No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMiscellaneous - 200 CHICKERING ROAD i 1 1 1 it APPLICATION FOR A ' COMPREHENSIVE PERMIT FOR KITTREDGE CROSSING ' 132 UNITS OF HOUSING BY TERRA PROPERTIES, LLC ' TO BE LOCATED AT 200 CHICKERING ROAD NORTH ANDOVER, MASSACHUSETTS ' APRIL 18, 2ooi /J r� INDEX I. Transmittal letter 2. Application form 3. Letter of authorization from owner's representative 4. Certified abutters list 5. Preliminary site development plans prepared by Merrimack Engineering(full size prints are under separate cover) 6. Report on existing site conditions prepared by Merrimack Engineering 7. Preliminary architectural plans prepared by GSD-Associates,Architects, Inc. (full size prints are under separate cover) 8. Tabulation of proposed buildings by type,etc. -See Sheet 1 of Preliminary Development Plan 9. Preliminary subdivision plan-not applicable 10. Preliminary utilities plan- See Sheet 4 of Preliminary Development Plans 11. Documents showing that applicant fulfills the jurisdictional requirements of 76o CMR 31.01 11a. Limited Dividend Organization 11b. Fundable by subsidizing agency - a Project Eligibility Letter from Warren Bank, a participating lender in the Federal Home Loan Bank's New England Fund is provided 11c. Site Control-the Applicant,Terra Properties,LLC has an agreement for the purchase of the site. 12. A list of requested exceptions 13. Fees 13a. Advertising fee- $130-00 enclosed 3 g $ 3 (enclosed) 13b. Filing fee- $5o/unit X 132 units= $6,600.00 (enclosed) V�5'fCh ir-k_ GQ�II1 Plaound — oft Starr-_a j Park. , - ---� ML _ sem_ utt, Mills _ SEEK C _- a utta'n Pond- gaffs Fields MiIhPond - Abkls� Si -- North Andovi=r G�11 - �= Asid:s�'er �� Ica 23 ens Crossing - Meniori. l_P� ,N, �afir Kew��- = l ltiry r6uAding �. _ b - Hol.s etjlY re -q > - g - - 4 � � a Orth Andover Center { _ = XjD L3 _ _- ' yen Roca€Park �% _ �' Ridge 69 kiawsheen village - '•s�.WL . F 4, � _ _ $hawsh n _ S M,y.;',,s ii 6r'i+ . r t4 - 02001 Mequest.com, Inc.;02001 Navgation TechnobgiesS,F �, 10DIn1 3010 A+1s ��' ip SaW Aye w �Vaood�` Yb cy a At a 02001 MapQuest.com Inc..02001 Navigatbn Techna�bgies Y TERRA PROPERTIES LLC ' 978-687-6200 phone 978-682-6473 fax ' April 17, 2001 ' William Sullivan, Chairman North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals ' Town Hall 120 Main Street North Andover, MA 01845 Dear Mr. Sullivan: Terra Properties LLC is pleased to inform you that it is submitting a Comprehensive Permit application to ' the Town of North Andover for 132 units of housing on the Rennie's Florist located at 200 Chickering Road in North Andover. ' The site is approximately six and a quarter acres in size, located on the west side of Route 125,Chickering Road, south of Massachusetts Avenue, This is the same site that was approved for the construction of a .24,000 square foot retail and office building.An Order of Conditions from the North Andover Conservation ' Commission was also received.Our revised plans for this site call for a change to a residential multi-family use and construction of 132 housing units of which 25%or 33 units wil was affordable housing. The development will consist of six buildings. ' We look forward to presenting our plans to your board fo i j Sincerely, Terra Properties LL Louis P. Minicucci, Jr., Mana er LPM/kp cc: Mark Rees,Town Manager Bill Scott, CD Dir. Rob Levy, Esq. Mark Terry,Warren Bank ' J:\DATA\WPFILES\Northpoint\Rennies\Comp.Permit\zba.ltr ' 231 Sutton Street Suite 1A,North Andover,MA 01845 Received by Town Clerk: RECEIVED jOYCEBRADSHAW TOW-1\1 OF NORTH A'-NDOVER. iVL,SS:IC.TrILTSETTBWN CLERK BOARD OF :�.PPEALS NORTH ANDOVER ?PLIC.u-.TION FOP. RELIEF FP�O�bI T�� ZONi`iG QI `NE A lig 42 ' ?; mac: 2 t Street Suite 1A, N. Andover, oollctttTerra Properties LLC .-�L�-r...... X31 Sut..on T ui P Mi ni rn ri Tr Manancr Td!- NO.97$_687-6900 01845 l. ?.ot)Iic� `) For variance from the require:rents of Section ' Para?rarh__,1nd Table of the ZorLng Bylaws. b) For a Scecial Pe aut under Section Par=zraoh ' of the Zoning Bylaws C) As a par-mv Aag-sieved. for review of a decision made by the Building Inspector or other aut rio rIt'v. **d) A Comprehetlsive Permit t _ a) Pre^?ses aeecced are land and buddirg(s) ni, beres 200 Chickerinp, Road Stree;. m UK b). Prerrises of ecced area prope.-ty with frontage on the No ch ( ) South ( ) East ( ) West ' side of Chickerin Road St,e_c. ..i ' C) P,e.;uses a iecce•i are irI Zoning Dist—;ctBl R4.. R5 Ana t,e pre.:uses 'Fzcted have ars area of 6.22 ac ± square feet and froncaee of a� T.F tett. _. �wiersb�y. •• vner a) via e ane address of otiY�er (ifjo dt OV Carol3 Roan Rennie,�TrusteethOld•Townnie, ' Individually and Trustee, an y Village Realty Trust Date of Purchase Prey ous Ov,-ner ' r'� tis/he: interest 'MFre Muses: b) 1. Ii at:oLc2nt is not ovvpe.. - �i check �_Prospe^'ive`Purchase; Lessee Ot; zr thor=arzon a For VriLnce!Special Pe. it re' re' «., f enclosed 03 r 4. Site of proposed building: -14h 2J LF front; 1-�1- a� _feet 1. deep; Hel2ht N/A stories; N/A azo rA p ro.xLrrualte date of erection, r , b� OCCC'.Cr;C'r GC use of each Ia00r: C) Tie of con_'.�,ction Yes 1997-1998 ' 5. Has there bee^ a previous appeal, under zon_na. on these pre.,_ises" U/�ren r6. Desc ;�tion of relief sought on this petition Comprehensive Permit application requests r2lief from all bylaws and regulations regarding the development. of affordable housing. r ' 7. Deed recorded in the Registry of Deeds in Book-No. Pa�e Bk 798 Pg 49 Bk 826 Pg 33 Bk 5598 Pg 98 Lard Cour, Cer:ifcate No. Book pwe 1 The principal points upon which ( base my application are as to(lo,,vs: («rust be stated in derail) ' This application for 132 units of housing of which 25% will be affordable units seeks relief in order to be economically viable and to exempt the proposed development from local requirements and ' regulations that are not consistentwith local needs. lr , .rot to p`1V the inews-c, ace. and incide to exzel Louis P' Minicucc' , Jr. , Manager, Terra Properties 1 ' Vivra,L'r'_ Or i ' oo.. 1 1 F� tit WORK SHEET DESCRIPTION OF V.I r,.1 �N'Cr REQUIESTED ' - N , ',- rC"��r �• NotApplicable licable ' Loc DLr,-,ecsioa Sc.ee: F:eacace Franc Se back (s) ' Sidd Sz:tac:.l' (s) Sz:`ad, (s) ' Special 2z:-1ic Not: Applir=able c: "WWIIy UUU1 U U1 Nppeals 1 27 Charles Street � North Andover. P-.44 an�s Town of North.Andover, Zoning Board of Appeals APPLICANT'S PRGFE,1,TY: list by map, parte?, name and address 1 (PLEA-SE PRINT CLEARLY, USE BLACK INK) MAP PARCEL I 1 Nh.ME A00F,,rE 1 46 J35, 46, 106 ( Rennie, Trustee, .Old Town 20U Chickering Road i a e I 1 g ASUT i ERS PP;OFE: iY: list by map, parcel, name and address 1 (PLEASE FIRINT CLEARLY, USE GL�CK INK) See attached abutters list 11AP PARCEL NAME ( A00RESS 1 l I I I I I 1 1 � . 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 I I I I rIS INFGRM'-, iGitf (NAS 06TAINED AT THE E ASS€SSGR'S OFI=iCE:'.N0 CE=c iriE cY THE „0R'" 0FFiCr Y.. '^ 11 CI ,\In_ F\E: r\^-ESSOR I V\/ F MOR I At j 11 rR 1 F rite !iS;or ,a...es e�ini�r�st Fagg cne I t . 1 ' 3. Letter of Authorization from Owners' Representative ' Orton, ce ATTORNEYS AT LAW � � Toll Free 1-877-470-3545 9�oGan 19 Beacon Street' One Elm Square 400 West Cummings Park Boston, Massachusetts 02108 617-227-4411 Andover, Massachusetts 01810 Suite 2800 TEL.978-470-3545 Woburn, MA 01801 FAX 617-926-4933 FAX.978-470-3464 781-939-7200 E-mail:bll@tiac.net FAX 781-938-3835 ' REPLY TO: Ja�errr, ✓�� 68 Stiles Road ' Salem, NH 03079 603-893-3100 ANDOVER April 4, 2001 FAX 603-893-3003 Zoning Board of Appeals Town of North Andover ' 120 Main Street North Andover, MA 01845 RE: 200 Chickering Road,North Andover,Massachusetts To Whom It May Concern: ' Terra Properties LLC,Louis P. Minicucci, Jr.,Manager, had my authorization to submit a comprehensive permit application for 132 units of housing on my land located at 200 Chickering Road in North Andover,also known as Assessor's Map 46, Lot 35,Lot ' 46 &Lot 106 to the Town of North Andover Zoning Board of Appe ' Sin l Art . Broadhurst, or Dor by J. Rennie, Individually and Trustee, ' Carol Ryan Rennie,`- rustee of Old Town Village Realty Trust, owner ' Web Site www.broadhurstiakiniakin.com a 4. Certified Abutters' List 2 sets of labels separate I � .. m._,. -_' .,.g:. ,z+ .., „�,, ,:_: • 'tea. .. �. 8 -., ',4r �.y s,:: r•s� ' 107 #" �... .2.a�" a� too ..'� .. � � .N - 2 ',:., •"� . .. . _ �2.�o'.e .'��5,g- _�Y. - 12,SW 43 >a a 02.e 95 39 3 101 - n•36o.t � 9 a arr= I03 16,500..E 0289 s< 97 C s ° I6,SOO.t 10 rl,Or.t • '19 89 17271..E 15 0.291.c . 16.890..E olu« 61 _ 94 '� s y $ 057. ~ 331 EY 29.9".1 ^ 12 �% 4 98 l02 Sl' IJ,SWa.E 18 o.z96K PVE. 2499b.f 103 1.16 ac cap . 28.365 s t 19.100 s.' s 13 1.03 a< 36 93 1p 104 ° e9,44o:.E 14 '� 47 5 �° 92 t an. 35,rr.[ 91 26,890 xt 90.270 a[ 17 a 34.4305.[ 136. 71 (� s I \ 8 � \\\ 41U. 48 �z1 g 19 20 2.96 ac 1835 a 34 21 LOT'A' 1.60 sc 133. z 49 'p1 F- 73 73 5 tia 0. SEE PLAN X 13434 . uj pl.X 12837 ujN n ° T 27 So ry 85 , ,p ON co� 26 1471x[ 44,360&E :.k... a a 23 u,29o4.[ 41004.[. 74 4 RQ 1o,32s..c. A 3.25 ac .� `U 'u 2iw24 28 32 10 Lna< O0�--�.. Ears• 76 i' 9.183 a<. 22 @ 7$ C4 /� +y. 37.195..E 41 Q i 29 3s,46o 5.[ k° 3 84 /04 31 y,I 16,624sf 6 EDGELA,�^' . rY 1V A e2,aooat /3O 33 o.s31 I),'160s.t 40 5913 77 78 ° I / u 71,569.E 832,1969E 79 83 / .w 82 n>zeo aE V AGE GREEN DRIVE 81 QIOar.t e2,aao,.c 80 42,100..E - •m 96 y 2 N� SCALE:200 FEET = 1 INCH SEE PLAT NO 23 5. Preliminary Site Development Plans (reduced) 1 I , 1 ASL OF RECORD AT AW OF APPLM.AAAN IS DOROTHY A REMNE; CAROL RYAN RENNIIE; MLLAGE REALTY 7RUST.200 CA'COIHC RD, NORM AADOW� S.B. 1a EXISTING STONE GO NOD +-+►- SILTATION FENCE S.B. ■ STONE BOUND TO BE SET M.D.P.W. MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS Z SEE TOWN OF NORM AADOWII TAX AAP 46, LOT#A 1106 FOR AWS SIE O.H. • EXISTING DRILL HOLE (A /A MASSACHUSETTS HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT) SEE EA DR.O. MW PX PAGE JM BOOK FM PAGE 04A BOOK AM PACE 08 D.H. • OWL HOLE TO BE SET E.N.OJW, ESSEX NORTH DISTRICT REGISTRY OF DEEDS FON TINS SITE N/P NOW OR FORMERLY D.M.H.O EXISTING DRAIN MANHOLE EXISTING ELEVATION CONTOUR C.B.❑ EXISTING CATCH SAW t J� NVILA PAPNY IEN PLANS N RECORD; LSM BASE TAGS DISI. (M.&v.0.). -... PROPOSER ELEVATION CONTOUR DALH.0 PROPOSED.DRAIN MANHOLE KIT'TR.EDGE CROSSING ��T 1. FROM PLAN BY A6HF Y DOW CONSULTANTS LrA7FD.AIN£r9. TAN REV 112x9 EXISTING SPOT ELEVATION C.B.IN PROPOSED CATCH BASIN ,MARL 13L 100E II VAN CIElAWEATED BY 0Lri£ENWARfaSWiENTAC 5T77NLE5 MIG.AND NE"RANDB PRESERVAITOK MIG 4.INSTALLATION PLANS FOR UNDERGROWWI GAS ELECTRW4IrY 112x8 F.G. PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATION GV GAS CATS AND CABLE MEEWSION UTILITIES SMALL BE PREPARED BY IW APPROPRIATE PROP. PROPOSED WG WATER GATE UWTY~ANY AND SAVANT= TO THE'NORM AADOW ? F.G. FYWSN GRADE H.W.— HEADWALL DEPARTMENT OF PUR C NOW PRIOR TO MISTALLAWN. R.C.P. FORCED CONCRETE PPE INV. INVERT A MVL77 FAWQLY DZVEGDPJ/JCNT S TOTAL PARCEL AREA.274749 S.F. .a22 AC C.N.P. CORRUGATED METAL PIPE GAR. GARAGE C.LD.L CEMENT LINED DUCTILE IRON S/W SIDEWALK —0— DRAIN PIPELINE U.O.N. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED LOCATE7D IN CONSTRUCTION NOTES —E-- ELECTRIC LIRE FES FLARED END PIPE SECTION oc-coo EXISTING STONE WALL 1. U17U71ES SHOWN NAVE BEEN COMPILED BASED OWFING PUNS AAD REIZWDS% —T— TELEPHONE LINE MINMINIMUM ACCURACY LOCATIONS AND COMPRF7F W3S 6 NOT WARANIIEED TO BE --RD— ROOF DRAM -- CORRECT. IT SHALL BE?W CON7RACMIR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO ASCERTAIN THE CEMCONCCEMENT CONCRETE W.F.D. WOW FRAME DWELLING NORTH AMOM, MASSACHIT Z= LOC4174N AND ELFVAWN OF ALL U17UIMS W WH AAY AFFECT TIRE WW.. . W=- WATERNAIN CAL4 rOLL-FREE RIE 010 SAFE CALL CENFE R AT r-800-.3x?-4844 SEbENTY-7W BIT. CONC. SITUMMMS CONCRETE A—� WETLANDS LNC (EDGE)(WPI) NOURS PRIOR 70 EXCAVA7700L GRAN. GRANITE �---.a� WETLANDS LINE (EDMXGOVE) (TYP.) TYPICAL A-4S WETLANDS FIELD FLAG 2. ALL EM WO VAUrY GATE M= AAAYHOLE FRAMES AND COMM CAMN T.F. TCP Of FOUNDATION BASTIV FRAMES AND ORATES AND ONO?CAS7IMGS 7O W RETAINED SMALL BE C.F. CELLAR FLOOR ELEVATION UHYD. HYDRANT DRAMN FAR AAA/SM 7D LINE AAD/t1R GTRAW- ANY WORK RECURRED ON ELECTRIC GAS R LEN07H GUARDRAIL L7L RADIUSCAE' T.Y. OR IO FIM W STR cn*vE8 ARID LM1ES SHALL BE CARRIED OUT BY L+A DEEP OBSERVATION HOLE � 'A-� EDGE OF WOODS ?w OWvm WMA A PROPERl1L'A7 itl.IE� A DAMAGED OR FILLED WIN SED6�NTAVON LX/RAMO 7W —WS-- WATER SERVICE COW157RUC1101V PROCESS'SHALL BE GT.EANEA, FLUSHED AAD/OR REPLAN'AT --SS--- SEWER SERVICE 2m SAN SIRW THE CONTRAC'MRIS EXPENSE —S— SEWER PIPELINE NDJtTJT AJiD0T7JCE; JtASSACFICRWM 01845 7sZ (B ) 607-ow 4. PUBLIC OR AWVAIE PROPETAM BENI;WD IAIE M7RK LAIBTX SUCH AS ADN. BOXES, Loam= SIDEWALK$ SHRUSIX Fag= STREET SAM E7G DAMAGED OR DISTURBED SHALL BE FIXED Of REPLACED AT T7aE CON RACIDRS ' EXPENSE AS OREMED BY THE L9Nf.1WWER OE57(aVLR S PRAOR IW rIEN NOTICE OF AT LEAST 48 HOURS SHALL BE GYHDV BY THE BM/STA CONTRACTOR TO AFFECTED MWWCIFAL WW47M ARID FIRE OVARTMENIS, WIN WE A COPY OF SUCH NOTICE SUBINTIED IO THE SO EER, BEFORE ANY UNWR 00 PAW S2RW MAN IS&Wr OFF AND M1 NO CASE SHALL A OATS OR HTDRANT LINE oPow OR AOMMS AV. AAWYM AMS4ACHUBb478 01810 STMT WITHOUT PROPER AUV40RIZATION, t IN. 8 NAVE01A7ELY PNM 7O PLAGTNG AEW LTIRrWAVVOL/S GCWM:RETE ALT„Hcawr TO ENSWX MnANW"CWM7& THE WORACAL FACE SHALL 8E CLEANED AAD COATED W714 BMWEN FOR TACK COAT. ' . 7. TOP OF CURB SHALL BE 6 INCHES ABOWB GVM GRADE LINLESS OTHERWISE ROOTED. s LL BEFORE ANY DRAINAGE STRUCTURES ARE CONSTRUCTED OR COiNJECAONS ARE F MAX TILE CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE THE ACR44L LOCATION OF SUBSURFACE S7RUC7LRES AND DRAINAGE*KRIS 70 AKW CONFLICTS WM UWAES UNLESS OTHIRWSE DOWEO BY THE EAK,VIVEER. OBD V ��yy A HORR MAL SEPARATION BETWEEN ALL SEINER AND WATER PIPES STALL BE A WMW OF SITE Gf~ i 1 n� TION!CANNOT BE OgrAMD, INE SEWER PFE SMALL BE LOCATED A 2 PROPERTY LINE PLAN MWWM OF 18 INCHES BELOW THE WRIER PIPE(MEASURED BETNEEN THE OUTSIDE OF THE PIPESk WM XE NEITHER HORI2GNTAL MOR MT7ICAL 3 EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN SEPARA7701V CAN BE OBTAINED, B07H PIPES SNALL IiE ENCASED IN COHOTWW.. 4 TOPOGRAPHY.GRADING AND UTILITIES PLAN 5 TOPOGRAPHY AND GRADING F , 6,7 DETAILS AND CONSTRUCTION NOTES UNIT TYPES >> LOCATION e C I F G TOTAL UNITS � BLDG. 1 8 12 8 12 38 BLDG. 2 - 12 - = 12 �P BLDG. 3 12 12 24 SCALE: 7-600' BLDG. 4 12 12 24 BLDG. 5 12 - 12 - 24 BLDC, 8 12 - - - 12 TOTAL 34 24 42 12 132 PROPOSED DENSITY6-21.22 UNITS/ACRE KTrfR=L CR08SING HANDICAP PARKING • 12 SPACES 231 SUTTON STINET-NORTH AN DOVER,MASS.018 8 COMPACT PARKING - B SPACES STANDARD PARKING - 160 SPACES SCALE: AS NOTED TOTAL PARKING - 180 SPACES DATE APRIL 1T.20M PARKING RATIO 1.36 SPACES/UNIT MaNaLmn 66 PARK SIREET WI°Na NEARME, TRUST PROP. rPROP. WOOD RETAINING PROP. OUMPSTER POST&RAIL g` WALL q W/8`NIGN STOCICAOE 4a s PENCE s` '�" FENCE AND GATE cn;.sa4 ' r R-5 RESIDENCE 5 DISTRICT (W0000 U-1 BUSINESS 1 DISTRICT 71 MW R.�OIO R PROP 81. 4241 .0 d• �3T o0 m I 3 STORY 1 12 WILDING RETAINING WALL 4 N90T70'00'E 713.00' ZONE R-5 REST ENCS 5 DISTRIC ZON R-4 SIDENCE 4 DISTRICT POST PROP• WOW 4' !! CEM. w 1 24 1 •1 r dY 2 � FENCE (M') a` ro + a ai�wcg s , f PROP. WOOD '41 POST RAIL e .1 s eaa FJ ItET G PROPOSER 3 STORY 2� , Oy,_ N `iYAll(HT. V IES') 35 LIMIT BUILDING yvU G' - 11 JJKTRIrT �� 30 .es RESIDENCE 4 DISTRICT R-4 R C °ze 83.1• PROP.HDUMPSTER IGN STOCKADE ,O FENCE AND GATE Q �� PROP. • *' RETAINING 24' WALL a, INDICATES DIRECTION TRAM OF (TTP) NOTES a, °> 1. ALL NON—PAVED. NON—SIDEWALK OR 8"NG DISTURBED AREAS ARE TO BE LANDSCAPED 2 ALL DIOSTING BUILOINGS &PAVEMENT ON SITE TO BE REMOVED as SITE PLAN r4 N'ITR mz CROSSING PROP.OOD . lw GUARDRAIL 31 SUTTON STREET-NORTN ANDOVER,MASS.01845 7 SCALE; 1'.4 0' DATE: APRIL 17. 2001 66 PAW STREET ► \ V \ \ t 3jN \ ► ► 04 F.� Oak 4NZ, I\ J It Aw ZI Ix III or AQV iz } / � 1� \ � \ I - � •alt I r & / rz �' 1 i • :ai w I •�. s eel OU eel Uj— � / t OU \ cti \ kt I / lip IL IL gel AM f 16 Or 'Q+M `moi. '^� i I' / / ./�► ,/ IN I \ / r let vo u-- 10,t / 1 l oe! N1.W / ! rr r rr rr �r rr rr rr rr �r �■r rr r rr r rr rr r rr POP.mm N/r NEN"MAGE roo-ow tlIROUt 1 a� AtAElUt � � e1. „ Wco/ae54 ASO ' i it s s s w/.o'vc sn� — �• .. — — n•n nrzaTrx w s V lot, 200 pppp / �/ W}ryy ) eriy I 7a� „mow t I• I ` � ` /� pRpP �g OONTR(1lSM E�MTIC'tll� f � ,. / ! ,awe•� / �,,, 5 z .� ��/ ( \ ti f ' 08 / / � \ / WF,95tes "gp wv.t ,r+1° ,.0 �,?• tom. a` - _ - -•a $ R � - 7 \ wFa- pRiP m ! 'may .w J ,rr'J i .r. 4•�9 / _ / ,�i' ""^ J��y1•..t>17 70� _ tut /,sem °y � � � � "� _ Wi45 Mtlbu' IVOYT 11�'J a5%° t / e { 44 70R>CCIYdN �NVti .�/ .\ 3e'�&�O / NAIBIOIAIN 7EF i PW,e'CA.OA NATEIWAN Kr'a PROP.P QAWKW- J ��'. d urv. '�• 1 w a� wd'/ .tet 'PCWP.TAPPMIO. 2 \ 5• V.OUT.19S0 _ ) 4� �. y0.�p / jO a !" Y.aiTY�4 % mP' ,fin o 9240 7 _ 4 a `' WFJ55 - - _ _ - fTRIC7r^r2 •' sty Ne �' —7::R-4 RESIDENCE `o s OISTRICroT y,w•`,� N > " // r INTERMITTENT STREAM ,y / ti ,sTM`° ' I 0PW. PROPS �" ncy P \ 0,444, PROP yM NTO. 4R' PROP.MTD. r QATEVALW PIMP.OW4 ,� PROP. R1M.t99.4Y_ , / J°a\ MTV.-195.47 � PROP. tY RCT PROP.STcwm7 R . IRAIM AFWA e r�. PROP. 1 PROP.Ir RCP / / ' WE PLAN 7.01 i /�,4aar/ OWi Ai111i5C�W{i CROSSING ae\� Rwt°n'199.7�5tt. E OSMEl�(' LVlRT IN%"T _ 1 SUnDN STREET-WIN MMVM MASS.01 /ma a SCALE 1"-40' DATE. APW 17, 2001 2y r " in PARK STREET 4OF 7 w a— w.--�•--w w a �$ y yl m 1 0-7;3 � : FFFFA� zap 0 m0 200 k, wigs IF4 S109 0 J ifgg WF17 w' 0 a 2 �. pV FF- wr�sz l zs F'- ffF, m O r / p '6 FF- It's F- / , a a PROP. RIP—RAP (TYP.) / ='°� y % �p °aa .NTERMfTTENT STREAM ro ` Al b qy o. z Too / S PROP. RIP—RAP '�., ,— � / EI�AnuwErlSITE PLAN r 1p2 / ICPT'PRZ;DGle CROSSING NORTH IML MAW, J �� 231 SUTTON sMU I D MAIRUM SS.of / "\ im(M)087— SCALE: r.4o' DATE APRT. 17, 2001 ' 10, 1/ �" as PARK STREE)CHUSkm Maio � s s gal Z ° e Val rw n 1k IRS! R -C_ Y EE a i $ �16 76 EQ kz EE 16 IN let pi lilt, V t. 4ilY:.: 11..... ZZ L Q 4$ �S jfC A a fig R - big � � � QLR gM w: rr r� r� rr rr r �r rr r r r rr r� rr r r rr r r oaaa ,� 91,oaaa 30,3" 000 •i s A � i .1 PONM IN OU s _ Z z _^ •► W Yrs 1J z kilnNE it I trig lit In lit oat 1 kill Clo L� $ 1113k� fill _ t a � hi lit � � ffjigQ k� s 0 m k a a !O 71M d ww kit rr� rr r �r r r rir rr r r� �r rr r� �r �r r� rr rr ri I � ' a. Report onExisting Site Conditions 1 � EXISTING CONDITIONS REPORT KITTREDGE CROSSING ' NORTH ANDOVER, MA APRIL 17, 2001 i The Kittredge Crossing Property is located at the intersection of Fanwood Avenue and Chickering Road and near the intersection of Wood Lane and Chickering Road in North ' Andover, Massachusetts. Fanwood Avenue is an improved minor street that provides access from adjacent apartment ' units to Chickering Road, Route 125,a major collector, which connects central population areas of Haverhill to North Andover, and North Andover to Andover. Wood Lane is an unimproved public way which links several minor roadways to Route 125, Chickering ' Road. Because it is unimproved there is currently no traffic utilizing the facility. The site consists of 6.22 acres or 270,749 square feet land area. The site has frontage on Chickering Road, Fanwood Avenue and Wood Lane. The site topography slopes from Chickering Road westerly towards the rear of the site and from Wood Lane southwesterly towards the rear of the site. There are wetlands(as defined under Chapter 131 Section 40 of the Wetlands Protection Act) located in the rear portion of the site which run parallel to Wood Lane. There are also some wetlands adjacent to.Wood Lane, and an intermittent stream which runs from Chickering Road westerly along Wood Lane. The site is approximately 3 5%wooded, the balance being open pasture land, a single family house, garage and driveways, as well as a paved parking area which services a greenhouse and farm stand, a floral sales facility. The site is serviced with municipal sanitary sewer on Fanwood Avenue and on Chickering Road as well as a municipal water system on Fanwood Avenue and Chickering Road. Underground gas service exists in Chickering Road and Fanwood Avenue and will probably be extended into the proposed development. All of the buildings will be serviced with the municipal water and sanitary which will be extended into the site. Telephone, electric and Cable TV which exists above ground on Fanwood Avenue and Chickering Road, will be extended underground into the site. There appears to be no floodplain, acquifer, endangered species, historical buildings, or other special resource areas located on the site. The proposed system of storm drainage will consists of individual catch basins which will collect the surface water runoff from the parking areas and walkways. Catch basins will contain 4 foot sumps with gas and oil traps. The water from the catch basins will run through an underground pipe system to a sediment forebay where solids will be settled out of the runoff water. The water will be stored in a detention area where it is discharged to the ' wetlands which currently receive the surface water runoff from the site. A total of 80%total suspended solids will be moved from the runoff water. Roof water from the roofs will be infiltrated to provide groundwater recharge and a reduction in peak rate of runoff from the site. ' MERRIMACK ENGINEERING SERVICES.INC. • 66 PARK STREET • ANDOVER.MASSACHUSETTS 01810 EXISTING CONDITIONS REPORT KITTREDGE CROSSING ' NORTH ANDOVER, MA APRIL 17, 2001 PAGE 2 Solid waste disposal will be in dumpsters which will be provided strategically on the site. ' Parking will be provided adjacent to the proposed residential buildings. A system of sidewalks allows for pedestrian circulation from the parking areas to the buildings, and from the parking areas to the adjacent roadways. ' There are areas which exist on site which can be utilized for active and passive recreation, being the area north of the proposed development along Wood Lane and west of the ' proposed development along Chickering Road. t t ' MERRIMACK ENGINEERING SERVICES.INC, 66 PARK STREET ANDOVER.MASSACHUSETTS 01810 I ' 7. Preliminary Architectural Plans II 1 i !-r M Yr 14t? ar X-f' yr b'-1 4 FP W-Vvr W4' MVr xffmj IMO Rm YNOi11 urtr mplw a�anal n� aw- aoc aai rEll 1 ' uc G-S-D S�aDIAP11! +wi d B I 01/i[0011 B-- mnar 1 11 K �11�' W wz 1anwoal � y13 cwto wayaomur � Una IIOOYcu v 0 — �•vr p a "'TM100Y ajvAwWL g � aur a am .a p cl a ,T "mm una"m aacm Yd'-E f-I Y-0' fd' IY Fif' W-2 yr ''.. r-m rr r-r r-oOR TYMV 1=SIR 2 'Er WASP nr ayr ,J� rs M ri N purl °' 9 Aff iL d6 R001l-11 f a+C. q OQI'�t!><0llt a I I J- I uas Rom a 4 uc I 1 Woo a+� g I I I t 1 j ue war aatri10a1 cl § - I o I I ' J- I I W I w ib K i PAW MND r K ro yr u K N tR ro AR iffm aam was amm mraaa emlmvl F4 K M1TL 46P M1S' W I ry hV TY rr M K PRELIMINARY ea rt? NOT l a 0 4 FOR CONSTRUCTION i - - .................. .................... ........... ABSOCtATER --------------- _ MnEE�j a>ss- �- �n _spm M = = = n= � _�_s �_ I l h-I - .f I ' # 4 _=9 Fill RR_ _ a � � M _ __ - — n— .. _= � _� � �:�i �� ���'--�•.��� Yllk�f �� ■If IfHl fi.Y� '.�� � •�_ _�1F�- �'_ - �^��� -YY I� 1 _ _ i . =M -101_ _� 11 1 � -1 > = -_� �:.- --_ • I:(,I I �_ �== =- I°l I t III f t _ I f�t�,;I 1f�! I'�t 42 --------------- = - -- - - -- _ _ - i -- )-z - -- ... -. - - - - - ........... - - - _ -' - ;Ira a Ir H, gEROMM t =Ism _ FEE =01-M M- ----------- I a'f LLow in Eggg in Ise MINFIl � `-( WEI1t ( ( ( _ = — lig = _ - — = •�iil� � ==_' —_-- — = ( rr — r �• -=_.� i I!111! K mt. :UM..f ----------- ............................... ---------------- - - - - ----------- ----------- _ .__._ .��__fir - ..............:. MIN •• w,.t_. tit --�� try,MIN taw _tra wta rta,tsar- .a. •aq n'n an .-._- 03-: =� �", =.�u�r°_� .-.�.•n. =�le�t�li =_� n.s,=_�Yr•i:.._ � .yt�E�_ � = �=1= tYr.� siert kat =1•rss rte= rrf'ysa-!_[•kf tu�tu�i-_ ti `I n 1�I_I-��l� f����1_ f I i �I .= t�rp�,,--- �.• ak.,t •_ - - •Yw _ =-,a IYlra 1t1[' ��[RH IYYI Vi �- �y. lE �� �= rn n.,i;_.'� #:- `� ((• Y�IrI'= _ -,a g Rrz sir r iii --i=:q utY Rri1�_1R ... .. -i:lrk ! I �- _I�>F �=+-�IIIII•� _ �pc?f� I ��_ �_- �■ - . �: �,�. _ ..r, � !_I atttim_ . -- ikff 1i. ili II l — J kl ! I1 ! SM-M] - - _- 1 - - =- _ _-- _ - _ rw`iit �. ri. .> - -rte rrr - !t►i ttY_ rra�us ril.rrrir � _ —-_------------__-_____ __ _ _ . 6: ; ( (� '�a:_ Son! =fit-- _ I ton n M ) :� 1' 4 ( � �`�_ � - __=-__-=__ _.. � �,.•.•• - _ 1�{ I �IIIIi { _ 1( ( 111 IIf.1.(. _ .� = � _�::-_ .�_ _FIN 1 "'" ..' _ III {-1JlI � ,, ,. lk , ! klll'K=�I = ► ► I`Ik I I11 160 - - _- t ' l • 1 .. ............................. : ............ ............::: —.. ............ .... . .. ...----- . _ — . --- ----:------------ — — — — ------------- ----------------- —— --------------- --__ —— — —— — — — ............ ..................... w--� — - - - — — — — _— — — - -_■ 11 == _ rar nw:v xr■.rr!_=nal. rs - e _�C� a[� � _—.��,�},_—surua�n�_ - - -- — I 1 1 1 1 11— __ =II!► I�I.I=_ �i ��I Ifll'= • = ���', _ � I� __ _ _— -- : _�_ _.— = 11:'111_ �I� — = = ► I I I II= — UM ___ — — — 1 —- r.r,r�l� u III�ler`lrA=_�rrr_ _ - — `� -_= (� �jy =i HY - 1 -Ila — �� -t _ + ' ` Irrrt'rar .;�r+U._rs�i�: '} -•"� %• .I 47"! llr►:�, — _ _- _.,.,,IMCI _..,... is 1 _ 11 as�a( _ _-�__- '� � �a..►x: u '� ur � r`iu rr"n. t a r IIl41 ' -- - - - ---------------- - ------------------ - - -- -- - -- - - - -- ------------------- = - -__- :-_-___ -__ _---------- --- ------------------- 1 -- - -=- -'- -- - = III if { I I I I I I 111.1 11= - �I I C = " - 1 1 11_ a � _ =:x _ Mm I 117 1"( I I i 1 1i b f hI1 mow ' rra - MIR : 1 I = r _�' R.a, �'} _ .iuRe =1 eri __-= _ I: - - I -_I I I I L I,I l I 1i...fJ M14VI6 a .1.4. © r le CKCAM,"'W" .ia.. Q ► -- - -- ---- _ --- - -- - -- - --............-- - -_ = = - -= - - - - - - - - - - '_ - Q --- _-_- - __- - - -- - =- - ^i- ------------------------ --------- _ _ _ __ 1 __ ____ __ r..:. ._ _ ... _ _ - ' f A � - I 1 _ na Fit"aff 11111 FS—11 _ = 1!! I ► If-��_ _1111 I -n n_1 1 1 1_ iff _ = - =- y= �4Tic ' :®war _��I�:`la(rer= -� - �e - -- - - I l I _—=- I iE I_loll: I I'I i — _ `fl'I I' �=iiiucri. '11 I f-Li r .. '1 :4►1 _.�. M� © r ►.i ..' •a . :,C,.1 ri 9 :{ , 1 r 1 O 1 r r 8. Tabulation of Proposed Buildings by Type, Etc. See Sheet 1 of Preliminary Development Plans t 9. Preliminary Subdivision Plan Not Applicable I� io. Preliminary Utilities Plan See Sheet 4 of Preliminary Development Plans 11. Documents Showing that Applicant Fulfills the Jurisdictional Requirements of 76o CMR 31.01 I� w iia. Limited Dividend Organization Terra Properties LLC will execute a regulatory agreement with the subsidizing agency as required by law, and will fulfill the obligations associated with being a limited dividend organization at the time the project is fully approved. t � 1 SII 1 1 1 1 1 1 11b. Project EligibilityLetter 1 1 1 ■ 1 WarrenBank 1 MARKJ.TERRY ' Senior Vice President 29 March 2001 Mr. Louis P. Minicucci, Jr., Manager Terra Properties LLC 231 Sutton Street, Suite IA North Andover, MA 01849 Re: Project Eligibility Letter Kittredge Crossing, North Andover ' Dear Lou: After the Bank's review of your plans, the proposed development of 132 units under a Comprehensive Permit, the Bank has determined that the Project appears to be eligible for funding through the Federal Home Loan Bank's ("FHLB-) New England Fund, which is a federally subsidized fund. This funding will consist of construction financing for the affordable unit component of the proposed Project. You have indicated that the Project as proposed will consist of a one hundred thirty-two (132) unit residential condominium of which twenty-five (25%) of the units will be affordable units to be sold or rented to moderate income persons meeting the eligibility guidelines established by FHLB (households with incomes no higher than eighty (80%) percent of the area median income as published by the Department of Housing and Urban tDevelopment (HUD). The affordable units will be sold or rented at a price to be determined in accordance with the guidelines established by FHLB. The units will be subject to the deed restrictions on resale as already established pursuant to the Comprehensive Permit. The subsidy funding will be conditioned upon your compliance with the terms and conditions and issuance of the Comprehensive Permit as the same may be modified by III the North Andover Board of Appeals and your execution of a regulatory agreement with the Bank and a monitoring service g agreement with an acceptable monitoring agent as well g p as compliance with any other requirements of the Comprehensive Permit statute, the rregulations promulgated thereunder and with any requirements of FHLB. Warren Five Cents Savings Bank Post Office Box 6159-Peabody, MA 01961-6159 (978)531-7400 Mr.Louis P.Minicucci,Jr.,Manager Terra Properties LLC 29 Mare 2001 Page 2 This letter does not constitute s itute a commitment b the provide financing by Banto p n ncing or lend to you. The actual terms and conditions upon which the Bank may provide such financing or lend to you are subject to completion of its usual and customary underwriting criteria and will be subject to such terms and conditions as it may require. In addition, such financing will be subject to the final approval of the FHLB upon completion of its usual and customary application process. The Bank loops forward to assistingin the financing of the construction of the affordable g units through this federally subsidized program. Sincerely, ' 'WARREN FIVE CENTSA NGS BANK By: A� Mark J. T ry Senior vice Presid nt ' Corporate Banking Group MJT:eg r 04/17/2001 10:13 978-682-6473 MINCO CORP PAGE 02 TERRA PROPERTIES LLC 978-687-6200 FAX 978-682-6473 ■ INVITATION TO NEGOTIATE ■ April 5, 2001 Attorney Arthur Broadhurst. One Elm Square Andover, MA 01810 RE: Revised Invitation to Negotiate - this letter extends the Invitation to Negotiate for the purchase of the Rennie parcel at 200 Chickering Road,North Andover,Mass.,of February 9, 2001,which was revised February 27,2001 Dear Attorney Broadhurst: The parties hereby agree to extend this Invitation to Negotiate until May 1 2001, no-1, than which a mutually satisfactory Purchase and Sale Agreeme Il be execute for the purphase of this property. --� All other terms and conditions as outlined in Invitation to Negotiate will remain Ahe some. t 9f Sincerely, Louis P. Minicu 1,Jr. Manager % Agreed Attorney Arthur Broadhurst for Dorothy J. e, l vidually rustee Carol n tee of own Villag s , Soffer Date LPM/kp J:ZATA\WPFILE&WoAhP01M on A*S\040nd.kw 231 Sutton Street,North Andover,MA 01845 733 Turnpike Street PMB 158,North Andover,MA 01845 12. List of Requested Exceptions 12. List of Required Exceptions to the By-Laws and Regulations in Effect in the Town of North Andover For the Proposed 132 Unit Affordable Housing To be known as Kittredge Crossing at 200 Chickering Road Terra Properties LLC has received a Project Affordability Letter from the Warren Bank as ' a participating lender in the Federal Home Loan Bank's New England Fund, which is a federally subsidized fund,to develop and construct 132 units of rental housing, of which 25% or 33 units will be set aside as affordable housing. The project location is the site of Rennie's Florist, located at 200 Chickering Road in North Andover. The site is presently occupied by a residential structure,a florist shop,and greenhouse;the majority of the site is vacant and unbuilt. The new use, which will be known as Kittredge Crossing will ' involve the demolition of the existing buildings and the construction of six buildings and related parking areas.The site is located in three zoning districts,Residential 4,Residential 5,and Business 1;multi-family dwellings are allowed by right in Residential 5. In addition to affordable housing, Terra Properties LLC will also provide 182 parking spaces and landscape the site. The proposed affordable housing will require the following exceptions from the North Andover Zoning By-Law. Exceptions Required from the Zoning Bylaw ' Based on plans submitted with this application and upon the Zoning Bylaw as amended through the Annual Town Meeting of May 13, 2000,which was approved by the Attorney General on October 12, 2000, posted October 25, 2000,and the Special Town Meeting of ' December 11, 2000,the proposed project requires the following exceptions: Section 4.1, District Use Re lations Table 1 Summau of Use Re lations An exception from this section of the Bylaw is requested. ' Section 4, Buildings and Uses Permitted Subsection .1.1 General Provisions 1. In the zoning districts above specified, the following designated buildings and alterations and extensions thereof and buildings accessory thereto and the following designated uses of land,buildings,or partthereof and uses accessory thereto are permitted. All other buildings and uses are hereby expressly prohibited except uses which are similar in character to the permitted uses shall be treated as requiring a Special Permit. An exception from the Bylaw is requested to permit a multi family use in Residential 4 and Business 1 district as proposed at this site. 3. When a zoning district boundary divides a lot of record on June 5, 1972 in one ownership,all the zoning regulations set forth in this Zoning Bylaw applying to the greater part by area of such lot so divided may,by Special Permit,be deemed to apply and govern at and beyond such zoning district boundary, but only to an extent not more than one ' hundred (loo) linear feet in depth (at a right angle to such boundary) into the lesser part by area of such lot so divided. 1 An exception p from this section of the Bylaw is requested, as the site is located in three zoning districts. No private or public(1985/20)w 5• p p ( 9 5/20} ay giving access to a building or use not.permitted in a residential district shall be laid out or constructed so as to pass through a residential district. ' Insofar as a private way may be necessary to give access to a multi family use not permitted in a Residential 4 or Business 1 district may pass through a Residential 5 district, an exception from this section of the Bylaw is requested. Section 4, Buildings and Uses Permitted Subsection 9 122 Residence 4 District 1. One residential building per lot. An exception from this section of the Bylaw is requested, as there will be more than one residential building on the Residential 4 zoning district portion of the lot. Section 4, Buildinzs and Uses Permitted Subsection 4126 Business 1 District 9- Residential uses including one and two family dwellings. Apartments shall be allowed where such use is not more than fifty(5o) percent of the total floor space in the building. An exception from this section of the Bylaw is requested, as multi family use has been proposed in a Business 1 district. Section 4, Subsection 4.137, Flood Plain District Insofar as any part of the site may be in the Flood Plain District, an exception from this section of the Bylaw is requested. Sections, Earth Materials Removal An exception from this section of the Bylaw is requested. Section 7, Dimensional Requirements (as summarized in Table 2) The following exceptions will be required from Table 2, Summary of Dimensional Requirements, as referenced throughout the By-Law: An exception from this section of the Bylaw is requested, including all dimensional and density requirements to those depicted on the plan. Section 8, Supplementary Regulations ' 8.1 Off-Street Parking An exception from this section of the Bylaw is requested. -2- 8.3 Site Plan Review 2. Developments Which Require Site Plan Review a) Site Plan [Review] is required: ' An exce tion om this section o P f� f t' he Bylaw is requested, as projects applied for under a Comprehensive Permit(Chapter 4ob)are exempt from such review. ' 8. Screening and Lands 4 g caping Requirements for Off-Street ' An exception from this section of the Bylaw is requested. 8.7 Growth Management An exception from this section of the Bylaw is requested. ' Section lo,Administration An exception from this section of the Bylaw is requested. Subdivision Control Bylaw An exception from this section of the Bylaw is requested. Wetlands Bylaw An exception from this section of the Bylaw is requested. ' Local Board of Health Bylaws An exception from this section of the Bylaw is requested. To the extent that a)the plans submitted with the application do not meet the requirements of the Bylaw,b)this application fails to include information required by the Bylaw and/or ' the Comprehensive Permit Rules and Regulations of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of North Andover, and c)the procedures followed by the Board in acting upon this application differ from the procedures contained in the Bylaw or Comprehensive Permit ' Rules and Regulations, Terra Properties LLC requests an exception. I� -3- ' 13. Fees ' Advertising Fee ($130.00) and Filing Fee ($50.00 X 132 units) Enclosed 1 URBELIS& FIELDSTEEL, LLP 155 FEDERAL STREET BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS 02110-1727 THOMAS J.URBELIS Telephone 617-338-2200 Andover e-mail tju@u#b.com Telecopier 617-338-0122 Telephone 978-475-4552 March 22, 2004 Board of Appeals North Andover Town Offices 27 Charles Street North Andover, MA 01845 RE: ELVIRA CURCIO V WILLIAM J SULLIVAN,,ET AL. Dear Members of the Board: Enclosed please find copies of 1. Memorandum of Decision and Order; and 2. Judgment on Motion to Dismiss. Please call if you have any questions. Very truly yours, Thomas J. brbelis Enclosures TJU/lah cc: Board of Selectmen Mark Rees Joyce Bradshaw Heidi Griffin Julie Parrino Charles Salisbury s;\wp5)\work\n-andove\curcio\appea)sbd.}tr.doc COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS ESSEX, ss. SUPERIOR COURT CIVIL ACTION -NO: 2003-1371 C ELVIRA CURCIO, Plaintiff VS. MARK JOHNSON, ESQUIRE, DOROTHY RENNIE, JOSEPH SCOTT, WILLIAM J. SULLIVAN, as Chairman hoard ofAppeals - North Andover and NINA M. ROMANO, as Chairlady for Heritage Green Condominium, Defendants MEMORANDUMOF DECISION AND ORDER On February 24, 2004, this civil matter was before the Court for hearing on motions to dismiss filed by each of the defendants in this case. Because each of the defendants predicate his or her motion on a different theory, each of the motions will be considered separately in this memorandum. L The motion to dismiss filed by defendant Nina Romano, Trustee of the Heritage Green Condominium Trust. In the motion to dismiss filed on behalfofHeritage Green Condominium Trust,the defendant argues that the complaint"merely recites a series of disjointed thoughts which cannot possibly form the basis of an actionable claim against the defendant Trustee in its present form." . A review of the complaint filed in this action confirms the position of the defendant. The complaint consists of five handwritten pages that make passing reference to a conspiracy in "our I clubhouse here in North Andover and in the Town Hall of the Town of Andover." There is further reference to abused seniors, reference to an appeal from the issuance of a comprehensive permit issued pursuant to G.L. c.40B by the Town of North Andover,and mention of the alteration of deeds in such a way as to eliminate the use of a street. There is no connection made with respect to those events. There is also included in the case file at least four large packages containing a miscellany of letters,newspaper articles and notes,none of which develop a consistent theme or constitute a claim against the defendant. Where relevant, Massachusetts Rules of Civil Procedure require as follow. "A pleading which sets forth a. claim for relief, .whether an, ori,yhial claim, co"I1terclaili, cross Claim or third parte claim. shall contain ( 1 ) L, slion aEid glair, statement of the claim showving that the pleader is entitled to relief:and (21)a deniand for judgment for the relief to which he deems himself entitled." Mass. R. Civ. P.8(a). The requirement that a complaint be alleged in a short and plaice statement of the claim is intended to provide a putative defendant frith fair notice of the claim and of the underlying grounds for that claim. Romano v. Sacknoff, 4 Mass. App. Ct. 862(1976); Pederson v. Time,Inc.,404 Mass. 14, 17(1989). "The question of a complaint's sufficiency turns on whether it provides enough information to give the defendant notice of what the dispute is about and asserts a right to recovery cognizable on some acceptable legal theory." Multi Technology, Inc. v. Mitchell Management Systems, Inc.,25 Mass. App. Ct. 333 at 335 (1988). In the present case, the complaint fails the standards set forth in Rule 8(a) and, for that reason, it will be dismissed with respect to any claim allegedly brought against the defendant Nina Romano, Trustee of the Heritage Green Condominium Trust, et al.' That dismissal will be with prejudice. The Court recognizes that the complaint in this case has been filed by pro se plaintiff; re and b � the same rules of procedure as litigants with counsel. Jones however., pro se parties a bo y p p Mcnoe v. Commonwealth, 393 Mass. v. Gallagher, 54 Mass. Ap . Ct. 88�, 88$ fn. S (2002 •), g P II 617, 6_0 (198 . International�atinal Fidelity Insurance Co. -�. Wilson 387 Mass. 841, 847 1983). _ ?. The motion to dismiss fled by defendant.Dorothy J. Rennie a./k/a Dorothv Rennie Todd and Rennie Florist In the motion to dismiss filed on behalf ofDorothy J.Rennie a/k/a Dorothy Rennie Todd and Rennie Florist, the defendant argues that the documents served on the defendant with the summons make no reference to any actions taken by defendant Rennie or Rennie Florist, and sets forth no factual allegations which, if taken to be true, give rise to a cause of action against those defendants. Plaintiffhas filed no opposition to this motion to dismiss even trough service orthe motion was 111,1de consistent with the previsions of'Superior €`ourt Rule 9A. For that reason, and becM1s,--: the compilation of papers alleged to constitute a complaint fails to set forth any cause of action against this defendant,the motion filed by Dorothy J.Rennie a/k/a Dorothy Rennie Todd and Rennie Florist will be allowed with prejudice. 3. The motion to dismiss filed by defendant William J Sullivan, Chairman Board of Appeals In the motion to dismiss fled on behalf of William J. Sullivan,Chairman,Board of Appeals, the defendant argues that, other than having his name appear in the caption of the summons, the documents served with the summons makes no reference to any action taken by him and contains no factual allegations which, if taken as true, would give rise to a cause of action against him. I As in the motion discussed immediately above, the plaintiff has filed no opposition to this motion even though it appears that the defendant has complied with the provisions of Superior Court Rule 9A. For that reason, and because the compilation of filings in this action fails to set forth any cause of action against the defendant,William J. Sullivan,his motion to dismiss will be allowed with prejudice. 4. The motion to dismiss filed by defendant Mark B. Johnson In his motion to dismiss,defendant Johnson has made an attempt to decipher documents fled 3 by the plaintiff According to Johnson, the plaintiff has alleged that the Trustees of the Condominium complex entered into a settlement agreement with the developer of a neighboring parcel, and then made some unspecified change to the master deed of her condemn-inium complex. Furthermore, according to defendant Johnson, the plaintiff has alleged that the Town of North Andover acted improperly in the manner in which a public hearing was conducted, the subject of which was the granting of a permit to that neighboring property known ask Kittridge Crossing. Apparently. Johnson is a lawyer �Niho represented the plaintiffs condominiun-i association in the � negotlatIon \�ith representatives o hittrl_doe('rossing. It is through that representation that.1ohnson 'Mins kno-\ ledge ofthe factual background of this case. Distilling what he knows from the background of the case. Johnson arrives at a description of the allegations against him. First, in his`capacity as attorney for the Trustees, he is accused of engaging in criminal fraud to fraudulently exploit an elderly person in violation of G.L. c.297, §9. Second,he is alleged to have engaged in a conspiracy with the Trustees by negotiating a settlement on their behalf with the developer of the property adjoining the Condominium property and then by filing a Declaration of Trust authorized by the Trustees. After reciting what he believes to be the claims against him,Johnson moves to dismiss those claims in that a) they are not pleaded with the required particularity and, b) he owed no duty to the plaintiff and, therefore, she cannot maintain a direct claim against him for following the lawful directions of the Trustees. Where relevant,Mass.R.Civ. P.9(b)requires that the circumstances constituting an alleged fraud be pled with particularity. Specifically, a plaintiff alleging fraud and must particularize the identity of the person making the fraudulent representation, the content of the representation and where and when it took place. In addition, the person must specify! the materiality of the 4 misrepresentation. his or her reliance and the resulting harm, see Friedman v. Jablowski, 371 Mass. 482 (1976). In the present case, the plaintiff has failed to meet those minimal requirements and, for that reason, the complaint against defendant Johnson will be dismissed with prejudice.'