 Andover St.: The community meeting required under the new draft regulations will be noticed with a 7 day
267 notice period. We'll be covering that in two weeks. This will be in the newspaper and all over social media.We will also have
268 three open houses at the facility.You'll be able to meet the architect,talk with the engineers,etc.
269 J.Luz:Requested J.Enright tap into the Master Plan outlets that are on social media,Twitter,the Town's Facebook page,etc.
270 1?. Goldberg: Can people submit questions i.e. on the Town website?(J.Enright to speak with IT).
271 Tom Zahoruiko:Noted the impact on real estate values is the most significant issue and must be addressed,i.e. appraisals
272 analysis based on change in use.I highly recommend addressing this is in the bylaw to require this of an applicant.
273 D.Torrisi:Is it the position of your Board that if you vote unfavorable action-Can Town meeting take this article up?This
274 Board is the gatekeeper of this article.
275 S.Egan: If this is deemed substantially different and that determination is made;then it requires a favorable action.
276 Ed Lynch, 137 Haymeadow Rd:Expressed concern for educating the public.This document needs to be explained to people
277 to ensure a good decision will be made.
278 MOTION: I?. Goldberg made a motion to place this article,as amended,on the January 8,2018 BOS agenda to be included
279 on the Special"Town Meeting warrant January 30,2018.J. Luz seconded the motion.The vote was 4-1 (P.Boynton opposed)
6
Town of North Andover
PLANNING BOARD
John Simons, Chairman Eitan Goldberg
Peter Boynton Aaron Preston
Jennifer Luz Christine Allen,Associate
Tuesday January 2, 2018 Cad 7 P.m. 120 Main Street Town Hall North Andover, AM 01845
280 MOTION: E. Goldberg made a motion to include the zoning map amendment to be placed on the January 8,2018 BOS
281 agenda to be included on the Special Town Meeting warrant January 30,2018. J.Luz seconded the motion.The vote was 4-1
282 (P.Boynton opposed)
283 MOTION:E. Goldberg made a motion to deem the two articles;the draft bylaw and zoning map amendment are of
284 "substantially different character"than that of prior Town Meeting 2017 (articles 9,10& 11),and to place them on the
285 January 8,2018 BOS agenda to be included on the Special Town Meeting warrant January 30,2018.J.Luz seconded the
286 motion.The vote was 4-1 (A.Preston opposed)
287 Charlie Salisbury,301 Johnson St.: The Board was addressed with a letter from former Selectman Wakeman which deserves a
288 response. The Citizen Petition has not been addressed. 90 towns in this state said"no"to marijuana,including North Andover.
289 As of last June,30 communities have put forth bylaws to say thank you but not in our town.North Andover did nothing. You
290 are now being consumed by a well-funded consortium.The drum beat is incessant. If approved,we will be different than
291 adjacent towns.I urge you to think long and hard about what Mr. Zahoruiko had to say about the impact on property values.
292 (noted Foxwoods in CT. suggesting they would second think what they were doing). Talk with other Planning Boards and
293 towns.
294 E. Goldberg:I strongly disagree with you regarding process. We have been working hard since June and we are having three
295 public meetings(9, 16&23).We are doing what the law requires and more.
296 S.Egan:Public Notice in noticing meetings has been handled properly.
297 C.J. Gangi, 350 Chestnut St.: Contested that these documents discussed were not published and available.
298 E. Goldberg:Everything has always been available online.
299
300 MINUTES APPROVAL
301 MOTION: P.Boynton made a motion to approve the December 19,2017 minutes, as amended.A.Preston seconded the
302 motion. The vote was 5-0,unanimous in favor.
303
304 ADJOURNMENT
305 MOTION:E. Goldberg made a motion to adjourn the meeting. The motion was seconded by P.Boynton. The vote was 5-0,
306 unanimous in favor.Meeting adjourned @ 10:30 p.m.
307
308 MEETING MATERIALS: PIanning Board Meeting Agenda January 2,2018,DRAFT Planning Board Meeting Minutes December 19,
309 2017;The Glade-Bond Release: 170102 Great Lake Lane STATIONING As-Built Plans, 171227 T.Willet Bond Reduction Memo,revAs-
310 Built Plans;21 High Street: 171228 School Dept.Comment,East Mill Parking Table 12-19-2017,East Mill Pond Building_SWR revised
311 12-19-2017(1),East Mill Rear Building_SitePlanSet_revised 12-19-2017(1),L_DPW Response to Comments,L—TEC_Response to
312 Comments,Parking Lot breakdown,Permitting Table,SIS Storage Table,TECCover Letter,Re-Submission; 122 Foster St.:Resident
313 Comment: 171205 resident email comment 1, 171222 resident email comment 2, 171222 resident email comment 3, 171222 resident email
314 comment 4, 171222 resident email comment 5, 171227 resident email comment 6, 171229 resident email comment 7, 180102 resident email
315 comment 8, 171229 resident email comment 9, 171514 ZBA Peer Review MEMO, 171220 Manzi-Murphy Memo, 171214 Peer Review
316 409 Foster Followup, 171212 N-Grid Merano re Varsity Wireless—Foster Street N Andover;Potential Zoning Amendments:Zoning Map:
317 171228 Zoning Map Amendment, 171227 Stamped 5723 MOD(EXHIBIT)(12-27-17),MOD bylaw: 171227 Warrant Article with
318 Formatting Marijuana bylaw draft clean, 171226 Marijuana bylaw draft redline,Citizen Petition:Cit Petition Prohibit All Marijuana
319 Establishments,wakeman 12-29-17,PB Filing Fees,Marijuana article, 171221 CCC Draft Regulations, 170626 Reconsideration Memo
320 SPE.
7