Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-12-05 Planning Board Minutes Planning Board Meeting APP'ROVED 1/17/01 December 5, 2000 Members Present: John Simons RichardRowen Richard Nardella Alberto Angles William Cunningham Others Present: Jacki Byerley, Planning Assistant The Planning Board meeting was called to order at 7:00 P.M. Discussions: Tax Increment Financing-Sweetheart C �--up Mr. William Scott Director of Community Development passed a draft brochure to show the proposal to special Town Meeting on December 11, 2000. Mi-. Nardella wauttd to know what would happen if Sweetheart Cup leaves after 5 years instead of the proposed 20 years? Mr. Scott stated that the Tax Increment Financing would stop. Mr. Angles wanted to know whether additional costs to come to the Town for Sweetheart Cup to move in? Mr. Scott stated that the Town would not be responsible for any on-site and/or off-site infrastructure or utility costs.' Mr. Scott asked that the Planning Board endorse the Tax Increment Financing. Mr. Nardella motioned to ENDORSE the":rax Increment Financing for Sweetheart Cup, 2"d by Mr. Rowen. Voted 5-0 in favor of Capital wrqvements Programjo.wn Hall Etqvator.-Prgjeqt Mr. Scott handed the Planning Board a draft brochure showing the need for an accessible Town Hall. Presently Town Hall is not in ADA compliance and with the propose $800,000.00 of Town fund along with prior authorized Town Funds and a State Grant the Town Hall could be renovated. The proposed improvements would enable citizens to access all of Town Hall not just the basement level. 1 Mr. Rowen wanted to know whether there was a deadline for the Town to make the improvements to Town Hall? Mr. Scott answered that with the prior authorized funds of $250,000.00 that was allocated to Town Hall improvements the Town then would be required to make the improvements while using the fiends. Mr. Nardella stated that the overall 1.3 million average cost stated to do the improvements is a lot of money to put into renovations to a building. Mr. Angles commented that keeping the Town Hall in the center of Town was a good idea and connecting the Senior Center to the Town Hall makes the idea that much better. Mr. Nardella commented that with the Town Hall Accessibility Project going to Special Town Meeting on December 11, 2000, that the citizens be the ones to decide whether it was too much money for renovations. Mr. Nardella motioned to Endorse the Town Hall Accessibility Project, 2"d by Mr. Angles. Voted 5-0 in favor of. Article 12-Sew r Pum in Station-Route 114 Mill Road Mr. Hmurciak of DPW stated that the pumping station located at Mill Road Route 114 will not be having any more tie-ins and the Town should accept the pumping station. Mr. Nardella commented that without having any more tie-ins the Town would not be benefiting from maintaining the pumping station. Mr. Nardella motioned to Endorse Article 12, 2"d by Mr. Rowen. Voted 5-0 in favor of Article 1.3-EasMent-Harkaway Road This article had been presented at Town Meeting in May 2000. Mr. Hmurciak stated that Town Counsel didn't think the wording in the original article was specific enough. Mr. Hmurciak went on to say that by accepting the easement the Town would be responsible for a sewer and water main along the roadway. Mr. Nardella motioned to Endorse Article 13, 2"d by Nle. Nardella. Voted 5-0 in I favor of Article IS-Wat r Pum in Station-Foxwood Drive Mr. Hmurciak stated that presently the developer of Foxwood Subdivision was in charge of the maintenance to the water pumping station. Mr. Hmurciak did not believe that the developer knew the schedule that needed to be kept to maintain the station. Mr. 2 Hmurciak believed that by the Town taking over the pumping station it would prevent any future problems with it. Mr. Simons asked whether the residents of the subdivision { were aware of the Article? Mr. Scott stated that the residents would feel better with the Town being in control of the water pumping station. Mr. Rowen motioned to Endorsed Article 15, 2"d by Mr. Nardella. Voted 5-0 in favor of. 69 South Bradford Street-Pro osed Modification Ms. Julie Perrino of Hancock representing the owners of the property stated that the owners would like to modify a special permit decision. The home-owners would like to not build the water quality Swale stated in the original special permit decision. To place the swale would require regrading. Mr. Angles stated that the Conservation Department might have a bigger issue with the lack of the swale. Ms. Perrino stated that she had brought this before the Conservation Commission and was told it was a Planning Board issue. Mr. Rowen stated that the Planning Board can see the problems and regrading issues