- ORDER For the reasons stated above,the motions to dismiss ofNina Romano..Trustee of the Heritage Green Condominium Trust; Dorothy J. Rennie a/k/a Dorothy Rennie Todd and Rennie Florist, `William J. Sullivan, Chairman, Board of Appeals: and Mark B. ,Johnson will he allowed with prtjudicc. Hon. Robert H. Bohn, Jr. Justice of the Superior Court Dated: March 12, 2004 Furthermore, plaintiff has failed to file an opposition to defendant Johnson's motion to dismiss even though service was made consistent with Superior Court Rule 9A. Commonwealth of Massachusetts County of Essex The Superior Court CIVIL DOCKET# ESCV2003-01371 Curcio, Plaintiff(s) vs Scott Construction et al, Defendant(s) JUDGMENT ON MOTION TO DISMISS (Mass.R.Civ.P. 12b) This action came on for hearing before the Court, Robert H. Bohn, Jr., Justice upon the Defendant, Mark Johnson, Esquire, Dorothy Rennie, Joseph Scott, William J Sullivan, as Chairman Board of Appeals, North Andover and Nina M. Romano, as Chairlady for Heritage Green Condominium, motion to dismiss pursuant to Mass. R.Civ.P. 12(b), and upon consideration thereof, It is ORDERED and ADJUDGED: That the Complaint of the plaintiff(s);Elvira Curcio is hereby dismissed against the defendant (s), Nina Romano, Trustee of the Heritage Green Condominium Trust, Mark Johnson, Dorothy J. Rennie, a/k/a Dorothy Rennie Todd and Rennie Florist, William J Sullivan, Chairman, Board Of Appeals and the defendant(s) recovers its costs of action. Dated at Lawrence, Massachusetts this 15th day of March, 2004. j; ff a� ................... By:..... r Assistant Clerk Entered: Copies mailed 03/15/2004 c,djudl2b.und 459152 judl2b mercierm �t-`� �� •_�.,,(�cuL��� Gam--, __ - .______._____.____._._..__ __._____ _,__._._ __.. ___..__._.:.._ ._.___._ .._....�._._._...__._-__ _._._ ___ __ _ __. __. __.✓-�.____.G/.,,.,.�Q-AGI.,.-'._C �Crt.-Z�� ����____/_._..0 L�=2 -_. .._�_ __. __..._ _ ,,,y.a�L%�I �--Zl�:?✓_._..�,.�2��___...�,.._:2?.�-r ,.;2�%6Z�4,..,>_✓—.i�.__ ___ ___, __.._..%i�Grr_!c�:�2'f,�•....._,.....___..._._ ....._ _..___ .-___ _. ?,_t.--:✓.t,�..�,y_.___L_.�_....-�"�.C._,•.�.. _ _ Gam-___../lam-f .___..-C:T_"►'�-- ._�%. ''ca�___..�.. ..___ - i-C >n� CD ,gym (AC:) cz 3 . ❑ The work described below, which includes all/part of the work described in your request, is within the Buffer Zone as defined in the regulations, and will alter an Area Subject to Protection Under the Act. Therefore, said work requires the filing of a Notice of Intent. This Determination is negative: 1. ❑ The area described in your request is not an Area Subject to Protection Under the Act. 2 . ❑ The work described in your request is within an Area Subject to Protection Under the Act, but will not remove, fill, dredge, or alter that are&. Therefore, said work does not require the filing of a Notice of Intent. 3 . ❑ The work described in your request is within the Buffer Zone, as defined in the regulations, but will not alter an Area Subject to Protection Under the Act. Therefore, said work does not require the filing of a Notice of Intent. 4 . ❑ The area described in your request is Subject to Protection Under the Acc, but since the work - described therein meets the requirements for the following ng exemption, specified in the Act and the regulations, no . as sp Notice of Intent is required: Issued by North Andover Cc rvation Commission S igratur (s �imust be signed b a majority of the Conservation Commission. T is Determination mu gn Y . on this 18th day of December _19--9-6--, before me personally appeared Joseph WT�znrrb, Tr to me known to be the person described in, and who executed, the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he/she executed the same as his/her free act and deed. Notary Public My Commission Expires This Determination does not relieve the applicant from complying with all other applicable federal, state or local statutes, ordinances, by-laws or regulations. This Determination shall be valid for three years from the date of issuance. The applicant, the owner, any person aggrieved by this Determination, any owner of land abutting the land upon which the proposed work is to be done, or any ten residents of the city or town in which such land is located, are hereby notified of their right to request the Department of Environmental Protection to issue a Superseding eq Pa Determination of Applicability, providing the request is made by certified mail or hand delivery to the Department, with the appropriate filing fee and Fee Transmittal Form as provided in 310 CMR 10.03(7) within ten days from the date of issuance of this Determination. A copy of the request shalt at the same time be sent by certified mail or hand detivery to the Conservation Commission and the applicant. 2-2A 310 CMR 10.99 DEP File No. (To be provided by DEP) Form 2 city/Tom North Andover Applicant MHF Design Consultants, Inc. Commonweal th' of Massachusetts Date Request Fi ted 11/14/96 Lots 35 & 46 200 Chickering Road POSITIVE Determination of Applicability Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act, G.L. C. 131, §40 From North Andover Conservation Commission Issuing Authority To MHF Design Consultants. Inc. Dorothy T_ Rannia (Name of Person making request) (Name of property owner) Address 12B Manor Pkway, Salem,N.H. Address 200 Chickering Rd. , No. Andover, MA This determination is issued and delivered as follows: ❑ by hand delivery to person making request on // (date) by certified mail, return receipt requested on e;-:W JA44&p(da te) Pursuant to the authority of G.L. c.131, §40., the North Andover Conservation Comm. has considered your request for a Determination of Applicability 'and itt sup- porting documentation, and has made the following determination (check whichever is applicable) : Location: Street Address 200 -Chickering Road Lot Number: Lots #35 & 446 This Determination is positive. 1. The area described below, which includes ail/part of the area described in your request, is an Area Subject to Protection Under the Act. Therefore, any removing, filing, dredging or altering of that area requires the filing of a Notice of Intent. plan Entitled: "Existing Conditions, Plan" , Dated Revision: December 11, 1996, Prepared by: MHF Design Consultants, Inc. , BVW only: WF1 through WF 47 stop 2. ❑ The work described below, which includes all/part. of the work described in your request, is within an Area Subject to Protection Under the Act and will remove, fill, dredge or alter that area. Therefore, said work requires the filing of a Notice of Intent. 2-1 Effective 11/10/89 4 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands 1 WPA Form 2 — Determination of Applicability Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 A. General Information Important: When filling out From: forms on the North Andover computer, use Conservation Commission only the tab key to move To: Applicant Property Owner(if different from applicant): your cursor do not use the Terra Properties return key. Name Name 231 Sutton St. rah Mailing Address Mailing Address North Andover MA 01845 City/Town State Zip Code_ City/Town State Zip Code remm 1. Title and Date(or Revised Date if applicable)of Final Plans and Other Documents: Request for Determination of Applicability 5/3/01 Title Date Plan entitled "Kittredge Crossing North Andover" 4/30/01-Rev Title 5/31/01 Title Date 2. Date Request Filed: 4/20/01 B. Determination Pursuant to the authority of M.G.L. c. 131, §40, the Conservation Commission considered your Request for Determination of Applicability, with its supporting documentation, and made the following Determination. Project Description (if applicable): Wetland resource area confirmation only. The resource areas confirmed under this RDA are in addition to the respurce areas previously approved under DEP 242-850 as depicted on plans entitled "Proposed site development, map 46-lots 35 &46, Chickering Road -Rte. 125, North Andover, MA, prepared for: Scott Construction Company"dated 6/19/98 Rev 11/4/98 Project Location: 200 Chickering Road North Andover StCt.f�Cltl CitylTown 46 35,46,106 Assessors Map/Plat Number Parcel/Lot Number wpaform2.doc•rev.6/8/01 Page 1 of 5 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands � r 1 WPA Form 2 — Determination of Applicability Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 B. Determination (cont.) The following Determination(s) is/are applicable to the proposed site and/or project relative to the Wetlands Protection Act and regulations: Positive Determination Note: No work within the jurisdiction of the Wetlands Protection Act may proceed until a final Order of Conditions(issued following submittal of a Notice of Intent or Abbreviated Notice of Intent) has been received from the issuing authority (i.e., Conservation Commission or the Department of Environmental Protection). ❑ 1. The area described on the referenced plan(s) is an area subject to protection under the Act. Removing, filling, dredging, or altering of the area requires the filing of a Notice of Intent. ® 2a. The boundary delineations of the following resource areas described on the referenced plan(s) are confirmed as accurate. Therefore, the resource area boundaries confirmed in this Determination are binding as to all decisions rendered pursuant to the Wetlands Protection Act and its regulations regarding such boundaries for as long as this Determination is valid. Intermittent bank flags Al through A32 and B1 through B33, boardering vegetated wetland flags G1 through G8, H1 through H4, and 11 through 18. ❑ 2b. The boundaries of resource areas listed below are not confirmed by this Determination, regardless of whether such boundaries are contained on the plans attached to this Determination or to the Request for Determination. ❑ 3. The work described on referenced plan(s)and document(s) is within an area subject to protection under the Act and will remove, fill, dredge, or alter that area. Therefore, said work requires the filing of a Notice of Intent. ❑ 4. The work described on referenced plan(s)and document(s) is within the Buffer Zone and will alter an Area subject to protection under the Act. Therefore, said work requires the filing of a Notice of Intent. ® 5. The area and/or work described on referenced plan(s)and document(s) is subject to review and approval by: Town of North Andover Name of Municipality Pursuant to the following municipal wetland ordinance or bylaw: North Andover Wetlands Protection Bylaws C.178 of the code of North Name Andover wpaform2.doc•rev.6/8/01 - Page 2 of 5 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands WPA Form 2 — Determination of Applicability Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 B. Determination (cont.) ® 6. The following area and/or work, if any, is subject to a municipal ordinance or bylaw but not subject to the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act: Isolated vegetated wetland flags K1 through K6 ❑ 7. If a Notice of Intent is filed for the work in the Riverfront Area described on referenced plan(s) and document(s), which includes all or part of the work described in the Request, the applicant must consider the following alternatives. (Refer to the wetland regulations at 10.58(4)c. for more information about the scope of alternatives requirements): ❑ Alternatives limited to the lot on which the project is located. ❑ Alternatives limited to the lot on which the project is located, the subdivided lots, and any adjacent lots formerly or presently owned by the same owner. ❑ Alternatives limited to the original parcel on which the project is located, the subdivided parcels, any adjacent parcels, and any other land which can reasonably be obtained within the municipality. ❑ Alternatives extend to any sites which can reasonably be obtained within the appropriate region of the state. Negative Determination Note: No further action under the.Wetlands Protection Act is required by the applicant. However, if the Department is requested to issue a Superseding Determination of Applicability, work may not proceed on this project unless the Department fails to act on such request within 35 days of the date the request is post-marked for certified mail or hand delivered to the Department. Work may then proceed at the owner's risk only upon notice to the Department and to the Conservation Commission. Requirements for requests for Superseding Determinations are listed at the end of this document. ❑ 1. The area described in the Request is not an area subject to protection under the Act or the Buffer Zone. ❑ 2. The work described in the Request is within an area subject to protection under the Act, but will not remove, fill, dredge, or alter that area. Therefore, said work does not require the filing of a Notice of Intent. ❑ 3. The work described in the Request is within the Buffer Zone, as defined in the regulations, but will not alter an Area subject to protection under the Act. Therefore, said work does not require the filing of a Notice of Intent, subject to the following conditions (if any). ❑ 4. The work described in the Request is not within an Area subject to protection under the Act (including the Buffer Zone). Therefore, said work does not require the filing of a Notice of Intent, unless and until said work alters an Area subject to protection,under the Act. wpaform2.doc•rev,6/8/01 Page 3 of 5 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection Wetlands WPA Form 2 - Determination of Applicability Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 B. Determination (cont.) ❑ 5. The area described in the Request is subject to protection under the Act. Since the work described therein meets the requirements for the following exemption, as specified in the Act and the regulations, no Notice of Intent is required: Exempt Activity(site applicable statuatory/regulatory provisions) ❑ 6. The area and/or work described in the Request is not subject to review and approval by: Name of Municipality Pursuant to a municipal wetlands ordinance or bylaw. Name Ordinance or Bylaw Citation C. Authorization This Determination is issued to the applicant and delivered as follows: ❑ by hand delivery on ® by email, on Date Date This Determination is valid for three years from the date of issuance(except Determinations for Vegetation Management Plans which are valid for the duration of the Plan). This Determination does not relieve the applicant from complying with all other applicable federal, state, or local statutes, ordinances, bylaws, or regulations. This.Determination must be sign a majority of the Conservation Commission. A copy must be sent to the appropriate DEP Reg' a(see Appendix A)and the property owner(if different from the applicant). Signatures: ' 7 e s� L DIANE POIRtER Notary Public Commonwealth of Massachusetts Date t My Commission Expires Februa 14,2008 wpaform2.doc•rev.6/5101 `F. Page 4 of 5 LlMassachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands WPA Form 2 — Determination of Applicability Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 B. Determination (cont.) ❑ 5, The area described in the Request is subject to protection under the Acta Since the work described therein meets the requirements for the following exemption, as specified in the Act and the regulations, no Notice of Intent is required: Exempt Activity(site applicable statuatory/regulatory provisions) ❑ 6. The area and/or work described in the Request is not subject to review and approval by: Name of Municipality Pursuant to a municipal wetlands ordinance or bylaw. Name Ordinance or Bylaw Citation C. Authorization This Determination is issued to the applicant and delivered as follows: ❑ by hand delivery on Z by certified mail, return receipt requested on 6/7/01 Date Date This Determination is valid for three years from the date of issuance(except Determinations for Vegetation Management Plans which are valid for the duration of the Plan). This Determination does not relieve the applicant from complying with all other applicable federal, state, or local statutes, ordinances, bylaws, or regulations. This Determination must be signed by a majority of the Conservation Commission. A copy must be sent to the appropriate DEP Regional Office(see Appendix A) and the property owner(if different from the applicant). Signatures: Date wpaform2.doc•rev.6/8/01 Page 4 of 5 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection -- Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands WPA Form 2 — Determination of Applicability t Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 D. Appeals The applicant,owner, any person aggrieved by this Determination, any owner of land abutting the land upon which the proposed work is to be done, or any ten residents of the city or town in which such land is located, are hereby notified of their right to request the appropriate Department of Environmental Protection Regional Office(see Appendix A)to issue a Superseding Determination of Applicability. The request must be made by certified mail or hand delivery to the Department, with the appropriate filing fee and Fee Transmittal Form(see Appendix E: Request for Departmental Action Fee Transmittal Form) as provided in 310 CMR 10.03(7)within ten business days from the date of issuance of this Determination.A copy of the request shall at the same time be sent by certified mail or hand delivery to the Conservation Commission and to the applicant if he/she is not the appellant. The request shall state clearly and concisely the objections to the Determination which is being appealed.To the extent that the Determination is based on a municipal ordinance or bylaw and not on the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Actor regulations, the Department of Environmental Protection has no appellate jurisdiction. wpaform2.doc•rev.6/8/01 Page 5 of 5 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands E WPA Appendix A DEP Regional Addresses Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 Mail transmittal forms and DEP payments,payable to: Commonwealth of Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Box 4062 Boston, MA 02211 DEP Western Region Adams Colrain Hampden Pittsfield 436 Dwight Street Agawam Conway Hancock Monroe Wales g Alford Cummington Hatfield Montague Plainfield Wales Suite 402 Monterey Richmond Ware Amherst Dalton Hawley Montgomery Rowe Warwick Springfield,MA 01103 Ashfield Deerfield Heath Monson Russell Washington Phone:413-784-1100 Becket Easthampton Hinsdale Mount Washington Sandisfield Wendell Belchertown East Longmeadow Holland New Ashford Savoy Westfield Fax:413-784-1149 Bernardston Egremont Holyoke New Marlborough Sheffield g Westhampton Blandford Erving Huntington New Salem Shelburne West Springfield Brimfield Florida Lanesborough North Adams Shutesbury West Stockbridge Buckland Gill Lee Northampton Southampton Whately Charlemont Goshen Lenox Northfield South Hadley Wilbraham Cheshire Granby Leverett Orange Southwick Williamsburg Chester Granville Leyden Otis Springfield Williamstown Chesterfield Great Barrington Longmeadow Palmer Stockbridge Windsor Chicopee Greenfield Ludlow Pelham Clarksburg Hadley Middlefield Peru Sunderland Worthington Tolland DEP Central Region Acton Charlton Hopkinton Millbury Rutland Uxbridge Ashbumham Clinton Hubbardston Millvilla 627 Main Street Shirleysnirley warren Ashby Douglas Hudson New Braintree Shrewsbury Webster Worcester, MA 01605 Athol Dudley Holliston Northborough Southborough Westborough Phone: 508-792-7650 Auburn Dunstable Lancater Northbridge Southbridge West Boylston Fax:508-792-7621 Aye East Brookfield Leicester North Brookfield Spencer West Brookfield Barre Fitchburg Leominster Oakham Sterling Westford TDD:508-767-2788 Bellingham Gardner Littleton Oxford Stow Westminster Berlin Grafton Lunenburg Paxton Sturbridge Winchendon Blackstone Groton Marlborough Pepperell Sutton Worcester Bolton Harvard Maynard Petersham Templeton Boxborough Hardwick Medway Phillipston Townsend Boylston Holden Mendon Princeton Tyngsborough Brookfield Hopedale Milford Royalston Upton DEP Southeast Region Abington Dartmouth Freetown Mattapoisett Provincetown Tisbury 20 Riverside Drive Acushnet Dennis Gay Head Middleborough Raynham Truro Attleboro Dighton Gosnold Nantucket Rehoboth Wareham Lakeville, MA 02347 Avon Duxbury Halifax NewBedford Rochester Welffieet Phone: 508-946-2700 Barnstable Eastham Hanover North Attleborough Rockland West Bridgewater Fax:508-947-6557 Berkley East Bridgewater Hanson Norton Sandwich Westport Bourne Easton Harwich Norwell Scituate West Tisbury TDD:508-946-2795 Brewster Ed artown 9 Kingston Oak Bluffs Seekonk Whitman Bridgewater Fairhaven Lakeville Orleans Sharon Wrentham Brockton Fall River Mansfield Pembroke Somerset Yarmouth Carver Falmouth Marion Plainville Stoughton Chatham Foxborough Marshfield Plymouth Swansea Chilmark Franklin Mashpee Plympton Taunton DEP Northeast Region Amesbury Chelmsford Hingham Merrimac Quincy Wakefield 205 Lowell Street Andover Chelsea Holbrook Methuen Randolph Walpole Arlington Cohasset Hull Middleton Reading Waltham Wilmington, MA 01887 Ashland Concord Ipswich Millis Revere Watertown Phone:978-661-7600 Bedford Danvers Lawrence Mi!!on Rockport Wayland Fax: 978-661-7615 Belmont Dedham Lexington Nahant Rowley Wellesley Beverly Dover Lincoln Natick Salem Wenham TDD:978-661-7679 Billerica Dracut Lowell Needham Salisbury West Newbury Boston Essex Lynn Newbury Saugus Weston Boxford Everett Lynnfield Newburyport Sherbom Westwood Braintree Framingham Malden Newton Somerville Weymouth Brookline Georgetown Manchester-By-The-Sea Norfolk Stoneham Wilmington Burlington Gloucester Marblehead North Andover Sudbury Winchester Cambridge Groveland Medfield North Reading Swampscott Winthrop Canton Hamilton Medford Norwood Tewksbury Woburn Carlisle Haverhill Melrose Peabody Topsheld Wpaform2.doc•Appendix A•rev.11/22/00 Page 1of 1 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection �— Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands t WPA Appendix E — Request for Departmental Action Fee Transmittal Form Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 A. Request Information Important: When filling out 1. Person or party making request(if appropriate, name the citizen group's representative): forms on the computer, use only the tab Name key to move your cursor- Mailing Address do not use the return key. City/Town State Zip Code Phone Number Fax Number(if applicable) Project Location Mailing Address City/Town State Zip Code 2. Applicant(as shown on Notice of Intent(Form 3), Abbreviated Notice of Resource Area Delineation (Form 4A); or Request for Determination of Applicability (Form 1)): Name Mailing Address City/Town State Zip Code Phone Number Fax Number(if applicable) 3. DEP File Number: B. Instructions 1. When the Departmental action request is for(check one): ❑ Superseding Order of Conditions ❑ Superseding Determination of Applicability ❑ Superseding Order of Resource Area Delineation Send this form and check or money order for$50.00, payable to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to: Department of Environmental Protection Box 4062 Boston, MA 02211 wpaform2doc•Appendix E-rev.2/00 Page 1 of 2. Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands + WPA Appendix E — Request for Departmental Action Fee Transmittal Form Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 B. Instructions (cont.) 2. On a separate sheet attached to this form, state clearly and concisely the objections to the Determination or Order which is being appealed. To the extent that the Determination or Order is based on a municipal bylaw, and not on the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act or regulations, the Department has no appellate jurisdiction. 3. Send a copy of this form and a copy of the check or money order with the Request for a Superseding Determination or Order by certified mail or hand delivery to the appropriate DEP Regional Office (see Appendix A). 4. A copy of the request shall at the same time be sent by certified mail or hand delivery to the Conservation Commission and to the applicant, if he/she is not the appellant. wpaform2.doc•Appendix E•rev.2/00 Page 2 of 2 Received by Town Clerk : Notice to APPLICANT/TOWN CLERK of action of Planning Board on accompanying plan 1 . The North Andover Planning Board has determined that said plan does not require approval under the Subdivision Control Law , and the appropriate endorsement has been made upon the same . 2 . The o th Andover l nning Boar ha determined t said pla sho s a subdivis on , s defin by G . c . 41 s . 8 -L, and m t th efore e re-s bmitte to it _ f r , app _oval and the S bdi vi si n C trol Law . Very truly yours , NORTH ANDOVER. PLANNING BOARD 11�titwl� By D a.t e . ._. x � � w low ?ecei ved by Town C1 erk : RECLINED JOYCE BRADSHAW TOWN CLERK FORM A NORTH ANDOVER APPLICATION FOR ENDORSEMENT OF PLAN JUN IO 3 51 PP '96 BELIEVED NOT TO REQUIRE APPROVAL June 18 1996 To the Planning Board of the Town of North Andover : I� The undersigned wishes to record the accompanying plan and requests a determination by said Board that approval by it under the Subdivision Control Law is not required . The undersigned believes that such approval is not required for the following reasons : I . The division of land shown on the accompanying plan is not a sub - division because every lot shown thereon has the amount of frontage required by the North Andover Zoning By Law and is on . a public way , namely , Chickering Rd. (Rte 125) , or a private way , namely , , being land bounded as follows : North by N/F New Heritage Trust South by Wood Lane South by N/F Trustees of Reservation East by Chickering Rd. (Rte 125) 2 . The division of land shown on the accompanying plan is not a sub- division for the following reasons : II I 3 . Ti tle reference North Essex Deeds , Book #826 Page #33 or Certificate of Title No . Registration Book ; Page Applicant ' s Sig ture - Owner' s signature and address if not the applicant : t (Print Name) Applicant ' s Address : Scott Construction Co., Inc. 12 Rogers Road Haverhill, MA 01835 Tel . No . 508-374-0034 ;< : Notice to APPLICANTJTO'WN CLERK of actionof Planning Board on accompanying plan I . The North Andover Planning Board has determined that said plan does not require approval under the Subdivision Control Law , and the appropriate endorsement has been made upon the same . 2 . The North Andover Planning Board has determined that said plan shows a subdivision , as defined by G . L . c . 41 , s . 81-L , and must therefore be re -submitted to it for approval under the Subdivision Control Law . `Very truly yours , NORTH ANDOVER PLANNING BOARD By Date : by (Town f I ? r:< : REG[IVEO JOYCE. BRADS'HAW CLEFORM A NOR HN ANDOVER APPLICATION FOR ENOORSEMENT OF PLAN ,JUN 10 3 51 PM BELIEVED NOT TO REQUIRE APPROVAL June 18 19 96 C To the Planning Board of the Town of !`forth Andover : The undersigned wishes to record the accompanying plan and requests a determination by said Board that approval by it under the Subdivision Control Law is not required . The undersigned believes that such approval is not required for the following reasons : 1 . The division of land shown on the accompanying plan is not a sub - division because every lot shown thereon has the amount of frontage required by the North Andover Zoning By Law and is on . a public way , namely , Chickering Rd. (Rte. 125) , or a _ private way , namely , , being land bounded as fol lows : North by NjF New Heritage Trust South by Wood Lane South by N/F Trustees of Reservation East by Chickering Rd. (Rte 125) 2 . The division of land shown on the accompanying plan is not a sub- division for the following reasons : I - 798 - - #49 3 . Ti tle reference North Essex Deeds , Book #-826 Page #33 or Certificate of Title No . , Registration Book ; Page licant ' s ignature : Owner' s signature and address if not ` the applicant : se h Sco t Presid n (Print Name) Applicant ' s Address : Scott Construction Co., Inc. 12 Rocrers Road Haverhill, MA 01835 Tel . No . 508-374-0034 C2F Planning Board Meeting Senior Center June 3, 1997 Members Present: Joseph Mahoney, Chairman, Richard Rowen, Vice Chairman, arrived at 7 : 02 p.m. Richard Nardella arrived at 7 : 02 p.m. Alberto Angles, Associate Member, arrived at 7 : 07 p.m. Alison Lescarbeau, Clerk, arrived at 7 : 11 p.m. John Simons was absent. William Scott, Director of Community Development was present. The meeting was called to order at 7 : 05 p.m. Minutes : The minutes of May 6, 1997 and May 20, 1997 were continued until June 17, 1997 . Discussion: Forest View Estates - preliminary plan Tom Laudani was present to represent Forest View Estates . Mr. Laudani stated that this project was recently denied by the Planning Board. Mr. Laudani stated that he submitted this preliminary on May 6, 1997 prior to the Town Meeting zoning change on Rt. 114 . Mr. Scott stated that he recommends the board to restate some of the issues they had in the past with this plan. Mr. Scott also recommends that DPW should be a part of the definitive plan. Mr. Laudani stated that the plans have been sent to John Chessia. Mr. Rowen asked Mr. Scott if he could go through the old file and get all of the issues that they have had in the past. Mr. Scott stated that he could do that . Mr. Mahoney asked what was different from the old plan. Mr. Laudani stated that this plan exceeds the requirements for a preliminary submission. Mr. Laudani stated that this plan shows an off site sewer plan. Mr. Stapinski, of Merrimack Engineering, showed the Board the new plans which have a total of 98 lots . Mr. Rowen suggested that they resolve their issues with drainage before they submit their definitive plan. 1 Mr. Rowen also stated that he would like to see what areas you' re opening up for other developments when the sewer exists on Rt. 114 . Mr. Rowen asked Mr. Laudani to pay attention to the playground area that they talked about during the last plan because there are going to be a lot of children in the development and they are going to be near a highway. Mr. Laudani stated that he knows it is important that we fit the needs of the community. Mr. Mahoney asked if there were any plans to access Harold Parker Forest . Mr. Stapinski stated that there are 3 access points to enter Harold Parker Forest. Continued until June 17, 1997 . Boston Ski Hill - preliminary plan Chris Huntress, of Geller Associates, was present to represent Boston Ski Hill . Mr. Huntress stated that at the TRC meeting he thought they came out with a favorable report. Mr. Huntress showed a plan from 1989 of Boston Ski Hill which is on record. Mr. Huntress stated that he filed the new plan with the town prior to the Town Meeting vote on the zoning change on Rt. 114 . Mr. Huntress showed the Board the new plan. He stated that there is a total of 700 of open space preserved and there is a total of 34 acres . They are planning to build a 3 lot subdivision. Mr. Mahoney asked how are you working with the sewer. Mr. Huntress stated that they have every intention to work with the other developments . Mr. Scott stated that they have locked in the zoning rights and 3 lots gives them the road access. Mr. Huntress stated that they are looking for the Planning Board to approve their preliminary plan. Continued until June 17, 1997 . Lot 8 Long Pasture Estates - correspondence Mr. Scott submitted the Board with a letter stating that Mr. Crowley is required to submit the security for the remaining improvements on both off and on site infrastructure. Heritage Estates - update Paul Donahue was present representing Heritage Estates . Mr. Scott stated that we need an agreement to begin the review. Mr. 2 Scott stated that the Board needs to establish dates for issuing permits . Mr. Scott read from his recommendations stating that the applicant should have the willingness to pay the necessary fee' s to the current fee schedule. Mr. Scott also stated that since 1987 there have been a lot of different levels of engineering review and may be cause for closer scrutiny. Swimming pools are an issue and they need to be looked at more closely. Mr. Scott stated that when the clock starts ticking there are no extensions of time and time will just run out for the applicant. Mr. Mahoney stated that it is a necessity to have a time limit on the public hearing. Mr. Scott stated that after the memo is signed we can lock in a time. Mr. Donahue stated that he is ready to proceed subsequent of the 17th and would like to start the Public Hearing. Mr. Scott stated that the time limit could be 60 days from the agreement . Mr. Donahue asked who' s responsibility is it to make sure that the progress is continuing. Mr. Rowen stated that it is the developers . Mr. Donahue asked what will be the process of the abutters . Mr. Scott stated that he will ask Town Council on how the applicant will have to proceed with the notification of abutters . Mr. Rowen stated that since we are moving forward why not get the plans in today. Mr. Scott stated that he does not want to touch anything until we have a signed agreement. Continued until June 17, 1997 . Merrimack College - establish a bond Mr. Scott recommends that Merrimack College give a bond through Reliance Insurance rather than a cash bond for the reason that their accountants recommend that for organizations such as theirs they should be able to have an insurance bond. On a motion by Rowen, seconded by Ms . Lescarbeau, the Board voted unanimously to allow Merrimack College to issue a bond through Reliance Insurance instead of a cash bond. 3 Continued: Red Gate Pasture - definitive Ben Osgood Jr. was present to represent Red Gate Pasture. Mr. Mahoney stated that the only issues from the site walk were drainage issues . Mr. Mahoney stated that the contour of the property was not as bas as he thought. Mr. Rowen stated that he was concerned with the ponds on the hill and is also concerned about the drainage. Mr. Rowen stated that the water leaves by Mr. Cyr' s property then goes across Salem Street and into a ditch and then into Mosquito Brook. Mr. Rowen stated that the first plan had the pond on the street and it could be built up. Mr. Osgood stated that he could berm an area to hold more water. Mr. Mahoney asked what it was to berm. Mr. Osgood stated that a burm was a narrow ledge along a slope. Mr. Mahoney stated that the property at the bottom of Foxwood has no yard because of the detention pond and Mr. Mahoney stated that he does not want to see another pond on Salem Street. Mr. Osgood explained the different effects of having the berms . Mr. Osgood stated that he is trying to set up a meeting with John Chessia, Towns Outside Consultant, for Monday some time . Mr. Osgood stated that a berm would keep sheath flow off of the Cyr' s property. Mr. Rowen stated that by having detention ponds on the owners property makes them to be responsible for maintaining them and does not feel that it is a good idea. Mr. Scott stated that if the residents want to put a deck on they would have to go before the Board because you can't cut into the slope . Mr. Nardella asked if Mr. Osgood could try to move the houses around. Mr. Osgood stated that they are proposing sub-drains at the top of the slope. Mr. Scott stated that they' re concerned about the upper basin and the pipe on the bottom of the hill . 4 Continued until June 17, 1997 . Decisions : 200 Chickering Road (Rennies) - site plan review The Board agreed to set the bond for 200 Chickering Road for $25, 000 . On a motion by Mr. Rowen, seconded by Mr. Mahoney the Board voted 3-2 to approve 200 Chickering Road site plan review, the site plan review was denied due to the fact you need 4 votes . Mr. Nardella asked if the applicant would like to know why they denied it . Mr. Shaheen stated that he thought the Public Hearing was closed. Mr. Nardella stated that the applicant should come back to resolve the issues of public safety and traffic issues . Mr. Nardella stated that there is an open door for further reconsideration. Ms . Lescarbeau stated that she does not concur with items 1&3 of the decision. Ms . Lescarbeau stated that it that it is not an appropriate location, the building is not appropriate and it a safety hazard to the town and area. Ms . Lescarbeau stated that she does not feel that she can be persuaded. Mr. Shaheen stated that if it meets the bylaws then the permit must be granted, that' s what the law says . Mr. Mahoney stated that they have followed the laws and statute. Mr. Mahoney feels that we have no right not to grant this. In his view the applicant has done everything they were supposed to do. 757 Turnpike Street (Stop & Shop) - site plan review The Board agreed to set the bond for 757 Turnpike Street for $25, 000 . On a motion by Mr. Rowen, seconded by Mr. Nardella, the Board voted unanimously to approve the decision as amended for 757 Turnpike Street site plan review. Endorse Plans : Lot 31A Weyland Circle - Form A Mr. Scott recommends the Board to sign the plan. 5 1 The Planning Board signed the Form A plan for Lot 31A Weyland Circle . Bonds/Lot Releases: 94 Flagship Drive (Chemlawn) - bond release Mr. Scott recommends the release of the bond. On a motion by Mr. Nardella, seconded by Ms . Lescarbeau, the Board voted unanimously to release the remaining balance of $3, 000 plus interest for 94 Flagship Drive. Windkist Farms - lot releases Mr. Scott recommends the release of the lots . On a motion by Mr. Nardella, seconded by Mr. Angles the Board voted unanimously to release lot 1-18 of Windkist Farms . Windkist Farms - bond release Mr. Scott recommends the release of the bond. On a motion by Mr. Nardella, seconded by Mr. Rowen, the Board voted unanimously to release the remaining balance of $15, 000 plus interest. On a motion by Mr. Rowen, seconded by Mr. Nardella, the Board voted unanimously to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 9: 30 p.m. 6 r f M1 Town of North Andover ekoRTN qti Office of the Zoning Board of Appeals iY . Community Development and Services Division ,° , W 27 Charles Street -„wap' R North Andover,Massachusetts 01845 20010�'Ssgcaus�' D. Robert Nicetta Telephon (95�}481;8141 Buitcdiig Commissioner Fax(978)688-9542 Notice of Decision Year 2001 Any appeal shall be filed within(20) Property at 200 Chickering Road days after the date of filing of this notice in the office of the town clerk. NAME: Terra Properties,LLC DATE: October 24,2001 ADDRESS: 231 Sutton St.Suite IA PETITION: 010-2001 North Andover,MA-1845 HEARING: 5/8/01;6/12/01; 7/10/01;9/18/01 The North Andover Board of Appeals held one public hearing in four sessions for Town Boards' and Citizens' input. The public hearing was closed on September 18, 2001 by placing the petition "under advisement” on Wednesday, October 24,2001 at 3:30 p.m. in the Conference Room, V floor Town Hall, 120 Main Street, North Andover,Massachusetts.The"under advisement"meeting was opened for Board members to discuss the request for a comprehensive permit by Terra Properties,LLC, 231 Sutton Street, Suite IA, North Andover, Massachusetts. This application was originally for 132 housing units (later reduced to 126 housing units)per MGL Chap. 40B §§20-22. The housing is to have 25% of the units set aside as "affordable" in the R4-Residential, R-5 Residential, and B-1 Business zones, located at 200 Chickering Road, North Andover,Massachusetts. The following members were present and voting: William J. Sullivan, Robert Ford, John Pallone, Ellen McIntyre, and George Earley. Also in attendance,but not voting, was Walter Soule. Upon a motion made by George Earley and seconded by John Pallone to grant the Applicant a comprehensive permit pursuant to MGL Chap. 40B §§20-22 for 126 housing units of which 25% will be affordable per the following preliminary plans: a. Plan Titled: Preliminary Site Pian, Kittredge Crossing, North Andover, MA Sheets 1-3 & 5-7, Sheet 4 Prepared for: Terra Properties,LLC 231 Sutton Street,North Andover, MA 01845 Prepared by: Merrimack Engineering Services,Inca 66 Park Street,Andover, MA 01810 Date: September 12, 2001 (Sheets 1-3 & 5-7); September 7, 2001 (Sheet 4) BOARD OF APPEALS 688-9541 BUILDING 688-9545 CONSERVATION 688-9530 HEALTH 688-9540 PLANNING 688-9535 b. Plan Titled: Preliminary Landscaping Plan, Kittredge Crossing, North Andover,MA Prepared for: Terra Properties,LLC Prepared by: GSD Associates-Architects, Inc. Date: September 12, 2001 C. Plan Titled: Preliminary Architectural Plans, Kittredge Crossing, North Andover, MA Prepared for: Terra Properties,LLC Prepared by: Gregory P. Smith, GSD Associates-Architects, Inc. Date: September 12, 2001 Also, 22 general conditions, 34 specific conditions,,and 30 waivers are included in the 20 page document attached. Voting in favor were William J. Sullivan,Robert Ford,John Pallone,Ellen McIntyre, and George Earley. Town of North Andover Board of Appeals �J William J. S llivan Chairperson t Decision on Comprehensive Permit Application Terra Properties, LLC 231 Sutton Street, Suite 1A North Andover, MA 01845 Petition No. 010-2001 PROCEDURAL HISTORY The Applicant is seeking a Comprehensive Permit pursuant to M.G.L. Chapter 40B, Sections 20 through 23, to construct 132 units of housing of which 25%will be set aside as "affordable,"all in the Residential 4, Residential 5, and Business 1 zoning districts, located at 200 Chickering Road, North Andover, MA 01845. The Comprehensive Permit application was submitted to the North Andover Town Clerk's office on April 19,2001 at 10:40 a.m.A waiver for time extension was signed by Louis P. Minicucci,Jr., Manager on May 4, 2001. The Town of North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals, after publication in The Eagle-Tribune on April 24, 2001 and May 1, 2001 and due notice sent to all abutters and interested parties, held a public hearing on May 8, 2001 at the North Andover Senior Center at 12OR Main Street, North Andover, MA 01845. North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals members present were Chairman William Sullivan; Raymond Vivenzio, Clerk; Robert Ford; John Pallone; George Earley and Ellen McIntyre, Alternates. Walter Soule was excused. An additional waiver for time extension was signed at the June 12, 2001 North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals meeting by Louis P. Minicucci, Jr., Manager, for the Comprehensive Permit Application to be continued and heard at a regular meeting to be held on July 10, 2001 at 7:30 p.m.; an additional waiver for a time extension was signed on July 10, 2001. At the May 8, 2001 North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals meeting, and at subsequent meetings held to continue the public hearing, Terra Properties, LLC was represented by Louis P. Minicucci, Jr. and Thomas D. Laudani, Managers of Terra Properties, LLC, 231 Sutton Street Suite 1A, North Andover, MA 01845; Robert W. Levy, Esq., Eckert Seamans Cherin&Mellott, LLC,Attorneys at Law,One International Place, 181 Floor, Boston, MA 02110; Gregory P. Smith, AIA, GSD Associates-Architects, Inc., 148 Main Street Building "A", North Andover, MA 01845; Dermot J. Kelly,PE, PTOE, Dermot J. Kelly Associates, Inc., Two Dundee Park Suite 301, Andover, MA 01810; and Stephen E. Stapinski, RLS, Merrimack Engineering Services, Inc., 66 Park Street, Andover, MA 01810. Curtis R. Young, Pres., Wetlands Page -1- Preservation, Inc.,47 Newton Road, Plaistow, NH 03865, represented the Applicant for matters pertaining to the Conservation Commission, but did not appear at any meetings. The public hearing was closed on SEPTEMBER 18, 2001. The North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals made the following Findings of Fact and Decision subsequent to the hearing. These findings are based on the following submissions which include, but are not limited to, the following materials,which are on file at the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals and are being incorporated into this decision as a portion of this Application for a Comprehensive Permit. 