HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-01-15 Planning Board Minutes NORTH
Acetated Jen's edits 0
6 0
2
4 04A9
5 IVA
6
7 TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER
8 PLANNING BOARD
9 Minutes of the Meeting
10 January 15,2008
11 Town Hall, 120 Main Street
12 7:00 PM
13
14 Members present: Richard Nardella, Chairman
15 John Simons, Vice Chairman
16 Richard Rowen, regular member
17 Jennifer Kusek, regular member
18 Timothy Seibert, alternate member
19
20 Members absent: Alberto Angles, Clerk
21
22 Staff present: Lincoln Daley, Town Planner
23 Mary Ippolito, Recording Secretary
24
15 Chairman Nardella introduced the panel to the assembly at approximately 7:10 pm.
27 CHAIR ANNOUNCED NO POSTPONEMENT(S):
29 None
30
31 CHAIR CALLED FOR DISCUSSION(S):
32 1. Peter's Street Realty Trust—CVS Pharmacy located at Rte#114 at corner of
33 Peters Street. Atty. John Thomson requesting bond release and close out of$10,000.00. As
34 built and letter from engineer submitted.
35
36 Lincoln stated the sidewalk which runs in front of Eagle Tribune has been done to the
37 satisfaction of DPW. However, Lincoln found deficiencies in the lack of landscape work.
38 Plantings at front and side are missing. Lincoln recommends a partial bond release of$5K and
39 retain $5K in the bond account. The wall is stable since its last reconstruction.
40
41 Atty. Thomson was absent tonight.
42
43 Chair commended CVS for being a good neighbor and for doing a good job. Motion by RR, 2nd
44 by JK, to release$5K and keep the remainder of$5K in the bond account until the landscaping is
45 done.
46
47 CHAIR CALLED FOR THE FOLLOWING DISCUSSION ITEM:
2. Eaglewood Plaza,Rte #114 -As built and letter from project Engineer submitted for bond
49 release and close out for the following bonds:
Planning Board
Minutes of the Meeting
January 15,2008
Page 1
A`,,cepted Jen's edits
■ $20,000.00 Site Opening bond
2 $20,000.00 Performance Guarantee bond
3 $5,000.00 Site Inspection bond.
4
5 Lincoln stated DPW visited the site along w/Lincoln, in conformance with water and sewer,
6 utility work, landscape work and conformity to the plans right down to the trees and things look
7 good. Lincoln recommends release and close out of the entire bonds.
8
9 Mr. Hamlen was great to do business with and has a successful project. $5K Site Inspection
10 bond was filed to ensure the site was done in compliance with the plans. There is a rather large
11 drainage pond behind the facility that needed careful inspection and it's performed properly
12 according to DPW records. Bonded heavily because of a minor issue with an odor problem
13 coming from the site, but applicant fixed the problem at their own expense.
14
15 Motion by RR, 2nd by JK,to release and close out all bond money to the applicant, vote was
16 unanimous,
17
18 CHAIR CALLED FOR THE FOLLOWING DISCUSSION ITEM:
19 3. Mr.Ahearn,Wallace and Saville Street subdivision bond release—As built
20 submitted and letter submitted from project Engineer. DPW recommends a partial bond release
21 in the amount of$26,450.00 leaving a balance of$15,300 in the bond account.
22
23 Lincoln stated Tim Willett inspected the site and believes that we should keep some bond
24 money to rectify issue left on the site. Sidewalks not put in yet,no street trees put in yet, street
25 convenience not done yet.
6
27 RR asked is there any chance that with the work not done yet it could cause deterioration on the
28 site and cause the value of the remaining work to increase?
29
30 Lincoln stated he doesn't believe so and that the remaining bond money should cover the issues
31 on that site before it's completed.
32
33 Chair wants to release$20,000 only tonight&hold the rest of the bond money, but w/the $20K
34 goes a stipulation that this work must get done this Spring.
35
36 RR stated there is a problem when they don't put sidewalks in prior to occupancy because
37 people move in and landscape their front yards and they complain when their front yard get dug
38 up because then they put a sidewalk in.
39
40 How does applicant get a COO when the sidewalks are not put in and done?
41
42 Lincoln stated it doesn't specify in our decision that sidewalks need to be completed prior to
43 occupancy.
44
45 RR stated the sidewalk needs to be done up to binder coat at a minimum, the area of the sidewalk
46 would be laid out so homeowners would not end up putting sprinkler systems in and then have
47 to dig them up later.
3
Planning Board
Minutes of the Meeting
January 15,2008
Page 2
A;cepted Jen's edits
i Chair doesn't want to cause the applicant to have a financial issue once they landscape their front
2 yard and put in sprinkler systems to have it dug up in order to put in sidewalks because then the
3 applicants are objecting to the sidewalk. Chair would like to ensure that this doesn't happen in
4 the future.
5
6 Motion by RR to release $20K only for Wallace and Saville Street and to keep a remainder in the
7 bond account, 2"d by JK, vote was unanimous.
8
9 Please note: John Simons arrived at 7:15 pm.
10
11 Chair instructed staff to send a letter to Mr. Ahearn requesting that all work be completed by the
12 end of May, otherwise, PB will pull the bond.
13
14 CHAIR CALLED FOR THE FOLLOWING DISCUSSION ITEM:
15 4. Stevens Corner, 75 Park Street—Neighborhood of Affordable Housing
16 proposal to redevelop the former Greenery Nursing Home into a 42 residential unit 40B Project.