but a swale needs to be in place. The current need for regarding was caused by the applicant not grading per the approved plan. Mr. Rowen suggested that the homeowners work with the design that they now have and place a swale or something equivalent to a swale. j i t Osgood Street-Informal for 100,000 s . ft. ro osed office buildin Steve Webster of Dutton& Garfield stated that the proposal is to place an office building with an entrance on Route 125 within the R-1 Zone. There would be a 100-foot buffer to the residential property. The proposed office building would a 2-tiered building and it would be two 50,000 sq. ft. buildings. The front building would have 15,000 sq. ft. on the first level and 35,000 sq. ft. on the second level. The additional building in the back would be 50,000 sq. ft. The Septic is located in the front and there would be a detention pond for runoff from the silty. Mr. Nardella suggested that the building be brought forward and place more units of parking in the rear. Mr. Webster stated that they might pull the buildings back and place more landscaping in the front. They would like to keep the parking in the front for better access to the building. Mr. Simons wanted to know what material would be used? Mr. Webster stated that it would be a glass front and masonry and would blend with the existing properties. 3 �� Mr. Webster questioned the Planning Board on whether a traffic study would be require when a formal application is filed? Mr. William Scott, Director of Community Development & Services stated that there was an existing traffic study of Holt Road. The Planning Board agreed the information from the Holt Road traffic study would be sufficient. 300 Chestnut Street-Informal Discussion Ms. Jill Mann representative for SBA Inc owners of an existing tower located at 300 Chestnut Street stated that SBA would We to take down the existing tower and place a monopole in place of.. Ms. Mann would like direction from the Planning Board on what permits would need to be applied for. Ms. Mann went on to say that the existing tower was 153' and the monopole would be about 190'. Ms. Mann gave a brief history on the existing tower stating that it was built around 1957 and made for transmission purposes for televisions. After 1988 the tower started being used for communications and the tower is not suited to hold major carriers. Ms. Mann was unsure of the construction schedule and when the antennae would be relocated from the existing tower. A member of the audience stated that normal construction takes place while the existing tower is still standing and that the shut off of coverage would be hours not days. Ms. Mann stated that the construction of the new antennae would be grandfathered because the new construction would be no more detrimental. Mr. Nardella requested that SBA give the Planning Board a photo of a monopole. The Planning Board agreed that SBA would be the applicant and to apply for one permit. 65 Fla shi -Site Plan Waiver Mr. Caruso representative for the applicant requested a waiver for change of use. The applicant will only be renovating the interior. Mi. McGuire the Building Inspector wrote a letter stating the zoning and parking were within code. Mr. Nardella motioned to WAIVE the Site Plan Review Special Permit, 2"d by Mr. Angles. Voted 5-0 in favor of. Public Hearings: 1591 Osgood Street-Propos Stora e Facilit -Site Plan Review Mr. Dave Allen representing Chris Adams commented that he had received the Town Planners comments and needed time to responds to them. Mr. Simons stated that from the comments of the Town Planner states that what has been submitted is not an acceptable format. The format received is difficult to read and review. Mr. Simons suggested that the applicant withdraw without prejudice and come back before the Planning Board when the applicant has more time to put into the plans. Mr. Adams requested to withdraw without prejudice. i Mr. Nardella motioned to APPROVE the withdrawal without prejudice and waive any new application fees for 1591 Osgood Street, 2nd by Mr. Rowen. Voted 5-0 in favor of Selectmen Petition-Amendment to Zoning Bylaw Section 8.9 Selectman Keith Mitchell gave a brief history on how the Selectmen made the decision to request the amendment. Mr. Mitchell stated that the Selectmen would like to balance services with impact to the Town. Mr. Mitchell went on to state that there has been a rapid interest in wireless services that has come to the Town and with the residents looking for a moratorium;the Selectmen felt the need to look into keeping the towers coming in and keeping them from the residents. Mr. Mitchell stated that with towers coming in close to residents they decrease property value. Mr. Mitchell