1. Exhibit A: Traffic Impact and Access Study and Revised Traffic Impact and Access Study, Proposed Development Project, Kittredge Crossing,North Andover, MA, Prepared by DJK Associates, Inc. for Terra Properties, LLC, May 1, 2001; 2. Exhibit B: Parking Impact Study, Prepared by Terra Properties, LLC for North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals, June 28, 2001; 3. Exhibit C: Fiscal Impact Analysis and Revised Fiscal Impact Analysis, Prepared by Terra Properties, LLC for North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals, July 3, 2001; 4. Exhibit D: Agreement with the Trustees of Reservations to purchase approximately 5,000 square feet of land; 5. Exhibit E: Certificate of Legal Existence of Applicant. 6. Exhibit F: Certified List of Abutters. 7. Exhibit G: Sample Regulatory Agreement and Deed Rider. 8. Exhibit H: Town of North Andover Performance Bond Agreement The Applicant submitted a plan prepared by Merrimack Engineering Services, Inc., dated April 17, 2001 to the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals with the submission of the Comprehensive Permit Application. The North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals circulated the plan for review to the North Andover Police Department, the North Andover Fire Department, the North Andover Conservation Commission, the North Andover Board of Health, the North Andover Planning Board, and the North Andover Department of Public Works. Partly as a result of comments and recommendations made by Page -2- these Boards, the Applicant submitted a revised plan dated July 3, 2001 to the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals. After subsequent review by the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals, the Applicant submitted a second revised plan to the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals on September 12, 2001, which is the final plan the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals reviewed for the Comprehensive Permit decision. There are no outstanding issues raised by any Town Boards. All issues have been addressed by the Applicant. Prior to the close of the public hearing on September 18, 2001, the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals also received and considered the following written communications: 10. Letter from Peggy Walsh, resident of Heritage Green Condominium, dated June 4, 2001; 11. Correspondence from Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc., consultants for the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals, dated July 6, 2001; 12. Letter from Elvira "Vera" Curcio, resident of Heritage Green Condominium, dated August 11, 2001; 13. Correspondence from Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc., consultants for the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals, dated September 13, 2001; 14. Letter from Elvira "Vera" Curcio, resident of Heritage Green Condominium, dated September 19, 2001. In addition to the foregoing materials, the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals retained Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc. (VHB)to provide a technical review of the Applicant's application,plans,and studies and to present findings of this review to the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals in writing.This review was paid for from funds received from the Applicant for this purpose. The Applicant has satisfactorily addressed the issues raised by the consultant. The premises and site affected are known as 200 Chickering Road, North Andover, Massachusetts and are commonly known as the Rennie's Florist site. In 1998, the Owner submitted a Special Permit Application to the North Andover Planning Board for the approval of a 24,055 square foot office and retail complex.Although approved on September 3, 1998,this project was never constructed.On April 19,2001, the Applicant submitted a Comprehensive Permit application to the North Andover Zoning Board of Page -3- Appeals.The site consists of 6.33 acres of land and 346.27 feet of frontage,a single family house,a florist shop,and greenhouse.The site is served by municipal water and sewer,and natural gas.All of the existing structures are to be demolished.The Applicant proposed to construct 132 units of multi-family housing in six wood frame buildings, three stories in height; 25% or thirty-three (33) units were to be set aside as "affordable". In addition, a community building or clubhouse was proposed, and 180 surface parking spaces. Trash storage and removal as proposed consisted of three dumpsters, ten cubic yards in size. The site itself is irregular in shape. Wetlands are found on the site; wetland issues will be addressed by the Conservation Commission when the Applicant submits a notice of intent. The parcel of land which is the subject of the Comprehensive Permit application is owned by Dorothy J. Rennie, Individually and Trustee and Carol Ryan Rennie, Trustee of Old Town Village Realty Trust. The Applicant is Terra Properties,,LLC. The Applicant has submitted evidence of site control to the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals as required.The parcel of land is recorded at the Essex North Registry of Deeds in Book 798 Page 49; Book 826 Page 23; Book 5598 Page 98;the Plan reference is Plan 13434. It is also identified as Assessor's Map 46 Lots 35 and 46.The site is located in Zoning Districts Residential 4(R-4), Residential 5(R-5),and Business 1 (B-1).The FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map#250098-0003-C dated June 2, 1993 indicates that the parcel is located in Zone X. The Applicant originally proposed access to the rear section of the site through Wood Lane,a paper street. Wood Lane was created by a vote of Town Meeting in 1909; in 1931 a portion of Wood Lane was discontinued as a town way at Town Meeting. The Applicant contended that the discontinued portion of Wood Lane is not the portion which runs along the site's South/Southwest boundary,and designed access to the rear portion of their site over Wood Lane. However, an abutter, the Trustees of Reservations, disagreed and objected to the Applicant's right to use Wood Lane for access to the rear portion of the site. During the course of the hearing on the Application,the Applicant and the Trustees agreed that Applicant would abandon its claim to use Wood Lane for access in exchange for approximately 5,000 square feet of land owned by the Trustees which would allow the Applicant to connect the front and rear sections of the site without creating a second driveway access from Chickering Road over Wood Lane. The North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals agrees that this is a better solution to the problem of access since it eliminates disagreement about the legality of crossing Wood Lane and reduces wetland impact. Evidence of the Agreement between the Applicant and the Trustees of Reservations was presented to the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals for review (Exhibit D). Page -4- Prior to the submission of the Comprehensive Permit application, the Applicant applied to the Federal Home Loan Bank of Boston's New England Fund for a project eligibility letter through the Warren Bank, a participating lender with an office in Beverly, Massachusetts.Warren Bank reviewed the Application and issued a Project Eligibility Letter to the Applicant on March 29, 2001. As a result of the decision by the Massachusetts Housing Appeals Committee in Stuborn Ltd. Partnership v. Barnstable Bd. ofAppeals, No. 98-01 (Decision March 5, 1999),the New England Fundwas added to the list of eligible housing programs. No other subsidy programs have been proposed by the Applicant. During the course of the public hearing and as a result of the agreement with the Trustees of Reservations, an abutter, to eliminate the need for an access drive crossing Wood Lane, the Applicant redesigned the site. The final plan presented to the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals showed the number of buildings reduced from six to four; the number of units decreased from 132 to 126; and the number of parking spaces increased from 180 to 202, an increase in the parking ratio of 1.36 of spaces per unit to 1.6 parking spaces per unit. In addition,the number of trash dumpsters,which had been decreased to two, was increased to three, ten cubic yards in size. In response to concerns from the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals regarding trash pickup, the Applicant has agreed to provide a trash compactor in each unit as well as a garbage disposal. During the course of the public hearing,the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals also heard testimony from the Heritage Green Condominium Association, an abutter, and various condominium unit owners at Heritage Green Condominium,also abutters,who objected to the use of Farrwood Avenue,a private road, for the purpose of accessing underground utilities.The Applicant has redesigned the plan to eliminate the use of Farrwood Avenue and the final plan shows the connections to utilities in Chickering Road only, a public way.Another issue brought up by these abutters concerned flooding of the Heritage Green property. As designed by the applicant and reviewed by the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals' technical consultant, VHB, no increase in peak rate of runoff water will be directed off-site, but will be detained on site in either surface detention basins or underground recharge chambers. The Heritage Green abutters also brought the issue of a buffer between the Kittredge Crossing property and the Heritage Green property. The Applicant has proposed both a fence and a vegetative buffer to be created along the property line in the vicinity of Farrwood Avenue, as shown on the final plan. In addition,various abutters questioned the financial impact of the proposed project on the Town of North Andover, specifically with respect to the impact on the public school system. The Applicant submitted a Fiscal Impact Analysis and a Revised Fiscal Impact Analysis(Exhibit C)prepared using a model developed Page -5- by the Natural Resources Defense Council called Developments and Dollars -an Introduction to Fiscal Impact Analysis in Land Use Planning, principally authored by Michael L. Siegel of Public and Environmental Finance Associates. The original Fiscal Impact Analysis assumed eleven children would live at Kittredge Crossing. In response to questions and comments from the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals, the Applicant revised the Analysis to show the impact of up to three times the number of children. Both the original and revised Analyses showed a positive fiscal impact to the Town,with a break even point in excess of 52 children. The Applicant proposed the Citizens' Housing and Planning Association (CHAPA), as the agency to monitor the resale of the affordable units. The North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals asked what the options were for such agencies and was told that the choices are a non-profit housing advocacy agency like CHAPA,the local housing authority,or a regional housing authority.The Applicant indicated that there was a conflict of interest in choosing the local housing authority and that CHAPA was the preferred agency. The Applicant has agreed with CHAPA for these services and will sign a contract with them to this effect. FINDINGS 1. The Applicant. The Applicant,Terra Properties, LLC is a"limited dividend organization"as that term is used on M.G.L.Chap.40B§21 and 760 CMR 30.02 and will sign a Regulatory Agreement with the funding agency to limit profits, and is eligible to apply for and receive a comprehensive permit. Terra Properties is a qualified applicant pursuant to 760 CMR 31.01 in that it is a limited dividend organization, the project is fundable by the Federal Home Loan Bank of Boston's(FHLB/B) New England Fund through a participating lender, and has control of the site as that term is used in 760 CMR 31.01 in that Terra has entered into a Purchase and Sale Agreement for the acquisition of the property from Dorothy J. Rennie, Individually and Trustee and Carol Ryan Rennie, Trustee of Old Town Village Realty Trust, the present owners. 2. Statutory Minima for Low and Moderate Income Housing. The Town of North Andover has not met any of the statutory minima set forth in M.G.L. Chap. 40B §20 or 760 CMR 31.04. 3. The Project. The Project, as shown on the final Site Plan, consists of a total of 126 condominium units in four residential buildings and an additional community building, including forty-two (42)one bedroom units,eighty-four(84)two bedroom units and a total of 202 parking spaces with related improvements. The Project is to be known as"Kittredge Crossing." Page -6- 4. Affordable Housing to be Provided.Twenty-five per cent(25%)of the units or 32(thirty-two) units will be "low or moderate income housing" as that term is defined in MGL Chap. 40B § 20. Terra Properties, LLC has agreed to a restriction on affordability.The duration of the affordability restriction shall be for a term of 99 years or, in the event of approval of the affordability restriction by Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development, in perpetuity or such other term contained in such restriction, from the date of this Decision, as specified in the Conditions to this Decision. 5. Access and Traffic Issues.The only means of access to and from the site will be via a main access way from Chickering Road.The North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals found that the proposed access is properly designed and safe to accommodate the needs of the Project for ordinary and emergency services. 6. Support by Town Board and Agencies. During the course of the public hearings,the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals sought and received comments and concerns from Town boards including the Department of Public Works,the Police Department,the Fire Department,the Conservation Commission,the Planning Board, and the Board of Health.The Applicant has addressed these concerns adequately, and there are no outstanding issues. DECISION Based on the above findings and a 5-0 (unanimous)vote of the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals taken on October 24, 2001, a Comprehensive Permit for the Project, subject to the following twenty-two general conditions, thirty-four specific conditions, and thirty waivers, is hereby APPROVED with the following conditions. Comprehensive Permit Conditions A. General Conditions 1. The site, as shown on the plan endorsed by the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals shall not be substantially changed, altered or reconfigured in any way without an amendment to this Comprehensive Permit, after notice and hearing by law. a. Plan Titled: Preliminary Site Plan, Kittredge Crossing, North Andover, MA Sheets 1-3 &5-7, Sheet 4 Page -7- Prepared for: Terra Properties, LLC 231 Sutton Street, North Andover, MA 01845 Prepared by: Merrimack Engineering Services, Inc. 66 Park Street, Andover, MA 01810 Date: September 12,2001 (Sheets 1-3&5-7);September 7,2001 (Sheet 4) b. Plan Titled: ` Preliminary Landscaping Plan, Kittredge Crossing, North Andover, MA Prepared for: Terra Properties, LLC Prepared by: GSD Associates-Architects, Inc. Date: September 12, 2001 C. Plan Titled: Preliminary Architectural Plans, Kittredge Crossing, North Andover, MA Prepared for: Terra Properties, LLC Prepared by: Gregory P. Smith, GSD Associates-Architects, Inc. Date: September 12, 2001 2. All requirements of the New EnglandFundas administered bythe Federal Home Loan Bank , of Boston are to be met. The Regulatory Agreement and Declaration of Restrictive Covenants are to be executed by the Applicant as required by the program prior to the issuance of a building permit and shall be recorded at the Essex North Registry of Deeds in Lawrence with marginal notations. 3. The number of units to be constructed under this Comprehensive Permit is one hundred twenty six (126). The affordable units shall comprise twenty-five per cent (25%) of the total or thirty two (32) units which shall be indistinguishable from the outside as being affordable. No two affordable units shall be located adjacent to each other.The utilities,equipment,fixtures,and appliances in the affordable units shall be the same as those in the standard market rate units at time of first conveyance. This shall not be construed to prevent buyers of standard market rate units from upgrading the utilities, equipment, fixtures, and appliances, among others, in those units. 4. All affordable units are to be sold through a lottery process in accordance with Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development guidelines. All fees and facilitation are to be the responsibility of Terra Properties, LLC. Seventy per cent (70%) of the affordable units shall be set aside for North Andover residents according to a policy to be developed by Terra in conjunction with the Town of North Andover Community Development Department, and approved by the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals. 5. Occupancy for each unit is expected to take place as soon as is reasonably practicable after completion of construction, issuance of Certificate(s) of Occupancy by the building commissioner and conveyance to individual unit owners, if not sooner. Page -8- 6. During construction, all local, state and federal laws and regulations shall be followed regarding noise, vibration, dust and blocking Town ways. At all times, the Applicant shall use reasonable means to minimize inconvenience to the residents in the area. 7. The Applicant shall comply with all bylaws, rules and regulations, and codes pertaining to the development of the site, unless expressly waived herein. 8. Before beginning any construction under this Comprehensive Permit,the Applicant shall furnish evidence to the Building Commissioner that this decision and the plans with the revisions necessitated by this decision, have been recorded with the Essex North Registry of Deeds in Lawrence. All plans shall include both an Engineer's and an Architect's stamp. Documentation of recording, including either a document number or a book and page number shall be provided to the Building Commissioner. 9. A certificate of insurance, which shall include coverage for general liability; automobile liability; umbrella coverage; and Workmen's Compensation, shall be submitted to the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals, prior to the beginning of construction, including site preparation. 10. Prior to obtaining a building permit,the Applicant shall submit to the Building Commissioner and to the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals for review and approval final construction drawings and final site plans signed by a Registered Architect and a Registered Engineer. 11. The Building Commissioner shall be the authorized agent of the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals and/or the Town of North Andover for the purposes of enforcement of any of the conditions, restrictions, or requirements of the comprehensive permit and is authorized to enforce any of these provisions in the Superior Court of the Commonwealth. 12. The comprehensive permit is granted based on the Application and no use and no other improvements substantially different from those contemplated by the Project Plans shall be deemed permitted by virtue of the granting of the comprehensive permit. 13. The comprehensive permit shall run with the land. 14. The comprehensive permit shall become void in the event the Applicant does not obtain a building permit in connection with the Project within two years of the date hereof, not including such time r rcomprehensive e uired to u sue or await the determination of an appeal from the rant of the permit or q p pp 9 Page -9- the issuance of an Order of Conditions from the Conservation Commission, or to pursue or await the determination of an appeal from the issuance of the Order of Conditions. 15. Any substantial deviation from the Project Plan shall require the approval of the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals. 16. The Applicant shall not be permitted to receive a building permit (other than for the community building and site work) until such time as the Applicant has executed and delivered a Regulatory Agreement substantially in the form as shown in Exhibit H (the Regulatory Agreement). The North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals acknowledges that the form of the Regulatory Agreement may be revised with respect to the details of reporting and similar requirements regarding the methods of achieving and monitoring compliance with substantive goals, based upon review of the form by the monitoring agent to be selected. 17. The waive m waivers from local law requested and granted are attached.All other regulations remain in full force and effect. 18. The Project shall comply with all applicable state and federal regulations including but not limited to State Building Code, State Sanitary Code, Architectural Access Board Regulations, and Plumbing, Electrical and Fire Codes. 19. Thirty days prior to the application for a building permit, the Applicant shall submit for the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals' review and comment a construction mitigation plan that shall include, but not be limited to, measures to control erosion and sedimentation, tree and brush clearing, grading and general site mitigation measure. 20. To the extent permitted by the law, residents of the Town of North Andover are to be granted a local preference for the affordable units. In no case shall local preference be granted for more than seventy per cent (70%) of the affordable units. 21. The Project shall comply at all times with the Regulatory Agreement. 22. Handicap accessibility shall be governed by the Massachusetts Architectural Board Rules and Regulations, 521 CMR. Page -10- B. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS 1. Terra Properties, LLC will be responsible for the snow removal, trash removal, rubbish removal, recyclable materials removal, road maintenance, and storm drainage maintenance on the premises until such time as control of the development is handed over to the organization of unit owners for the condominium.Terms to this effect will be incorporated in the condominium documents for Kittredge Crossing. 2. Terra Properties, LLC will develop and sell these units as condominiums and not as rental units. The rules and regulations of the condominium shall contain a provision which is not less restrictive than the following: Any lease or rental of a unit by a Unit Owner, other than by the Declarant, shall be subject to the following conditions: a. Such lease or rental agreement shall be in writing; b. The lease or rental agreement shall apply to the entire unit, and not a portion thereof; C. The term of the lease or rental agreement shall be for a term of not less than six(6) months; d. The occupancy of the unit shall be for not more than two (2) unrelated people; e. The lease or rental agreement shall expressly provide that the lease or rental is subject to the Master Deed, the Organization of Unit Owners and the Rules and Regulations of the Condominium; and f. A copy of the lease or rental agreement shall be provided to the Organization of Unit owners. r ited except as governed Leasing or renting of the affordable units shall be prohibited,9• g 9 p P 9 by the provisions of the Regulatory Agreement and Deed Rider. Page -11- 3. Terra Properties, LLC will develop a preference policy for sale of the affordable units in conformance with guidelines established by the Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development(DHCD). Terra Properties, LLC will work with the Town of North Andover towards this goal. 4. Terra Properties, LLC will hire as an outside monitoring agency Citizens' Housing and Planning Association (CHAPA), which will work with the North Andover Housing Authority to ensure that affordability guidelines are met. 5. Twenty-five percent (25%) of the total units in the Project shall be available for purchase by persons whose income is no more than 80%of the area median as determined by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.These affordable units shall be mixed with and indistinguishable from market value units throughout the buildings in the project. Before any unit is sold in the Project, the Applicant shall submit to the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals the proposed form of Deed Rider to be attached to and recorded with the Deed for each and every affordable unit in the Project at the time of each sale and resale, which Deed Rider shall restrict each unit in accordance with this requirement in perpetuity in accordance with the requirements of MGL Chap. 184 §§ 31-33. Prior to submitting the proposed Deed Rider to the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals,the Applicant shall use its best efforts to obtain any necessary governmental approvals for such a deed restriction in perpetuity. In the event that the Department of Housing and Community Development(formerly the Executive Office of Communities and Development, EOCD) ("DHCD") is required by law to approve but declines to approve the perpetual restriction, the proposed Deed Rider shall set forth a period of affordability which shall be the longest period allowed by law and approved by the DHCD, but in no case less than ninety-nine years as offered by the Applicant. In this event, the Applicant shall submit to the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals written evidence of the Applicant's efforts to secure approval of the perpetual restriction,the written denial thereof, and the grounds for denial;and the Applicant shall also grant to the Town of North Andover or its designee in the Deed Rider a right of first refusal, in a form mutually acceptable to counsel for the Applicant and to Town Counsel, covering each and every affordable unit in the Project triggered upon the expiration of the affordability period. 6. Terra Properties, LLC will exchange the fee interest in Wood Lane for an approximately 5,000 square foot parcel of land at the southwesterly corner of the site, presently owned by the Trustees of Reservations. Terra Properties, LLC will present evidence,of an agreement to this effect. Page -12- 7. There will be four(4) residential buildings containing 126 units, 25% (or 32 units) of which will be affordable units. There will be a total of 202 parking spaces for a parking ratio of 1.6 spaces per unit. 8. Terra Properties, LLC will provide handicapped accessible curb cuts at all locations where sidewalks cross over streets on the entire site. 9. Terra Properties,LLC will provide a trash compactor and an under-sink disposal in each unit as well three trash dumpsters,each ten cubic yards in size, located on the site as shown on the final plan. 10. There will be one consolidated driveway to the site, located on Chickering Road. The sight distance of the driveway when constructed will be at least 400 feet in both directions. 11. Terra Properties, LLC will place one master fire alarm box at the entrance to the property. 12. Terra Properties,LLC will equip all buildings with a sprinkler system as per State regulations and building code. 13. Terra Properties, LLC will install hydrants in accordance with the final plans. 14. Fire Lanes for each building will be clearly marked at the site. 15. Signs will be posted in the area of the driveway connecting the front and rear portions of the site indicating that vehicles will be towed at their owner's expense if they are blocking access to emergency vehicles. Terms to this effect will be incorporated in the condominium documents for Kittredge Crossing. The condominium management will be responsible for enforcement of this provision. 16. Terra Properties, LLC will install an opticom at the junction of Chickering Road and Massachusetts Avenue pending State approval. 17. Terra Properties, LLC will file a Notice of Intent under the 310 CMR 10.00, the Wetlands Protection Act Regulations, with the Conservation Commission. Replication of lost Bordering Vegetated Wetlands and compensatory flood storage areas will be provided consistent with 310 CMR 10.00. Page -13- 18. Terra Properties, LLC will provide a tee cut into the water line on Chickering Road as shown on the final plans. 19. Terra Properties, LLC will use 45-degree bends rodded together with restraining bands on the main water main connecting buildings. 20. Where possible, Terra Properties, LLC will work with the North Andover Department of Public Works to loop water lines where reasonable. Terra Properties will comply with State standards regarding the number of hydrants, gates, as shown on the final plans. 21. Terra will submit detailed drainage calculations to the North Andover Department of Public Works for review and approval, which shall not be unreasonably withheld and shall be issued in a timely fashion, including information about Total Suspended Solids and subsurface infiltration systems. 22. Terra will submit evidence of compliance with Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Stormwater Management Policy to the North Andover Conservation Commission at the time of the filing of the Notice of Intent for the Project. 23. Terra will submit evidence of receipt of a Massachusetts Highway Department Permit for entrance onto Route 125/Chickering Road before a building permit is issued. 24. A fire protection system will be designed by a licensed fire protection engineer. 25. Cross connection details and proper backflow information regarding water tie-ins and the type and size of water services will be provided and approved by the North Andover Department of Public Works; such approval shall not be unreasonably withheld and shall be issued in a timely fashion. 26. Terra Properties, LLC will provide details on the sewer main and sewer services including profiles of the utility. Terra will use two 45 degree bends instead of 90 degree bends in the sewer force main. 27. Drawings and specifications of the sewer pumping station design will be submitted to the North Andover Department of Public Works for review and approval,if a pumping station is required;such review and approval shall not be unreasonably withheld and shall be issued in a timely fashion Page -14- 28. All artificial lighting used to illuminate the exterior premises shall be arranged and shielded so as to prevent direct glare from the light source into any public street or private way or onto any adjacent property. 29. Screening and landscaping shall be substantially in compliance with a landscaping plan submitted on April 12, 2001, and revised on July 10, 2001. 30. A drainage system maintenance manual shall be provided. 31. A report by a Professional Engineer accompanied by certified As-Built plans of the construction of the drainage improvements shall be submitted and accepted prior to the issuance of any building permit other than a foundation permit or a building permit for the construction of the community building. 32. This comprehensive permit is conditional on the Applicant obtaining feesimple interest in the real estate. 33. Whenever residents of Kittredge Crossing are eligible for school busing, the bus will pick up and discharge students at the entrance to the driveway only. 34. The condominium documents shall include a provision that no vehicle shall park so as to impede travel in the access lanes at any time, except those allowed by regulation of the Americans with Disabilities Act or those vehicles temporarily on the site,including but not limited to vehicles for the purpose of delivery or moving, construction, repair or maintenance, public or private transportation, or those vehicles of an emergency nature. No vehicles shall obstruct the fire lanes except those allowed by law. Page -15- Approved Waivers to the By-Laws and Regulations in Effect in the Town of North Andover For the Approved 126 Unit Residential Housing Project To be known as Kittredge Crossing at 200 Chickering Road, North Andover, Massachusetts Based on final revised plans and drawings prepared by Merrimack Engineering Services,including sheets 1 of 7, 2 of 7, 3 of 7, 5 of 7, 6 of 7, and 7 of 7 dated September 12, 2001, and sheet 4 of 7 dated September 7, 2001 and plans and drawings prepared by GSD Associates, including sheets A1.1, A1.2, A1.3, A1.4, A2.1, and A2.2 dated 09/12/2001 submitted and based upon the Zoning Bylaw as amended through the Annual Town Meeting of May 13, 2000, which was approved by the Attorney General on October 12, 2000, posted October 25, 2000, and the Special Town Meeting of December 11, 2000, the following zoning waivers are granted: Section 1 - Purposes: 1. A Waiver is granted from this section where the regulations vary and/or are in conflict with the regulations as provided by Chapter 40-B of the General Laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, which shall govern this application, where they are in conflict. Section 4- Buildings and Uses Permitted: 1. A Waiver from Section 4.1.1.1 is granted which states: In the zoning districts above specified, the following designated buildings and alterations and extensions thereof and buildings accessory thereto and the following designated uses of land,buildings,or part thereof and uses accessory thereto are permitted. All other buildings and uses are hereby expressly prohibited except uses which are similar in character to the permitted uses shall be treated as requiring a Special Permit. A waiver from this section is granted since the proposed use as a multi-family building is not allowable in the Business -1 and Residential - 4 district. The waiver shall state that a multi-family use does not require a Special Permit. 2. A Waiver from Section 4.1.1.3 is granted which states: When a zoning district boundary divides a lot of record on June 5, 1972 in one ownership, all the zoning regulations set forth in this Zoning Bylaw applying to the greater part by area of such lot so divided may,by Special Permit,be deemed to apply and govern at and beyond such zoning district boundary,but only to an extent not more than one hundred(100) linear feet in depth (at a right angle to such boundary)into the lesser part by area of such lot so divided. 3. Waiver from Section 4.1.1.5 is granted which states: No private or public(1985/20) way giving access to a building or use or not permitted in a residential district shall be laid out or constructed so as to pass through a residential district.A waiver from this section by deletion of it entirely is granted to allow such access since the private or public ways are located in and through a residential district that does not allow multi-family residences. Page -16- 4. A Waiver from Section 4.122.1 is granted which states: One residential building per lot. A waiver from this section is granted to allow multi-family residential uses since the project is a multi-family residential development on a single lot that has a total of four(4)residential buildings and one community building located within a portion of a Residence 4 District. Waiver shall include the ability to have multi- family residences in this zone. 5. A waiver from Section 4.122.12 is granted which states: Swimming and/or tennis dubs shall be permitted with a Special Permit.A waiver is granted from this section so much as the proposed pool may be considered a swimming club. The pool is for the exclusive use of the residents and their guests and may not be operated as a swimming club for non-residents. 6. A waiver from Section 4.124.12 is granted which states: Swimming and/or tennis clubs shall be permitted with a Special Permit.A waiver is granted from this section so much as the proposed pool may be considered a swimming club. The pool is for the exclusive use of the residents and their guests and may not be operated as a swimming club for non-residents. 7. A Waiver from 4.126.9 is granted which states: Residential Uses including one and two family dwellings. Apartments shall be allowed where such use is not more than 50% of the total area of the building. A waiver from this section is granted to allow for up to 100%of the building floor area since the multi-family dwellings have residential uses in up to 100% of the building floor area. 8. A waiver from Section 4.124.11 is granted which states: Swimming and/or tennis clubs shall be permitted with a Special Permit.A waiver is granted from this section so much as the proposed pool may be considered a swimming club. The pool is for the exclusive use of the residents and their guests and may not be operated as a swimming club for non-residents. 9. A waiver from Section 4.2 Phased Development Bylaw is granted in its entirety. This waiver is granted as it may be construed to hinder the development of this project. 10. A waiver from the Table 1 Summary of Use Regulations is granted.This waiver is granted to allow for multi-family dwellings and associated uses in each of the zoning districts which the property is located where it is not permitted by right. Section 4.1, District Use Regulations, Table 1, Summary of Use Regulations a. Change "no" to"yes" in R-4 column for Multi-family Dwellings and Apartments. b. Change "yes*"to"yes" in R-5 column for Multi-family Dwellings and Apartments. (eliminate *) Section 7- Dimensional Requirements: 1. A waiver from Section 7.1.1 Contiguous Buildable Area(CBA) is granted which states "As of April 28, 1986, the area of any new lot created, exclusive of area in a street or recorded way open to public use, Page -17- at least seventy five(75)percent of the minimum lot area required forzoning shall be contiguous land other than land located within a line identified as wetland resource areas in accordance with the Wetlands Protection Act, Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 131, Section 40 and the Town of North Andover Wetland Protection Bylaw, Chapter 178 of the Code of North Andover. The proposed structure must be constructed on said designated contiguous land area."A waiver is granted from this section so much as the addition of the 5,000 SF t of the Trustees of Reservations's land area to the main portion of the lot constitutes a new lot, or that the project would be required to meet these requirements. 2. A waiver from the dimensional requirements of Section 7.3 Yards (Setbacks) is granted for all zoning districts listed. This waiver is granted to construct the buildings as indicated on the site plan. See the specific listing in Table 2 below. 3. A waiver from the dimensional requirements of Section 7.4 Building Heights is granted for all zoning districts listed.This waiver is granted to construct a three story building with a basement and a sloped roof as indicated on the Architectural Drawings. See the specific listing in Table 2 below. 4. A waiver from the dimensional requirements of Section 7.5 Lot Coverage is granted for the zoning districts listed. This waiver is granted to construct the buildings as indicated on the site plan. See the specific listing in Table 2 below. 5. A waiver from the dimensional requirements of Section 7.6 Floor area Ratio (FAR) is granted for the zoning districts listed. This waiver is granted to construct the buildings as indicated on the site plan. See the specific listing in Table 2 below. 6. A waiver from the dimensional requirements of Section 7.7 Dwelling Unit Density is granted for all zoning districts listed. This waiver is granted to construct the buildings as indicated on the site plan. See the specific listing in Table 2 below. 7. The following list of waivers as described above are granted from Table 2,Summary of Dimensional Requirements, as referenced throughout the By-Law: Table 2 changes are listed below for all zoning districts. TABLE 2: The following waivers are required as Listed in this table: a. Change height to 55'from 35' in the R-4, R-5, B-1 Zone b. Change front and rear setback to 10'from 30' R-4, R-5, B-1 Zone C. Change side setback from 15' in R-4 Zone, 25' in R-5 Zone and 20' in B-1 Zone to 9.83' in these three zones. d. Delete FAR requirement in B-1 Zone. Page -18- e. Delete lot coverage requirement in R-5 and B-1 Zone f. Permit density of 19.90 units/acre in R-4, R-5 and B-1 Zone for "Density Max/Acre" line. g. Delete note 2 requirement for an additional 15' buffer zone adjacent to a residential district as this note may apply to this project. h. Delete the note 6 requirement for townhouse dimensions as this note may apply to this project. i. Delete the note 7 requirement for additional requirements for apartments and townhouses as this note may apply to this project. j. Delete the note 12 requirement for multi-family structures and site plan review requirements as this note may apply to this project. Section 8, Supplementary Regulations 1. A waiver from Section 8.1.2 listing of Uses and Minimum Spaces Required for Off-Street Parking. This waiver is granted to allow for the parking ratios indicated on the site plan. Change Minimum Spaces Required from 2 spaces per unit to 1.6 spaces per unit.This includes all associated accessory uses such as the complex office and common spaces. 2. A waiver from Section 8.1.7 is granted which reads:A parking space shall mean an area of not less than 9'x18; accessible over an unobstructed driveway not less than 25'wide. A waiver from this section is granted to allow for driveways of 24' wide adjacent to parking spaces and 20' wide where driveway is used for two way access between parking areas in which no parking space is directly accessed from the 20' wide driveway. 3. A waiver from Sections 8.1.8 is granted which reads: For multifamily dwellings the front yard shall not be used for parking for accessory uses.A waiver from this section in its entirety is granted in as much as this section could be construed to prohibit parking as indicated on the site plan. 4. A waiver from Sections 8.1.9 is required which reads: In all residential districts the front yard shall not be used for parking for accessory uses.A waiver from this section in its entirety is granted in as much as this section could be construed to prohibit parking as indicated on the site plan. 5. A waiver from Section 8.3 Site Plan Review in its entirety is granted in as much as this project is regulated by the requirements under a Comprehensive Permit (Chapter 4013) and is exempt from such review. Page -19- 6. A waiver from Section 8.5 Planned Residential Development(PRD) is granted in its entirety since this project is regulated by the requirements under a Comprehensive Permit(Chapter 40B)and are exempt from such review. 7. A waiver from Section 8.7 Growth Management is granted in its entirety in as much as this section could be construed to hinder the development of this project. 