17
18 Lincoln stated this is essentially the same project that was previously discussed at Town
19 Meeting. ZBA wants PB comments on this project on design, street layout, parking.
20
21 Chair asked that if this is a redevelopment that might involve ancillary type work on the facility
22 that's still all Zoning and nothing comes under the Planning Board?
23
24 Lincoln stated this falls under the 40B regulations, which requires the ZBA as the granting
25 authority.
?6
27 Philip R. Giffee, Executive Director, introduced Jon Juhl, Development Consultant and Lucio
28 Trabucco, Architect.
29
30 NOAH has owned this site since June and has been meeting with the neighbors regularly and
31 with Town officials for a year now. Purchased the property at a private auction from HRPT
32 Properties. Meets with a couple of people on the Greenery Police Station so they know what's
33 going on.
34
35 John Drew, stated this is a 3 story brick building nursing home built in the 1970's. 75 Park
36 Street is the actual building. Parking lot has 66 spaces located at 290 Osgood Street. A 2-
37 family exists to be divided with an ANR plan for your review on 69-61 (are these numbers
38 correct?) Park Street.
39
40 2.55 acres total area, will have 2.25 acres once parcel is taken out. Within R-4 zoning district and
41 located in the C zone which is a minimum flooding zone.
42
43 Lucio Trabucco, Architect spoke 3-story structure w/ground floor for parking. He's using the
44 same footprint. He will remove the roof and add a floor to go up making it three stories.
45
46 Will do landscaping on Park St. Applicant will pick up 6 units by adding a mansard roof to the
47 top of the building. Two parking spaces per unit will apply, 88 parking spaces total. There is
$ someone who wants to purchase the two-family next door. BOS issued their acceptance letter of
Planning Board
Minutes of the Meeting
January 15,2008
Page 3
&,,ce tcd Jen's edits
1 this project. 32 units will be affordable however; all the units are counted toward the Town's
2 number(because this is a 40B).
3
4 JS commended NOAH for doing nice work on this project in bringing people into this issue.
5 This will still need to go to Town Hall in May of 08 for a vote.
6
7 Private trash collector utilizing a dumpster on site. Plowing is private. Applicant will have their
8 affordable units in perpetuity. Make known what the time period is at Town Meeting.
9
10 Lincoln to send a note to ZBA to make note in their decisions regarding trash pick up and
I l plowing done be put into their decision on this project. This project will be called the Steven's
12 Corner instead of the Greenery. Upper slope where people walk there may need to be some
13 covered walkways.
14
15 Lincoln wants to soften the street side with landscaping. What areas would this deviate from the
16 Site Plan Review regulations of our Town? John Smolak stated the buffer around the property
17 would be softened up.
18
19 JS stated the density is higher that's why it s a 40B, it's got to be a pre-existing non-conforming
20 use.
21
22 No questions from the audience tonight.
23 Jennifer Kusek requested to excuse herself from the 40B project.
24
25 CHAIR CALLED FOR THE FOLLOWING DISCISSION ITEM:
6 5. John Grasso, 1003 Osgood Street,Map 34, Parcel 50. Conceptual site plan to
27 construct a three-story, 18,000 s.f consisting of a restaurant, retail space, and office space
28 within the B-2 zoning district.
29
30 Lincoln stated this project would raze existing barn and put in a restaurant/retail use. There is
31 an existing SP on the property now. Deed restriction for soccer field at back of property.
32 Previous applicant did remove the soccer field by giving the Town $25K. Parking relief will
33 need to be done thru ZBA and PB.
34
35 Chris Tamula, MHF Design presented and stated that John Grasso is now the new owner of
36 1003 Osgood St. Mr. Grasso is proposing a 3-story retail building, and a 6K s.f. Restaurant.
37 Mr. Grasso is willing to let someone purchase the barn and move it.
38
39 Lincoln stated there is a demo permit already issued to demo the entire property. Lincoln to
40 check the records on how long a demo permit is good for.
41
42 JS sees a huge problem with the location of the parking it's located right n the middle of the
43 field.
44
45 Chair wants applicant to use the original use for the parking, which is to the left of the proposed
46 structure, and not to the rear of the proposed structure. Chair does not want to see more
47 encroachment than was already done for the approval of the previous project.
8
Planning Board
Minutes of fire Meeting
January 15,2008
Page 4
A_rcepted Je_n's edits f
1 JS stated there was a zoning change approved on this previous project. Now the Town is not
2 getting anything they originally wanted with this new project such as maintaining a historical
3 structure(barn), keeping an open space area,now the Town lost the soccer field too. This has a
4 long way to go before it's going to work.
5
6 JK wants to see a change with the shared use and keep the open space. She has no problem for
7 the use of a restaurant and retail office. Do something about the open space and the parking.
8
9 TS wants someone to look at the street entrance issue. There are a lot of trees located there and
10 there is a sharp curve. Chris stated that is an enter only, Mass Highway did approve this.
11
12 Chair wants Chris to relocate the parking spaces that are next to historic area because where that
13 parking is it's meant to be a field.
14
15 PB said draw a soccer field and see what space is left. Chair said you already have existing
16 parking but come in with something that can be recorded as a deeded use of existing parking
17 spaces in order to build the parking spaces.
18
19 Chris stated he would look at what shared use for parking can be used for 1025 Osgood Street
20 and 1008 Osgood St. (is 1025 and 1008 Osgood the correct numbers?)
21
22 Lincoln wants Chris to think outside of box and look to preserve the historic feature of this area
23 and the natural vista of the lake. May create a new barn that can house a restaurant?