stated that all Town bylaws are open to litigation. Mr. Mitchell went on to say that the Selectmen would like to tale a pro-active mode to keep the industries coming in and still appease the citizens. Mr. Steven Anderson representing AT&T Wireless stated that he had researched properties that have been shown to have the 900-foot setback. Mr. Anderson stated that 3 the setback would eliminate co-location, eliminate creative location and make it difficult to find sites that would meet their coverage needs. Mr. Randy Jones representing Omnipoint agreed with Mr. Anderson on what the 900-foot setback would do to the R wireless organizations. Mr. Rowen wanted to know how many towers AT&T would need in the Town to provide coverage? Mr. Anderson stated that AT&T would need 6 installations within the Town. I Mr. Cunningham stated that the Town needed to take this amendment slowly and take a few months to do more research before the amendment is agreed upon. Mr. Rowen questioned Mr. Mitchell on whether the problems with the towers were aesthetics or health issues? Mr. Mitchell answers that both were an issue with the Town and citizens. Mr. Rowen stated that 900 feet would not solve both problems. Mr. Mitchell stated that a Telecommunications Committee meeting was to be held the next night and that they would discuss lowering the setback. Mr. Mitchell also stated that the Committee woj41d discuss a possibility of a variance instead of a waiver to the setback. Mr. Rowen motioned to CONTINUE the public hearing for the Selectmen Petition-Zoning fay-law amendment to December 11, 2000 at 6:30 p.m., 2"d by Mr. Nardella. Voted 5-0 in favor of 5 �/ Mr. Rower motioned to CONTINUE the public hearing for the Citizen Petition- Zoning By-law amendment to December 11, 2000 at 6:30 p.m., 2"d by Nh'. Nardella. Voted 5-0 in favor of. Article 19-Lease Wireless Communication Facilit -Steven's Estate The proposal will authorize the Selectmen to lease, for a term of up to 20 years, space at the town-owned property known as Stevens Estate at Osgood Hill for purposes of a wireless communication facility or facilities and related equipment P. improvements. Mr. Rowen motioned to ENDORSE Article 19, 2"a by Mr. Nardella. Voted 5-0 in favor of Article 20-Easements to Service Wireless Corrununication Facility-Stevens Estate The proposal will authorize the Selectmen to grant a non-exclusive easement(s) for electric and telephone utilities for the sole purpose of locating, relocating erecting, construction, etc. to serve the needs of the Town and its present and future lessees on said land. Mr. Rowen motioned to ENDORSE Article 20, 2"d by Mr. Nardella. Voted 5-0 in favor of. Continued Public Hearings: I 'E 1292 Osgood Street-For etta Florist Shop-Site Plan S ecial Permit Mr. Rowen motioned to CLOSE the public hearing for 1292 Osgood Street, 2"d by Mr. Nardella.. Voted 5-0 in favor of Mr. Rowers suggested that the findings of facts language be changed to incorporate zoning district and the uses. Mr. Nardella motioned to APPROVE the Site Plan Special Permit as amended, 2"d by Mr. Angles. Voted 5-0 in favor of. Decisions: Endicott Plaza-Os ood Street-Site Plan S ecial Permit Mr. Nardella wanted the wording changed in the draft decision to have it read that the Planning Board expected the project be built in accordance with the referenced plans and specifications g ecifications brow ht up at the public hearings. Mr. Rowen suggested that page 3 (b) be 6 P reworded to give the Town Planner the authority to waive the ductile iron pipe force main. Mr. Rowen motioned to APPROVE the Site Plan Special Permit as amended, 2"� by Mr. Angles. Voted 5-0 in favor. Heritage g Estate§-Partial Bond Release Mr. Nardella requested that Mr. Kindred come to the Planning Board meeting to give the Planning Board an update on the subdivision. Mr. Nardeha motioned to a-PAR'T'IAL RELEASE of$223,300.00 from Heritage Estates leaving a balance of$202,900.00, 2"1 by Mr. Cunningham. Voted 5-0 in favor of. North Andover Estates-Bond Release Mr. Rowen motioned to a FULL RELEASE of all remaining funds fi•om North Andover Estater,, 2"d by Mr. Nardella. Voted 5-0 in favor of North Andover Heights-Bond Release Mr. Rowen motioned to a PARTIAL RELEASE keeping a balance of$6000.00, 2nd by Mr. Nardella. Voted 5-0 in favor of 59 Bonn Lane-Bond Release Mr. Rowen motioned to a FULL RELEASE of$1000.00 from 59 Bonny Lane, 2"d by Mr. Nardella, Voted 5-0 in favor of Minutes Mr. Rowen motioned to APPROVE the minutes of November 14, 2000, 2'd by Mr. Nardella. Voted 5-0 in favor of Mr. Rowen motioned to ADJOURN the Planning Board meeting of December 5, 2000, 2 nd by Mr.Nardella. Voted 5-0 in favor of Respectfully Submitted Alberto Angles, Clerk I 3