8. A Waiver from Section 8.10 Lot/Slope Requirements is granted in its entirety in as much as this section could be construed to be applicable to this project.A waiver is granted since the application for the Kittredge Crossing project was made prior to the Town Meeting of May 15, 2001, at which this item was added to the zoning by-law. Section 10- Administration: 1. A waiver from Section 10.3 Special Permit is granted in its entirety in as much as this section could be construed to be applicable to this project. References are made to various special permit granting authorities that are in conflict with the requirements under a Comprehensive Permit(Chapter 40B)and are exempt from such review. Section 11 - Planned Development District: 1. A waiver from Section 11 Planned Development District is granted in its entirety in as much as this section could be construed to be applicable to this project.This project is not located in an I-S district and this project is being submitted under the requirements of a Comprehensive Permit(Chapter 40B)and are exempt from such review. The following waivers are also granted: Wetlands Bylaw A waiver from the entire North Andover Wetlands Bylaw is granted.The project will meet the requirements of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts as promulgated in 310 CMR 10.00, Wetlands Protection Act Regulations. Bonds A waiver from all Town of North Andover's requirements for all cash bonds related to this Project is granted. In lieu of such cash bonds, surety bonds shall be provided of the same value. The Applicant will execute a performance bond agreement in substantially the same language and form as put forth in Form F, Performance Bond Agreement,of the North Andover Planning Board, Exhibit I,and incorporated herein by reference. The amount of the surety bond is to be determined by Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc.,when construction plans and specifications are provided,prior to site development,except for bond requirements of the Conservation Commission, which shall determine the bonding amount in relation to the Order of Conditions. In lieu of all such cash bonds, including bonds required by the Conservation Commission, surety bonds shall be provided of the same value. Page -20- 6. A waiver from Section 8.5 Planned.Residential Development(PRD)is granted in its entirety since this project is regulated by the requirements under a Comprehensive Permit(Chapter 40B)and are exempt from such review. 7. A waiver from Section 8.7 Growth Management is granted in its entirety in as much as this section could be construed to hinder the development of this project. 8. A Waiver from Section 8.10 Lot/Slope Requirements is granted in its entirety in as much as this section could be construed to be applicable to this project.A waiver is granted since the application for the Kittredge Crossing project was made prior to the Town Meeting of May 15, 2001, at which this item was added to the zoning by-law. Section 10-Administration: 1. A waiver from Section 10.3 Special Permit is granted in its entirety in as much as this section could be construed to be applicable to this project. References are made to various special permit granting authorities that are in conflict with the requirements under a Comprehensive Permit(Chapter 40B)and are exempt from such review. Section 11 - Planned Development District: 1. A waiver from Section 11 Planned Development District is granted in its entirety in as much as this section could be construed to be applicable to this project.This project is not located in an I-S district and this project is being submitted under the requirements of a Comprehensive Permit(Chapter 40B)and are exempt from such review. The following waivers are also granted: Wetlands Bylaw A waiver from the entire North Andover Wetlands Bylaw is granted.The project will meet the requirements of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts as promulgated in 310 CMR 10.00, Wetlands Protection Act Regulations. Bonds A waiver from all Town of North Andover's requirements for all cash bonds related to this Project is granted. In lieu of such cash bonds, surety bonds shall be provided of the same value. The Applicant will execute a performance bond agreement in substantially the same language and form as put forth in Form F, Performance Bond Agreement,of the North Andover Planning Board, Exhibit I,and incorporated herein by reference. The amount of the surety bond is to be determined by Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc.,when construction plans and specifications are provided,prior to site development,except for bond requirements of the Conservation Commission, which shall determine the bonding amount in relation to the Order of Conditions. In lieu of all such cash bonds, including bonds required by the Conservation Commission, surety bonds shall be provided of the same value. Page -20- Town of North Andoverof Na oT4 OFFICE OF �? e�t< ��e�p COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND SERVICES 3 146 Main Street North Andover, Massachusetts 01845 use..'s�5 SSacH _ MODIFICATION TO ORDER OF CONDITIONS File No. 242-856 Project: 200 Chickering Road The NORTH ANDOVER CONSERVATION COMMISSION at its meeting on qq �Q March 24, 1999 , agreed to accept Plaf s d aA ( I. lg6i Vi to 9 as a Modification to the Order of Conditions issued in file # 242-856 dated 6/5/97 and recorded in Book # and Page # Issued by the NORTH ANDOVER CON VATION COMMISSION: On this 2/4th day of March 1999 before me personally al pard Albert P. Manzi, Jr. , to me known to be the -person described in and who executed the foregoing instrument and ac;knowledged that he/she executed the same as his/her free act and deed» -' � December 11, 2003 Notary Publi My Commission Expires A receipt from the Registry of Deeds must be submitted to this g Y office showing that this Modification has been recorded and referenced to the Book and Page numbers where the original Order 242-856 was recorded. Bt7;i:3 Ji ?AL.�LS 688-9541 L'°JIi:'t:C adzi-i� uNJE t rr�"isOty 6 8-9i3i, fTF i�1 638-9540 ?L Q,',rR4C 638•"53.`_ Town of North Andover kORT" OFFICE OF in RE,QL'0 1 O 11L10 '6,6 L COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND A NORTH ANDOVER 30 School Street `� 9 North Andover Mmsachu t 0184 '' `°•,r,° se is 9 PH p7 < WII,LIAM J.SCOTT �UN �� � 11 1 � JI SSACNUS� Director NOTICE OF DECISION Any appeal shall be filled within (20) days after the date of filling this Notice in the Office of the Town Clerk. Date June 25, 1997 Date of Hearing 12/3/96, 12/17/96, i/7/97, 2/4/97,3/4/97, 4/8/97, 4/15/97, 5/20/97,6/3/97 Petition of 200 Chickering Road (Rennies) Premises affected 200 C_hicVkPring Rnnd Referring to the above petition for a special permit from the requirements of the North Andover Zoning Bylaw Section 8.3 So as to allow the construction of a concrete masonry & wood. One story 16, 900 SF building for commercial use located at 200 Chickering Road. After a public hearing given on the above date, the Planning Board voted to DENY the Special Permit- site plan review based upon the following conditions: Signed a CC: Director of Public Works Richard Rowen, Chairman Building Inspector Natural Resource/Land Use Planner Alison Lescarbeau, V. Chairman Health Sanitarian Assessors John Simons, Clerk Police Chief Fire Chief Richard Nardella Applicant Engineer Joseph V. Mahoney File Interested Parties Planning Board CONSERVATION 688-9530 HEALTH 688-9540 PLANNINCT 688-9535 Town of North Andover f 10RTH I OFFICE OF 3?Cft�ec L COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND SERVICES ° : p 30 School Street ' North Andover,Massachusetts 01845 �,"°�•r.o•°''�<y WILLIAM J. SCOTT ss�CHU Director June 25, 1997 Ms. Joyce Bradshaw Town Clerk 120 Main Street No. Andover, MA 01845 Re: Special Permit/Site Plan Review 200 Chickering Road Dear Ms. Bradshaw: The North Andover Planning Board held a public hearing on Tuesday evening, December 3, 1996 at 7:30 p.m. in the Senior Center behind the Town Building, on the application of Scott Companies, 12 Rogers Road, Haverhill, MA 01835 for a special permit under Section 8.3 (Site Plan Review) of the North Andover Zoning Bylaw . The legal notice was properly advertised in the North Andover Citizen on November 13 and November 20, 1996 and all parties of interest were duly notified. The following members were present: Joseph V. Mahoney, Chairman, Richard Rowen, Vice Chairman Alison Lescarbeau, Clerk, John Simons and Alberto Angles, Associate Member. Kathleen Bradley Colwell, Town Planner was also absent. The petitioner was requesting a special permit to allow to allow the construction of a concrete masonry& wood. One(1) story 16,900 SF building for commercial use located at 200 Chickering Road, North Andover, MA 01845 in the Business-1 (B-1) Zoning District. Mr. Rowen read the legal notice to open the public hearings. Peter Shaheen was present representing Scott Companies for Old Town Village a 16,900 square foot retail subdivision. The property is located off of Rt. 125 (Rennes Florist) on 18 acres of land. Some of the types of businesses that have approached the applicant have been a hairdresser, Mailboxes Etc., and a travel agency. Mark Gross is the site engineer, he stated that there is no residential property involved. The property is zoned B-1 surrounded by R-5, R-4 and R-3 residential zonings. Rennies Florist will still occupy one unit, it will be the in the front of the it in m 00 1 000 F in size. There building. There will be approximately nine units ranging from 2,0 to S will be a green pedestrian area in the front provided with landscaping. The existing vegetation in the rear of the building will be maintained to be supplemented with a 5' fence and landscaping to buffer the residential area. The original plan was to have two entrances and exits with one close to Farrwood. A revised plan will eliminate the driveway access adjacent to Farrwood Drive. The Technical Review Committee CONSERVATION 688-9530 HEALTH 688-9540 PLANNING 688-9535 Mr. Rowen asked if the road were widened at this point would the cars then go faster. Mr. Hajec stated probably yes, but it can't be said until it's done. Elvira Curcio, of 23 Edgelawn Drive, stated that Officer Soucy stated that this a State road and was wondering why there_has not been a State Police Officer attend a meeting to address the traffic. Mark Johnson, representing Heritage Green Condominiums, is concerned with the traffic plan. He questioned what would happen if you did not allow the passing on the right. Mr. Rowen stated that cars would queue up. Mr. Rowen stated that given the fact that the two traffic consultants and the State have approved the traffic plan he would not require a center turn lane. Mr. Gross spoke with the town's engineering consultant and stated that the most significant issue is with the down stream area. They plan to do a perk test. Mr. Rowen asked if they will have enough time to get the results in by the next meeting. Mr. Rowen stated that we will put them on the agenda for the next meeting but if they don't get the results back in time we'll take them off. Mr. Nardella stated that he is looking for them to bring something back to the Board on a proposal for roadway improvement. Mr. Shaheen stated that the applicant is willing to do what ever anyone else is willing to do. Tom Neve, of Neve Associates, is working with the condominium association stated that his major issue is with the site drainage. He would like them to test every layer that exists and test in at least in 4 different areas. Mr. Neve's other concern is the maintenance of the sub-surface system. Mr. Gross stated that the maintenance for these systems could be put in the decisions. The North Andover Planning Board held a regular meeting on April 15, 1997. The following members were present: Joseph Mahoney, Chairman, Richard Rowen,Vice Chairman, Alberto Angles, Associate Member and Richard Nardella. Kathleen Bradley Colwell, Town Planner was also present. MHF Design requested a continuance until May 20, 1997 in order to complete the required soil tests as required by Coler& Colantonio in their last correspondence. The North Andover Planning Board held a regular meeting on May 20, 1997. The following members were present: Joseph Mahoney, Chairman, Richard Rowen, Vice Chairman, Alison Lescarbeau, Clerk, Alberto Angles, Associate Member John Simons and Richard Nardella. William Scott, Director of Community Development. requested that compact car spaces be dispersed around the site, not clustered in one area and to disperse handicap parking spaces. Fire access will be provided around the building. There are no large delivery trucks anticipated. The elevation of the building will be broken up horizontally and vertically. There were concerns about storm water management and the catch basins and whether or not the drainage can be off site. The sewage will be pumped up to Rt. 125. The lighting will be 12' poles with down cast boxes, and low level pedestrian lights. Safety lights at the rear will be downcast over the doors. They produced a cross section of the site. The roof line will create a false facade with roof top units hidden inside to buffer noise. An RDA was filed with ConCom however the applicant requested a continuance in order to produce soil testing to the ConCom. An ENF was filed with the state. A traffic study has been prepared. Town will hire an outside consultant to review. Mr. Simons asked why not orient the building towards Farrwood Drive. Rayner Cooke the architect, stated that the reason why they faced the orientation the way they did is because the sun faced the three sided greenhouse, also it was the best fit for the shape of the lot. Mr. Simons stated that he would like it to be oriented towards Farrwood, for example a gate or fence at the west end for pedestrian's to walk through to get to the shops. Mr. Gross stated that they are going to screen the site from the neighbors to make it as least intrusive as possible and consider pedestrian access if so desired. Mr. Rowen was concerned about where the drainage will go. Mr. Gross stated that the natural flow is towards Farrwood, but the plan channels the water to the opposite side of the lot. Ms. Colwell asked how they have designed the drainage. Mr. Gross stated that there is an underground system currently proposed, but is more expensive and is of high maintenance. Mr. Mahoney question what kind of materials they are planning to use. Mr. Cooke stated that they are going to use clapboard siding and brick with colonial style store fronts and wood doors. They will have carved wood signs with outside lights. There will be roofscape with dormers and windows to make a village theme. Mr. Rowen asked about the slope of the gables and commented that steep roofs are preferred. Mr. Simons is also concerned with the slope of the roof. Ms. Colwell suggests that they take a look at the slope of the roof at Osco Drug and check plans vs. actual. Mr. Dermot J. Kelly of Kelly& Associates, Inc. reviewed the traffic study. The counts that were done at the entrance of Farrwood and on Rt.114 estimated that 23,000 cars per day during the week pass the site. These studies were conducted during the hours of 7:00 a.m. till 9:00 p.m. and on Saturday during the hours of 11:00 a.m. till 2:00 p.m. there were 17,000 cars. At the peak hours 1600 cars passed in the a.m. 1900 cars passed in the p.m. Saturday's peak hours showed 1300 cars passing. Some traffic growth needs to be assumed. There is only a 16' lane for entering traffic. There should be no planting on the site entrance and, there should also be stop signs at each exit. Mr. Mahoney asked about how much more traffic is going to be generated with the project. Joe Bolen, 27 Farrwood Avenue is concerned about the traffic volume in the a.m. and p.m. Peggy Walsh, 27 Farrwood Avenue is concerned about the traffic when she is trying to take a left turn in the a.m. out of Farrwood, she is also is concerned about the dumpsite pickup and snow removal. Hillary Cannor, 98 Edgelawn Drive#7, is concerned about the orientation of the building and the ability to rent the units at the end and is concerned about customers missing the entrance and turning around on Farrwood Drive. Mr. Cooke stated that not all retail tenants require visibility from the road. Mr. Gross explained that no one would be able to see the building if it were oriented towards Farrwood Drive. Mark Johnson, representing the Condominium Association, is concerned about the traffic and believes it should be revised with new entrances. Mr. Johnson also had concerns about the level of service increases in the future with the level of traffic. He also expressed some concern about the orientation of the building, and thought that the building should face Rt. 125 with a smaller project. Vera Curcio, 23 Edgelawn Drive, brought to the Boards attention that there was a denial for a building on the site of Rennies in the past, based on the problems with the traffic and stated that she will look into that more fully. Ms. Curcio also stated that she has checked with the State Department of Public Works and says they have received no information on this project. Ms. Curcio is against this project and feels that it will lower her property value and bring more problems to the adjacent properties. Ms. Curcio also stated that she was not informed about the meeting until a few days before. Jeff Cannor, 98 Edgelawn Drive, expressed some concern about the sign that would be placed in the front of the project. Mr. Gross stated that they would like to have an identifying sign at the entrance and will have a facade sign. They will be submitting a plan of the sign. Jim McCarthy, an abutter was concerned about the hours of operation. Mr. Bolero, was concerned about how long will the construction time be in affect. Mr. Gross stated that the approximate time on the construction would be about 4 months. Ms. Curcio submitted a letter to the Planning Board outlining her concerns. The letter will be placed in the Planning Board files. The public hearing was continued to the December 17, 1996 meeting. The North Andover Planning Board held a regular meeting on December 17, 1996. The following members were present: Joseph V. Mahoney, Chairman, Richard Rowen, Vice Chairman, Alison Lescarbeau, Clerk, Richard Nardella and John Simons. Kathleen Bradley Colwell, Town Planner was also present. The applicant requested a continuance until January 1, 1997. The North Andover Planning Board held a regular meeting on January 7, 1997. The following members were present: Joseph V. Mahoney, Chairman, Richard Rowen, Vice Chairman, Alison Lescarbeau, Clerk, Alberto Angles, Associate Member, Richard Nardella and John Simons. Kathleen Bradley Colwell, Town Planner was also present. Mr. Rowen read a letter from Scott Construction asking for a continuance until February 4, 1997 in order to complete the traffic review and requested plan review. The North Andover Planning Board held a regular meeting on February 4, 1997. The following members were present: Joseph V. Mahoney, Chairman, Richard Rowen, Vice Chairman, Alison Lescarbeau, Clerk, Richard Nardella and John Simons. Kathleen Bradley Colwell, Town Planner was also present. Mark Gross of MHF Design, was present to discuss the traffic study. Mr. Gross stated that they have filed an Environmental Notification Form. Mr. Gross has spoken to Mass. DEP.and Mass. DPW and they stated that they are free to go ahead and file for curb cut permit. Dermot Kelley, President of DJK Associates was present to give an overview of the traffic study. Mr. Kelley showed a plan with a single access as far away as possible from Farrwood Ave. A stop line and a stop sign will be installed at the exit onto Rt. 125. Mr. Kelley stated that he has requested data from the state regarding the number of accidents but has not received it yet. Mr. Nardella stated that his major concern is the number of accidents that could occur. Mr. Kelley stated they cannot determine the number of accidents. Mr. Mahoney asked if they could get data from the Town's Police Department on the number of accidents that have occurred on Farrwood entering and exiting. Mr. Nardella asked what the distance is from center line of the access drive to the center line at Farwood. Mr. Kelley stated 250'. Mr. Kelley stated that Ms. Colwell,Mr. Hajec and himself went out to Chickering Road to observe the traffic flow. Mr. Kelley stated that the traffic flows in cycles every 70 seconds. They observed that the traffic flows from one direction for 30 seconds and from the other direction for 40-50 seconds. For 20-30 seconds the traffic is lessened. So people who are exiting and entering Farrwood have 30-35 seconds of no traffic and for 45 cars turning onto Farrwood there was no queuing. Mr. Nardella asked the number of cars that could que up out of 200 Chickering Road. Mr. Kelley stated that 3 could. Paul Hajec, President of Hajec Associates, the town's traffic consultant was present to explain what he has observed. Mr. Hajec stated that everything that Mr. Kelley has said is correct. Mr. Hajec stated that they did not observed more than 2 cars at a time queuing. There could be some traffic problems when Rt. 495 is blocked up and people use this as an alternative route however that is a rare occurrence and is not one that the applicant should be expected to fix. Ms. Lescarbeau asked what would happen if there was a car turning into the plaza and there was a car behind them that is turning into Farrwood. Mr. Hajec stated that they could use the shoulder of the road. It is a paved road and the shoulder is 8'to 10' wide. Mr. Hajec stated a traffic light would have to be approved by the state and Mr. Hajec thought that would be very unlikely. The traffic lights would make unnecessary delays and more accidents usually occur when there is a traffic light. Dave Johns of 209 Chickering Road, stated that it is difficult to take a left hand turn out of his driveway and that people walk on the shoulder therefore it is very hard to pass in the shoulder. Lisa Neukuckatz of 68 Fernview Ave. stated that her children walk on Chickering Road to and from school and believes itis dangerous if people use the shoulder to pass. Joseph Balliro of 27 Farrwood Ave. stated that he is a criminal defense lawyer and thinks it is not a legitimate point to use the shoulder. It may be legal but it is not safe. Peggy Walsh of 27 Farrwood stated too many things are happening(too many other driveways)within the 250' of road. Mr. Nardella asked as residents if they had any ideas to make the flow better. Mr. Balliro stated that they should put in a dedicated turn lane and possibly a yellow blinking light. Jim McCarthy stated that during the 20-30 second delay if there is somebody coming out of the 99 Restaurant or Bulgers Animal Hospital then the delay is shortened. Mark Johnson who represents Heritage Green Estates asked that there should be no heavy trucks on the site and questioned the level of service. Is E or D? Mr. Gross responded by saying that they are not planning to have any trailer trucks on the property just box trucks and are willing to put that in the decision as a condition. Mr. Johnson stated that level D represents a condition with long delays to minor street traffic. The levels go from A-F and A being the least amount of delays and F being the longest. Chickering Road and Farrwood currently operates at a level of service at C or better. Under 2001 Build weekday evening peak hour conditions the service will decrease to Level D. Mr. Balliro asked why the exit could not be changed to the back of the property. Mr. Gross stated that access to commercial property has to be through commercial property and cannot be through residential property. Ms. Curcio, 23 Edgelawn Ave. questioned the zoning for the site. Ms. Colwell stated that the site is zoned B-1 for business but is surrounded by residential property. Ms. Colwell suggested that Ms. Curcio come into the Planning Office to look at the zoning map. If she had additional questions she can review the zoning with the Zoning Code Enforcement Officer. Continued the public hearing until the March 4, 1997 meeting. The North Andover Planning Board held a regular meeting on March 4, 1997. The following members were present: Joseph V. Mahoney, Chairman, Richard Rowen, Vice Chairman, Alison Lescarbeau, Clerk, Alberto Angles, Associate Member and John Simons. Kathleen Bradley Colwell, Town Planner was also present. Atty. Peter Shaheen was present representing 200 Chickering Road. Mark Gross, MHT Design Inc. the site engineer stated that the Conservation Commission has also requested review of the drainage from John Chessia, the Town's consultant therefore he will respond to both the Planning and Conservation drainage issues at the same time. Dermit Kelley of DJK Association conducted traffic counts while Merrimack College was in session as requested by the Town's traffic consultant and the counts were less than the original ones. Mr. Kelley stated that he received a copy of all the accidents that occurred in North Andover from Mass. Highway and none have occurred on Farrwood. Mr. Kelley stated that in his opinion a left turn lane is not required. He is concerned about widening the shoulder as that may cause traffic to travel faster along Rt. 125. Mr. Kelley stated that while Ms. Colwell, Mr. Hajec and himself went out to the site people were turning into Farrwood and passed on the left hand side. Sgt. Fred Soucy of the North Andover Police Dept., stated that a middle turn lane would benefit the Town but it would have to go from Rennies to Mass. Ave. Possibly the costs could be borne by all property owners along that stretch of roadway. He is not in favor of widening the shoulder. If a middle turn lane is not constructed the roadway should remain as. If there are two vehicles and one went to pass on the right there would be adequate space to pass. Joseph Balliro, of 27 Farrwood Drive, asked if that was legal to pass on the breakdown lane. Mr. Soucy stated that they need to determine if it is a breakdown lane. Lisa Neukuckatz, of 68 Farrwood Drive, stated that people will start to pass on both sides of the street and make it a 4 way street and what about the pedestrians that are walking. Mr. Soucy stated that there is a sidewalk for the pedestrians. Carol Rennie, owner, stated that there has never been an accident in front of Rennes. Ms. Lescarbeau stated that there was just one store there now however with this complex there will be more. Atty. Peter Shaheen stated that Mass. Highway has jurisdiction over Rt. 125 and the plans have been submitted for their approval. P.J. Piantadosi stated that these people live off of a state highway what do they expect. He would like to see a mall come into this town instead of going over Andover to spend his money. Ms. Curcio, of Farrwood Drive, stated that once the mall goes in the accidents will start to occur just like they did when Osco Drug went in on Rt. 114. She stated that 9 accidents have occurred. Jim McCarthy, Heritage Green property manager, stated that he does not want to see Rt. 125 turn into a Rt. 28 in Salem, NH. Carol Rennie stated that the mall would be a benefit to the town and it will have a country atmosphere. P.J. Piantadosi stated that the Rennes have lived in this town their whole life and they are not planning on putting up the mall and leaving town. Mark Gross, site engineer, stated that there would be 4 underground systems designed to store a 100 yr. Storm. Mr. Gross stated that they have been before ConCom and they have asked John Chessia to look over the drainage because they will be discussing that with ConCom. Mr. Mahoney asked where the runoff would go. Mr. Gross stated that it would go into the wetlands on the Rennies property. Ms. Colwell stated that the building inspector had concerns with the proposed drainage structures off site and suggested that the applicant check with him regarding this issue. Mr. Gross stated that all the runoff goes through the infiltration. Mr. Mahoney asked what would happen if the sumps overflow. Mr. Gross stated that the property owner is supposed to maintain the system and keep it cleaned out. If it is not, silt will build up and go through the pipe and to the infiltration system and eventually be carried down the system. Mr. Rowen asked if something can be done to prevent this from happening. Mr. Gross stated that a hood structure will be placed over the pipes to prevent garbage and silt from getting through. Atty. Mark Johnson, representing Heritage Green, asked if the drainage that is going into the wetlands is on residential property. Mr. Gross stated yes. Mr. Johnson stated that he asked John Morin, of Neve Associated to look over the proposed drainage and he would like to be put on the cc: list when there is information on the drainage for this property. Mr. Mahoney asked what the building looked like in elevation, lighting and landscaping. Mr. Gross stated that the original plan had all compact parking spaces together now they have them spread out throughout the parking lot. The lighting along the parking lot on the opposite side of Farrwood will have 12' high lighting standards that cast light down on the lot. They will have landscaping with a stockade fence 5'high along Farrwood. There will also be a picket fence along the front of the property. The signage will be reviewed by the building inspector. Mr. Gross stated that the HVC units will be located on the top of the Rennies building in a pocket to reduce the noise. Helene Wilder,of Farrwood Drive, asked what side of the building will be facing Farrwood with the lighting issues and what about delivery times. Mr. Gross stated that the back of the building would be facing Farrwood and the only lights that would be on the back would be emergency lights on the back doors facing down to the door for security purposes. There are no late night or early morning deliveries. Ms. Colwell stated that there would be restriction on the delivery times written in the decision. Mr. Shaheen stated that he would like to end this at the next meeting. They have designed the building to be safe and the traffic has been approved by the Mass. State Highway. Joe Balliro, of 27 Farrwood Drive, asked if there was going to be any security with the overnight parking. Mark Johnson asked if there was going to be a buffer of trees where the fence is going to be. Mark Johnson also asked if there are going to be any trees coming down and if the area is going to be graded. Joe Balliro asked if there is going to be any restrictions on the construction hours. Ms. Colwell stated that the Police Department would be in charge of that. Continued until April 1, 1997. The public hearing was continued until April 8, 1997 due to a snow storm. The North Andover Planning Board held a regular meeting on April 8, 1997. The following members were present:Richard Rowen, Vice Chairman, Alison Lescarbeau, Clerk, Alberto Angles, Associate Member and Richard Nardella. Kathleen Bradley Colwell, Town Planner was also present. Peter Shaheen of MHF Design was present on behalf of the applicant. Mr. Shaheen is requesting a conditional Site Plan approval. Mr. Shaheen stated that the only thing that remains to be done is a perk test, which will be done on Friday. Ms. Colwell stated that there are other outstanding issues. John Chessia, the Town's engineering consultant, received the revised drainage last Wednesday and needs 2 weeks to review them. Mr. Rowen stated that not everything has been finalized. There are some issues that can be resolved like the building, lighting and landscaping. Mr. Rowen stated he would like to wrap up the traffic issue tonight. Mr. Nardella asked what the number of parking spaces were there. Mark Gross, of MHF Design, stated that they have moved the compact spaces around. The required size of the spaces are to be 84" and they are giving them 86 '/2. Mr. Shaheen stated that there will be no restaurant put in the plaza. Mr. Nardella asked if the dumpster was going to be enclosed with a gate. Mr. Gross stated that it would be. Ms. Lescarbeau asked if it was a compactor or a dumpster. Mr. Gross stated that it was going to be a dumpster. Ms. Lescarbeau asked how many units are there in the building. Mr. Gross stated that there are a total of 9 but some can be combined. Dermit Kelley, of DJK Associates,stated that the size of the road is 36' wide. Mr. Kelley stated that the shoulder is 5'-6' wide. Mr. Lescarbeau stated that even though you can't be cited for using the shoulder she is not going to approve a plan which requires passing in the shoulder. Mr. Nardella stated that the road is not going to be lined for the use of the shoulder. Atty. Shaheen stated that Officer Soucy stated that it was not illegal to use the shoulder. Mr. Nardella asked what is the objection to spending a little money and put the road wider and put the stripes on the road. Paul Hajec, the Town's Traffic Consultant, stated that he agrees with the applicant's traffic consultant and with the state highway department that a turning lane is not warranted for this project. However, in the future, if there is increased development along Rt. 125, a turning lane may be warranted along this stretch of RT. 125. Y g Mark Gross of MHF Design and Peter Shaheen were present. Mr. Scott stated that they did tests on Monday and the water tables were higher and they addressed the issues and sent them to John Chessia and he had no major issues. Mr. Gross stated that he could design a system on a 7 inch water table. Mr. Rowen stated that at the last meeting the attorney for Heritage Estates had brought up some issues at the last meeting and wanted to know if they have been addressed. Mr. Scott stated that they did additional testing. Mr. Rowen asked if they are planning on having a maintenance plan to include in the decision. Mr. Gross stated that there are 6 pages in the drainage report for maintenance. Mr. Gross stated that on site litter would be picked up weekly, sediment and underground tanks will be inspected monthly and the water swale will be inspected twice a year. The Board would like to have a maintenance plan put in the decision. Mr. Shaheen stated that he thought we addressed these issues at the last meeting and both traffic consultants agreed. Mr. Nardella asked if we had anything from Sgt. Soucy. Ms. Lescarbeau stated that there is a letter in our packets that states that you should not cross over the white line. Mr. Shaheen stated that it is a line to show that the width of the road is almost at an end. Ms. Lescarbeau stated that you are trying to make a bad situation worse by using the sides of the road. Why don't you just widen the road. Mr. Shaheen stated that at the last meeting we suggested that an inexpensive way to improve the road would be to add a patch of pavement to the side of the road so people could use it. Mr. Shaheen believes that if it is widened people might not slow down but, speed up and also they are not allowed to widen the road without the state to say it was O.K. Mr. Nardella stated that we a legitimate difference of opinion on that. W. Shaheen stated that the applicant meets all the requirements for site plan review so they should get the approval. Mr. Mahoney stated that Mr. Shaheen is right if they meet all requirements we cannot deny them. Mr. Nardella stated that he is not opposed for them to start construction and then widening the road. Mr. Nardella stated that when it snows and the plows are pushing the snow and it covers that side of the road how are the people then going to pass. Mr. Rowen stated that we have had 3 traffic people say that the road should not be widened and that people would speed up if it was widened and that's not what we want. Mr. Mahoney stated that he agrees. Mr. Shaheen stated that the applicant might contribute to the cost of the road. MrShaheen stated that we are willing to do extra to get the approval. Jim Mcartney stated that the City of Haverhill has approved to widen Rt. 125 and they don't have a concern with speeding. Mr. Mcartney also state that he would like the North Andover Police Department to write a letter stating that it is legal for people to pass over the white line. Also he would like it put in the decision that if the owner of the mall goes belly up that someone has to maintain the drainage system. Mr. Nardella stated that there will be a bond to ensure that you would be protected. Mark Johnson, representing Heritage Estates, disagrees with Mr. Mahoney. In section 8.3 1A, the purpose of it is to protect the health and safety of the residents and people. This is a site which has a building as big as you can get on the site. The drainage is not easy to get to and if it fails the Heritage Green people will be the only ones who will get hurt. The building is so big they can't even put a detention pond on the site so it underneath. The traffic configuration is not good for any of the residents. Mr. Johnson stated that his biggest concern is the statement "we have met all requirements so you have to approve it". Mr. Rowen stated that he shares concerns with the drainage but it would have been fool proof if Heritage green tie into their sewer. Jim Mcartney stated that in response to Mr. Rowen's comment, would you like it if someone used access on your driveway., It is private property. Mr. Rowen stated that my point was that they denied them to tie into the sewer so they will have to live with what happens. Elvira Curcio, 23 Edgelawn passed out packets to the Board members. Mr. Shaheen stated that he is looking for them to accept the site plan review and close the public hearing. On a motion by Mr. Nardella, seconded by Mr.Bowen the Board voted 4-1 to close the public hearing. On a motion by Mr. Rowen, seconded by Mr. Angles, the Board voted 4-1 to direct staff to draft a decision. The Board agreed to set the bond for 200 Chickering Road for $25,000. On a motion by Mr. Rowen, seconded by Mr. Mahoney the Board voted 3-2 to approve 200 Chickering Road site plan review, the site plan review was denied due to the fact you need 4 votes. Mr. Nardella asked if the applicant would like to know why they denied it. Mr. Shaheen stated that he thought the Public Hearing was closed. Mr. Nardella stated that the applicant should come back to resolve the issues of public safety and traffic issues. Mr. Nardella stated that there is an open door for further reconsideration. Ms. Lescarbeau stated that she does not concur with items 1&3 of the decision. Ms. Lescarbeau stated that it that it is not an appropriate location, the building is not appropriate and it is a safety hazard to the town and area. Ms. Lescarbeau stated that she does not feel that she can be persuaded. Mr. Shaheen stated that if it meets the bylaws then the permit must be granted, that's what the law says. Mr. Mahoney stated that they have followed the laws and statute. Mr. Mahoney feels that we have no right not to grant this. In his view the applicant has done everything they were supposed to do. Attached are the conditions. Sincerely, "�i ) Richard S. Rowen, Chairman North Andover Planning Board r 200 Chickering Road(Rennies)Site Plan Review-Special Permit 200 Chickering Road (Rennies) Site Plan Review - Special Permit The Planning Board herein by a vote of 3 in favor, 2 opposed, does not approve the Special Permit/Site Plan Review for the construction of a 16,900 one story concrete, masonry&wood building located at 200 Chickering Road in the Business -1 Zone. Scott Companies,12 Rogers Road, Haverhill, MA 01835 requested this Special Permit. This application was filed with the Planning Board on November 5, 1997. The three Planning Board members in favor make the following findings as required by the North Andover Zoning Bylaws Section 8.3 and 10.3: FINDINGS OF FACT: 1. The specific site is an appropriate location for the project as it is located in the Busines -1 Zone along a major roadway, surrounded by industrial and commercial uses; 2. The use as developed will not adversely affect the neighborhood as the site is designed to buffer adjacent uses; 3. There will be no nuisance or serious hazard to vehicles or pedestrians as identified through traffic analysis and review of such analysis by the Town's traffic consultant. 4. The landscaping approved as a part of this plan meets the requirements of Section 8.4 of the North Andover Zoning Bylaw; 5. The site drainage system is designed in accordance with the Town Bylaw requirements; 6. The applicant has met the requirements of the Town for Site Plan Review as stated in Section 8.3 of the Zoning Bylaw; 7. Adequate and appropriate facilities will be provided for the proper operation of the proposed use. Finally, the Planning Board members in favor find that this project generally complies with the Town of North Andover Zoning Bylaw requirements as listed in Section 8.35 but requires conditions in order to be fully in compliance. 1 r .. 200 Chickering Road(Rennies)Site Plan Review-Special Permit The two dissenting Planning Board members found: 1. Mr. Nardella stated that the applicant should come back to resolve the issues of public safety and traffic issues. Mr.Nardella stated that there is an open door for further reconsideration. 2. Ms. Lescarbeau stated that she does not concur with items 1&3 of the decision(as cited above). 