24
25 Chair stated if you want to come back in for another discussion, as you get further on then do
,6 so.
27
28 CHAIR CALLED FOR THE FOLLOWING DISCUSSION ITEM:
29 6. Route 125/ Osgood Northern Corridor Rezoning Plan. Presentation of the proposed
30 rezoning efforts along the northern corridor of Route 1251 Osgood Street,
31
32 Lincoln stated in looking at Rte. 125 at the Workshop the consensus of the opinion is they want
33 more commercial use to allow for more commercial retail uses. A handout containing
34 proposed rezoning was discussed. Current zoning is I-1 &B-2, and 1-S. and R-2. There are 21
35 parcels to be proposed for rezoning with frontage on Rtc. 125. Lincoln tried to work within
36 our current zones and the Master Plan. He said B-2 offers the most opportunity for retail and
37 for housing. Sec his color chart for explanation. Keep Microwave Engineering as Industrial
38 use.
39
40 Chair congratulated Lincoln's first pass as what can or cannot be put on these parcels and
41 stated this is what a Town Planner is supposed to do. A discussion ensued between the PB and
42 Lincoln regarding the zones that need to be rezoned and their uses. Lincoln to redo his legend
43 regarding residential zones.
44
45 PB is leaning to rezoning some of the lots rather than not change their current zoning district.
46 PB should do a site walk.
47
48 JS asked a question regarding dark blue area. Lincoln clarified the color-coding.
49
Planning Board
Minutes of the Meeting
January 15,2008
Page 5
Accepted Jen's edits
.1 Chris Adams, abutter, stated he's excited about doing this rezoning and getting sewerage. The
2 black piece will go to Residential. Why does his property have triple zoning? He wants to
3 change the blue line that runs across his property to make it residential? Chair stated nothing is
:4 set in stone yet.
5
6 George Barker, 1267 Osgood St. What are the blue areas going to be changed to? Lincoln stated
7 they represent a portion of an entire piece of property to be rezoned; the pink area will actually
8 be rezoned and blue areas will remain R-2. Neighbors won't be pleased if blue area near Barker
9 St. would change. Chair said good start by Lincoln and excellent work.
10
11 Chris Adams asked to see article 16,2, regarding restaurants and their exclusion of drive thru
12 facility. Whey exclude drive-in facility? Chair said PB didn't want any piece of our roads to be
13 a strip of fast foods restaurants right next to each other such as Rte. 114 in Danvers. PB looks at
14 this as a case-by-case basis.
15
16 Lincoln will take this project to the May 2008 Town Meeting.
17 Chair stated we have subcommittee to look at parking. And subcommittee to look at Police
18 Station and Greenery. Cell Tower sub-committee too. PB to chat about this committee at some
19 time. And a sub-committee for rezoning of Rte 125. Keep Rte. 125 Rezoning on each PB
20 agenda.
21
22 CHAIR CALLED FOR THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC HEARING(S):
23 7. Angus Realty Corporation, 1077 Osgood Street, Map 35, Lot 27.
24 Attorney Tom Caffrey representing Angus Realty Corp. requested a modification of a Site Plan
25 Review Special Permit decision under 8.3 and Watershed Special Permit under 4.136 dated July
'6 17, 2007 to modify the wording in decisions.
27
28 Lincoln stated that Angus Realty Corp. approached the PB to amend specific language in a
29 decision and to eliminate any reference to the trailers see page 44, Special Condition Section#4
30 in the Site Plan Special Permit. The site as described in Condition 1 (A) is permitted a maximum
31 of two permanent storage trailers. No additional permanent storage of trailers will be allowed on
32 site. Temporary storage trailers may be allowed for up to two-weeks during holidays and busy
33 periods of operation. This condition is subject to future zoning amendments pertaining to the
34 outside storage of products/goods and the use of trailers for this purpose. This decision shall be
35 in compliance with the most current Zoning and General Bylaws for the Town. The request is to
36 eliminate that paragraph entirely from the Site Plan SP decision.
37
38 There was recent litigation on this project relative to the trailers being a permanent structure and
39 the Court found for Mr. Ragonese.
40
41 Chair wants to bring this issue of a structure and place it as an article at the May 2008 Town
42 Meeting by the PB.
43
44 Lincoln stated we are placing language in our Site Plan Review SP stating no alternate trailers;
45 structure will be approved thru the PB...
46
47 PB should redefine what a permanent structure is. PB discussed the Site Plan Review process
8 relative to temporary trailers and as temporary structure or otherwise. Chair asked are these
49 interpretations left open to the.Building Inspector? Lincoln stated yes.
Planning Board
Minutes of the Meeting
January 15,2008
Page 6
Accepted .leg's edits
1
2 JS stated at some level you have to leave it up to the interpretation of the Building Inspector.
3 With the clarity that the Court provided and the common sense decision made in the Court is that
.4 sufficient or do you have to go with belt and suspenders and clarify what's a permanent structure
5 or not? (All you have to do is just redefine what a permanent structure is.)
6
7 RR stated all of this discussion is pertinent to any proposed change in wording for the Bylaw; it's
8 not pertinent to the discussion for tonight as we shall modify the decision. RR stated he would
9 rather not get into adding things to the decision an application is made here's a structure that we
10 may want to put in,here's the structure, here's the drainage, that's what's approved, nothing
11 more, nothing less.
12
13 RR stated the Building Inspector made a decision; the Court said he was wrong, it had nothing to
14 do with us.
15
16 Chair stated PB has been asked to modify a decision for 1077 Osgood Street, a decision that PB
17 made pertaining to the storage of trailers. RR stated that everything that Lincoln is going to read
18 is proposed to be deleted.
19
20 Lincoln read the following: The site as described in Condition 1 (A) is permitted a maximum of
21 two permanent storage trailers. No additional permanent storage of trailers will be allowed on
22 site. Temporary storage trailers may be allowed for up to two-weeks during holidays and busy
23 periods of operation. This condition is subject to future zoning amendments pertaining to the
24 outside storage of products/goods and the use trailers for this purpose. This decision shall be in
25 compliance with the most current Zoning and General Bylaws for the Town.
,6
27 Date of the decision is July 17, 2007
28
29 Chair stated, "use this Motion"to modify the Angus Realty Corp., 1077 Osgood St. Site Plan SP
30 dated July 17, 2007. The modification is to strike language under Special Conditions#4 the
31 entire paragraph starting with the words the site and ending with the words the Town.
32
33 RR stated delete the paragraph#4 under Special Conditions and replace it with the word deleted.
34
35 Atty. Caffrey representing Angus Realty Corp. stated Mr. Ragonese's concern related to
36 permanent storage trailers, that issue was dealt with the Land Court so those two first sentences
37 had to go. Later he had a discussion with Mr. Ragonese about temporary storage trailers and his
38 Attorneys concern was that the PB threw that language in and didn't have jurisdiction that was a
39 throw away type of permission and the PB could not and should not have done that. His position
40 is gong to be after the PB strikes this is that temporary storage trailers and they happen for a
41 seasonal reason (Easter, a holiday) temporary trailers can and probably will be at the site. It's
42 just that this PB won't have given overt or affirmative protection to those trailers. He stated that
43 he believes that is what Mr. Ragonese's concern is that this PB condoned or somehow blessed
44 those trailers being there. He wants the PB to be clear that that is the intention that he needs
45 these trailer from time to time on a temporary basis and there probably will be some there diesel
46 operated they go away as a matter of weeks and they come back when he needs them.
47
48 RR stated it's not the PB concern.
49
Planning Board
Minutes of the Meeting
January 15,2008
Page 7
Accepted .fen's edits
1 Atty. Caffrey stated if there's any concern about this on the PB perspective he would like to talk
2 about this now because if it's the PB view is that we have to have your permission to have a
3 temporary trailer there....
4
5 Chair stated do you see any Bylaw that says that in our Bylaw?
6
7 Atty. Caffrey stated no.
8
9 Chair said then we're not going to talk about it.
10
11 Chair sated what you've just heard is one of the reasons why he thinks PB should consider
12 looking at language and trying to understand where the PB wants to go.
13
14 Chair asked Frank Ragonese, 1939 Great Pond Road, are you on board with eliminated Item. #4?
15 Mr. Ragonese stated yes, absolutely,he would not have appealed the PB decision if that weren't
16 in there.
17
18 Chair said publicly that Mr. Ragonese was right and PB was wrong. Mr. Ragonese stated that
19 night that the PB was making a mistake and PB made a mistake the Chair wanted to say that
20 publically.
21
22 Mr. Ragonese stated that we're talking now about temporary trailers and this has been a long
23 issue for him and that it's gone on for 7 to 10 years. Angus Realty has presented to different
24 Boards a different solution as to what they are going to do and the last solution was when they
25 get available retail space they are going to put permanent in door refrigeration. They said that to
'6 appease the Boards but they never had that intent as evidenced by what they did, they rented the
27 store out instead of putting permanent refrigeration in there. What they are trying to do is just
28 circumvent the Land Court decision. PB should read the Land Court decision, because it was
29 based on the fact that the trailers were considered permanent structures per our Bylaw. And now
30 they want to bring in temporary trailers,but what he didn't say to you was. —where are these
31 temporary trailers going to be located? Especially the diesel ones which are probably twice as
32 loud as the ones that were there before? Where are they going to be located? Because we are
33 going to have another issue. And basically, temporary trailers that are brought on site still have
34 to have a permit and those permits have to meet setback requirements, so if we don't have any
35 issue that's going to be settled now, it's still going to be a continuous battle.
36
37 Chair stated that's his understanding and thank you for putting it that way and that why he's
38 trying to get it across to the PB that this doesn't resolve anything and the PB probably has to
39 look at what the PB needs to do whether it's in coordination with the Building Inspector or
40 whether the PB do something with our Bylaw where we give the PB some ability to say ya, or na
41 things but the PB is not going to apparently easily resolve this problem.
42
43 RR stated that if in the Bylaw we provided a better definition of what a permanent trailer or what
44 a permanent structure was and temporary, and if in fact there needs to be setback requirements if
45 there aren't any now they have to be specified then fine.
46
47 Chair stated maybe the Building Inspector needs to give the PB the input.
18
Planning Board
Minutes of the Meeting
.January 15,2008
Page 8
Accepted Jen's edits
4 RR stated that as far as the enforcement of whether the trailers on site are permanent or
2 temporary that's not us.
3
4 Chair stated he doesn't disagree with that but he's advocating that the PB needs some Bylaw
5 change and fixing up and maybe the PB needs the Building Inspector to come up with some
6 language....
7
8 RR stated whether it's in the Zoning Bylaw or whether it's instruction for the Building Inspector
9 in his own rules to follow he doesn't have the answer for that but perhaps guidance is necessary.