3. Ms. Lescarbeau stated that it that it is not an appropriate location,the building is not appropriate and it is a safety hazard to the town and area. The Board further instructs that this decision is done without the prejudice of the two year stay from further applications for a Special Permit. The Board will allow reapplication within the two year period as setforth in 40A 16 without the need for steps required for reconsideration. cc. Applicant Assessors Building Inspector Conservation Administrator Director of Public Works Engineer File Fire Chief Health Administrator Planning Board Police Chief 2 < t � Town of North Andover {/1 (Eii�} wwF E NORTH OFFICE OF REC ,E„4 �0 14T�aD <6.e�0 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ANUS 'N"( Hoa�� at�ac�vlrR 30 School Street North Andover,Massachusetts 0184 WILLIAM J.SCOTT uN �1� �� 4 PH '97 7 »,iFD "c5 ( 9Ssac►+usEt Director NOTICE OF DECISION Any appeal shall be filled within (20) days after the date of filling this Notice in the Office of the Town Clerk. Date June 25, 1997 Date of Hearing i2/3/9b, .12/17/96, 1/7/97, 2/4/97,3/4/97, 4/8/97, 4/15/97, 5/20/97,6/3/97 Petition of 200 Chickering Road (Rennies) Premises affected 200 Chi rkarinq RnaA Referring to the above petition for a special permit from the requirements of the North Andover Zoning Bylaw Section 8.3 so as to allow the construction of a concrete masonry & wood. One story 16, 900 SF —building for commercial use located at 200 Chickering Road. After a public hearing given on the above date, the Planning Board voted to DENY the Special Permit- site plan review based upon the following conditions: Si ned CC: Director of Public Works Richard Rowen. Chairman_ Building Inspector Natural Resource/Land Use Planner Alison Lescarbeau, V. Chairman Health Sanitarian Assessors John Simons, Clerk Police Chief - Fire Chief Richard Nardella Applicant Engineer Joseph V. Mahoney File Interested_Parties Planning Board CONSERVATION 688-9530 HEALTH 688-9540 PLANNING 688-.9535 Town of North Andover 40RTH OFFICE OF c� COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND SERVICES p 30 School Street WILLIAM J. SCOTT North Andover,Massachusetts 01845 ��ssacHusE��h Director June 25, 1997 Ms. Joyce Bradshaw Town Clerk 120 Main Street No. Andover, MA 01845 Re: Special Permit/Site Plan Review 200 Chickering Road Dear Ms. Bradshaw: The North Andover Planning Board held a public hearing on Tuesday evening, December 3, 1996 at 7:30 p.m. in the Senior Center behind the Town Building, on the application of Scott Companies, 12 Rogers Road, Haverhill, MA 01835 for a special permit under Section 8.3 (Site Plan Review) of the North Andover Zoning`Bylaw . The legal notice was properly advertised in the North Andover Citizen on November 13 and November 20, 1996 and all parties of interest were duly notified. The following members were present:Joseph V. Mahoney, Chairman, Richard Rowen, Vice Chairman Alison Lescarbeau, Clerk, John Simons and Alberto Angles, Associate Member. Kathleen Bradley Colwell,Town Planner was also absent. The petitioner was requesting a special permit to allow to allow the construction of a concrete masonry &wood. One(1) story 16,900 SF building for commercial use located at 200 Chickering Road, North Andover, MA 01845 in the Business -1 (B-1)Zoning District. Mr. Rowen read the legal notice to open the public hearings. Peter Shaheen was present representing Scott Companies for Old Town Village a 16,900 square foot retail subdivision. The property is located off of Rt. 125 (Rennes Florist) on 18 acres of land. Some of the types of businesses that have approached the applicant have been a hairdresser, Mailboxes Etc., and a travel agency. Mark Gross is the site engineer, he stated that there is no residential property involved. The property is zoned B-1 surrounded by R-5,R-4 and R-3 residential zonings. Rennes Florist will still occupy one unit, it will be the in the front of the building. There will be approximately nine units ranging from 2,000 to 1,000 SF in size. There will be a green pedestrian area in the front provided with landscaping. The existing vegetation in the rear of the building will be maintained to be supplemented with a 5' fence and landscaping to buffer the residential area. The original plan was to have two entrances and exits with one close to Farrwood. A revised plan will eliminate the driveway access adjacent to Farrwood Drive. The Technical Review Committee CONSERVATION 688-9530 HEALTH 688-9540 PLANNING 688-9535 Mr. Rowen asked if the road were widened at this point would the cars then go faster. Mr. Hajec stated probably yes, but it can't be said until it's done. Elvira Curcio, of 23 Edgelawn Drive, stated that Officer Soucy stated that this a State road and was wondering why there has not been a State Police Officer attend a meeting to address the traffic. Mark Johnson, representing Heritage Green Condominiums, is concerned with the traffic plan. He questioned what would happen if you did not allow the passing on the right. Mr. Rowen stated that cars would queue up. Mr. Rowen stated that given the fact that the two traffic consultants and the State have approved the traffic plan he would not require a center turn lane. Mr. Gross spoke with the town's engineering consultant and stated that the most significant issue is with the down stream area. They plan to do a perk test. Mr. Rowen asked if they will have enough time to get the results in by the next meeting. Mr. Rowen stated that we will put them on the agenda for the next meeting but if they don't get the results back in time we'll take them off. Mr. Nardella stated that he is looking for them to bring something back to the Board on a proposal for roadway improvement. Mr. Shaheen stated that the applicant is willing to do what ever anyone else is willing to do. Tom Neve, of Neve Associates, is working with the condominium association stated that his major issue is with the site drainage. He would like them to test every layer that exists and test in at least in 4 different areas. Mr. Neve's other concern is the maintenance of the sub-surface system. Mr. Gross stated that the maintenance for these systems could be put in the decisions. The North Andover Planning Board held a regular meeting on April 15, 1997. The following members were present: Joseph Mahoney, Chairman, Richard Rowen, Vice Chairman, Alberto Angles, Associate Member and Richard Nardella. Kathleen Bradley Colwell, Town Planner was also present. MHF Design requested a continuance until May 20, 1997 in order to complete the required soil tests as required by Coler& Colantonio in their last correspondence. The North Andover Planning Board held a regular meeting on May 20, 1497. The following members were present: Joseph Mahoney, Chairman, Richard Rowen, Vice-Chairman, Alison Lescarbeau, Clerk, Alberto Angles, Associate Member John Simons and Richard Nardella. William Scott, Director of Community Development. requested that compact car spaces be dispersed around the site, not clustered in one area and to disperse handicap parking spaces. Fire access will be provided around the building. There are no large delivery trucks anticipated. The elevation of the building will be broken up horizontally and vertically. There were concerns about storm water management and the catch basins and whether or not the drainage can be off site. The sewage will be pumped up to Rt. 125. The lighting will be 12' poles with down cast boxes, and low level pedestrian fights. Safety lights at the rear will be downcast over the doors. They produced a cross section of the site. The roof line will create a false facade with roof top units hidden inside to buffer noise. An RDA was filed with ConCom however the applicant requested a continuance in order to produce soil testing to the ConCom. An ENF was filed with the state. A traffic study has been prepared. Town will hire an outside consultant to review. Mr. Simons asked why not orient the building towards Farrwood Drive. Rayner Cooke the architect, stated that the reason why they faced the orientation the way they did is because the sun faced the three sided greenhouse, also it was the best fit for the shape of the lot. Mr. Simons stated that he would like it to be oriented towards Farrwood, for example a gate or fence at the west end for pedestrian's to walk through to get to the shops. Mr. Gross stated that they are going to screen the site from the neighbors to make it as least intrusive as possible and consider pedestrian access if so desired. Mr. Rowen was concerned about where the drainage will go. Mr. Gross stated that the natural flow is towards Farrwood, but the plan channels the water to the opposite side of the lot. Ms. Colwell asked how they have designed the drainage. Mr. Gross stated that there is an underground system currently proposed, but is more expensive and is of high maintenance. Mr. Mahoney question what kind of materials they are planning to use. Mr. Cooke stated that they are going to use clapboard siding and brick with colonial style store fronts and wood doors. They will have carved wood signs with outside fights. There will be roofscape with dormers and windows to make a village theme. Mr. Rowen asked about the slope of the gables and commented that steep roofs are preferred. Mr. Simons is also concerned with the slope of the roof. Ms. Colwell suggests that they take a look at the slope of the roof at Osco Drug and check plans vs. actual. Mr. Dermot J. Kelly of Kelly& Associates, Inc. reviewed the traffic study. The counts that were done at the entrance of Farrwood and on Rt.114 estimated that 23,000 cars per day during the week pass the site. These studies were conducted during the hours of 7:00 a.m. till 9:00 p.m. and on Saturday during the hours of 11:00 a.m. till 2:00 p.m. there were 17,000 cars. At the peak hours 1600 cars passed in the a.m. 1900 cars passed in the p.m. Saturday's peak hours showed 1300 cars passing. Some traffic growth needs to be assumed. There is only a 16' lane for entering traffic. There should be no planting on the site entrance and, there should also be stop signs at each exit. Mr. Mahoney asked about how much more traffic is going to be generated with the project. Joe Bolen, 27 Farrwood Avenue is concerned about the traffic volume in the a.m. and p.m. Peggy Walsh, 27 Farrwood Avenue is concerned about the traffic when she is trying to take a left turn in the a.m. out of Farrwood, she is also is concerned about the dumpsite pickup and snow removal. Hillary Cannor, 98 Edgelawn Drive#7, is concerned about the orientation of the building and the ability to rent the units at the end and is concerned about customers missing the entrance and turning around on Farrwood Drive. Mr. Cooke stated that not all retail tenants require visibility from the road. Mr. Gross explained that no one would be able to see the building if it were oriented towards Farrwood Drive. Mark Johnson, representing the Condominium Association, is concerned about the traffic and believes it should be revised with new entrances. Mr. Johnson also had concerns about the level of service increases in the future with the level of traffic. He also expressed some concern about the orientation of the building, and thought that the building should face Rt. 125 with a smaller project. Vera Curcio, 23 Edgelawn Drive, brought to the Boards attention that there was a denial for a building on the site of Rennies in the past, based on the problems with the traffic and stated that she will look into that more fully. Ms. Curcio also stated that she has checked with the State Department of Public Works and says they have received no information on this project. Ms. Curcio is against this project and feels that it will lower her property value and bring more problems to the adjacent properties. Ms. Curcio also stated that she was not informed about the meeting until a few days before. Jeff Cannor, 98 Edgelawn Drive, expressed some concern about the sign that would be placed in the front of the project. Mr. Gross stated that they would like to have an identifying sign at the entrance and will have a facade sign. They will be submitting a plan of the sign. Jim McCarthy, an abutter was concerned about the hours of operation. Mr. Bolero, was concerned about how long will the construction time be in affect. Mr. Gross stated that the approximate time on the construction would be about 4 months. Ms. Curcio submitted a letter to the Planning Board outlining her concerns. The letter will be placed in the Planning Board files. The public hearing was continued to the December 17, 1996 meeting. The North Andover Planning Board held a regular meeting on December 17, 1996. The following members were present: Joseph V. Mahoney, Chairman, Richard Rowen, Vice Chairman, Alison Lescarbeau, Clerk, Richard Nardella and John Simons. Kathleen Bradley Colwell, Town Planner was also present. The applicant requested a continuance until January 1, 1997. The North Andover Planning Board held a regular meeting on January 7, 1997. The following members were present: Joseph V. Mahoney, Chairman,- Richard Rowen, Vice Chairman, Alison Lescarbeau, Clerk, Alberto Angles, Associate Member, Richard Nardella and John Simons. Kathleen Bradley Colwell, Town Planner was also present. Mr. Rowen read a letter from Scott Construction asking for a continuance until February 4, 1997 in order to complete the traffic review and requested plan review. The North Andover Planning Board held a regular meeting on February 4, 1997. The following members were present: Joseph V. Mahoney, Chairman, Richard Rowen, Vice Chairman, Alison Lescarbeau, Clerk, Richard Nardella and John Simons. Kathleen Bradley Colwell, Town Planner was also present. Mark Gross of MHF Design, was present to discuss the traffic study. Mr. Gross stated that they have filed an Environmental Notification Form. Mr. Gross has spoken to Mass. DEP.and Mass. DPW and they stated that they are free to go ahead and file for curb cut permit. Dermot Kelley, President of DJK Associates was present to give an overview of the traffic study. Mr. Kelley showed a plan with a single access as far away as.possible from Farrwood Ave. A stop line and,a stop sign will be installed at the exit onto Rt. 125. Mr. Kelley stated that he has requested data from the state regarding the number of accidents but has not received it yet. Mr. Nardella stated that his major concern is the number of accidents that could occur. Mr. Kelley stated they cannot determine the number of accidents. Mr. Mahoney asked if they could get data from the Town's Police Department on the number of accidents that have occurred on Farrwood entering and exiting. Mr. Nardella asked what the distance is-from center line of the access drive to the center line at Farwood. Mr. Kelley stated 250'. Mr. Kelley stated that Ms. Colwell, Mr. Hajec and himself went out to Chickering Road to observe the traffic flow. Mr. Kelley stated that the traffic flows in cycles every 70 seconds. They observed that the traffic flows from one direction for 30 seconds and from the other direction for 40-50 seconds. For 20-30 seconds the traffic is lessened. So people who are exiting and entering Farrwood have 3 0-3 5 seconds of no traffic and for 45 cars turning onto Farrwood there was no queuing. w Mr. Nardella asked the number of cars that could que up out of 200 Chickering Road. Mr. Kelley stated that 3 could. Paul Hajec, President of Hajec Associates, the town's traffic consultant was present to explain what he has observed. Mr. Hajec stated that everything that Mr. Kelley has said is correct. Mr. Hajec stated that they did not observed more than 2 cars at a time queuing. There could be some traffic problems when Rt. 495 is blocked up and people use this as an alternative route however that is a rare occurrence and is not one that the applicant should be expected to fix. Ms. Lescarbeau asked what would happen if there was a car turning into the plaza and there was a car behind them that is turning into Farrwood. Mr. Hajec stated that they could use the shoulder of the road. It is a paved road and the shoulder is 8'to 10'wide. Mr. Hajec stated a traffic light would have to be approved by the state and Mr. Hajec thought that would be very unlikely. The traffic lights would make unnecessary delays and more accidents usually occur when there is a traffic light. Dave Johns of 209 Chickering Road, stated that it is difficult to take a left hand turn out of his driveway and that people walk on the shoulder therefore it is very hard to pass in the shoulder. Lisa Neukuckatz of 68 Fernview Ave. stated that her children walk on Chickering Road to and from school and believes it is dangerous if people use the shoulder to pass. Joseph Balliro of 27 Farrwood Ave. stated that he is a criminal defense lawyer and thinks it is not a legitimate point to use the shoulder. It may be legal but it is not safe. Peggy Walsh of 27 Farrwood stated too many things are happening (too many other driveways)within the 250' of road. Mr. Nardella asked as residents if they had any ideas to make the flow better. Mr. Balliro stated that they should put in a dedicated turn lane and possibly a yellow blinking light. Jim McCarthy stated that during the 20-30 second delay if there is somebody coming out of the 99 Restaurant or Bulgers Animal Hospital then the delay is shortened. Mark Johnson who represents Heritage Green Estates asked that there should be no heavy trucks on the site and questioned the level of service. Is E or D? Mr. Gross responded by saying that they are not planning to have any trailer trucks on the property just box trucks and are willing to put that in the decision as a condition. Mr. Johnson stated that level D represents a condition with long delays to minor street traffic. The levels go from A-F and A being the least amount of delays and F being the longest. Chickering Road and Farrwood currently operates at a level of service at C or better. Under 2001 Build weekday evening peak hour conditions the service will decrease to Level D. Mr. Balliro asked why the exit could not be changed to the back of the property. Mr. Gross stated that access to commercial property has to be through commercial property and cannot be through residential property. Ms. Curcio, 23 Edgelawn Ave. questioned the zoning for the site. Ms. Colwell stated that the site is zoned B-1 for business but is surrounded by residential property. Ms. Colwell suggested that Ms. Curcio come into the Planning Office to look at the zoning map. If she had additional questions she can review the zoning with the Zoning Code Enforcement Officer. Continued the public hearing until the March 4, 1997 meeting. The North Andover Planning Board held a regular meeting on March 4, 1997. The following members were present: Joseph V. Mahoney, Chairman, Richard Rowen, Vice Chairman, Alison Lescarbeau, Clerk, Alberto Angles, Associate'Member and John Simons. Kathleen Bradley Colwell, Town Planner was also present. Atty. Peter Shaheen was present representing 200 Chickering Road. Mark Gross, MHF Design Inc. the site engineer stated that the Conservation Commission has also requested review of the drainage from John Chessia, the Town's consultant therefore he will respond to both the Planning and Conservation drainage issues at the same time. Dermit Kelley of DJK Association conducted traffic counts while Merrimack College was in session as requested by the Town's traffic consultant and the counts were less than the original ones. Mr. Kelley stated that he received a copy of all the accidents that occurred in North Andover from Mass. Highway and none have occurred on Farrwood. Mr. Kelley stated that in his opinion a left turn lane is not required. He is concerned about widening the shoulder as that may cause traffic to travel faster along Rt. 125. Mr. Kelley stated that while Ms. Colwell, Mr. Hajec and himself went out to the site people were turning into Farrwood and passed on the left hand side. Sgt. Fred Soucy of the North Andover Police Dept., stated that a middle turn lane would benefit the Town but it would have to go from Rennes to Mass. Ave. Possibly the costs could be borne by all property owners along that stretch of roadway. He is not in favor of widening the shoulder. If a middle turn lane is notn co structed the roadway should remain as. If there are two vehicles s and one went to pass on the right there would be adequate space to pass. Joseph Balliro, of 27 Farrwood Drive, asked if that was legal to pass on the breakdown lane. Mr. Soucy stated that they need to determine if it is a breakdown lane. Lisa Neukuckatz, of 68 Fan-wood Drive, stated that people will start to pass on both sides of the street and make it a 4 way street and what about the pedestrians that are walking. Mr. Soucy stated that there is a sidewalk for the pedestrians. Carol Rennie, owner, stated that there has never been an accident in front of Rennies. Ms. Lescarbeau stated that there was just one store there now however with this complex there will be more. Atty. Peter Shaheen stated that Mass. Highway has jurisdiction over Rt. 125 and the plans have been submitted for their approval. P.J. Piantadosi stated that these people live off of a state highway what do they expect. He would like to see a mall come into this town instead of going over Andover to spend his money. Ms. Curcio, of Fan-wood Drive, stated that once the mall goes in the accidents will start to occur just like they did when Osco Drug went in'on Rt. 114. She stated that 9 accidents have occurred. Jim McCarthy, Heritage Green property manager, stated that he does not want to see Rt. 125 turn into a Rt. 28 in Salem, NH. Carol Rennie stated that the mall would be a benefit to the town and it will have a country atmosphere. P.J. Piantadosi stated that the Rennies have lived in this town their whole life and they are not planning on putting up the mall and leaving town. Mark Gross, site engineer, stated that there would be 4 underground systems designed to store a 100 yr. Storm. Mr. Gross stated that they have been before ConCom and they have asked John Chessia to look over the drainage because they will be discussing that with ConCom. Mr. Mahoney asked where the runoff would go.. Mr. Gross stated that it would go into the wetlands on the Rennies property. Ms. Colwell stated that the building inspector had concerns with the proposed drainage structures off site and suggested that the applicant check with him regarding this issue. Mr. Gross stated that all the runoff goes through the infiltration. Mr. Mahoney asked what would happen if the sumps overflow. Mr. Gross stated that the property owner is supposed to maintain the system and keep it cleaned out. If it is not, silt will build up and go through the pipe and to the infiltration system and eventually be carried down the system. Mr. Rowen asked if something can be done to prevent this from happening. Mr. Gross stated that a hood structure will be placed over the pipes to prevent garbage and silt from getting through. Atty. Mark Johnson, representing Heritage Green, asked if the drainage that is going into the wetlands is on residential property. Mr.-Gross stated yes. Mr. Johnson stated that he asked John Morin, of Neve Associated to look over the proposed drainage and he would like to be put on the cc: list when there is information on the.drainage for this property. Mr. Mahoney asked what the building looked like in elevation, lighting and landscaping. Mr. Gross stated that the original plan had all compact parking spaces together now they have them spread out throughout the parking lot. The lighting along the parking lot on the opposite side of Farrwood will have 12' high lighting standards that cast light down on the lot. They will have landscaping with a stockade fence 5'high along Farrwood. There will also be a picket fence along the front of the property. The signage will be reviewed by the building inspector. Mr. Gross stated that the HVC units will be located on the top of the Rennies building in a pocket to reduce the noise. Helene Wilder, of Farrwood Drive, asked what side of the building will be facing Farrwood with the lighting issues and what about delivery times. Mr. Gross stated that the back of the building would be facing Farrwood and the only lights that would be on the back would be emergency lights on the back doors facing down to the door for security purposes. There are no late night or early morning deliveries. Ms. Colwell stated that there would be restriction on the delivery times written in the decision. Mr. Shaheen stated that he would like to end this at the next meeting. They have designed the building to be safe and the traffic has been approved by the Mass. State Highway. Joe Balliro, of 27 Farrwood Drive, asked if there was going to be any security with the overnight parking. Mark Johnson asked if there was going to be a buffer of trees where the fence is going to be. Mark Johnson also asked if there are going to be any trees coming down and if the area is going to be graded. Joe Balliro asked if there is going to be any restrictions on the construction hours. Ms. Colwell stated that the Police Department would be in charge of that. Continued until April 1, 1997. The public hearing was continued until April 8, 1997 due to a snow storm. The North Andover Planning Board held a regular meeting on April 8, 1997. The following members were present: Richard Rowen, Vice Chairman, Alison Lescarbeau, Clerk, Alberto Angles, Associate Member and Richard Nardella. Kathleen Bradley Colwell, Town Planner was also present. Peter Shaheen of MHF Design was present on behalf of the applicant. Mr. Shaheen is requesting a conditional Site Plan approval. Mr. Shaheen stated that the only thing that remains to be done is a perk test, which will be done on Friday. Ms. Colwell stated that there are other outstanding issues. John Chessia, the Town's engineering consultant, received the revised drainage last Wednesday and needs 2 weeks to review them. Mr. Rowen stated that not everything has been finalized. There are some issues that can be resolved like the building, lighting and landscaping. Mr. Rowen stated he would like to wrap up the traffic issue tonight. Mr. Nardella asked what the number of parking spaces were there. Mark Gross, of MU Design, stated that they have moved the compact spaces around. The required size of the spaces are to be 84" and they are giving them 86 '/2. Mr. Shaheen stated that there will be no restaurant put in the plaza. Mr. Nardella asked if the dumpster was going to be enclosed with a gate. Mr. Gross stated that it would be. Ms. Lescarbeau asked if it was a compactor-or a dumpster. Mr. Gross stated that it was going to be a dumpster. Ms. Lescarbeau asked how many units are there in the building. Mr. Gross stated that there are a total of 9 but some can be combined. Dermit Kelley, of DJK Associates, stated that the size of the road is 36' wide. Mr. Kelley stated that the shoulder is 5'-6' wide. Mr. Lescarbeau stated that even though you can't be cited for using the shoulder she is not going to approve a plan which requires passing in the shoulder. Mr. Nardella stated that the road is not going to be lined for the use of the shoulder. Atty. Shaheen stated that Officer Soucy stated that it was not illegal to use the shoulder. Mr. Nardella asked what is the objection to spending a little money and put the road wider and put the stripes on the road. Paul Hajec, the Town's Traffic Consultant, stated that he agrees with the applicant's traffic consultant and with the state highway department that a turning lane is not warranted for this project. However, in the future, if there is increased development along Rt. 125, a turning lane may be warranted along this stretch of RT. 125. Mark Gross of MHf Design and Peter Shaheen were present. Mr. Scott stated that they did tests on Monday and the water tables were higher and they addressed the issues and sent them to John Chessia and he had no major issues. Mr. Gross stated that he could design a system on a 7 inch water table. Mr. Rowen stated that at the last meeting the attorney for Heritage Estates had brought up some issues at the last meeting and wanted to know if they have been addressed. Mr. Scott stated that they did additional testing. Mr. Rowen asked if they are planning on having a maintenance plan to include in the decision. Mr. Gross stated that there are 6 pages in the drainage report for maintenance. Mr. Gross stated that on site litter would be picked up weekly, sediment and underground tanks will be inspected monthly and the water swale will be inspected twice a year. The Board would like to have a maintenance plan put in the decision. Mr. Shaheen stated that he thought we addressed these issues at the last meeting and both traffic consultants agreed. Mr. Nardella asked if we had anything from Sgt. Soucy. Ms. Lescarbeau stated that there is a letter in our packets that states that you should not cross over the white line. Mr. Shaheen stated that it is a line to show that the width of the road is almost at an end. Ms. Lescarbeau stated that you are trying to make a bad situation worse by using the sides of the road.. Why don't you just widen the road. Mr. Shaheen stated that at the last meeting we suggested that an inexpensive way to improve the road would be to add a patch of pavement to the side of the road so people could use it. Mr. Shaheen believes that if it is widened people might not slow down but, speed up and also they are not allowed to widen the road without the state to say it was O.K. Mr. Nardella stated that we a legitimate difference of opinion on that. Mr. Shaheen stated that the applicant meets all the requirements for site plan review so they should get the approval. Mr. Mahoney stated that Mr. Shaheen is right if they meet all requirements we cannot deny them. Mr. Nardella stated that he is not opposed for them to start construction and then widening the road. Mr. Nardella stated that when it snows and the plows are pushing the snow and it covers that side of the road how are the people then going to pass. Mr. Rowen stated that we have had 3 traffic people say that the road should not be widened and that people would speed up if it was widened and that's not what we want. Mr. Mahoney stated that he agrees. Mr. Shaheen stated that the applicant might contribute to the cost of the road. Mr`. Shaheen stated that we are willing to do extra to get the approval. Jim Mcartney stated that the City of Haverhill has approved to widen Rt. 125 and they don't have a concern with speeding. Mr. Mcartney also state that he would like the North Andover Police Department to write a letter stating that it is legal for people to pass over the white line. Also he would like it put in the decision that if the owner of the mall goes belly up that someone has to maintain the drainage system. Mr. Nardella stated that there will be a bond to ensure that you would be protected. Mark Johnson, representing Heritage Estates, disagrees with Mr.Mahoney. In section 8.3 1A, the purpose of it is to protect the health and safety of the residents and people. This is a site which has a_building as big as you can get on the site. The drainage is not easy-to get to and if it fails the Heritage Green people will be the only ones who will get hurt. The building is so big they can't even put a detention pond on the site so it is underneath. The traffic configuration is not good for any of the residents. Mr. Johnson stated that his biggest concern is the statement "we have met all requirements so you have to approve it". Mr. Rowen stated that he shares concerns with the drainage but it would have been fool proof if Heritage green tie into their sewer. Jim Mcartney stated that in response to Mr. Rowen's comment, would you like it if someone used access on your driveway. It is private property. Mr. Rowen stated that my point was that they denied them to tie into the sewer so they will have to live with what happens. Elvira Curcio, 23 Edgelawn passed out packets to the Board members. Mr. Shaheen stated that he is looking for them to accept the site plan review and close the public hearing. On a motion by Mr. Nardella, seconded by Mr. Rowen the Board voted 4-1 to close the public hearing. On a motion by Mr. Rowen , seconded by Mr. Angles, the Board voted 4-1 to direct staff to draft a decision. The Board agreed to set the bond for 200 Chickering Road for $25,000. On a motion by Mr. Rowen, seconded by Mr. Mahoney the Board voted 3-2 to approve 200 Chickering Road site plan review, the site plan review was denied due to the fact you need 4 votes. Mr. Nardella asked if the applicant would like to know why they denied it. Mr. Shaheen stated that he thought the Public Hearing was closed. Mr. Nardella stated that the applicant should come back to resolve the issues of public safety and traffic issues. Mr. Nardella stated that there is an open door for further reconsideration. Ms. Lescarbeau stated that she does not concur with items 1&3 of the decision. Ms. Lescarbeau stated that it that it is not an appropriate location, the building is not appropriate and it is a safety hazard to the town and area. Ms. Lescarbeau stated that she does not feel that she can be persuaded. Mr. Shaheen stated that if it meets the bylaws then the permit must be granted, that's what the law says. Mr. Mahoney stated that they have followed the laws and statute. Mr. Mahoney feels that we have no right not to grant this. In his view the applicant has done everything they were supposed to do. Attached are the conditions. Sincerely, qlkka,rdsTa�� Richard S. Rowen, Chairman North Andover Planning Board 200 Chickering Road(Rennies) Site Plan Review-Special Permit 200 Chickering Road (Rennies) Site Plan Review - Special Permit The Planning Board herein by a vote of 3 in favor,2 opposed, does not approve the Special Permit/Site Plan Review for the construction of a 16,900 one story concrete, masonry&wood building located at 200 Chickering Road in the Business-1 Zone. Scott Companies, 12 Rogers Road,Haverhill,MA 01835 requested this Special Permit. This application was filed with the Planning Board on November 5, 1997. The three Planning Board members in favor make the following findings as required by the North Andover Zoning Bylaws Section 8.3 and 10.3: FINDINGS OF FACT: 1. The specific site is an appropriate location for the project as it is located in the Busines -1 Zone along a major roadway,surrounded by industrial and commercial uses; 2. The use as developed will not adversely affect the neighborhood as the site is designed to buffer adjacent uses; 3. There will be no nuisance or serious hazard to vehicles or pedestrians as identified through traffic analysis and review of such analysis by the Town's traffic consultant. 4. The landscaping approved as a part of this plan meets the requirements of Section 8.4 of the North Andover Zoning Bylaw; 5. The site drainage system is designed in accordance with the Town Bylaw requirements; 6. The applicant has met the requirements of the Town for Site Plan Review as stated in Section 8.3 of the Zoning Bylaw; 7. Adequate and appropriate facilities will be provided for the proper operation of the proposed use. Finally, the Planning Board members in favor find that this project generally complies . with the Town of North Andover Zoning Bylaw requirements as listed in Section 8.35 but requires conditions in order to be fully incompliance. 1 n 200 Chickering Road (Rennies) Site Plan Review-Special Permit The two dissenting Planning Board members found: 1. Mr. Nardella stated that the applicant should come back to resolve the issues of public safety and traffic issues. Mr. Nardella stated that there is an open door for further reconsideration. 2. Ms. Lescarbeau stated that she does not concur with items 1&3 of the decision(as cited above). 3. Ms. Lescarbeau stated that it that it is not an appropriate location, the building is not appropriate and it is a safety.hazard to the town and area. The Board further instructs that this decision is done without the prejudice of the two year stay from further applications for a Special Permit. The Board will allow reapplication within the two year period as setforth in 40A 16 without the need for steps required for reconsideration. cc. Applicant Assessors Building Inspector Conservation Administrator Director of Public Works Engineer File Fire Chief Health Administrator Planning Board Police Chief 2 Otrr.ao u5�t NORTH ANDOVER OM CYOF THE ZONLNG BOARD OF APPEAL 27 CH.ARLE7S Si P—PT NORTHi DOVER,'NL?SSACH- SE TS 0i3µ15 a�(973) 683-95Y'? Date: TO: Town of North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals 27 Charles Street North Andover, MA 01845 phone # 978-688-9541_ fax# 978-688-9542 Please be advised that l have agreed to waive the time constraints f the Zoning Board of Appeals to ma a ecision regarding the granting of a , VARIANCE for property located at: f a� STREET: U0 ie--Ik ewe.®^ TOWN: �v �`ida/e� W4 47 NA E OF P 1TIONER: Signed: " petiti er (or petitioner's represe tative) 10.4 Variance and Appeals . The Zoning Board of Appeals shall have power upon appeal to grant variances from the terms of this Zoning Bylaw where the Board finds that owing to circumstances relating to soil conditions, shape, or topography of the land or structures and especially affecting such land or structures but not affecting generally the zoning district in general, a literal enforcement of the provisions of this Bylaw will involve substantial hardship,financial or otherwise,to the petitioner or applicant, and that desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent or purpose of this Bylaw. Mi/variance l.carc.J 5C'._.�.C.G�ost•_`�:-:z LO'v S .. T.G^ .,,,., ?_11fi 'r.=.A,i. Pr _�n;�;` 6SS L• 08/14/2001 13:14 978-682-6473 MINCO CORP P96E 02 Aug-14-02 Ii.-30A �� c Ips V1 • wd ( JOYCE BRADS AW TOWN CLERK NORTH ANDOVER y'tiRn AN D 4FR i11s�Ii.$OF' 1� �{ ME ZO NLNr M) 0€;:12���aLS 22 P 2: 20 Date: T0: Town of Nath Amdovw ZOnkV Bard of Appesis 27 Chaff"Streit Cctir4 n r4l9tvt_ North Andover, MA 0't 84$ f sv�►t Tt*si�`r qr ;� i7 Aft�'d �; ��.,, � ?'• � ,��: trig�">�: Ph"#978-M-9541 fax#978.688-9542 rptsP ,fe y-,z•, v k a - 4,4 7-pte T Ak -;Uf"7 a drlGs Please be advised that i have agreed to MIMI�t_ 1011M ,10-ft irits for the zoning Board of Appeals t0 make a dsCislon Dan rdine._mow - 'dps• —� --- yren+_k'it PrOPOrty faceted at. >t rf •0/'idp - �Pce,m i r '�Ov/ 110 �,,;�10F, T; /a, ,., sem` � >�.�. / �"- `-Ate,£-�-tf•-_�fy"'~Z.•-"�"-`'�, n it; vrte......:. lve Y�ua�ti n i j AMf ww P09W Feil NOIR 7671 u! g �4 r,Vwi twit t fir (•y• ��A. 5i Flay.. MOM• � dc�rr sate 4.• .?•G�7d � Ali �!. � r C. Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection T- Bureau of Resource-Protection- Wetlands DEP File Number: �. WPA Fora- 5-_ Or der of Conditions 242-1111 , Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 Provided by DEP A. General Information Important: When filling From: out forms on North Andover the computer, conservation commission use only the tab key to This issuance if for(check one): move your cursor-do ® Order of Conditions not use the return key. ❑ Amended Order of Conditions To: Applicant: If different Property Owner rent from applicant): Tema Properties Name Dorothy&Carob Rennie, Old Town Village Rity. Name 231 Sutton Street Tmst,200 Chickering Road Mailing Address MaWgAddrms North Andover MA 10845 North Andover MA 01845 Citylrmn Siete. 2i�_Code State _Zip Code 1. Project Location: 200 Chickerin Road Noah Andover 46 Street Address CWTMn 35,46& 106 Assessors N{'ap/Plat Number p 2. Property recorded at the Registry of Deeds for: . Essex North 826, 798, 55 33,49,98 county Boole p Certificate(if registered larxn 3. Dates: Nov. 2, 2001 April 24,20o2 May 1,2002 Date Notice of IrderFiled Date Pl cHeaft Dalp-of mance 4. Final Approved Plans and Other Documents(attach additional plan references as needed): Sheets 1 of 9 (See attached conditions for specift titles and dates) Various Toe Date _ Notice of Intent, Prepared,by Merrimack Ejonqeqm 11/01101 T-ft Date Twe Date 5. Final Plans and Documents Signed and Stamped by: Anthony Donato, P.E., Stephen Stapinski, P.L.S. Name 6. Total Fee: $3080 (from Appendix B'Wetland Fee;r-ansnaittal-Form). Wpaform5.doc•rev.5/1/02 Page 1 of 7 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection - Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands DEP File Number: ' WPA Form 5 - Order of Conditions 242-1111 Massachusetts.Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 931, §40 Provided by DEP B. Findings Findings pursuant to the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act: Following the review of the above-referenced Notice of Intent and based on the information provided in this application and presented at the public hearing,this Commission finds that the areas in which work is proposed is significant to the following interests of the Wetlands Protection Act. Check all that apply: ® Public Water Supply ❑ Land Containing Shellfish 0 Prevention of Pollution ® Private Water Supply ❑ Fisheries 0 Protection of Wildlife Habitat 0 Groundwater Supply ® Storm Damage Prevention 0 Flood Control Furthermore,this Commission hereby finds the project,as proposed,is:(check one of the following boxes) Approved subject to: ® the following conditions which are necessary, in accordance with the performance standards set forth in the wetlands regulations,to protect those interests checked above.This Commission orders that all work shall be performed in accordance with the Notice of Intent referenced above,the following General Conditions, and any other special conditions attached to this Order.To the extent that the following conditions modify or differ from the plans,specifications, or other proposals submitted with the Notice of Intent,these conditions shall control. Denied because: ❑ the proposed work cannot be conditioned to meet the performance standards set forth in-the wetland regulations to protect those interests checked above.Therefore,work on this project may not go forward unless-and until-a-new Notice of Intent is submitted which provides measures which-are- adequate to protect these interests, and a final Order of Conditions is issued. ❑ the information submitted by the applicant is not sufficient to describe the site,the work,or the effect of the work on the interests identified inthe Wetlands Protection Act.Therefore,work on this project may not go4orwar4,unl wand 4#0,a ised3Notice of Intent submitted which provides sufficient information and includes measures which are adequate to protect the Act's interests, and a final Order of Conditions is issued.A description of the specific information which is lacking and why it is necessary is attached to this Order as per 310 CMR 10.05(6)(c). General Conditions (only applicable to approved projects) 1. 'Failure to comply with all conditions stated herein;and with all related statutes and otherregulatory measures, shall be deemed cause to revoke or modify this Order. 2. The Order does not grant any property rights or any exclusive privileges;it does not authorize any injury to.private property or invasion of private rights. 3. This Order does not relieve the permittee or any other person of the necessity of complying with all other applicable federal, state, or local statutes, ordinances, bylaws,or regulations. I WpafoTm5.doc•iev.5!1/02 Page 2 of 7 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands °EP F'�Number. ILI WPA Form 5 Order of Conditions 242-11, 1 Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 Pr°"'�by DEP B. Findings (cont.) 4. The work authorized hereunder shall be completed within three years from the date of this Order unless either of the following apply: a. the work is a maintenance dredging project as provided for in the Act; or b. the time for completion has been extended to a specified date more than three years, but less than five years, from the date of issuance. If this Order is intended to be valid for more than three years,the extension date and the special circumstances warranting the extended time period are set forth as a special condition in this Order. 5. This Order may be extended by the issuing authority for one or more periods of up to three years each upon application to the issuing authority at least 30 days prior to the expiration date of the Order. 6. Any fill used in connection with this project shall be dean fill.Any fill shall contain no trash,refuse, rubbish, or debris, including but not limited to lumber, bricks, plaster,wire, lath, paper, cardboard, pipe, tires, ashes, refrigerators, motor vehicles,or parts of any of the foregoing. 7. This Order is not final until all administrative appeal periods from this Order have elapsed, or if such an appeal has beerstaken,until all proceedings before the Department have'been'completed. 8. No work shall be undertaken until the Order has become final and then has been recorded in the Registry of Deeds or the Land Court for the district in which the land is-located,-within chain of title of the affected property. In the case of recorded land,the Final Order shall also be noted in the Registry's Grantor Index under the name of the owner of the land upon which the proposed work is to be done. In the case of the registered land,the Final Order shall also be noted on the Land Court Certificate of Title of the owner of the land upon which the proposed work is done. The recorxding information shall be submitted to this Conservation Commission on the form at the end of this Order, which form must be stamped by the Registry of Deeds, prior to'the commencement of work. 9. A sign shall be displayed at the site not less then two square feet or more than three square feet in size bearing the words, "Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection'[or, "MA DEP' "File Number242-1111 10. Where the Department of Environmental Protection is requested to issue a Superseding Order, the Conservation Commission shall be a party to all agency proceediri s and hearings before DEP- 11- EP.11. Upon completion of the work described herein,the applicant shall submit a Request for Certificate of Compliance (WPA form 8A)to the Conservation Commission. i 12. The work shall conform to the plans and special conditions referenced in this order. 13. Any change to the plans identified in Condition#12 above shall require the applicant to inquire of the Conservation Commission in writing whether the change is significant enough to require the filing of a new Notice of Intent. 14. The Agent or members of the Conservation Commission and the Department of Environmental Protection shall have the right to enter and inspect the area subject to this Order at reasonable hours to evaluate compliance with the conditions stated in this Order,and may require the submittal of any data deemed necessary by the Conservation Commission or Department for that evaluation. Wpaform5.doc.rev.511/02 Page 3 of 7 Massachusetts.Department of Environmental Protection IL Bureau of Pesourm Protection-Wetlands DEP File Number:WPqForm- 5-- Order oi` Conditions 242-11111 Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act-M:G.L. c. 131, §40 Provides by DEP B. Findings (cont.). 15. This Order of Conditions shall apply to any successor in interest or successor in control of the property subject to this Order and to any contractor or other person performing work conditioned by this Order. 16. Prior to the start of work, and if the project involves work adjacent to a Bordering Vegetated Wetland, the boundary of the wetland in the vicinity of the proposed work area shall be marked by wooden stakes or flagging. Once in place,the wetland boundary markers shall be maintained until a Certificate of Compliance has been issued by the Conservation Commission. 