10
11 Chair stated that's kind of where he was going and let's let Mr. Ragonese speak.
12
13 Mr. Ragonese stated the Zoning Bylaw in this Town does not address trailers.
14
15 Chair stated he knows they don't at all.
16
17 Mr. Ragonese stated therefore, for individuals to come forward and put trailers on their property
18 that is not covered. If Bylaws do not cover trailers they should not be allowed. What has
19 happened over this period of time that he wants the PB to know that this has cost him a lot of
20 money because of some of the decisions the Board officials made. To prove his point he had to
21 go to Land Court away from some of the Boards which were making some decisions in favor of
22 Angus Realty and it was wrong and you're apologizing to me by saying you made a mistake and
23 I'm saying fine that's a nice apology but it doesn't take away all the frustration, the aggravation,
24 that he had and the enjoyment of his home that he's had for all these years, that will never be
25 taken away.
.6
27 Chair stated that clause that the PB put in there should never have been put in there,but the issue
28 was way before we put in this clause, we were not responsible for ........
29
30 Mr. Ragonese stated at one of the hearings he was at it said that the revised should show a snow
31 storage area and he wanted to see the plans from Lincoln tonight but he couldn't. You
32 mentioned the one hundred foot buffer zone what is allowed and what is not allowed in that one
33 hundred foot buffer zone?
34
35 Lincoln stated the snow storage is near the detention basin, which is a logical area to put snow....
36
37 Mr. Ragonese stated your understanding by personal view or your understanding by verbal
38 exchange? Because if you go look at it right now the snow is almost on top of the pumping
39 station that was put in that the Town owns?
40
41 Lincoln stated before he makes any kind of statement he wants to inspect the site before he
42 makes any assessment or any kind of determination going forward.
43
44 Chair stated it's a valid question,please note it and Lincoln do a little research and let's come up
45 with a definitive answer that we all understand.
46
47 Mr. Ragonese read the revised plans (which are from the Town Engineer) show an existing snow
8 area, however, this is a clear violation since the area directly abuts the wetland resource area, if
Planning Board
Minutes of the Meeting
January 15,2008
Page 9
i
Accepted Jen's edits
1 the applicant cannot propose an area for snow storage the OMN plan should reflect snow
2 removal off the site.
3
4 Chair stated the thought that was mitigated in the final plan because PB takes the comments from
5 the Engineer and action them into the final decision.
6
7 Mr. Ragonese asked would you be willing to hold on your decisions so he could look at that plan
8 tomorrow to see if it had been addressed?
9
10 Chair stated one doesn't have anything to do with the other tonight. The PB job is to take care of
11 the particular paragraph and the PB is going to do that but anything else you have please ask
12 Lincoln about and Lincoln will respond.
13
14 RR stated delete the language in P#4 under Special Conditions replace it in its entirety with the
15 word deleted and this applies to the Special Permit for Angus Realty dated July 17, 2007.
16
17 Chair asked for a motion to delete#4 as amended this evening, motion made by RR, 2nd by JS,
18 vote was unanimous.
19
20 CHAIR CALLED FOR CONTINUED HEARING (S):
21 7. Park Street Redevelopment LLC, 498 Chickering Road, Map 71, Parcel 26.
22 Site Plan Review Special Permit. Removal of existing structures of gas station and automobile
23 service station and build a new one-story retail building.
24
25 Steve Stapinski, engineer, handed out plans tonight to the PB that have changes to details and
16 cross sections to the plan, in reference to a few modifications to the plan regarding comments
27 from VHB. The question regarding treating the entire facility as retail relative to the parking
28 calculations is correct,because there is a Starbucks proposed and some questions about
29 Starbucks not being retail. See the submitted parking calculations and the Building Inspector
30 stated that the proposed parking is adequate even if he considers the issue of the restaurant as
31 Starbucks. He's moved the handicapped parking to the middle of the site. Chris Huntress
32 eliminated a tree at corner of Park St. and Chickering Road, because Dermott Kelly's traffic
33 study found there is adequate design in the access in and out of the site and there would be no
34 traffic problem if this plan were implemented. Architect made changes in building plans, he
35 changed the high school end of the building by putting additional windows on top and changed
36 the dormers and location and size of the signs, on drive-thru of Starbuck's side added additional
37 windows. Architect added more specifics to the layout of the three retail areas, make reference
38 to the drawing tonight, this plan shows all tenants and the square footage required to be sure the
39 parking is adequate for the site development. VHB and Lincoln asked for more info. regarding
40 lighting. Mr. Landry prepared a colonial lighting fixture to be located along front and side of the
41 site. VHB requested more construction details and they found only two items regarding
42 sidewalk detail change on a ramp.
43
44 RR asked what abut the stairway? Mr. Stapinski stated it's not on the plan because the
45 difference in grade. There is a difference in elevation of 4 feet between the parking lot and the
46 Park St. side.
47
1111.8 RR stated that's why PB said a stairway instead of a ramp.
49
Planning Board
Minutes of the Meeting
January 15,2008
Page 10
Accepted Jen's edits
1 Kids are coming from middle school they can walk down the street another 25 feet; there is a
2 sidewalk there to walk into the site. Where is Steve to put stairs? It's not a simple thing of doing
3 stairs. Building Inspector would require concrete walls, a crew to run borings. He couldn't put
4 in railway ties because it has to comply with code and it has to be safe.
5
6 JS stated if you have to go up 4 feet that means you (have a run of approximately 8 feet) isn't
7 that what your problem is?
8
9 Mr, Stapinski stated no,because there is a slop from the property line to the top of the wall of
10 one foot so the wall that they have is only about 3 feet high, once you start cutting in stairs then
11 he has to take the grade all the way back to the property line and further he has to take it back to
12 edge of pavement. Will propose plantings along that edge of the property.