17, All sedimentation barriers shall be maintained in good repair until all disturbed areas have been fully stabilized with vegetation or other means.At no time shall sediments be deposited in a wetland or water body. During construction,the applicant or hisTber designee shall Inspect the erosion controls on a daily basis and shall remove accumulated sediments as needed.The applicant shall immediately control any erosion problems that occur at the site and shall also immediately notify the Conservation Commission, which reserves the right to require additional erosion and/or damage prevention controls it may deem necessary. Sedimentation barriers shall serve as the limit of work unless another limn of work line has been approved by this Order. Findings as to municipal bylaw or ordinance Furthermore, the hereby finds(check one that applies): Conservation Commission ❑ that the proposed work cannot be conditioned to meet the standards set forth in a,municipal ordinance or bylaw specifically_ Municipal ordinance or Bylaw clatim Therefore,work on this project may not go forward unless and until a revised Notice of Intent is submitted which provides measures which are adequate to meet these standards,and a final Order of Conditions is issued. ❑ that the following additional conditions are necessary to comply with a municipal ordinance or bylaw, specifically: Municipal Ordinance or Bylaw CRAM_ The Commission orders that all work shall be performed in accordance with the said additional conditions and with the Notice of Intent referenced above.To the extent that the following conditions modify or differ from the plans,specifications, or other proposals submitted with the Notice of Intent, the conditions shall control. Wpaform5.doc•rev.5(1/02 Page 4 of 7 DEP FILE#242-1111 herefore, the North Andover Conservation Commission (hereafter the ACC")hereby finds that the following conditions are necessary,in accordance with the Performance Standards set forth in the State Regulations to protect those interests noted above. The NACC orders that all work shall be performed in accordance with said conditions and with the Notice of Intent referenced below. To the extent that the following conditions modify or differ from the Tans specifications or other proposals submitted with the Notice of Intent the conditions shall control: GENERAL CONDITIONS 18. Failure to comply with all conditions stated herein,and with all related' statutes and other regulatory measures,shall be deemed cause to revoke or modify this Order. 19. This Order does not grant any property rights or.any exclusive privileges;it does not authorize any injury to private property or invasion of property rights. However, the NACC,agent of the NACC or the Department of Environmental Protection(DEP)reserves the right to enter and inspect the property at all reasonable times until a Certificate of Compliance is issued,to evaluate compliance with this Or-der of Conditions,the Act(310 CMR 10.00), and may require any information,measurements,photographs,observations, and/or materials,or may require the submittal of any data or information deemed necessary by the NACC for that evaluation. Further,work shall be halted on the site if the NACC,agent or DEP determines that any of the work is not in compliance with this Carder of Conditions. Work shall not resume until'the NACC is satisfied that the work will comply and has so notified the applicant in writing. 20. This Order does not relieve the permittee or any other person of the necessity of complying with all other applicable federal,state or local statutes, ordinances,by-laws or regulations. 21. The work authorized hereunder shall be completed within three years from the date of this order. 22. This Order may be extended by the issuing authority for one or more periods of up to three years each upon application to the issuing authority at least thirty days (30) prior to the expiration date of the Order in accordance with 310 CMR (10.05) (8). C:\Winword\OOC\242-1I I Ldoc 1 NACC 5/1/02 DEP FILE#242-1111 23. The NACC reserves the right to amend this Order of Conditions after a legally advertised public hearing if plans or circumstances are changed or if new conditions or information so warrant. 24. Where the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP)is requested to make a determination and to issue a Superseding Order of Conditions or whereas any other state agency is requested to intervene and render decisions affecting these Order of Conditions,the Conservation Commission shall be a party to all agency proceedings and hearings before the Department. 25. This Order of Conditions is issued as a replacement for those issued under a previous filing,File No.242-856. This Order of Conditions completely replaces any prior approvals and since no work under the prior Order of Conditions had commenced,it is deemednull and void. This Order of Conditions is also issued in addition to the Positive Determination of Applicability issued by the NACC on June 6,2001 for approval of a wetland delineation. 26. The conditions of this decision shall apply to,and be binding upon,the Applicant owner,its employees and all successors and assigns in interest or control. These obligations shall be expressed in covenants in all deeds to succeeding owners of portions of the property. 27. The term "Applicant"as used in this Order of Conditions shall refer to the owner,any successor in interest or successor in control of the property referenced in the Notice of Intent,supporting documents and this Order of Conditions. The NACC shall be notified in writing within 30 days of all transfers of title of any portion of property that takes place prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Compliance. 28. The proposed work includes: Construction of four apartment buildings,a community center,a=swi ening pool,pang lots,retaining walls, stormwater management structures,engineered fill,groundwater recharge areas,wetland replication areas and other appurtenant improvements. 29. The work shall confornt'to the following(except as noted in the remainder of this document where revisions may be required): Notice of Intent filed by: Terra Properties 231 Sutton Street North Andover,MA 01845 Dated 11/01/01 CAWinword\00C\242-1 I I Ldoc 2 NACC 5/1/02 DEP FILE#242-1111 Site Plans prepared by: Merrimack Engineering Services 66 Park Street Andover,Massachusetts 01810 Title Sheet,Sheet 1 of 9,Dated 11/1/01,REV. 4/8/02 Property Line Plan,Sheet 2 of 9,Dated 21/01101,REV.4/9/02 Existing Conditions Plan, Sheet 3 of 9,Dated 11101/01,REV.VSM Grading and Utilities Plan,Sheet 4 of 9,Dated 11/01/01,REV.4111/02 Grading&Erosion Control Plan,Sheet 5 of 91 Dated 11/01/01,REV.419/02 Details,Sheet 6 of 9,Dated 11101/01,REV. 4/8/02 Details, Sheet 7 of 9,Dated 11/01/01,REV. 4/11102 Details,Sheet 8 of 9,Dated 11/01/01,REV. 4/8/02 Grading Enlargements,Sheet 9 of 9,Dated 1.1/.01/01 Cross Sections,Sheet 1 of 1,Dated 3/13/02 Reports prepared by: This Order of Conditions is subject to all correspondence by and between Merrinuw* Engineering and their consultants and those of Lisa Eggleston, P.E.(Commission's Consultant) Operation &Maintenance Plan prepared by: Merrimack Engineering,Dated 11/01/01, REV.through 3/13/02 30. The following wetland resource areas are affected by the proposed work: Buffer Zone to Bank and Bordering Vegetated Wetland (BVW). In addition, an isolated jurisdiction under 1 vegetated wetland not subject to j g l CAWinword\00C\242-1111.doc 3 NACC 5/1/02 DEP FILE#242-1111 310 CMR 10.00 was identified and delineated. The applicant has proposed to provide mitigation for alterations to the isolated wetland identified by flagging series K2-K6. These resource areas are significant to the interests of the Act as noted above and therein, with the exception of the isolated wetland series. The applicant has not attempted to overcome the presumption of significance of these resource areas to the identified interests. 31. The NACC agrees with the applicant's delineation of the wetland resource areas on the site as shown on the plans dated referenced herein. Resource areas were approved under a Positive Determination of Applicability issued by the NACC on June 6,2001. The identified isolated resource area was reviewed and approved under the Determination. 32.The NACC finds that the intensive use of the upland areas and buffer zone proposed on this site will cause further alteration of the wetland resource areas. In order to prevent any alteration of the state protected wetland resource areas,a 15'(foot)separation is mandated between the edge of the foundation on Building#4 (south side of Building#4) to wetland flagging series I4 through I8 and A18 through A14. The NACC finds that the prescribed 15`(foot)separation is necessary and appropriate given the fact that construction of the building necessitates staging,movement and storage of building materials within this narrow width of work area. Further,the NACC finds that the 15'(foot)separation area is necessary to prevent alteration to the wetland resource area,given the extremely steep slopes (in many instances a grade steeper than 1:1 and unprotected)that will result in an unstable soil condition when the grade between the existing wetland area and the proposed grades at the rear of building,#4 are complete. 33. There shall be no increase in the post development discharges from the storm drainage system or any other changes in post development conditions that alter the post development watershed boundaries as currently depicted in the Notice of Intent and approved by this Order of Conditions,unless specifically approved in writing by the Commission.The applicant has analytically proposed to achieve this performance standard basest upon data and assumptions presented by Merrimack Engineering and QXk the applicants geotechnical consultant. To assure that the analytical performance is actually met,the NACC finds it to be necessary and proper to require a comprehensive quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC)procedure be implemented during construction activities of all engineered filled areas, within the vicinity of the groundwater recharge areas. Said QA/QC program must include sufficient soil sampling,compaction testing and permeability testing in order to verify the validity of assumptions made supporting that no post development discharges will occur. To achieve C:\Winword\OOC\242-111 Ldoc 4 NACC 5/1!02 DEP FILE#242-1111 this, a geotechnical engineer must be present on the site daily during the installation of the fill material in the recharge area and during the installation of the groundwater wicks proposedbeneath the retaining walls. The engineer shall submit daily monitoring reports to the NACC for review. The name, telephone number and qualifications of the soil engineer must be submitted to the NACC for review and approval prior to construction.Upon completion of construction activities related to the groundwater recharge area,the geotechnical engineer shall submit`a stamped certification to the NACC. Said certification shall state that the groundwater recharge area has been constructed in accordance with the assumptions and analysis performed under the Notice of Intent.And further, the certification shall state.that the as-built system will functionally meet the performance standard with regards to groundwater recharge. 34. This document shall be included in all construction contracts,subcontracts, and specifications dealing with the work proposed and shall supersede any conflicting contract requirements. The applicant shall assure that all contractors,subcontractors,and other personnel performing the permitting work are fully aware of the permits terms and conditions. Thereafter, the contractor will be held jointly liable for any violation of this Order resulting from failure to comply with its conditions. 35. The owners of the project and their successors in title,in the event they proceed to alter areas subject to the Commission's jurisdiction under the order,agree that the Order does not"in itself impose upon the Town any responsibility to maintain the proposed drainage system and that said Town shall not be liable for any damage in the event of failure. By acceptance of this Order,the owners agree to indemnify and hold harmless to the Town and its residents for any damage attributable to alterations undertaken on this property pursuant to the Order. Issuance of these Conditions does not in any way imply or certify that the site or downstream areas will not be subject to flooding,storm damage or any other form of water damage. Maintenance of the drainage system,if accepted by the Town as part of a public way, becomes the responsibility of the Town. 36. The NACC finds the applicant`s proposal for 5250:W&of wetland replication to be adequate. 'Replication methodologies mast be conducted in accordance with the performance standards outlined in 310 CMR, 10.55(4) and the replication report prepared by West Environmental Services dated 11/1/01 and 1/31, 2002. A Wetland Specialist must be present on site during replication construction and planting activities. Monitoring of the replication areas must be conducted by a qualified wetland specialist in the spring and. fall for two consecutive growing seasons. At the end of each inspection, a progress report of the relative success or failure of the replication effort shall C:\Winword\OOC\242-1 l l l.doc 5 NACC 5/1/02 DEP FILE#242-1111 be conducted by the wetlands specialist and submitted to the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP)and the North Andover Conservation Commission. If at the end of the second growing season, compliance with 310 CMR 10.55 (4)(b)(6)is not achieved, the NACC maintains the right to require additional mitigative measures. PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION 37. No work shall be undertaken until all administrative appeal periods from this Order have elapsed or,if such an appeal has been filed,until all proceedings before the Department or Court have been completed. 38. This Order shall be recorded by the applicant at the Registry of Deeds immediately after the expiration of all appeal periods.No work shall be undertaken until the Final Order has been recorded in the Registry of Deeds- or the Land Court for the district in 11ich.the W is located,within;the chain of title of the affected property. In the case,of recorded land,the Final Order shall also be noted in the Registry's Grantor Index under the name of the owner of the land upon which the proposed work is to be done.In the case of registered land,the Final Order shall also be noted on the Land Court Certificate of Title of the owner of the land upon which the proposed work is to be done. The recording information shall be submitted to the North Andover Conservation Commission on the form at the end of this Order prior to commencement of the work. Any Order not recorded by the applicant before work commences may be recorded by the NACC at the applicant's expense. 39. A sign shall be displayed at the site not less than two square feet or more than three square feet in size bearing the words"Massachusetts DEP,File Number 242-1111: 40: Any changes in the submitted plans caused by the applicant,another Board's decision or resulting from this Order of Conditions must be submitted to the NACC for approval prior to implernentation. If theNACC-finds said changes to be significant,the NACC will call for nnotl rpt lic arin {at the expense of the applicant). Within 21 days of the close ofsaid public hearing the NACC will issue an amended or new Order of Conditions.Any errors found in the plans or information submitted by the applicant shall be considered as changes.The proposed project may be still under review by other local or state boards or agencies. This may result in changes to the project plans or wetland impacts. If any such changes occur a revised plan and an explanation of the revisions shall p be submitted to the NACC for CAWinword\000242-1 11 Ldoc 6 NACC 5/1/02 DEP FILE#242-1111 review and approval prior to the start of construction. No work shall begin on a project until written approval has been granted by the NACC. 41. It is the responsibility of the applicant, owner, and/or successor(s) to ensure that all conditions of this Order of Conditions are complied with. The project engineer and contractors are to be provided with a copy of this Order of Conditions and referenced documents before commencement of construction. 42. Prior to any work commencing ort-site, the applicant shall submit to the NACC for approval,a detailed sequence of construction,including the construction of compensation and retention areas,installation of sedimentation/erosion control devices and re-vegetation to be completed before other work begins on-site. 43. From the information submitted to the NACC,including the OPECHE construction sequence and record plans,Building#4 can not be built without potential alteration to the wetland resource area.The plans submitted to the NACC lack sufficient detail and clarity to construct the improvements at Building#4 and areas adjacent thereto. Clarity and constructability of the record drawing are essential given the close proximity of Building#4 to the wetland resource areas and the steepness of slope between the two areas.As such,all construction improvements to Building#4 are hereby not approved at this time. The applicant is. encouraged to submit supplemental and detailed information regarding a specific construction sequence for the building,retaining walls and associated grading.Details and cross-sections must be submitted at a suitable plan scale not less than a 21Y scale in order to accurately assess the impacts to the adjacent wetland resource areas. Upon review and approval of the submitted information,the NACC will issue an amendment to the Order of Conditions for construction of Building#4. 44.Wetland flagging shall be checked prior to start of construction and shall be re-established where missing. All wetland flagging shall remain visible and enumerated per the approved plan(s)throughout the life of the project and until a Certificate of Compliance is issued so that erosion control measures can be properly placed and wetland impacts can be monitored_ The proposed limit of work shall be shall be clearly marked with stakes or flags and shall be confirmed by the NACC. Such markers shall be checked and replaced as necessaryand shall be maintained until all construction is complete. Workers should be informed that no use of machinery,storage of machinery or materials stockpiling of soil,p g so ,or construction activity is to occur beyond this line at any time. All flags used for the above purposes shall I� Ss be of a color P �� different from other flagging used on the site. CAWinword\000242-111 Ldoc 7 NACC 5/1/02 DEP FILE#242-1111 45. A row of staked hay bales backed by trenched siltation fence shall be placed between all construction areas and wetlands. The erosion control barrier will be properly installed and placed as shown on the plans approved and � referenced herein and shall b e inspected and approved by the NACC prior to the start of construction and shall remain intact until all disturbed areas have been permanently stabilized to prevent erosion. All erosion prevention and sedimentation protection measures found necessary during construction shall be implemented at the direction of the NACC. The NACC reserves the right to impose additional conditions on portions of this project to mitigate any impacts which could result from site erosion,or any noticeable degradation of surface water quality discharging from the site. For example,installation of erosion control measures may be required in areas not shown on the plan(s) referenced in this Order of Conditions. Should such installation be required by the NACC,they shall be installed within 48 hours of the Commission's request. 46. The applicant shall have on hand at the start of any soil-disturbance,removal or stockpiling, a minimum of 100 hay bales and sufficient stakes for staking these bales (or an equivalent amount of silt fence). Said bales shall be used only for the control of emergency erosion problems and shall not be used for the normal control of erosion. 47. A check payable to the Town of North Andover shall be provided in the amount of$30,000 which shall be in all respects satisfactory to Town Counsel, Town Treasurer, and the NACC, and shall be posted with the North Andover Town Treasurer through the NACC before commencement of work. Said' deposit of money shall be conditioned on the completion of all conditions hereof, shall be signed by a party or parties satisfactory to the NACC,and Town Counsel,and shall be released after completion of the project,provided that provisions,satisfactory to the NACC,have been made for performance of any conditions which are of continuing nature. The applicant may propose a monetary release schedule keyed to completion of specific portions of the project for the NACC's review and approval_ 48. The applicant shall designate a Wetland Scientist as an "Erosion Control Monitor"to oversee any en ' placement of controls and regular inspection or replacement of sedimentation control devices. The name and phone number of the erosion control monitor must be provided to the NACC in the event that this person has to be contacted,due to an emergency n at the site, during any 24-hour period, including weekends. This person shall be given the authority to stop construction for erosion control purposes. The erosion control monitor will be required to inspect all such devices and oversee cleaning and the proper disposal of waste products. Cleaning shall CAWinword\000242-111 l.doc 8 NACC 5/1/02 DEP FILE #242-1111 include removal of any entrapped silt. At least once during each week in which construction activities occurs on-site and for as long thereafter as ground remains unstabilized, the applicant shall submit a written report from the "Erosion Control Monitor"to the NACC certifying that, to the best of his/her knowledge and belief based on a careful site inspection, all work is being performed in compliance with this Order of Conditions and that approved setbacks are being adhered to. The erosion control monitor must visually inspect all sedimentation/erosion control measures and assume responsibility for their maintenance on a weekly basis and that they are functioning as intended. In addition,all wetland resource areas must be visually inspected for siltation,turbidity,and/or other water quality impacts. 49. Prior to construction,the applicant shall permanently mark the edge of the wetland resource area with signs spaced evenly every 25 feet incorporating the following text: "Protected Wetland Resource Area". The signs shall be placed along the southern property boundary behind Building#4. This will designate their sensitivity and assure no further:inadvertent encroachment into the wetland. These permanent markers are sub}ect to review and approval by the NACC. The applicant shall instruct all agents to explain these markers to buyers/lessees/landscapers and all persons taking over the property from the applicant. 50. The applicant and/or the legal owner of that portion of land upon which these Orders of Conditions have been placed shall provide to the NACC prior to transferring,or assigning any portion of said'land;to another party, subject to said Orders of Conditions,the"Compliance Certification Form Affidavit"attached via"Appendix A"signed under the pains and penalties of perjury,stating that said applicant and/or owner has read these Orders of Conditions and is in compliance with each and every condition. This requirement will apply to the Condo Association on behalf of all unit owners collectively.Further this requirement shall also apply to each and every owner of units located within Building#4(Unit owners in Buildings 1,2 &3 are not subject to this condition).This document shall apply to each of the conditions referenced herein and shall be provided to the Conservation Department at least five(5)business days prior to the closing of said land transaction. 51. Once these above mentioned pre-construction requirements are complete, the applicant shall contact the Conservation Office prior to site preparation or construction and shall arrange an on-site conference with an NACC representative,the contractor,the engineer,wetland scientist and the applicant to ensure that all of the Conditions of this Order are understood. This Order shall be included in all construction contracts,subcontracts, and specifications s dealin with the work proposed and shall supersede any CAWinword\00C\242-11 l l.doc 9 NACC 5/1/02 DEP FILE#242-1111 conflicting contract requirements. The applicant shall assure that all I contractors, subcontractors and other personnel performing the permitted work are fully aware of the permit's terms and conditions. Thereafter, the contractor will be held jointly Iiable for any violation of this Order of Conditions resulting from failure to comply with its conditions. The applicant or contractor shall notify the NACC in writing of the identity of the on-site construction supervisor hired to coordinate construction and to ensure compliance with this Order. A reasonable period of time shall be provided as notice of the pre-construction meeting(e.g. 72 hours). DURING CONSTRUCTION 52. IMPORTANT: Immediately upon completion of the dwelling foundation and retaining walls of Building#4,and prior to further construction activities associated with the site,the applicant shall complete a plan prepared by a Registered Professional Land Surveyorof the Commonwealth (R.P.L.S.)which accurately depicts the foundation location and it's proximity to wetland resource areas as approved under this Order of Conditions. Said plan shall be submitted to the Conservation Administrator for approval. 53. Upon beginning work,the applicant shall submit written progress reports every one (1)week detailing what work has been done in or near resource areas, and what work is anticipated to be done over the next period. This will update the construction sequence. 54. All catch basins shall contain oil/gasoline traps,and it shall be a continuing condition of this order,even after a Certificate of Compliance is issued,that the oil/gasoline traps in the catch basins be maintained. All catch basins shall be free of all accumulated silt and debris before a Compliance is issued;and the owner or his/her agent shall so specify in the request for Compliance. 55. The sewer lines on the site,where they cross wetland resource areas,shall be tested for water tightness in accordance with North Andover DPW standards. 56. The proposed project includes significant amounts of earthwork in an area where groundwater is at or near the ground surface during extended periods of time throughout the year.A specific de-watering plan must be submitted to the NACC for review and approval prior to the commencement of construction on the site. Dewatering activities shall be supervised and witnessed by the designated erosion control monitor. This designee must be on-site during dewatering activities. De-watering activities shall be conducted as shown on thea roved plans and shall b pp e monitored b the p Y CAWinword\OOC\242-111 Ldoc 10 NACC 511!02 DEP FILE #242-1111 erosion control monitor to ensure that sediment laden water is appropriately settled prior to discharge toward the wetland resource areas. No discharge of water is allowed directly into an area subject to Jurisdiction of the Wetlands Protection Act. If emergency de-watering requirements arise,the applicant shall submit a contingency plan to the Commission for approval which provides for the pumped water to be contained in a settling basin,to reduce turbidity prior to discharge into a resource area. 57. Any fill used in connection with this project shall be clean fill,containing no trash,refuse,rubbish or debris,including but not limited to lumber,bricks, plaster, wire,lath,paper,cardboard,pipe,tires,ashes,refrigerators,motor vehicles or parts on any of the foregoing.Work proposed on the site includes demolition of existing buildings and site improvements.Residual material resulting from demolition shall be removed from the site. 58. No exposed area shalt remain unstable for more than thirty(30) days,unless approved by the NACC. 59. No re-grading in the buffer zone shall have a slope steeper than 2:1 (horizontal: vertical). Slopes of steeper grade shall be rip-rapped to provide permanent stabilization. 60. All stockpile materials shall be Iocated such that migration of materials shall not breach the erosion controls separating the wetland resource area from the construction zone. 61. Washings from concrete trucks,or surplus concrete,shall be removed from the site. No truck wash out is allowed on site. 62.All waste generated by,or associated with,the Construction activity shall be contained within the construction area,and away fromany wetland resource area. There shall be no burying of spent construction materials or disposal`of waste on the site by any other means. The applicant shall maintain dumpsters(or other suitable means)at the site for the storage and removal of such spent construction materials off-site. However,no trash;dumpstera will be Mowed within 5®' srect pte ue Act. 63. Accepted engineering and construction standards and procedures shall be followed in the completion of the project. 64. During and after work on this project, there shall be no discharge or spillage of fuel, or other pollutants into any wetland resource area. If there is a spill or discharge of any pollutant during any phase of construction the NA CC CAWinword\000242-1111.doc I I NACC 5/1!02 DEP FILE#242-1111 shall be notified by the applicant within one (1) business day. No construction vehicles are.to be stored within 100 feet of wetland resource areas, and no vehicle refueling,equipment lubrication,or maintenance is to be done within 100 feet of a resource area. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT CONDITIONS 65. All construction and post-construction stormwater management shall be conducted in accordance with supporting documents submitted with the Notice.of Intent,the Department of Environmental Protection Stormwater Management Policy and as approved by the NACC in this Order of Conditions. 66. All stormwater best management practices shall be maintained as specified in the Operation and Maintenance:Plan,subatittedith the Notice of-Ment and incorporated in the Order of Conditions. Evidence of maintenance of the stormwater management system shall be provided to the NACC on an annual basis by a Registered Professional Civil.-Engineer.The first report shall be submitted to the NACC one year after the fust stormwater structure goes on-line.Further,annual reports shall also be submitted each year and continue until two years after the entire project is complete.After complete project construction,the applicant will verify the performance of the storm water management systems during,a storm event of a recurrence interval of 50 years or more. This assessment shall include verification of water levels at the 0,24 and 48 hour intervals. The ord_ed water,levels(in feet,elevation and the time)will be compared.with the designed detention water elevations and times to determine if the basin is meeting targeted detention times. The compliance of the system with.the design basis and Order of Conditions will be certified by a Registered Professional Engineer to the Conservation Commission or its Agent This condition must be satisfied prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Compliance. 67. Water quality in down gradient BVW's shall not differ significantly following completion of the project from the pre-development-conditions- There shall be no sedimentation into wetlands or,water bodies from discharge pipes or surface runoff leaving the site. 68. The applicants, owners, and their successors and assignees,shall maintain all culverts, collections basins,traps,outlet structures,subsurface storage areas, and other elements of the drainage system,unless put into an easement to the Town of North Andover,in order to avoid blockages and siltation which CAWinword\000242-11 I Ldoc 12 NACC 5/1/02 DEP FILE#242-1111 might cause failure of the system and/or detrimental impacts to on-site or off-site resource areas, and shall maintain the integrity of vegetative cover on the site. AFTER CONSTRUCTION 69, No underground storage of fuel oils shall be allowed on any lot within one hundred (100)feet of any wetland resource area. This condition shall survive this Order of Conditions and shall run with the title of the property. 70. Slow release,Iow-nitrogen fertilizers types(>5°lo),utilized for landscaping and lawn care and pesticides and herbicides shall not be used within 100 feet of a wetland resource area. This condition shall survive this Order of Conditions and shall run with the title of the property. 71. Permanent signs designating"No-Salt.Zone,and"No-Snow'Stockpiling Zones"shall be displayed in the locations shown ort the approved plans. 72. Upon completion of construction and grading,all disturbed areas located outside resource areas shall be stabilized permanently against erosion. This shall be done either by loan-ting and seeding according to SCS standards. If the latter course is chosen,stabilization will be considered complete once vegetative cover has been achieved. 73. Upon completion of the project the applicant shall submit the following to the Conservation Commission as part of a request for a Certificate of Compliance: a. WPA Form 8A—"Request for a Certificate of Compliance." b. A letter from the applicant requesting a Certificate of Compliance. c. The name and address of the current landowner. d. Signed statements from the individual property owners shall be submitted with the request for a Certificate of Compliance indicating that they read and understood the recorded Order of Conditions prior to purchasing their property. e. The name and address of the individual/trust or corporation to whom the compliance is to be granted. f. The street address and assessor's map/parcel number for the project. g. The DEP file number. h. A written statement from a Registered Professional Civil Engineer of the Commonwealth certifying that the work has been conducted as shown on the plan(s) and documents referenced above, and as conditioned by the Commission. CAWinword\00C\242-1 l 1 Ldoc 13 NACC 5/1/02 DEP FILE #242-1111 i. A written statement from a qualified wetland specialist stating compliance of the replication area with the statutory performance standards. j. An "As-Built"plan prepared and signed and stamped by a Registered Professional Civil Engineer and a Registered Professional Land Surveyor of the Commonwealth,for the public record. This plan will include: "As-Built"post-development elevations of all drainage& stormwater management structures constructed within 100 feet of any wetland resource area. NOTE: If portions of the stormwater systems exist partially within the Buffer Zone than the entire structure must be depicted to accurately verify compliance. A "As-Built"post-development elevations and grades of all filled or altered wetland rest ce areas including the encompassing buffer zone. A Distances from structures to wetland resource areas. Structures include(but are not limited to)septic systems;additions,fences, sheds,stone walls,pools,retaining walls,subsurface utilities and decks, A A line showing the limit of work and the extent of existing erosion control devices. "Work includes any disturbance of soils or vegetation. A Location of all subsurface utilities entering the property. 74. The following special conditions shall survive the issuance of a Certificate of Compliance (COC)for this project A Maintenance of catch basins(Condition#54); . Discharge or stege PO ProhibIdi ition A Prohibition of underground fuels(Condition#69); A Limitations on the use of fertilizers,herbicides, and pesticides (Conditions#70). CAWinword\OOC\242-11 ll.doc 14 NACC 5/1/02 f DEP FILE#242-1111 ➢ The approved "Stormwater Operations and Management Plan including Best Management Practices. No additional filings will be required to conduct maintenance of the above referenced system and plan. I CAWinw0rd\00C\242-111 Ldoc 15 NACC 5/1/02 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands DEP File Number- i WPA Form 5 - Order of Conditions �- Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 Provided by DEP B. Findings (cont.) Additional conditions relating to municipal ordinance or bylaw: This Order is valid for three years, unless otherwise specified as a special condition pursuant to General Conditions#4, from the date of issuance. Date This"Order must be signed by a majority of the Conservation Commission. The Order must be mailed by certified mail (return receipt requested)or hand delivered to the applicant.A copy also must be mailed or hand d livered at the same ime to the appropriate Department of Environmental Protection Regional Office see ppendi A) the property owner(if different from applicant). Sign ure �Q- !6 On f)'l ZaoZ� Day MonthtW Year before me personally appeared to me k- wr the person described in and who executed the foregoing imtrument and acknowledged that he/she executed the same as his/her free act and deed: Nota ubtic My Commission Expim Pwk This Order is issued to the applicant follows:licant as f ofCofae Evift its 7.2OW by hand delivery on ❑ by certified mail,return receipt requested, on Date Date Wpaform5.doc•rev.12/15/00 Page 5 of 7 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection -- Bureau of Resource-Protection- Wetlands DEP File Number: WPA Form- 5 Order- of Conditions 242-1111 ` Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 13't, §40" Provided by DEP C. Appeals The applicant, the owner, any person aggrieved by this Omer,any owner of land abutting the land subject to this Order, or any ten residents of the city or town in which such land is located, are hereby notified of their right to request the appropriateDEP Regional Office to issue a Superseding Order of Conditions. The request must be made by certified mail or hand delivery to the Department,with the appropriate filing fee and a completed Appendix E:Request of Departmental Action Fee Transmittal Form,as provided in 310 CMR 10.03(7)within ten business days from the date of issuance of this Order.A copy of the request shall at the same time be sent by certified mail or hand delivery to the Conservation Commission and to the applicant, if he/she is not the appellant. The request shall state clearly and concisely the objections to the Order which is being:appealed<and how the Order does not contribute to the protection of the interests identified in the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act, (M.G.L.c. 131,§40)and is inconsistent with the wetlands regulations(310 CMR 10.00). To the extent that the Order is based on a municipal ordinance or bylaw, and not on the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act or regulations,the Department has no appellate jurisdiction. D Recording Information' This Oder of Conditions must be recorded in the Registry of Deeds or the Land Court for the district in which the land is located,within the chain of title of the affected property. In the case of recorded land,the Final Order shall also be noted in the Registry's Grantor index under the name of the owner of the land subject to the Order. In the ease of registered land,this Order shall also be noted on the Land Court Certificate of Title of the owner of the land subject to the'Order of Conditions.The recording information on Page 7 of form 5 shall be submitted to the Conservation Commission fisted below. North Andover Conservation commission Wpaform5.doc•rev.511/02 Page 5 of 7 i Vassachusetts Department of Environmental Pro tection- �- - Bureau of Resource Protection--Wetlands DEP File Number: j WPA Form 5 - Order of Conditions 242-1-111, Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 Provided by DEP D. Recording.lnformatvn (cont.) Detach on dotted line,have stamped by the Registry of Deeds and submit to the Conservation Commission. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- North Andover Conservation commission Please be advised that the Order of Conditions for the Project at: Project Location DEP Fite Number Has been recorded at the Registry of Deeds of. county t3ootc P age for: Property Owner and has been noted in the chain of title of the affected property in: Book P age In accordance with the Order of Conditions issued on: Date If recorded land,the instrument number identifying this transaction is: Instrument Number If registered land,the document number 00110(yif thus Vion.i.: Document Number Signature of Applicant Wpakwm5-doc•rev.511102 - Page 7 of 7 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection �— Bureau of Resource Protection:- Wetlands �I WPA Appendi-x E -�Request for {; Departmental Action Fee-Transmittal Form Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act Ml:G.L. c 1,31; §40 A. Request Information Important: When filling 1• Person or party making request Cf appropriate, name the citizen group's representative): out forms on the computer, Name use only the tab key to Malting Address move your cursor-do City/Town not use the state Code return key. Phone Number Fax Number(rr aPpe) + Project Location /gun Mailing Address CRY/I own Mate 2. Applicant(as shown on Notice of Intent(Form 3),Abbreviated Notice of Resource Area Delineation (Form 4A); or Request for Determination of Applicability(Form 1)): Name Mailing Address City/Town state zip Code Phone Number Fax Number(if app kabie) 3. DEP File Number: B. Instructions 1. When the Departmental action request is for(check one): ❑ Superseding order of Conditions ❑ Superseding Determination of Applicability ❑ Superseding Order of Resource Area Delineation Send this form and check or money order for$5Q.00,payable to the Co+nmonwiea#h of Massachusetts to: Department of Environmental Protection Box 4062 Boston, MIA 02211 wpaform5_doc•Appendix E.rev.5/7/02 Page T of 2 Massachusetts-Department of Environmental Prote . Bureau-of Resource Protection-Wetlands ct�on WPA PPendix-'E Request for Departmental-Action-Fee-Transmittal Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 F©rrr B. Instructions (cont.) 2. On a separate sheet attached to this form, state clearly and concise the objections Determination or Order which is bei appealed. concisely t the rminans to the based on a municipal bylaw, and not ion t Mu extsetts Wet�aar p � af`i�ono or Order is the Department has no appellate jurisdiction. r regulations, 3. Send a copy of this form and a c Determination or Order b ° of the check or money order with the Request for a Superseding Appendix A). y certified mart or hand delivery to the appropriate DEP Regio Office(se, 4. A copy of the request shalt at the samet�rr>' e be sent bycertified maiF or hand delivery toy the Conservation Commission and to the applicant, if he/she is not the appellant. wpaform5.doc•Appendix E-rev.5/1/o2 Page 2 of 2 ReJceived by Town Clerk : ? Y TOWN C! FORM A NORTH a APPLICATION FOR ENDORSEMENT OF� yI�N BELIEVED NOT TO REQUIRE APPROVAL October 13 1998 To the Planning Boar r: The undersigned wis flan and requests a determination by s der the Subdivision ' Control Law is noteves that such approval is not required f / L'� n plan is no I . The division g p a t o s b division be( 3 the amount of fro Cage required by i and is on . a public -'way , namely , Chi private way , namely , Farrwood gland bounded as follows : Northerly by Farrw_ stage Trust Southerly by +Food Road & Tru_ aeservations Easterly by Chickering Road 2 . The division of land shown on the accompanying plan is not a sub- division for the following reasons : Adequate frontage and area , no new roads or wads created Book 798 Page 49 3 . Title reference North Essex Deeds , Book 826 Page 33 or Certificate of Title No . , Registration Book ; Page Applica is Signat Owner' s signature and address if not the applicant : (Print Name) - --- Applicant ' s Address : 200 Chickering Road N. Andover, MA 01845 Tel. No.- (978)685-5176 Received by Town Clerk : Notice to APPLICANT/TOWN CLERK of action of Planning Board on `. accompanying plan : 1. The North Andover Planning Board has determined that said plan does not require approval under the Subdivision Control Law , and the appropriate endorsement has been made upon the same . 2 . The North Andover Planning Board has determined that said plan shows a subdivision , as defined by G . L . c . 41 , s . 81-L , and must therefore be re-submitted to it for approval under the Subdivision Control Law . Very truly yours , NORTH ANDOVER PLANNING BOARD By : Date : Received by Town Clerk : _ TOWN FORMA NORTHA6 APPLICATION FOR ENDORSEMENT OFNjq " BELIEVED NOT TO REQUIRE APPROVAL Octol)er 13 1998 To the Planning Board of the Town of North Andover: The undersigned wishes to record the accompanying plan and requests a determination by said Board that approval by it under the Subdivision Control Law is not required . The undersigned believes that such approval is not required for the following reasons 1 . The division of land shown on the accompanying plan "is not a sub- division because every lot shown thereon .has the amount of frontage required by the North Andover Zoning By Law and is on . a public - way , namely , Chickering Rd . & wood Rd . , or a private way , namely , Farrwood Avenue being land bounded as follows Northerly by Farrwood Avenue & N/F Heritage Trust Southerly by Wood Road & Trustees of Reservations Easterly by Chickefing Road 2 . The division of land shown on the accompanying plan is not a sub- division for the following reasons : Adequate frontage and area , no new roads or wa7s created Book 798 Page 49 3 . Title reference North Essex Deeds , Book 826 Page 33 _; or Certificate of Title No . Registration Book ; Page Applica is Signat Owner ' s signature and address if not zr the applicant : (Print Name) Applicant ' s r Address : 200 Chickering Road N. Andover, MA 01845 Tel. No.- (978)685-5176 Received by Town Clerk : Notice to APPLICANT/TOWN CLERK of action of Planning Board on accompanying plan : 1 . The North Andover Planning Board has determined that said plan does not require approval under the Subdivision Control Law , and the appropriate endorsement has been made upon the same . 2 . The North Andover Planning Board has determined that said plan shows a subdivision , as defined by G . L . c. 41 , s . 81-L , and must therefore be re-submitted to it for approval under the Subdivision Control Law . Very truly yours , \ - - - NORTH ANDOVER PLANNING BOARD 1 By : Date eived by Town Clerk : RE'w TOWN CLE FORM A NORTH ANNOY ER APPLICATION FOR ENDORSEMENT OF PLAN BELIEVED NOT TO REQUIRE APPROVAL October 13 1998 To the Planning Board of the Town of North Andover : The undersigned wishes to record the accompanying plan and requests a determination by said Board that approval by it under the Subdivision Control Law is not required . The undersigned believes that such approval is not required for the following reasons : 1 . The division of land shown on the accompanying plan is not a sub- division because every lot shown thereon has the amount of frontage required by the North Andover Zoning By Law and is on . a public way , namely , Chickering Rd . & Wood Rd . or a private way , namely , Farrwood Avenue , being land bounded as , follows : Northerly by Farrwood Avenue & N/F Heritage Trust Southerly by Wood Road & Trustees of Reservations Easterly by Chickering Road 2 . The division of land shown on the accompanying plan is not a sub- division for the following reasons : Adequate frontage and area , no new roads or wars created Book 798 Page 49 3 . Title reference North Essex Deeds , Book 826 Page 33 or Certificate of Title No . Registration Book ; Page Applica is Signat Owner ' s signature and address if not the applicant : (Print Name) -- Applicant ' s Address : 200 Chickering Road N. Andover, MA 01845 Tel. No. (978)685-5176 I _ Received by Town Clerk : Notice to APPLICANT/TOWN CLERK of action of Planning Board on accompanying plan : 1 . The North Andover Planning Board has determined that said plan does not require approval under the Subdivision Control Law , and the a propriate endorsement has been made upon the same . 2 . The North ndover Plan ng Bo rd has de rmin d that said 1 n s ows a subdivision , as define by G . L . c . 41 , s . �1-L , and must theref re be r -submitted to it or approv un er the S bdivision ntr 1 Law . Very truly yours , NORTH ANDOVER PLANNING BOARD J� Q1_ a By : 1 Date : z CQfn: x7 � x; i 1 R-ecdi`Ved by Town Clerk : RECI1 V JOYCE BRAfi`111 W FORMA TOWN CLERK NORTH ANDOVER APPLICATION BELIEVEDNOT OTOEREQUIRE EAPPROVAL A%EE 3 1151 AM '96 19 To the Planning Board of the Town of North Andover: The undersigned wishes to record the accompanying plan and requests a determination by said Board that approval by it under the Subdivision Control Law is not required . The undersigned believes that such approva is not required for the following reasons : 1 . The division of land shown on the accompanying plan is not a sub- division because every lot shown thereon has the amount of frontage required by the North Andover Zoning By► Law and is on a public way , namely ch; k ring 'Road (Rnjji-r. 129� or a private way, namely , Farrwood Avenue being land bounded as follows : Northerly by Farrwood Avenue and Heritage Green Condominuntis. Southwesterly by Wood Lane. Southerly by land of the Trustees of Reservations. _Easterly by Chickering Road (Route 125) - 2 . The division of land shown on the accompanying plan is not a sub- division for the following reasons : Existing low of record on gXishing frontage 3. Title reference North Essex Deeds , Book Page 33 or Certificate of Title No . Registration Book Page Appy"a'cant ' s Sig ature : Owner ' s signature and address if not k✓ the a plicant : Applicant ' s Address : Dorothy J. Rennie Scott Companies 200 Chickering Road, No. Andover, MA 01845 12 Rogers Road, Hayprhilli MA 01835 Received by Town Clerk : " + r a Notice to APPLICANT/TOWN CLERK' of action of Planning Board on accompanying plan : 1 . The North Andover Planning Board has determined that said plan does not require approval under the Subdivision Control Law , and the appropriate endorsement has been 'made upon the same . i 2 . The North Andover Planning Board hasIdetermined that said plan shows a subdivision , as defined by G . L . c . 41 , s . Bl-L , and must therefore be re-submitted to it for approval under the Subdivision Control Law. Very truly yours , NORTH ANDOVER PLANNING BG4;:D By ., Date Received by Town Clerk : JOYOE PRAD,$,"SAW FORM A TOWN NORTH ANOVER APPLICATION FOR ENDORSEMENT OF PLAN BELIEVED NOT TO REQUIRE APPROVAL Drc 3I 5,2 e 19 To the Planning Board of the Town of North Andover: The undersigned wishes to record the accompanying plan and requests a determination by said Board that approval by it under the Subdivision Control Law is not required . The undersigned believes that such approva is not required for the following reasons : 1 . The division of land shown on the accompanying plan is not a sub- division because every lot shown thereon has the amount of frontage required by the North Andover Zoning Bw law and is on a public way , namely , Chi k ring Road (Rrm#:P 129.)_, or ' a private way , namely , Farrwond Avenue , being land bounded as follows : Northerly by Farrwood Avenue and Heritage Green CondomiSouthwesterly by Wood Lane Souther by land of the Trustees of Reservations, Easterly by Chickering Road (Route 125) 2 . The division of land shown on the accompanying plan is not a sub- division for the following reasons : Existing lots of record on existing frontage 3. Title reference North .Essex Deeds , Book; Page 33 or Certificate of Title No . Registration Book ; Page Applicant ' s Signature : Owner ' s signature and address if not the applicant : Applicant ' s Address : Dorothy J. Rennie Scott Companies 200 Chickering Road No, Andover, MA 01845 12 Rogers Road, Haverhi 11` MA 01825 Received by Town Clerk: EUS j' - TOW A i00VER pflRTN Notice to APPLICANT/TOWN CLERK' of action of Planning Board on -accompanying pian : 1 . The North Andover Planning Board has determined that said plan does not require approval under the Subdivision Control Law , and the appropriate endorsement has been 'made upon the same . 2 . The rth ndover P1 nnin Board ha a rmined tha said Ian sho s a su division as de ined b G . L . c . 41 , s . 1-L , and m t there ore be r -submit ed t it for ap roval nder the S bdivicion ontr Law. Very truly yours , NORTH ANDOVER PLANNING BGPIRE By : Date am RID * i tE Received by Town Clerk: ANVER t ' FORMA APPLICATION FOR ENDORSEMENT OF PLAN BELIEVED NOT TO REQUIRE APPROVAL 2 -7 , 19 5 To the Planning Board of the Town of North Andover: The undersigned wishes to record the accompanying plan and request a determination by said Board that approval by it under the Subdivision Control Law is not required. The undersigned believes that such approval is not required for the following reason: 1. The division of land shown on the accompanying plan is not a subdivision because every lot shown thereon has he amount of frontage required b the North Andove<F Zon'n Bylaw and is on a publ is way, amely, C C'���;'�� �� fw '� d C or a private way, namely, , being land bounded as follows: /Qcj4j.%,45 Ea,. v vu n 2. The division of land shown. on the accompanying plan is not a subdivisionfo following reas ns r; �� S 1�r�ars � � 31 3 . Title reference North Essex Deeds, Book � _; Page 4� ; or Certificate of Title No. , Registration Book Page Appl,icant's Signature: Owners Signature and address if.-not the ap 'cant: (Print Name) Applicant's Address: Tel. No. Received by Town Clerk: +fs- `; R ti C, ER f f Notice to APPLICANT/TOWN CLERK of action] " P1{ nning Board on accompanying plan: 1. The North Andover .Planning Board has determined that said plan does not require approval under the subdivision Control Law, and the appropriate endorsement has been made upon the same. 2. The North Andover Planning Board has determined that said plan shows a subdivision, as defined by G.L. c.41, s. 81-L, and must therefore be re-submitted to it for approval under the Subdivision Control Law. Very truly yours, NORTH ANDOVER PLANNING BOARD By: Date: i z� ' 't\Ll.L.•iY tQ► W CLL, K Received by Town Clerk: N RTV4 ANGOVER FORMA k' {J4 „.N APPLICATION FOR ENDORSEMENT OF PLAN BELIEVED NOT TO REQUIRE APPROVAL 19 4 To the Planning Board of the Town of North Andover: The undersigned wishes to record the accompanying plan and request a determination by said Board that approval by it under the Subdivision Control Law is not required. The undersigned believes that such approval is not required for the following reason: 1. The division of land shown on the accompanying plan is not a subdivision because every lot shown thereon has he amount of frontage required by the North Andover Zoning Bylaw and is on a public way, namely, or a private way, namely, being land bounded as follows. ,J J 2. The division of land shown on the accompanying plan is not a subdivision fol37 the. following reasons: "7 3 . Title reference North Essex Deeds, Book Page or Certificate of Title No. , Registration Book Page Applicant's Signature: Owners Signature and address if not the applicant: (Print Name) % Applicant's Address: Tel. No. �y Received by Town. €�E t� ;�Al � a1AWK Notice to APPLICANT/TOWN CLERK of actio �f1' P1'anning Board on accompanying plan: 1. The North Andover Planning Board has determined that said plan does not require approval under the subdivision control Law, and the appropriate endorsement has been made upon the same. 2. The North Andover Planning Board has determined th said plan s a subdiv' i , as define y .L. c.41 s. 8 -L, an must therefoo be r -submitt to it r a oval er t Subdi isio Control w. Very truly yours, NORTH ANDOVER PLANNING BOARD By: Date: Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection DEP File Number: 1Bureau of Resource Protection -Wetlands WPA Form 7 — Extension Permit for Orders of Conditions 242-856 11 Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 Provided by DEP A. General Information Important: When filling out 1. Applicant: forms on the Scott Companies computer, use e tab Name key only yto move 12 Rogers Rd. your cursor- Mailing Address do not use the Haverhill MA 01835 return key. Cityfrown State Zip Code ree 2. Property Owner(if different): Terra Properties, LLC Name m 342 N. Main St. Mailing Address Andover MA 01810 City/Town State Zip Code B. Finding Information The Order of Conditions(or Extension Permit) issued to the applicant or property owner listed above on: 12/4/98 Date for work at: 200 Chickering Rd. 46 35,46 Street Address Assessor's Map/Plat Number Parcel/Lot Number recorded at the Registry of Deeds for: Essex 798/826 49/33 County Book Page Certificate(if registered land) is hereby extended until: 12/4/2002 Date This date can be no more than 3 years from the expiration date of the Order of Conditions or the latest extension. Only unexpired Orders of Conditions or Extension may be extended. Date the Order was last extended (if applicable): Date Issued by: North Andover Conservation Commission wpafornnTdoc-rev.917101 Page 1 of 3 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection DEP File Number. p , Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands WPA Form 7 — Extension Permit for Orders of Conditions 242-856 Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 Provided by DEP B. Finding Information (cont.) This Order of Conditions Extension must be signed by a rRajority of the ons+ ation Commission and a copy sent to the applicant and the appropriate DEP Regi--'-] Off' a (se pp dix A). Signatures: AM On Of Day Month and Year before me personally appeared Scott Masse to me known to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that he/she executed the same as his/her free act and deed. Notary Public My Commission Expires C. Recording Confirmation The applicant shall record this document in accordance with General Condition 8 of the Order of Conditions (see below), complete the form attached to this Extension Permit, have it stamped by the Registry of Deeds, and return it to the Conservation Commission. Note: General Condition 8 of the Order of Conditions requires the applicant, prior to commencement of work, to record the final Order(or in this case, the Extension Permit for the Order of Conditions) in the Registry of Deeds or the Land Court for the district in which the land is located, within the chain of title of the affected property. In the case of recorded land, it shall be noted in the Registry's Granter Index under the name of the owner of the land upon which the proposed work is to be done. In the case of registered land, it shall also be noted on the Land Court Certificate of Title of the owner of the land upon which the proposed work is done. Detach page 3 of Form 7 and submit it to the Conservation Commission prior to the expiration of the Order of Conditions subject to this Extension Permit. wpaform7.doc•rev.8/29/01 Page 2 of 3 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands DEP File Number: WPA Form 7 — Extension Permit for Orders of Conditions 242-856 L11 Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 Provided by DEP B. Finding Information (cont.) This Order of Conditions Extension must be signed by a majority of the Conservation Commission and a copy sent to the applicant and the appropriate DEP Regional Office(see Appendix A). Signatures: On Of Day Month and Year before me personally appeared Scott Masse to me known to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that he/she executed the same as his/her free act and deed. Notary Public My Commission Expires C. Recording Confirmation The applicant shall record this document in accordance with General Condition 8 of the Order of Conditions (see below), complete the form attached to this Extension Permit, have it stamped by the Registry of Deeds, and return it to the Conservation Commission. Note: General Condition 8 of the Order of Conditions requires the applicant, prior to commencement of work, to record the final Order(or in this case, the Extension Permit for the Order of Conditions) in the Registry of Deeds or the Land Court for the district in which the land is located, within the chain of title of the affected property. In the case of recorded land, it shall be noted in the Registry's Granter Index under the name of the owner of the land upon which the proposed work is to be done. In the case of registered land, it shall also be noted on the Land Court Certificate of Title of the owner of the land upon which the proposed work is done. Detach page 3 of Form 7 and submit it to the Conservation Commission prior to the expiration of the Order of Conditions subject to this Extension Permit. wpaform7.doc•rev.9/7/01 Page 2 of 3 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection DEP File Number: 1 Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands WPA Form 7 — Extension Permit for Orders of Conditions 242-856 Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 Provided by DEP C. Recording Confirmation (cont.) To: North Andover Conservation Commission Please be advised that the Extension Permit to the Order of Conditions for the project at: Project Location DEP File Number has been recorded at the Registry of Deed of: Essex County for: Property Owner and has been noted in the chain of title of the affected property in accordance with General Condition 8 of the original Order of Conditions on: Date Book Page If recorded land the instrument number which identifies this transaction is: Instrument Number If registered land, the document number which identifies this transaction is: Document Number Signature of Applicant wpaform7.doc•rev.9/7/01 Page 3 of 3 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection -Wetlands WPA Appendix A - DEP Regional Addresses Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 Mail transmittal forms and DEP payments,payable to: Commonwealth of Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Box 4062 Boston, MA 02211 DEP Western Region Adams Colrain Hampden Monroe Pittsfield Tyringham 436 Dwight Street Agawam Conway Hancock Montague Plainfield Wales Alford Cummington Hatfield Monterey Richmond Ware Suite 402 Amherst Dalton Hawley Montgomery Rowe Warwick Springfield,MA 01103 Ashfield Deerfield Heath Monson Russell Washington Phone:413-784-1100 Becket Easthampton Hinsdale Mount Washington Sandisfield Wendell Belchertown East Longmeadow Holland New Ashford Savoy Westfield Fax:413-784-1149 Bernardston Egremont Holyoke New Marlborough Sheffield Westhampton Blandford Erving Huntington New Salem Shelburne West Springfield Brimfield Florida Lanesborough North Adams Shutesbury West Stockbridge Buckland Gill Lee Northampton Southampton Whately Charlemont Goshen Lenox Northfield South Hadley Wilbraham Cheshire Granby Levered Orange Southwick Williamsburg Chester Granville Leyden Otis Springfield Williamstown Chesterfield Great Barrington Longmeadow Palmer Stockbridge Windsor Chicopee Greenfield Ludlow Pelham Sunderland Worthington Clarksburg Hadley Middlefield Peru Tolland DEP Central Region Acton Charlton Hopkinton Millbury Rutland Uxbridge 627 Main Street Ashburnham Clinton Hubbardston Millville Shirley Warren Ashby Douglas Hudson New Braintree Shrewsbury Webster Worcester,MA 01605 Athol Dudley Holliston Northborough Southborough Westborough Phone:508-792-7650 Auburn Dunstable Lancater Northbridge Southbridge West Boylston Fax:508-792-7621 Ayer East Brookfield Leicester North Brookfield Spencer West Brookfield Barre Fitchburg Leominster Oakham Sterling Westford TDD:508-767-2788 Bellingham Gardner Littleton Oxford Stow Westminster Berlin Grafton Lunenburg Paxton Sturbridge Winchendon Blackstone Groton Marlborough Pepperell Sutton Worcester Bolton Harvard Maynard Petersham Templeton Boxborough Hardwick Medway Phillipston Townsend Boylston Holden Mendon Princeton Tyngsborough Brookfield Hopedale Milford Royalston Upton DEP Southeast Region Abington Dartmouth Freetown Mattapoisett Provincetown Tisbury 20 Riverside Drive Acushnet Dennis Gay Head Middleborough Raynham Truro Attleboro Dighton Gosnold Nantucket Rehoboth Wareham Lakeville,MA 02347 Avon Duxbury Halifax NewBedford Rochester Wellfieet Phone:508-946-2700 Barnstable Eastham Hanover North Affieborough Rockland West Bridgewater Fax:508-947-6557 Berkley East Bridgewater Hanson Norton Sandwich Westport Bourne Easton Harwich Norwell Scituate West Tisbury TDD:508-946-2795 Brewster Edgartown Kingston Oak Bluffs Seekonk Whitman Bridgewater Fairhaven Lakeville Orleans Sharon Wrentham Brockton Fall River Mansfield Pembroke Somerset Yarmouth CarverFalmouth Marion Plainville Stoughton Chatham Foxborough Marshfield Plymouth Swansea Chilmark Franklin Mashpee Plympton Taunton DEP Northeast Region Amesbury Chelmsford Hingham Merrimac Quincy Wakefield 205 Lowell Street Andover Chelsea Holbrook Methuen Randolph Walpole Arlington Cohasset Hull Middleton Reading Waltham Wilmington,MA 01887 Ashland Concord Ipswich Millis Revere Watertown Phone:978-661-7600 Bedford Danvers Lawrence Milton Rockport Wayland Fax: 978-661-7615 Belmont Dedham Lexington Nahant Rowley Wellesley Beverly Dover Lincoln Natick Salem Wenham TDD:978-661-7679 Billerica Dracut Lowell Needham Salisbury West Newbury Boston Essex Lynn Newbury Saugus Weston Boxford Everett Lynnfield Newburyport Sherbom Westwood Braintree Framingham Malden Newton Somerville Weymouth Brookline Georgetown Manchester-By-The-Sea Norfolk Stoneham Wilmington Burlington Gloucester Marblehead North Andover Sudbury Winchester Cambridge Groveland Medfield North Reading Swampscott Winthrop Canton Hamilton Medford Norwood Tewksbury Woburn Carlisle Haverhill Melrose Peabody Topsfield wpaform7.doc•Appendix A•rev.9/7/01 Page 1 of 1 Uv/10/U1 1U-44 tAA 011 440 JJUV t11LL 0: GAALU" �1UVJs VVJ 0�17/2001 13:57 9784702690 NORTH ATLANTIC PAGE 02 L,ECEl i ED JOYCE BRADSHAV TOWN CLERK NORTH ANDOVER 2001 OCT -5 P 12. 32 Recravvd by Town Clerk FORM A p,•ppL1C&-no` r-OR EMORSMOXT Of PLAN -SMMvm NOT TO nQumss AMMIL Sa tember 14 2003 'Y o the "Dowd of tha Town GC1iotth Axsdovvs Ina and rc*le&m a dltrsmi don by Sald Read tbat The anderj^urd w1Sr $to totord lho�g➢ LLirecL 'I bn anda I8Ipad believes that bud► apowval by it Uadw Bad Subdi�a CCDVMlLaw is cl0treq 2pplO"2j is notmgvived for die io]lovriRg crasons= i. The division of lmd ahow�a on thti aoco�mPeaYMw plan is notasubdivisioa:w=-%e evay lot shoK►n tho lftrth Aadavar Zcaing ByLaw and is on a pnbL'c th=wn has tho amour of po equ Ora ase ,cow_dY a r.�nea 1 Y v,►,�ry.namely.ClLfck pcs�Cbic '3toad atm ' a 'Tslsst 1xin�landbouadodaSfoUawe: to tha ®a9L b th d o d b bI a sem. tee o€ Raeery curs• do dthe�4S �C. cd a vaed b cots nd t e pp �is fmK a y ,vtclon fbK the foUovvxS TM0wt 'L �1e di�i =of land shown oa tt1C acoomp P b �7d7de --. ,- Lot b" a ua roa a -- ao nap lot bas been Th:ts t; re xeseued s 1 ' ijns Gh8 created. 3. Loc ftont �'�°of each lot degiemd an=0 10 p C icist=i ad. 7.ot £cont: e - 1d.T Aes1r Tryst 386.23 dcrea - 6.33 acres 5.076 s€ or .I2 a as of Land from 4, pccrip¢ion of pt4po9 Tot $e d e t to f to 1.5 'rung of Rese s v af:-tear tyle .Lot TC•convay�noa occur s�. 9�' ;or Qwdecue of tWombt gae,r Book.`598 --.+ •Po rue go_._.— --- Tula the dca� Ap f isot tha G , oww _arra Px ex as LT+C appti T.att3s F. irslcoi-',Jx. gar Re Tru.a (print name) Old 10vu 00 ' el�css O�ppGcaac Address: pac3 over a 1845 navel 'Ms M q1Q ,,� 9?3-687-6200 ust:ees of Reservations 572 Essex Street: 'Bevexly, MA 01915 RECEIVED JOYCE BRADSHAW TOWN CLERK NORTH ANDOVER ce to APPLICANUTOWN CLERK of action of Planning Board on accompanying U —5 P 12: 5 2 1. e North Andover Planning Board has determined that said plan does not require approval under the Subdivision Control Law,and the appropriate endorsement has been made upon the same. 2. The North Andover Planning Board has determined that said plan shows a subdivision,as defined by G.L. c.41,s. 81-L and must therefore be re-submitted to it for approval under the Subdivision Control Law. Very truly yours, North d Pla d l By: Received by Town Clerk. RECEIVED JOYCE BRADSHAW TOWN OF XORTH .1-1yTDOVER. ivL-%,SSACF1SZTT9WN CLERK BOARD OF Al2PE.'_LS NORTH ANDOVER a r OPS P�ELIEF FR 0NI T�� ZONi`jG "�- E P_IC. .TION F �1�i Wf� Ali 42 , a o „ � c v otic ntTerra Properties LLC �udr.s� X31 Sutton Street Spite 1A, N. Ando er, 1 nni s P Mini rncri, Tr , Manaae - —Te!• 'NO.-928-687-6900 01845 l. ?.golic ,.0 is he-ew made: a) For a varance Lom the regLire:r_ezcs of Szcaon P`rafzrat;h `ndTabte of the Zoning B�'t--,vs. b) For a Sceciel Per-= under Section Paraf7raph o F Che Zo nin° B ylativs c) As a Par-c,A'ga?r;eved for revietiv ofa dec;sion made bv the Building Inspeccor or other auih,o rite. **d) A Comprehensive Permit a) Prer^ises adecced are land and buUdinf7(s) nunbe-ed 200 Chickering Road Stceec. �,� •. ( ) _ b) Prerrises arecCed area. property with ftontane on the NEast West UXorh ( ) South ( ) side of Chickering Road Street. ) Pce.;Lises a ecced are in Zonina Districa Bl R4s R5 u'nd dl e pre.-,us es aIle ed have ar: C) area of 6 22 act squdre tete and � eonta, of 346 27 LF f a) Nla.rne end address of oV,r=- (if'j0int ovine-s m. give -H na^es): Dorothy J. Rennie, Individually and Trustee, and Carol Ryan Rennie, Trustee, Old Town Village Realty Trust Dace of Purchase Previous 0w•ne: b) 1. Ii at oiicrnt is not o�tir_er, check his/her into `sr ir.pre:rises: XXx Pro �ec:ive�Furchase. L"Jet Gzher _. L of author_ tion for.Vanance/Spec;! Pecc-' iu : enclosed 0E3 ,t, 4. Site of proposed building: 14r;_97-_r F- front; 1113-,7-5 bF feet de'p; Height NSA stories, N/A feet. ` al Approximate date of erection + I ) ' o Oc.,eo.:...ev or use of each boor: C) Tvre of const uctioti Y:ns the-e been a precious appeal, under zon:n , on t rse prer_�sgs'? Yes V4�ez1997-1998 I6. Desc io.,don of relic¢sought-on this petition Comprehensive Permit application recuegts �ra�.ritcu-�-CR relief from all bylaws and regulations regarding the development, of affordable housing. 7. Deed recorded in the Registry of Deeds in Book o: Pace Bk 798 Pg 49 Bk 826 Pg 33 Bk 5598 Pg 98 I L�!nd Cour, Ce-:i cote Flo. Book - Par I E bass my acplication are as tollo�vs; (trust be rated in detail) The principal points upon whir h f IThis a lication' for 132 units of housing o£ which 25% will be PP S affordable units seeks relief in. order, to be economically viable,. and to exempt the proposed development from local requirements and regulations that are not consistentwithI local needs. I a?; e to •. adverts ' a in newspace and incid ra e :re. LouisP. Minic cc' Jr. , Mara r, Terra Properties st2?Ia Lre oi'Pe;lI,on�; t5) i 6 o '3 i 09/18/01 10:22 FAX 617 428 3500 HILL & BARLOW __ � _ 10003/003 09/17/2001 13:57 9764702690 NORTH ATLANTIC PAGE 02 RECEIVED JOYCE BRADSHA ' TOWN CLERK{ NORTH ANDOVER 2001 OCT -S P 12: 32 Rac6vad by Tows+Clrrlc FORM A. -FOR END0RSBMXNT 07 B Mrf TO REQT3IIiF AkP�09AL N Sa r- Ar 14 2001 1"0[he Ylntutitio Soeatt3.of titoTown oFXocd•, Xfsa undets�^ued wiShC,*.to tocord rive saeompGP7JDB Ply aad rcq�a���boliw�ft�� apocdvel by it under end Subdivision Can='Law a cwttcquilted. approvsi is not required For Che 1ollowi(1 t=oas- 1. Tho division of land shown on MOaocornpeayiaa p is nota ssMivW=becnuse every lot sbo� fiver Zoning ByLjw ad is on a publk thczcon hes the ats�cts►S of frontab�ReQud by _ czaovn e3 by v�'•+4'•tamely.Cbicke Road oc a Pmt• �''30aad s bcl n ff land bounded es foUowat 10 t� ea5r b a own d b bT w liege Ttast eh b r.raed b Tu�tee of Ra ervra.t'o!as• o the eod e s tot a s sod ffit t e f •vlclonfoc�follo �aas: 2 aL.ds vision of Toad shown oa the acoaa s¢bdz . cone e b wa •• La t he.9 a ua. -- ao s►eq lot has been _ This the re ze9ea•Ct9 a 1 Z Line. G'belt created. 3• Lot{rootage and acreage of each lot depicumd on=omg$jda,l,p�i pR C icl�=i ad•i, ?,Qe fronCaRe - Old Toss Realz T=us't 3 b �a �crea c - 6.33 acres ' d from 4, ptgtript gn of pt yosa To 1c fe 5.076 awes of t ons OId '>•ova - e1.5 _ _ �.... ming of Roserva ions i1J, ve a rox to a t_er_ the .Lot •conveyance occurs- _-- _ 96 a or Cefffft m of +•Noctbc P-se�cbe Book.SS98 Page]---= S. Ttt>e' f 6 '` •page - Tills 3 via Vi11a8e IV7 t• �' Tstle •clta tiwons �Q Ap ants'Sig /. d if not,4M r' erra Px ext. es LTG Qx (print na=)Lou9cvcni, Jr. 031d xora=► Asn Rea 00 ' ekes a AppGcanes Ad,&esc: AmAmer, 1945 9?3-687-6200 us>:ees of Reservations Ta[.No. 57Z gssex Street 'Beverly, MA 01915 f:u IVED ;10 GE BRADSHAW TOWN CLERK NORTH ANDOVER 2001 SEP 1 1 P 12: 29 Received by Town Clerk: FORM A, APPLICATION FOP,ENDORSEMENT OF PLAN BELIEVED NOT TO REQUIRE AP'PRO'VAL September 14, 2001 To the Planning Board of the Town of North Andover The undersigned wishes to record the accompanying plan and requests a determination by said Board that approval by it under and Subdivision Control Law is not required. The undersigned believes that such approval is not required for the following reasons: 1. The division of land shown on the accompanying pian is not a subdivision because every lot shown thereon has the amount of frontage required by the Nortb Andover Zoning By Law and is on a public way,namely,Chickering Road _ or a private way,namly, being land bounded as follows: to the east by Chickerinit oad and land owned by Trustees of Re ervat ons' to the north b band owned by 1+iew llerita a Trust to the south an e b the a or 6 r W od Lane and land owned b t f 2. The division of land shown on the aecompanying plan is not a subdivision far the following feasons: Lot has ade u e ronta a on a aub1 wa -- Chle-keringRad -- This chane re resents a lot line c n e no new lot has been creatred, ym_�p 3. -Lot frontage.and acres ld each lot elt depicted n 'Colas -2 Tlaozr ickezin Road. Lot front s ua Acreage — 6.33 acres 4. Description of proposaLjo transfer 5,076 sf or .12 acres of land from Trust4 $gs of Reservations tk Old Town V lia a Reals Wrust TrzLgZea& _of Reservations will have approximately_ 1 -5 ping after the Lot X conveyance occurs. 55 $ 98 •or Certificate of 5. Title I rtlz-1 x ,Book _ ,Page e Title Page . Title ten a 1d Village eaZty T t. App ' ants'Sign r . f '� 1 1 ._._...ty�;i-'-�, �G(•��. Owtter' to s if not the errs Pr erties, LTC appiic (print name)LOui3 P. ieucci, Jr. nager Old Towa Vi a e Rea t Trust Applicant's Address: 200 Chicker Road _ PQ Rox 3039 X. Andover, MA 01$45 dover, MA OZ 10 Tel.No. 975-6$7-6200 Z0 39dd OI1Nt09iV HIWN 069Z0Lb8L6 WET 100Zlb1f60 , tru�iH1 * e LA U ��SS•CNUSYt�y NORTH ANDOVER OFFTC'F'OF THE ZONLNG BOARD OF APPEAL:D 27 CHA-RLES STREET RET NOR-Mi-A DG VER,VL?SSAC: TSE-11 1 s 0134-5 // f�X(973)633-9542 Date: .2 TO: Town of North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals 27 Charles Street North Andover, MA 01845 phone # 978-688-9541. fax # 978-688-9542 Please be advised that I have agreed to waive the time constraints f the Zoning Board of Appeals to ma a ecision regarding the granting of a -� VARIANCE for property located at: a� 6-;Z6201 STREET- 00 TOWN: A NA E OF P 1TIONER: - - R Signed: petiti er (or petitioner's represe tative) 10.4 Variance and Appeals . The Zoning Board of Appeals shall have power upon appeal to grant variances from the terms of this Zoning Bylaw where the Board finds that owing to circumstances relating to soil conditions, shape, or topography of the land or structures and especially affecting such land or structures but not affecting generally the zoning district in general, a literal enforcement of the provisions of this Bylaw will involve substantial hardship, financial or otherwise,to the petitioner or applicant, and that desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent or purpose of this Bylaw. Ml/variance J jc__ J :30A ••.,••,• JOYCE BRADSHAW TOWN CLERK NORTH ANDOVER ` -ytyR711 ANTI ) F*R Or"Cr OF, AUG 22 P 2: 20 .- �.:•'�i;tea-:'= - t Date: TO: Town of North Andover .21 twf 4vv,1 �il Zoning Board of Appeals Jir/ TD 14J9iVe- 27 Charles Street North Andover, MA 01845 �v+«t 7<�ld'`� a Mee r..e, phone#978.688-9541 falx#91"88-9542 ,e o - I-A Tee 'rli Ak Please be advised that I have agreed to waIvQ the hM aonstraissta for the Zoning board of Appeals to make a decision re arding ra tin of a property located at: r j I REE : - TOWN-. y�� �Oo✓r: - s7Ar AN Co F Signed: petit: . r(or petl:br*t- pr tive) At7TA0-A*W poe!'1!'Fax NOW 7671NO �/ ) r.WOrwrec SAO¢ Co. z :,.... ,� � ...moi . t ...:l1: :•a•iY-.!. .-: 1,:)>'SC.\'lam'':+�?•i.».Y:i9 I_..:."r'•v;t. :�: P:.:.'.... .••ri:i.::.' FJ k nrct "I" = = E.2 MHF Design Consultants, Inc. ` 45 12-B Manor Parkway•Salem, NH AY94EL b03)893-0720•FAX(603)893-0733 November 21, 1996 r. , 6 MAI �.. _ Ms Kathleen Bradley Colwell,Planner 1 II p Town of North Andover N I N Community Development and Services 146 Main Street North Andover, Massachusetts 01845 Re: Retail Project/Chickering Road MHF#45996 Dear Ms. Colwell: Per our telephone discussion this week regarding the traffic review services for the above referenced project, Dermot Kelley has given me a list of traffic consultants that can be used for the purposes of soliciting proposals for the outside review of the traffic study. Those consultants suggested for review of the traffic study are: Volmer Associates, Inc. (617) 451-0044 Bruce Campbell &Associates,Inc. (617) 542-1199 Sasaki Associates, Inc. (617) 926-3300 Should you have any questions,please feel free to contact me at your convenience. Sincerely yo rs, MHF DE C4 , C. M G E. Principal cc: Mr. Joseph Scott, Scott Construction Mr. Dermot J. Kelly, DJK Associates ENGINEERS PLANNERS . SURVEYORS RE t_j'{, Town of North Andover NORTH JOYCE �3t��46,, .1. �r a°• , ftt .o e1h•0 OFFICE OF TOWN C L� t COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND SE OVER A 30 School Street SEP 3 3 39 f ° ~; North Andover,Massachusetts 01845 W]LL"J. SCOTT ppl 'ssAcHus�t� Director NOTICE OF DECISION Any appeal shall be filled within (20) days after the date of filling this Notice in the Office of the Town Clerk. Date September .3, 1998 Date of Hearing July 21, 1998, August 18, 1998 Petition of Scott Construction Co. Premises affected 200 Chickering Road Referring to the above petition for a special permit from the requirements of the North Andover Zoning Byla Section 8.3 (site plan review) so as to allow construction of a 12451055 SF wood framed retail/office building. After a public hearing given on the above date, the Planning Board voted to APPROVE the SPECIAL PERMIT -, SITE PLAN REVIEW based upon the following conditions: Signed CC: Director of Public Works Richard S.Rowen, Chairman Building Inspector Natural Resource/Land Use Planner Alison Lescarbeau, V. Chairman Health Sanitarian Assessors John Simons, Clerk Police Chief Fire Chief Richard Nardella Applicant Engineer Joseph V. Mahoney Towns Outside Consultant File Planning Board Interested Parties CONSERVATION-(978)688 9530 • HEALTH-(978)688-9540 • PLANNING-(978)688-9535 *BUILDINGOFFICE-(978)688-9545 • *ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS-(978)688-9541 9 *146 MAIN STREET Town of North Andover of 40RTN OFFICE OF 3� ,ES"" °*40oL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND SERVICES p 384 Osgood Street WILLIAM J. SCOTT North Andover,Massachusetts 01845 s`S,*Eo •�`h qt ACHUS Director September 2, 1998 Ms. Joyce Bradshaw Town Clerk 120 Main Street No. Andover, MA 01845 Re: Special Permit/Site Plan Review 200 Chickering Road Dear Ms. Bradshaw: The North Andover Planning Board held a public hearing on Tuesday evening, July 21, 1998 at 7:30 p.m. in the Department of Public Work 384 Osgood Street on the application of Scott Construction Co., 12 Rogers Road, Haverhill, MA 01835 North Andover, MA 01845 for a special permit under Section 8.3 (Site Plan Review) of the North Andover Zoning Bylaw . The legal notice was properly advertised in the North Andover Citizen on July 1 and July 8, 1998 and all parties of interest were duly notified. The following members were present: Alison Lescarbeau, Vice Chairman, John Simons, Clerk, Richard Nardella and Alberto Angles, Associate Member. Kathleen Bradley Colwell, Town Planner was also absent. The petitioner was requesting a special permit to allow the construction of a 24,055 SF wood framed retail/office building located at 200 Chickering Road North Andover, MA 01845 in the Business - 1 district (B-1). Peter Shaheen, Mark Gross of MI-IF Design and Dermit Kelly of DJK Associates were present to represent 200 Chickering Road. Mr. Shaheen stated that they reoriented the site due to Town Meeting. Mr. Shaheen stated that the old plan was running perpendicular to Chickering Road and now it is running parallel to Chickering Road. Mr. Gross stated that the rezoning line is 300' from Chickering Road. Mr. Gross stated that the proposed building is going to be utilized with the same footprint. Mr. Gross stated that the 13`floor of the building will be 16,500 SF of retail space and the 2nd floor will be 7,500 SF of office space and the parking spaces will be 9 x 18. Mr. Gross stated that to enter the main entrance there is going to be stairs and an elevator. Mr. Gross stated that the storm water plan is much more simplified. Mr. Gross stated that the dumpster is going to be set away from the building with a fence around it. Mr. Gross stated that they are putting up a stockade fence along Farrwood Drive with a gate for residents in the condo to access the stores easily. Mr. Gross stated that the back parcel will be given to the Town or to the Trustees of Reservations. The driveway will be 13' further away from Farrwood Drive. Mr. Gross stated that the display area will be used by Rennies and there will be a 360 degree turn around the building. Mr. Gross stated that the site will be serviced with town sewer. Mr. Gross BOARD OF APPEALS 688-9541 BUILDING 688-9545 CONSERVATION 688-9530 HEALTH 688-9540 PLANNING 688-9535 showed the Board what type of lighting they are planning on using. Mr. Nardella asked where the dumpster will be located. Mr. Gross stated that it will be adjacent to the fence on Farrwood Drive. Ms. Lescarbeau asked where the lights are going to be placed. Mr. Gross showed the Board the location of the lights on the plan. Mr. Simons asked if there was a loading dock. Mr. Gross stated that there is one in the rear for just box trucks. Mr. Nardella asked what the original size of the other building. Mr. Gross stated that it was 16,900 SF of just retail. Mr. Reiner the Architect, stated that the highest point of the building is 33'. Mr. Reiner went over the plans with the Board. Mr. Reiner stated that they are planning on putting rails on the roof to hide the HVAC units. Mr. Reiner stated that the building will be made of clapboard siding with divided windows and utility steel doors. There will be some brick at the entrance and with a asphalt roof. Mr. Simons asked if there is anything they could do architecturally to the back of the building. Mr. Reiner stated that they could do something in the back. Mr. Simon stated that this is the first time we have ever mixed commercial with retail and he thinks it is a good thing. Mr. Nardella asked what are they doing with regards to noise because of the HVAC units. Mr. Reiner stated that the railings are walls that look like railings. Mr. Nardella asked if there is going to be a covenant so that the renters signs are all the same. Mr. Shaheen stated that we will go by the sign bylaw. Mr. Nardella told the applicants to think about delivery times. Dermit Kelly of DJK Associates, stated that the original study was based on 17,500 SF of retail and the new one is 16,500 SF of retail and 7,500 SF of office. Mr. Kelly stated that the impact will be the same. Ms. Colwell asked if they will have to go back to the state. Mr. Kelly stated they do. Mr. Gross stated that they have to re-file with ConCom and will be doing that within the next week or so. Mr. Gross stated that we are collecting runoff:and are providing storm water treatment structure. Mr. Chessia stated that the drainage was looked at extensively at the last submittal and he would recommend a test pit be done. Mr. Simons stated that he likes the plan and thinks they did a nice job. Mr. Simons asked if they thought of moving the house instead of tearing it down. Mr. Simons also stated that he still has a personal preference about moving the building up closer to the front and put the parking in the rear. Paul Hajec of Hajec Associates stated that would suggest that they re-submit a curb cut to the state but, they already did and the movement of the driveway was also better. Chris Rodstrom of the Trustees of the Reservations asked if there was any assessment going to be done. Mr. Shaheen stated no. Mr. Nardella asked if the condo association has seen this plan. Mr. Shaheen stated yes, and I think they are pleased. Continued until August 18, 1998. The North Andover Planning Board held a regular meeting on August 18, 1998. The following members were present: Richard S. Rowen, Chairman, Alison Lescarbeau, Vice Chairman, John Simons, Clerk, Alberto Angles, Associate Member, Joseph Mahoney and Richard Nardella. Kathleen Bradley Colwell, Town Planner was also present. 'I Dom Scalise was present to represent 285 Holt Road. Mr. Scalise stated that on behalf of the applicant they would not like to hold a hearing tonight because there is only 4 members present and at the last meeting there was 6 and they are afraid that it might be a problem when it comes time to vote. Ms. Colwell stated that we did receive a copy of our traffic consultants comments but, we did not ask him to attend this meeting because we thought your consultant would not have time to respond. Mr. Rowen stated that he has put together a list of things that he would like to see during the permit process. Mr. Rowen stated that he is not keen on surprises and would like to pass them out to you. Mr. Rowen went over his punch list with the Board and the applicants. Ms. Colwell stated that the noise proposal went out today to the 3 companies. Ms. Colwell also stated that the People for the Environment are holding a meeting Thursday night July 9, 1998 @ 7:00 p.m. @ the North Parish Church. Continued until September 1, 1998. The North Andover Planning Board held a regular meeting on September 1, 1998. The following members were present: Richard S. Rowen, Chairman, John Simons, Clerk, Joseph Mahoney and Richard Nardella. Kathleen Bradley Colwell, Town Planner was also present. Mark Gross of MHF Design was present to represent Scott Construction. Mr. Gross stated that he received a letter from John Chessia of Coler&Colantonio and he had a discussion with Ms. Colwell and she stated that they were all set. Ms. Colwell stated that the ponds will not contain no more than 9" of water. Ms. Colwell stated that another test pit should be done by the leaching area. Mr. Gross went over the parking space issue. Mr. Rowen stated that he would like to come up with language that is used by the building inspector for the number of parking spaces. Mr. Gross went over his theory on the number if parking spaces. Mr. Nardella stated that the zoning bylaw states that for residential area the parking spaces required are greater than retail area. Mr. Gross stated that all these tenants need to submit building plans to the building inspector so he will be able to enforce if they try to put in tables or booths. Mr. Nardella stated that he wants to see this succeed. The Board went over the number of parking spaces for residential and for retail. Mr. Rowen stated that right now they are set up for retail. Mr. Mahoney stated that we have a building inspector to enforce this. Mr. Nardella stated that 701 Salem Street has a table in there and they're not supposed to. Mr. Gross stated that this is an enforcement and not part of the approval. Mr. Gross stated that if there is a tenant that would be brought in they would have to go to the building inspector anyway. Mr. Nardella stated that they don't have enough parking to get a restaurant. Dave Rennie asked if they have enough parking for any seating. Mr. Rowen stated that they don't have enough parking. Mr. Gross stated that they are not going to build the building with out tenants sot hey will have to come back before the Board if they need more parking spaces. Mrs. Rennie asked if this is affected with a coffee shop. Mr. Nardella stated that no, as long as there are no seats. Bill Sullivan, Chairman of Zoning Board of Appeals stated that if there are counters that customers can serve themselves that is considered a seat. Mr. Rowen stated that we just want to make sure that your eyes are open. Ms. Colwell went over her wording for the parking spaces. On a motion by Mr. Mahoney, seconded by Mr. Nardella, the Board voted unanimously to close the Public Hearing. Attached are the conditions. Sincerely, Richard S. Rowen, Chairman North Andover Planning Board 200 Chickering Road (Rennies) Site Plan Review- Special Permit The Planning Board herein approves the Special Permit/Site Plan Review for the construction of a 24,055 SF retail/office building located in the Business-1 (B-1) Zoning District. Scott Construction Co., 12 Rogers Road,Haverhill,MA, requested this Special Permit on June 23, 1998. The Planning Board makes the following findings as required by the North Andover Zoning Bylaws Section 8.3 and 10.3: FINDINGS OF FACT: 1. The specific site is an appropriate location for the project as it is located in a business zone and will replace an existing florist shop. 2. The use as developed will not adversely affect the neighborhood as sufficient buffers, hours of operations and deliveries, and noise controls have been provided; 3. There will be no nuisance or serious hazard to vehicles or pedestrians as the entrance drive has been moved as far as possible from the entrance to the adjacent driveway; 4. The landscaping approved as a part of this plan meets the requirements of Section 8.4 of the North Andover Zoning Bylaw; 5. The site drainage system is designed in accordance with the Town Bylaw requirements and has been reviewed by the Department of Public Works and engineering consultant; 6. The applicant has met the requirements of the Town for Site Plan Review as stated in Section 8.3 of the Zoning Bylaw; 7. Adequate and appropriate facilities will be provided for the proper operation of the proposed use. Finally the Planning Board finds that this project generally complies with the Town of North Andover Zoning Bylaw requirements as listed in Section 8.35 but requires conditions in order to be fully in compliance. The Planning Board hereby grants an approval to the applicant provided the following conditions are met: SPECIAL CONDITIONS: 1) Dumpsters: a) The dumpsters may only be emptied between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. 