13
14 RR stated people will hop over the guardrail walk down to the shrubs and then they will get there
15 anyway.
16
17 Chair stated leave out one or two shrubs and at least make the path.
1$
19 Mr. Stapinski stated snow removal would be removed off site. Trash and dumpster removal
20 designed to handle front or rear loading truck or a front loaded truck and the area is wide enough
21 to accommodate this issue.
22
23 Lincoln stated elimination of the tree at the left bottom corner of site, why was tree removed and
24 can it be placed back in there?
25
26 Mr. Stapinski stated Dermott Kelly recommended that we have a clear site triangle, the tree carne
27 within the clear site triangle and VHB recommended that the tree be removed. Mr. Stapinski
28 stated that dense shrubs are to be lined all along the edge by Sal's this is an exit and entry side.
29
30 Mr. Stapinski listed the kind of trees to be located at the front and side and along the entry/exit
31 edge of the proposed area,
32
33 Lincoln stated consider an entry way to Sal's and across the street.
34
35 Mr. Stapinski will leave an opening in the guardrail and make it simplistic.
36
37 Chair stated leave an opening in the guardrail and once you build the place go back in and put in
38 three railroad ties.
39
40 Chair said building inspector stated there is ample parking. Chair said 500 s.f. is allocated to a
41 restaurant (keep it generic).
42
43 Lincoln recommended keep public hearing open until Feb. 6"' and draft a decision for that
44 meeting.
45
46 RR asked if there are signs on Chickering Road? Mr. Stapinski stated that signage is to be on the
47 building.
18
Planning Board
Minutes of the Meeting
January 15,2008
Page 11
Accepted Jen's edits
1 No comments from the audience. Mr. Stapinski if you have outstanding items get them to
2 Lincoln, and get the final review from VHB. Lincoln to draft a decision.
3
4
5 CHAIR CALLED FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS:
6 8. The DF Parker Company,LLC, 500 Sutton Street, (at Airport) Map 74,Lot
7 1-B. Site Plan Review Special Permit under section 8.3 to permit construction of a 20,540 s.f. 2
8 floor masonry and steel pet care facility and for a Watershed Special Permit for construction of
9 detention basins in the non-discharge buffer zone within the 1-2 zoning district.
10
11 Lincoln stated this is the first Public Hearing for this petition to construct a Pet care facility. The
12 request for a Watershed SP consists of the portion of the detention pond located on the Southern
13 portion of the property. The remainder of the site lies outside of the Watershed Protection
14 District.
15
16 Atty. Jill Mann introduced Ms. Newton, Manager, who gave the following overview.
17 This site was considered for a proposed post office use and was approved thru the Planning
18 Board and the ZBA a few years ago, however, nothing came to fruition. Project is located
19 within the 1-2 zoning district located on airport property. The project will be located on leased
20 property with possible future expansion in mind. The front of the proposed building will be
21 located at the entrance to the airport driveway. Applicant will utilize the same general parking.
22 No landscape is proposed along the center boulevard area. A big issue is to keep the airport
23 entrance clean because of a 911 stipulation. There will be some plantings around the proposed
24 building. Sewer is in place. Some edits were pointed out on the plan regarding directional
25 arrows.
26
27 Atty. Mann pointed out that there is lots of room for future parking and the applicant will
28 discuss this with Gerry Brown. Trees will be discussed and the applicant will work with the
29 Town to meet the ordinance relative to the boulevard area. Applicant wants to place the street
30 trees wherever the Town wants them to be placed. The applicant plans to keep the same sewer
31 design already in place. Will get casements on all under ground electrical conduit. VHB will
32 review the drainage plan.
33
34 This project will require a Watershed Special Permit and a Site Plan Review Special Permit
35 from the Planning Board.
36
37 This project will comply with airport requirements as well as Town requirements. Applicant is
38 to pull trash dumpster back so that it's not the first thing that will be seen. Sewer will be
39 reviewed by the Town.
40
41 This project is a"day care for dogs". The dogs are to be checked in at a reception area then
42 separated by age, temperament. A training class and play room is located on site for a two hour
43 playtime. Dogs will take a rest period, then will go to the pool area for one hour. There is a
44 drying unit to dry off the dogs who are then put back in a rest area for an afternoon break. They
45 are returned to the playroom awaiting their pickup between 5:30 PM and SPM. There is also a
46 grooming room for onsite grooming and a veterinarian will be available for 24-hour
47 consultation.
'18
Planning Board
Minutes of the Meeting
January 15,2008
Page 12
Accepted Jen's edits
1 Specific turf has been designed and is comprised of several levels of turf, to be used for dog
2 maceration. Fifteen to twenty dogs will be using this rest area at one time.
3
4 Applicant stated that constantly barking dogs would not be allowed to come back again.
5 The neighbors in the area are sensitive to barking issues.
6
7 Discussion took place regarding whether to remove the waste in containers or flush waste into
8 sewer line or hire a service company to take it away. Maybe incorporate a gray water system.
9
10 There will be a kitchen facility located on the 2nd floor to prepare food for the dogs. The dog
I I pool is chlorine free.
12
13 Applicant wants to drain the detention pond instead of fencing it in.
14
15 The wetland was previously flagged by Epsilon Consulting.
16
17 The building should be sprinkled and a radio box connected.
18
19 The proposed building will be made of metal. One hundred to 125 dogs to be on board and it
20 may increase to 150 dogs.
21
22 Proposed to use astro-turf relative to inside and outside use and how it applies to the bylaw.
23 Applicant will submit a legal opinion in writing to Lincoln.
24
25 Report to the Town Clerk's office all dog tags.
>6
27 Portion of the dog's corner is located in the Watershed non-discharge district? Disposal of all
28 waste is of huge concern to the DPW. Suggested that a roof be placed over this particular dog
29 area.
30
31 The airport will own all of these structures, so the airport will have to put in curb cuts. The
32 applicant to submit a maintenance plan for the antro-turf area.
33
34 Atty. Mann stated this is part of the airport lot at Old Clark Road. It's located within the
35 1-2 district, which permits a pet care facility,
36
37 RR asked if pets would be boarded overnight. Atty. Mann stated yes, however, the bulk of the
38 business is day care.
39
40 Atty. Mann provided a noise letter to the PB tonight. She measured the interior noise of about
41 150 dogs and she's measuring the average noise time. One to two o'clock in the afternoon is the
42 least noisy time.
43
44 Lincoln asked Atty. Mann to address the penned in area. Atty. Mann stated there would never be
45 dogs out there playing.
46
47 She is still waiting for VHB's review.
18
49 Chair wants Atty. Mann to submit some planting plans by next PB meeting.
Planning Board
Minutes of the Meeting
January 15,2008
Page 13
Accepted .ten's edits
1 '
2 JS wants to know how the building plays on Sutton Street including the landscaping. Atty. Mann
3 stated she would get that.
4
5 Chair stated put a good planting plan at the detention pond on your plan, with trees, shrubs,
6 plantings, this will beautify the area it does boarder industrial and nobody will hear anything and
7 submit it to Lincoln. What will you do to protect the detention pond?
S
9 JS stated you're mixing a traditional style building with a contemporary style building?
10
11 Chair asked what the artificial turf is made of Atty. Mann stated it's a green artificial turf such
12 as in a football field,has an aerobic base similar if you were to install a septic system. Solid
13 waste matter is picked up and disposed off-site.
14
15 Lincoln to look at the dumpster enclosure. People will not be allowed to walk their dogs outside
16 of the building.
17
18 Gerry Brown agreed with the interpretation of bylaw for kennels.
19
20 Chair wants to see a landscaping plan that hides any dumpster.
21
22 Carl Dubay, MHF Design, stated the basin is a dry basin; he will put pussy willows there. He
23 doesn't want to invite vegetation to invite ponding. He will put in a traditional erosion control
24 mixture.
25
26 RR wants a less slippery slope to maintain by making it shallower and bigger? Mr. Dubay wants
27 to create more green area around there and he will spruce it up.
28
29 Louie Napoli, Old Clark Road, abutter, stated he has water issues on Old Clark Road it's
30 freezing and it goes down to Clerk St. then to Sutton St.
31
32 Lincoln stated when VHB reviews the plans look at Mr. Napoli's issue.
33
34 Mr. Dubay stated when site was cleaned off he went in wlhis assistants and there is a wedge of
35 flow coming along the back and onto Clark St. Mr. Dubay stated he wants to see VHB's review
36 comment on this water issue.
37
38 PB wants to keep this meeting open.
39
40 CHAIR CALLED FOR DECISION DRAFTED:
41 10. RCG North Andover Mills, LLC,East Mill, 21 High Street and 120 Water
42 Street, Map 69, Parcel 1 and Map 68, Parcel 10. Preliminary Plan Approval for Planned
43 Development District (PDD) Special Permit for the redevelopment of 65,000 s.f of existing
44 buildings to 50 1- and 2-bedroom apartments, renovation of 50,000 s.f of existing space for
45 commercial uses allowed in the PDD district, construction of 137 new residential units, and
46 associated 'improvements to parking areas and landscaping. Closed public hearing on 12118107.
47
'18 Lincoln drafted a decision for phase 2 of the mill project. Lincoln was concerned about
49 restricting to 98 units reg. limiting parking garage to 2 levels. Either go to ZBA or go to Town
Planning Board
Minutes of the Meeting
January 15,2008
Page J 4
i
Accepted.Jens edits
I Meeting. This gives preliminary plan approval so RCG can come in with a definitive application
2 and plan. SEE condition 3 or 4 in SP, which stated the parking facility could only be 2 levels.
3
4 JS asked if PB denies preliminary does it not really matter? Or is there something substantially
5 different:
6
7 Lincoln stated the difference is if PB denies the preliminary subdivision it's no big deal. if PB
8 does deny this preliminary SP then applicant has to reapply this process all over again.
9
10 JS stated the difference in subdivision is its State law instead of Town Bylaw.
11 Chair stated see#3 - Lincoln be specific as to what the restriction is such as date etc.
12 is applicant starting to think to build somewhere else on the site?
13 Lincoln stated no.
14
15 JS stated the first one is fine but add clarity to which parts we're asking them to come back in
16 such as 39 and design and layout of 98.
17
18 Chair stated they could come in for a definitive approval for PDD excluding the 98? Lincoln
19 said yes.
20
21 Atty, Smolak stated see condition 3 it says prior to submission etc. -you would have to resolve
22 the issue of the restriction.
23
24 Chair wants the decision to say why they cannot build the 98 and be specific. 39 can go to
25 definitive but clear it up a bit.
26
27 RR asked do you create a district then have a Site Plan Review with drainage and architectural?
28
29 Atty. Smolak stated his applicant filed a PDD and Site Plan Review SP. Lincoln stated there are
30 two separate issues.
31
32 Chair wants Atty. Smolak to come in with a PDD application to exclude the 98 units?
33
34 Atty. Smolak stated general condition under number 3 .
35
36 Lincoln will make the edits
37
38 Chair wants Lincoln &Atty. Smolak to look at language more closely.
39
40 Chair said number 5 on Nov. 26th to allow the construction of one level parking deck? Lincoln
41 copied language in SP. Lincoln will change the language to make it two levels.
42
43 Use this - Application to affirm Phase 2 PPD Special Permit as amended this evening,motion by
44 JS, as amended, 2nd by RR, vote was unanimous 5-0.
45
46 CHAIR CALLED FOR DECISION DRAFTED:
47 11. Edgewood Retirement Community,Inc. 575 Osgood Street, map 36, Parcel 3,
t8 17, 18, & 19, Site Plan Review Special Permit and Continuing Care Retirement Center Special
49 Permit to construct 22 new single-family attached and detached"cottages, 3 residential units in
Planning Board
Minutes of the Meeting
January 15,2008
Page 15
Accepted Jen's edits
I existing structures, greenhouse, new 20-foot wide access roadway, and inform at dining area and
2 2-story Adult Social Day program addition to the existing Continuing Care Facility.
3
4 Lincoln stated Lisa Egglestom issued her final review letter and all conditions have been met.
5 PB reviewed the decision and directed Lincoln to take out the reference to PDD in the cover
6 sheet and in the body of the decision.
. 7
8 PB made edits: Number 8 on Site Plan- existing portion on NW side does that have a name? Joe
9 Norton, Engineer for Edgewood stated it's just a horse barn.
10
11 Chair asked is there a covenant to renovate the milk barn and convert it? Mr. Norton stated there
12 is a restriction on the property to maintain it in good order,but its Edgewood's desire to maintain
13 that building.
14
15 JS wants Lincoln to put a restriction on the barn, they have to keep it and not tear down the barn.
16 Barn shall be renovated and maintained in accordance with restricted covenants in perpetuity
17 with a restriction.
18
19 Chair asked is there a restricted covenant on maintaining the barn? Peg Wheeler stated yes there
20 is one. This information is part of Edgewood's application and has been recorded as part of the
21 purchase and sale.
22
23 Atty. Lavoie stated there is a restricted covenant now that the Trustees of Reservations are the
24 holders of that restriction, it's Section 32 Conservation Restriction, the parties are "us" as land
25 owner's, Trustees as holders, the BOS has signed off and they are a party to that restriction, the
.26 Conservation Commission signed off as a party to that restriction, and the Commonwealth of
27 Massachusetts Secretaries office. This is the conservation restriction for where these barns are.
28
29 Chair stated make sure the barn is renovated, maintained and preserved in accordance with
30 recorded covenants and Conservation restrictions -use this language.
31
32 JS said look at#8, separate it from the finding of fact and put in a condition.
33
34 Atty. Lavoie stated within 30 days of the decision-becoming final he would file an ANR and
35 record it.
36
37 JS stated CCRC should be more substitutive.
38
39 Tony Capachiett, Engineer Christiansen & Sergi was present tonight. Stated as built for this
40 project would cost$30 to $40K. Chair stated set the bond at$40K for this project.
41
42 JS stated prior to commencement of site clearing, define what trees we will keep or not kept,
43 and the other end (see planting and screening will have to stay) we should have opportunity to
44 review if any more screening or landscaping is required PB should have the opportunity to do so
45 -put this language into the Site Plan SP decision.
46
47 Peg Wheeler referenced Site Plan SP see item 10 under release of security...she wants to mark
8 the boundaries between construction and conservation areas...this should be done before
Planning Board
Minutes of the Meeting
January 1 S,2008
Page 16
EOccel�ted 3en's edits
I construction begins. Ms Wheeler wants those boundaries marked before a construction begins.
2 This belongs under#5.
3
4 Lincoln stated one of the conditions of this SP was a payment to the Town. If they decide to
5 increase the number of living units on that piece of property see page 5, #2 lays out the total
6 payment amount and the schedule to the Town . $851,000.00 is to be paid to the Town based
7 on $2.00 per s.f. of the new units plus the new facility. This was reviewed by the Town
8 Manager.
9
10 Motion by JS, 2"1 by RR to close the public hearing tonight, vote was unanimous.
ll
12 Motion by JS to approve Edgewood Site Plan Review SP and CCRC 2nd by RR, vote was
13 unanimous.
14
15 JS stated look at finding of fact preserved the barn and changed open space and improvement to
16 trailhead to Osgood Hill.
17
18 Chair instructed Lincoln to take out the reference to PDD take it out of the CCRC completely.
19
20 Atty. Lavoie see 6B on page 6 the bond in amount of 40K posted etc.
21
22
23 Please note: Each Board is allowed four (4) hours of tape per meeting, at 11:00PM the tape ran
24 out. My Union contract doesn't allow me to stay later than 4 hours at the PB meetings.
25
26
27 DISCUSSION:
28
29 12. Cell Tower Committee update.
30
31
32 APPROVAL OF THE "MINUTES".
33
34 13. Minutes for the following Planning Board Public Meetings
35 ■ November 20, 2007
36 = December 4, 2007
37 December 18, 2007
38
39 UPCOMING PLANNING BOARD MEETINGS:
40
41 February 6, 2008 Wednesday
42 February 19, 2008 Tuesday
43 Note: The Planning Board reserves the right to take items out of order and to discuss and/or vote
44 on items that are not listed on the agenda.
45
46 By order of the Planning Board
47
49 Approved
Planning Board
Minutes of the Meeting
January 15,2008
Page 17