1 b) All dumpsters must be placed on concrete pads and enclosed on all sides with a permanent fence. The location of the dumpsters must be reviewed and approved by the Board of Health and Fire Department for conformance to their regulations. 2) Deliveries: a) Deliveries to the site must be limited to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. with the exception of individual vendors approved by the Board of Health. 3) Hours of Operation: a) The hours of operation of the retail/office complex will be between the hours of 6:00 a.m. and 12:00 midnight. 4) Parking/Uses: a) The site as currently configured contains sufficient parking for retail/office use only. No restaurants, seats, booths, stools, counters or table for eating or drinking will be allowed without the closing off of some of the existing office/retail space or the creation of additional parking spaces in a number sufficient to meet the requirements of the Zoning Bylaw. 5) Prior to the endorsement of the plans by the Planning Board,the applicant must comply with the following conditions: a) A FORM A plan must be submitted to the Planning Board for review and approval separating the"back land"as shown on Exhibit A which will be donated to the Trustees of Reservations. b) The final plan must be reviewed and approved by the engineering consultant, DPW and the Town Planner and subsequently endorsed by the Planning Board. The final plans must be submitted for review within ninety days of filing the decision with the Town Clerk. c) A bond in the amount of ten thousand dollars($10,000) shall be posted for the purpose of insuring that a final as-built plan showing the location of all on-site utilities, structures, curb cuts,parking spaces and drainage facilities is submitted. The bond is also in place to insure that the site is constructed in accordance with the approved plan. This bond shall be in the form of a check made out to the Town of North Andover. This check will then be deposited into an interest bearing escrow account. 2. Prior to the start of construction: 2 a) A construction schedule shall be submitted to the Planning Staff for the purpose of tracking the construction and informing the public of anticipated activities on the site. b) Test pit data must be provided at the location of the proposed drainage recharge systems and be reviewed and approved by the Town's Engineering Consultant c) All erosion control must be installed as shown the approved and endorsed plans. 3. Prior to FORM U verification (Building Permit Issuance): a) The "back-land"as shown on Exhibit A must be transferred to the Trustees of reservations to be kept as open space, or, alternatively to the Town of North Andover. b) The final site plan mylars must be endorsed and three (3) copies of the signed plans must be delivered to the Planning Department. c) A certified copy of the recorded decision must be submitted to the Planning Department. 4. Prior to verification of the Certificate of Occupancy: a) The applicant must submit a letter from the architect and engineer of the project stating that the building, signs, landscaping, lighting and site layout substantially comply with the plans referenced at the end of this decision as endorsed by the Planning Board and the attached list of materials prepared by Koch Architects. b) The Planning Staff shall approve all artificial lighting used to illuminate the site. All lighting shall have underground wiring and shall be so arranged that all direct rays from such lighting falls entirely within the site and shall be shielded or recessed so as not to shine upon abutting properties or streets. The Planning Staff shall review the site. Any changes to the approved lighting plan as may be reasonably required by the Planning Staff shall be made at the owner's expense. c) The building must have commercial fire sprinklers installed in accordance with the North Andover Fire Department. 5. Prior to the final release of security: 3 a) The Planning Staff shall review the site. Any screening as may be reasonably required by the Planning Staff will be added at the applicant's expense. b) A final as-built plan showing final topography, the location of all on- site utilities, structures, curb cuts,parking spaces and drainage facilities must be submitted to and reviewed by the Planning Staff and the Division of Public Works. 6. Any stockpiling of materials(dirt, wood, construction material, etc.) must be shown on a plan and reviewed and approved by the Planning Staff. Any approved piles must remain covered at all times to minimize any dust problems that may occur with adjacent properties. Any stock piles to remain for longer than one week must be fenced off and covered. 7. Noise Issues: a) Heating and cooling requirements for this building require sizable equipment. The design for this building is a split system where approximately half the equipment is located within the building and will have no adverse noise impact. The remaining roof mounted equipment (condensing units)will be placed in screened and/or recessed roof areas, with acoustically dampening treatment, reducing reverberation and arresting the travel of sound. b) In an effort to reduce noise levels, the applicant shall keep in optimum working order, through regular maintenance, any and all equipment that shall emanate sounds from the structures or site. 8. Any plants,trees or shrubs that have been incorporated into the Landscape Plan approved in this decision that die within one year from the date of planting shall be replaced by the owner. 9. The contractor shall contact Dig Safe at least 72 hours prior to commencing any excavation. 10. Gas, Telephone, Cable and Electric utilities shall be installed underground as specified by the respective utility companies. 11. No open burning shall be done except as is permitted during burning season under the Fire Department regulations. 12. No underground fuel storage shall be installed except as may be allowed by Town Regulations. 4 13. The provisions of this conditional approval shall apply to and be binding upon the applicant, its employees and all successors and assigns in interest or control. 14. Any action by a Town Board, Commission, or Department that requires changes in the plan or design of the building as presented to the Planning Board, may be subject to modification by the Planning Board. 15. Any revisions shall be submitted to the Town Planner for review. If these revisions are deemed substantial,the applicant must submit revised plans to the Planning Board for approval. 16. ThisSpecial Permit approval shall be deemed to have lapsed after 5 :M c (two years from the date permit granted)unless sutstaAtial use or construction has commenced. Substantial use or construction will be determined by a majority vote of the Planning Board. 17. The following information shall be deemed part of the decision: a) Letter dated June 19, 1998, from Dermot J. Kelly Associates, Inc., Traffic Engineering/Transportation Planning, Two Dundee Park,Andover,MA 01810,prepared for MHF Design. b) Letter dated July 16, 1998, from Paul Haject Associates, Transportation Engineering and Planning, 375 Common Street, Lawrence, MA 01840, prepared for North Andover Planning Board. c) Plan titled: Proposed Site Development Map 46 -Lots 35 &46 Chickering Road- Route 125 North Andover,MA Prepared for: Scott Construction Company,Inc. 12 Rogers Road Haverhill,MA 01835 Prepared by: MHF Design Consultants,Inc. 12-B Manor Parkway Salem,NH 03079 Date: June 19, 1998, rev. 8/6/98 Sheets: 1 through 15, A-1 Architectural Rendering d) Report titled: Storm water Management Report for Old Town Village Retail Project, 200 Chickering Road North Andover,Massachusetts, 01845 Prepared for: Scott Companies 12 Rogers Road Haverhill,MA 01835 5 Prepared by: MHF Design Consultants, Inc. 12-B Manor Parkway Salem,NH 03079 Dated: February 7, 1997,rev. March 31, 1997, April 30, 1997, May 14, 1997, June 22, 1998, August 4, 1998. e) Plan titled: Building Elevations 200 Chickering Road North Andover Dated: August 8, 1998 Scale: 1/8"= 1' Prepared by: Koch Architects 36 Essex Road Ipswich, Massachusetts CC. Director of Public Works Building Inspector Health Administrator Assessors Conservation Administrator Planning Board Police Chief Fire Chief Applicant Engineer File 200 Chickering Road - Site Plan Review 6 LAW OFFICE OF pECEIVED MARK B. JOHNSON JoTOWNNCAERKAw 12 Chestnut Street TOCLERK NORTH ANDOVER Andover,Massachusetts 01810-3706 AUG Q l 08 PP-17 (508)475-4488 Telecopier.(508)475-6703 Paralegals MARK B. JOHNSON(MA,NH,DC) KATHRYN M.MORIN LINDA A. O'CONNELL(MA,NH,RI) JEAN A.SHEEHAN DONALD F. BORENSTEIN (MA,ME) LIANNE CRISTALDI August 18, 1997 Clerk's Office Land Court Department Old Court House Room 408 Pemberton Square Boston, MA 02108 Re: Dororthv J. Rennie, et al.v. Richard Nardella,et al. Land Court No. 240275 Dear Sir/Madam: Enclosed for filing in the above-referenced matter,please find the following: 1. Motion of Heritage Green Condominium Association to Intervene in the above matter; 2. Memorandum In Support of Motion To Intervene; 3. Answer of Heritage Green Condominium Assoc; and 4. Certificate of Service. Please schedule this Motion for hearing on August 28, 1997 at 10:00 a.m. I would be happy to argue this Motion by telephone,if the Court would like. Thank you for your anticipated cooperation. Very truly yours, son MBJ*tlr Enclosure cc: Peter G.Shaheen,Esquire Clerk,Town of North Andover Joel B. Bard, Esq. Heritage Green Condominium Association RE/HEREAGE/COURT 1 COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS SUFFOLK, ss. LAND COURT NO. 240275 DOROTHY J. RENNIE AND SCOTT COMPANIES, INC., Plaintiffs V. RICHARD NARDELLA,ALISON LESCARBEAU, JOHN SIMON, ALBERTO ANGELES,RICHARD ROWEN AND JOSEPH V. MAHONEY AS THEY COMPRISE THE NORTH ANDOVER PLANNING BOARD AND THE TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER, Defendants MOTION OF HERITAGE GREEN CONDOMINWM ASSOCIATION TO INTERVENE Heritage Green Condominium Association moves that it be allowed to intervene in this action. In support of this Motion,said Association states the following reasons and submits its Memorandum In Support and Answer herewith: 1. Heritage Green Condominium Association is an abutter of the property which is the subject of the special permit. 2. The Planning Board,being the special permit granting authority for the Town of North Andover sit plan review,voted three to two in favor of the application. The application was denied as a vote of four members in favor was necessary. During the course of the hearing,Heritage Green Condominium Association retained an expert to review plans and to make recommendations to the Planning Board. 3. Since a majority of the Board voted in favor of this plan,Heritage Green does not believe its interest will be protected and requests that it be allowed to intervene as a party to this action. Respectfully Submitted, Heritage Green Condominium Association By their attorney arlCB.Johnson - LAW OFFICE OF Y MARK B.JOHNSON 12 Chestnut Street Andover,MA 01810 (508) 475-4488 B.B.O. #252760 Date: CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Mark B. Johnson Esq., hereby certify that on this day of , I have served a copy of the foregoing Motion of Heritage Green Association to interven on all parties by mailing same, postage prepaid, first class mail, to Peter G. Shaheen,Esquire 565 Turnpike Street North Andover, MA 01845 a ohnson COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS SUFFOLK, ss. LAND COURT NO. 240275 DOROTHY J.RENNIE AND SCOTT COMPANIES, INC., Plaintiffs V. RICHARD NARDELLA,ALISON LESCARBEAU,JOHN SIMON, ALBERTO ANGELES,RICHARD ROWEN AND JOSEPH V. MAHONEY AS THEY COMPRISE THE NORTH ANDOVER PLANNING BOARD AND THE TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER, Defendants HERITAGE GREEN CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, Defendant-Intervenor ANSWER OF DEFENDANT-INTERVENOR,HERITAGE GREEN CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION,TO PLAINTIFFS' COMPLAINT The defendant-intervenor, Heritage Green Condominium Association ("Defendant"), is a residential condominium association formed pursuant to M.G.L. c. 183A. Defendant is the association of the condominium owners and owner of the common area of the Heritage Green Condominiums, located in North Andover, Essex County, Massachusetts. Defendant answers in response to the numbered paragraphs of the Plaintiffs' Complaint as follows: 1. Admitted. 2. Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of Plaintiffs' allegations concerning the agreement for sale of 200 Chickering Road. The Defendant admits the remaining allegations contained in this paragraph. 3. Admitted. 4. Admitted. 5. Admitted. 6. Admitted. 7. Admitted. 8. As to the first and second sentence of this paragraph Defendant answers as follows, the Town's Zoning By-Laws are the best evidence of their content, to the g ` extent a further answer is required, Defendant denies the allegations made. Defendant denies the allegation set forth in the third sentence of this paragraph an paragraph d denies that the 'Town must grant the site plan approval". As to the fourth end fifth sentences of this Defendant answers as follows, Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the specific allegations contained in said sentences. 9. Defendant admits that the public hearing was closed on May 20, 19 7. Defendant denies that the Plaintiffs "had met all of the requirements for o taining site plan approval" and"that a permit could .. not be denied". Defendant i without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining allegations contained in this paragraph. 10. Defendant admits the allegations contained in the first sentence of his paragraph. Defendant admits that the Planning Board has not issued a sit plan special permit to the Plaintiffs. Defendant admits that an affirmative vote f four members of the Planning Board was required to approve Plaintiffs' appli ion. 11. Defendant admits the allegations contained in the first sentence of his paragraph. The remaining sentences of this paragraph contain broad alleg tions and characterizations of various persons' knowledge and beliefs and are ne ther simple, concise or direct as required by Mass.R.Civ.P. 8(e)(1). Accordingl , Defendant objects thereto. To the extent that a further answer is required Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief to the truth of the allegations contained in this paragraph and calls on Plaintiffs t prove same. 12. Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in this paragraph. 13. Defendant denies the allegations contained in the first and second sentences of this paragraph. As to the remaining allegations, Defendant is withouts fficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to their truth. 14. Defendant restates its answers in response to paragraphs 1 - 13 as i fully set forth herein. 15. Defendant denies that the Town must grant Plaintiffs' application f r a site plan special permit. Defendant denies that the Plaintiffs have met all of a criteria established for site plan special permit approval. Defendant further answ rs that the Town's Zoning By-Law is the best evidence of its contents. 16. Denied. 17. Defendant answers that the Town's Zoning By-Law is the best evidence of its contents. No further answer is required 18. This paragraph states a legal conclusion, to the extent that an answer is required, Defendant denies same. 19. Defendant denies that the Plaintiffs are entitled to declaratory judgement under M.G.L. c. 231A and further answers that the Town of North Andover has no authority to issue a site plan special permit as it is not a special permit granting authority under the Zoning Act, M.G.L. c. 40A. 20. Defendant restates its answers in response to paragraphs 1 - 19 as if set forth at length herein. 21. Denied. 22. Denied. 23. Denied. 24. Admitted. 25. Defendant restates its answers in response to paragraphs 1 -24 as if set forth at length herein. I 26. Admitted. 27. Admitted. 28. Defendant admits that applications for approval of site plan special permits are governed by M.G.L. c. 40A, s. 9. 29. Denied. 30. Defendant restates its responses to paragraphs 1 -29 as if set forth at length herein. 31. Defendant admits that Plaintiffs' complied with the procedural elements of the Town's Zoning By-Law. As to the second sentence of this paragraph, Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in this paragraph. 32. Defendant denies that Plaintiffs met the requirements.for approval of their application for a site plan special permit. Defendant further answers that the Town's Zoning By-Law is the best evidence of its contents. 33. Defendant answers that the Town's Zoning By-Law is the best evidence f its contents. 34. Defendant admits that Plaintiffs'ha Pl in iffs' a lication complied with the procedural requirements of the Town's Zoning By-Law. Defendant denies all other allegations contained in this paragraph. 35. Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in this paragraph. 36. Denied. Respectfully Submitted, By their attorney sl . son OFFICE OF MARK B.JOHNSON Chestnut Street dover, MA 01810 (508)475-4488 B.B.O. #252760 Date: / I J COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS SUFFOLK, ss. LAND COURT NO. 240275 DOROTHY J. RENNIE AND SCOTT COMPANIES, INC., Plaintiffs V. RICHARD NARDELLA,ALISON LESCARBEAU, JOHN SIMON, ALBERTO ANGELES, RICHARD ROWEN AND JOSEPH V. MAHONEY AS THEY COMPRISE THE NORTH ANDOVER PLANNING BOARD AND THE TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER, Defendants MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF MOTION OF HERITAGE GREEN CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION TO INTERVENE NOW comes Heritage Green Condominium Association ("Heritage Green") and states the following in support of its Motion to Intervene. I. Introduction This action is an appeal by the Plaintiffs of the Town of North Andover Planning Board's ("Board") denial of the Plaintiff's application for a site plan special permit. Plaintiffs sought approval for a commercial project directly abutting the residential condominiums of Heritage Green. Heritage Green opposed the project. The condominium association participated extensively in the Planning Board proceeding and retained an aert who reviewed plans and made recommendations to the Board. Heritage Green's main cont rns were with the project's affect on traffic and drainage. Heritage Green contends that the proj ct will greatly increase traffic volume and that the proposed drainage system for the project is not feasible and may cause damage to Heritage Green's property. The Planning Board voted three to two in favor of the application but the application was denied, as the favorable vote of four members was required for approval. Of the two members who voted against the project, one has resigned and the term of the second has expired without reappointment by the town manager. Where nearly all of the current Board members are in favor of the project, Heritage Green now seeks to protect its interest by intervening as a party to this action. I� II. Argument Heritage Green seeks to intervene as of right under Mass. R. Civ. P. 24(a) and, alternatively, b the Court's discretion under Mass.R. Civ. P.24(b). The Zonin Acts specifically provides that in Yg P YP addition to thea applicant and t other persons may be pp he special permit granting authority, O p y permitted to intervene upon motion." M.G.L. c.40A, 17. Rule 24(a)(2)provides intervention as of right, "when the applicant claims an interest relating to the property or transaction which is the subject of the action and he is so situated that the disposition of the action may as a practical matter impair or impede his ability to protect that interest, unless the applicant's interest is adequately represented by existing parties." Mass. R. Civ. P. 24(a)(2). Rule 24(b) provides that"anyone may be permitted to intervene in an action: 1)when a statute of the Commonwealth confers a conditional right to intervene; or 2)when an applicant's claim or defense and the main action have a question of law or fact in common. ... In exercising its discretion the Court shall consider whether the intervention will unduly delay or prejudice the adjudication of the rights of the original parties. Mass. R. Civ. P. 24(b). As discussed above, M.G.L. c.40A, 17 provides Heritage Green with a conditional right to intervene. A. Heritage Green Has an Interest in the Subject of This Action. Heritage Green is a direct,abutter to the proposed project. Heritage Green has raised concerns about the projects negative impact on traffic and the proposed drainage system. Heritage Green contends that where the proposed drainage system is entirely underground, if the system were to fail, it would result in significant flooding and damage to Heritage Green's property. These concerns have been substantiated by an expert retained by Heritage Green who commented on the project during the Planning Board process. Heritage Green's interest and its ability to effect changes to the project will be impaired if it is unable to participate in the disposition of this case. Further, if the Board had voted to approve the plaintiffs application, Heritage Green would have had standing to appeal the decision as a"party aggrieved"under M.G.L. c. 40A §17. See Rafferty v. Sancta Maria Hospital, 5 Mass. App. Ct. 624, 367 N.E. 2d. 856 (1977) (abutters are presumed to be "persons aggrieved"by a decision of a special permit ranting authority.), Pauldining v. Bruins, 18 Mass. App. Ct. 207, 470 N.E. 2d.398 1984, (gabutters concerned about a projects potential to cause harm to their properties were persons aggrieved".). Marashalian v. Zoning Board of Appeals, 421 Mass. 719, 660 N.E. 2d. 369 (1996) (abutters who feared increased traffic and decreased parking were "persons aggrieved".) Watros v. Greater Lynn Mental Health, 421 Mass. 106, 653 N.E. 24. 589 (1995) (an abutter may rely solely on the presumption that it is an"aggrieved pe son" absent evidence controverting the presumption.) Where Heritage Green would have qualified as a"person aggrieved" to appeal the Board's approval of the plaintiffs' application, the Heritage Green has satisfied the burden of Rule 24(a) for intervention as of right or, at a minimum, the Court should be compelled to exercise its discretion under Rule 24(b), to allow Heritage Green's permissive intervention. B. Heritage Green's Interests Are Not AdeduatelYRepresented b Ey xisting Parties. At the time of its decision,only two members of the Town's Planning Board voted against the project. Therefore, a majority of the Board supports the plaintiff's position in this case. According to a newspaper article published in the Eagle-Tribune Newspaper,both h ve come under severe criticism for oft e Board members who voted against the protect ha their votes. Planning Board member,Alison LeCarbeau,who voted against the project,has since resigned. The remaining Planning Board member opposed to the project,Richard A. Nardella, has not been reappointed to the Board,apparently as a result of his opposition to the plaintiff's project. The Eagle-Tribune article further emphasizes that Town Selectmen do not support the Boards denial of a permit for the project. Where the remaining members of the Planning Board, as well as,the Town Selectmen strongly support the project, it is clear that Heritage Green's interest may not be adequately represented by the only defendant to the case, the Town's Planning Board. This is consistent with the Plaintiffs' Complaint which makes various allegations concerning the conflict between the members of the Planning Board and other Town officials in connection with the Plaintiffs'project. C. Zoning Act Clearly Provides for the Participation of Parties Other Than the Applicant and the Permit Grantine Authority in an Appeal of a Permit Granting Authority Decision. Where M. G.L. c. 40A, 17,states,"(o)ther persons may be permitted to intervene, upon motion"a conditional right to intervene is conferred. Therefore,the Court should exercise its discretion by permitting Heritage Green to intervene where,"the intervention will (not) unduly delay or prejudice the adjudication of the rights of the original parties." Mass R. Civ. P. 24(b). D. Heritage Green's Intervention is Timely and Will Not Unduly Delay or Prejudice the Original Parties. This action has only been filed for a short period of time and no significant events have occurred since the filing. Heritage Green does not require or seek any delay of the proceeding. Further,Heritage Greens intervention into the case will not cause any delay or effect the rights of the original parties. II. Conclusion Where Heritage Green has significant rights and interests which will be affected by this action, the current parties cannot be relied on to adequately represent or protect those interests, and no delay or prejudice will be occasioned by Heritage Greens intervention, then this Court should allow the requested intervention either as of right under Rule 24(a)or pursuant to the Court's discretion under Rule 24(b). Respectfully Submitted, Heritage Green Condominium Association By their attorney ar Johnson FFICE OF MW B.JOHNSON l Chestnut Street Andover,MA 01810 (508) 475-4488 Date: i B.B.O. #252760 � �� �� CERTIFICATE OF SERVI 1, Mark B. Johnson Esq.,hereby certify that on this C jV day of August, 1997 I have served a copy of the foregoing,Motion To Intervene,Memorandu—m-ETSupport and Answer,on all parties by mailing same,postage prepaid,first class mail,to Peter G. Shaheen, Esquire 565 Turnpike Street North Andover, MA 01845 Town Clerk Town of North Andover Municipal Building 120 Main Street North Andover, , MA 01845 ar ohnson �'�'�-� �. ��� .�z.. ��� •fes L?�-� - /�,,� le-e r U/` L "'CE PRAQSHAV 0V!N CLERK rH ', 0 V E R � 2001 OCT ib A q: 51 y t v T1 Town of North Andover of No oT Office of the Zoning Board of Appeals 0j '='' °p Community Development and Services Division 27 Charles Street --• ' North Andover,Massachusetts 01845 'SsA HUSE` D. Robert Nicetta Telephone(978)688-9541 Building Commissioner Fax(978)688-9542 Notice of Decision Year 2001 Any appeal shall be filed within(20) Property at 200 Chickering Road days after the date of filing of this G2 X C notice in the office of the town clerk. c::> �o�� v C-) *rnm Xa:;C-) NAME: Terra Properties,LLC DATE: October54,29" cn r� ADDRESS: 231 Sutton St. Suite 1A PETITION: -20i North Andover,MA-1845 HEARING: 5/8/01; 012/01; 7/10/01;`91/18/01 The North Andover Board of Appeals held one public hearing in four sessions for Town Boards' and Citizens' input. The public hearing was closed on September 18, 2001 by placing the petition "under advisement" on Wednesday, October 24, 2001 at 3:30 p.m. in the Conference Room, Pt floor Town Hall, 120 Main Street, North Andover,Massachusetts .The"under advisement"meeting was opened for Board members to discuss the request for a comprehensive permit by Terra Properties, LLC, 231 Sutton Street, Suite 1A, North Andover, Massachusetts. This application was originally for 132 housing units (later reduced to 126 housing units) per MGL Chap. 40B §§20-22. The housing is to have 25% of the units set I aside as "affordable" in the R4-Residential, R-5 Residential, and B-1 Business zones, located at 200 Chickering Road, North Andover,Massachusetts. The following members were present and voting: William J. Sullivan, Robert Ford, John Pallone, Ellen McIntyre, and George Earley. Also in attendance, but not voting,was Walter Soule. Upon a motion made by George Earley and seconded by John Pallone to grant the ''Applicant a comprehensive permit pursuant to MGL Chap. 40B §§20-22 for 126 housing units of which 25% will be affordable per the following preliminary plans: a. Plan Titled: Preliminary Site Plan, Kittredge Crossing, North Andover, MA Sheets 1-3 & 5-7, Sheet 4 Prepared for: Terra Properties,LLC 231 Sutton Street, North Andover, MA 01845 Prepared by: Merrimack Engineering Services,Inc. 66 Park Street, Andover,MA 01810 Date: September 12, 2001 (Sheets 1-3 & 5-7); September 7, 2001 (Sheet 4) BOARD OF APPEALS 688-9541 BUILDING 688-9545 CONSERVATION 688-9530 HEALTH 688-9540 PLANNING 688-9535 t A T b. Plan Titled: Preliminary Landscaping Plan, Kittredge Crossing, North Andover,MA Prepared for: Terra Properties,LLC Prepared by: GSD Associates-Architects,Inc. Date: September 12, 2001 C. Plan Titled: Preliminary Architectural Plans, Kittredge Crossing, North Andover,MA Prepared for: Terra Properties,LLC Prepared by: Gregory P. Smith,GSD Associates-Architects,Inc. Date: September 12, 2001 Also, 22 general conditions, 34 specific conditions,.and 30 waivers are included in the 20 page document attached. Voting in favor were William J. Sullivan,Robert Ford, John Pallone,Ellen McIntyre, and George Earley. Town of North Andover Board of Appeals . A William J. Sullivan Chairpers n Decision on Comprehensive Permit Application Terra Properties, LLC 231 Sutton Street, Suite 1A North Andover, MA 01845 Petition No. 010-2001 PROCEDURAL HISTORY The Applicant is seeking a Comprehensive Permit pursuant to M.G.L. Chapter 40B, Sections 20 through 23, to construct 132 units of housing of which 25%will be set aside as"affordable,"all in the Residential 4, Residential 5, and Business 1 zoning districts, located at 200 Chickering Road, North Andover, MA 01845. The Comprehensive Permit application was submitted to the North Andover Town Clerk's office on April 19, 2001 at 10:40 a.m.A waiver for time extension was signed by Louis P. Minicucci,Jr., Manager on May 4, 2001. The Town of North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals, after publication in The Eagle-Tribune on April 24, 2001 and May 1, 2001 and due notice sent to all abutters and interested parties, held a public hearing on May 8, 2001 at the North Andover Senior Center at 120R Main Street, North Andover, MA 101845. North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals members present were Chairman William Sullivan;Raymond Vivenzio, Clerk; Robert Ford; John Pallone; George Earley and Ellen McIntyre, Alternates. Walter Soule was excused. An additional waiver for time extension was signed at the June 12, 2001 North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals meeting by Louis P. Minicucci, Jr., Manager, for the Comprehensive Permit Application to be continued and heard at a regular meeting to be held on July 10, 2001 at 7:30 p.m.; an additional waiver for a time extension was signed on July 10, 2001. At the May 8, 2001 North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals meeting, and at subsequent meetings held to continue the public hearing, Terra Properties, LLC was represented by Louis P. Minicucci, Jr. and Thomas D. Laudani, Managers of Terra Properties, LLC, 231 Sutton Street Suite 1A, North Andover, MA 01845; Robert W. Levy, Esq., Eckert Seamans Cherin&Mellott, LLC,Attorneys at Law, One International Place, 18' Floor, Boston, MA 02110; Gregory P. Smith, AIA, GSD Associates-Architects, Inc., 148 Main Street Building "A", North Andover, MA 01845; Dermot J. Kelly, PE, PTOE, Dermot J. Kelly Associates, Inc., Two Dundee Park Suite 301, Andover, MA 01810; and Stephen E. Stapinski, RLS, Merrimack Engineering Services, Inc., 66 Park Street, Andover, MA 01810. Curtis R. Young, Pres., Wetlands Page -1- Preservation, Inc.,47 Newton Road, Plaistow,NH 03865,represented the Applicant for matters pertaining to the Conservation Commission, but did not appear at any meetings. The public hearing was closed on SEPTEMBER 18, 2001. The North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals made the following Findings of Fact and Decision subsequent to the hearing. These findings are based on the following submissions which include, but are not limited to, the following materials,which are on file at the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals and are being incorporated into this decision as a portion of this Application for a Comprehensive Permit. 1. Exhibit A: Traffic Impact and Access Study and Revised Traffic Impact and Access Study, Proposed Development Project, Kittredge Crossing, North Andover, MA, Prepared by DJK Associates, Inc. for Terra Properties, LLC, May 1, 2001; 2. Exhibit B: Parking Impact Study, Prepared by Terra Properties, LLC for North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals, June 28, 2001; 3. Exhibit C: Fiscal Impact Analysis and Revised Fiscal Impact Analysis, Prepared by Terra Properties, LLC for North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals, July 3, 2001; 4. Exhibit D: Agreement with the Trustees of Reservations to purchase approximately 5,000 square feet of land; 5. Exhibit E: Certificate of Legal Existence of Applicant. 6. Exhibit F: Certified List of Abutters. 7. Exhibit G: Sample Regulatory Agreement and Deed Rider. 8. Exhibit H: Town of North Andover Performance Bond Agreement The Applicant submitted a plan prepared by Merrimack Engineering Services, Inc., dated April 17, 2001 to the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals with the submission of the Comprehensive Permit Application. The North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals circulated the plan for review to the North Andover Police Department, the North Andover Fire Department, the North Andover Conservation Commission, the North Andover Board of Health, the North Andover Planning Board, and the North Andover Department of Public Works. Partly as a result of comments and recommendations made by Page -2- these Boards, the Applicant submitted a revised plan dated July 3, 2001 to the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals. After subsequent review by the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals,the Applicant submitted a second revised plan to the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals on September 12, 2001, which is the final plan the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals reviewed for the Comprehensive Permit decision. There are no outstanding issues raised by any Town Boards. All issues have been addressed by the Applicant. Prior to the close of the public hearing on September 18, 2001, the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals also received and considered the following written communications: 10. Letter from Peggy Walsh,resident of Heritage Green Condominium, dated June 4, 2001; 11. Correspondence from Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc., consultants for the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals, dated July 6, 2001; 12. Letter from Elvira "Vera" Curcio, resident of Heritage Green Condominium, dated August 11, 2001; 13. Correspondence from Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc., consultants for the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals, dated September 13, 2001; 14. Letter from Elvira "Vera" Curcio, resident of Heritage Green Condominium, dated September 19, 2001. In addition to the foregoing materials, the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals retained Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc. (VHB)to provide a technical review of the Applicant's application,plans,and studies and to present findings of this review to the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals in writing.This review was paid for from funds received from the Applicant for this purpose. The Applicant has satisfactorily addressed the issues raised by the consultant. The premises and site affected are known as 200 Chickering Road, North Andover, Massachusetts and are commonly known as the Rennie's Florist site. In 1998, the Owner submitted a Special Permit Application to the North Andover Planning Board for the approval of a 24,055 square foot office and retail h roved on September 3 1998 this ro'ectwas never constructed.On April 19,2001, complex.Although a p p g pp P the Applicant submitted a Comprehensive Permit application to the North Andover Zoning Board of Page -3- Appeals.The site consists of 6.33 acres of land and 346.27 feet of frontage,a single family house,a florist shop,and greenhouse.The site is served by municipal water and sewer,and natural gas.All of the existing structures are to be demolished. The Applicant proposed to construct 132 units of multi-family housing in six wood frame buildings, three stories in height; 25% or thirty-three (33) units were to be set aside as" "affordable". In addition, a community building or clubhouse was proposed, and 180 surface parking spaces. Trash storage and removal as proposed consisted of three dumpsters, ten cubic yards in size. The site itself is irregular in shape. Wetlands are found on the site; wetland issues will be addressed by the Conservation Commission when the Applicant submits a notice of intent. The parcel of land which is the subject of the Comprehensive Permit application is owned by Dorothy J. Rennie, Individually and Trustee and Carol Ryan Rennie, Trustee of Old Town Village Realty Trust. The Applicant is Terra Properties, LLC. The Applicant has submitted evidence of site control to the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals as required.The parcel of land is recorded at the Essex North Registry of Deeds in Book 798 Page 49; Book 826 Page 23; Book 5598 Page 98;the Plan reference is Plan 13434. It is also identified as Assessor's Map 46 Lots 35 and 46.The site is located in Zoning Districts Residential 4(R-4),Residential 5(R-5),and Business 1 (B-1).The FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map#250098-0003-C dated June 2, 1993 indicates that the parcel is located in Zone X. The Applicant originally proposed access to the rear section of the site through Wood Lane,a paper street. Wood Lane was created by a vote of Town Meeting in 1909; in 1931 a portion of Wood Lane was discontinued as a town way at Town Meeting. The Applicant contended that the discontinued portion of Wood Lane is not the portion which runs along the site's South/Southwest boundary,and designed access to the rear portion of their site over Wood Lane. However, an abutter, the Trustees of Reservations, disagreed and objected to the Applicant's right to use Wood Lane for access to the rear portion of the site. During the course of the hearing on the Application,the Applicant and the Trustees agreed that Applicant would abandon its claim to use Wood Lane for access in exchange for approximately 5,000 square feet of land owned by the Trustees which would allow the Applicant to connect the front and rear sections of the site without creating a second driveway access from Chickering Road over Wood Lane. The North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals agrees that this is a better solution to the problem of access since it eliminates disagreement about the legality of crossing Wood Lane and reduces wetland impact. Evidence of the Agreement between the Applicant and the Trustees of Reservations was presented to the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals for review (Exhibit D). Page -4- Prior to the submission of the Comprehensive Permit application, the Applicant applied to the Federal Home Loan Bank of Boston's New England Fund for a project eligibility letter through the Warren Bank, a participating lender with an office in Beverly, Massachusetts.Warren Bank reviewed the Application and issued a Project Eligibility Letter to the Applicant on March 29, 2001. As a result of the decision by the Massachusetts Housing Appeals Committee in Stuborn Ltd. Partnership v. Barnstable Bd.of Appeals, No. 98-01 (Decision March 5, 1999),the New England Fundwas added to the list of eligible housing programs. No other subsidy programs have been proposed by the Applicant. During the course of the public hearing and as a result of the agreement with the Trustees of Reservations, an abutter, to eliminate the need for an access drive crossing Wood Lane, the Applicant redesigned the site. The final plan presented to the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals showed the number of buildings reduced from six to four; the number of units decreased from 132 to 126; and the number of parking spaces increased from 180 to 202, an increase in the parking ratio of 1.36 of spaces per unit to 1.6 parking spaces per unit. In addition,the number of trash dumpsters,which had been decreased to two, was increased to three, ten cubic yards in size. In response to concerns from the North Andover Zoning, Board of Appeals regarding trash pickup, the Applicant has agreed to provide a trash compactor in each unit as well as a garbage disposal During the course of the public hearing,the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals also heard testimony from the Heritage Green Condominium Association, an abutter, and various condominium unit owners at Heritage Green Condominium,also abutters,who objected to the use of Farrwood Avenue,a private road, for the purpose of accessing underground utilities.The Applicant has redesigned the plan to eliminate the use of Farrwood Avenue and the final plan shows the connections to utilities in Chickering Road only, a . public way.Another issue brought up by these abutters concerned flooding of the Heritage Green property. As designed by the applicant and reviewed by the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals' technical consultant, VHB, no increase in peak rate of runoff water will be directed off-site, but will be detained on site in either surface detention basins or underground recharge chambers. The Heritage Green abutters also brought the issue of a buffer between the Kittredge Crossing property and the Heritage Green property.The Applicant has proposed both a fence and a vegetative buffer to be created along the property line in the vicinity of Farrwood Avenue, as shown on the final plan. In addition,various abutters questioned the financial impact of the proposed project on the Town of North Andover, specifically with respect to the impact on the public school system. The Applicant submitted a Fiscal Impact Analysis and a Revised Fiscal Impact Analysis(Exhibit C)prepared using a model developed Page -5- by the Natural Resources Defense Council called Developments and Dollars - an Introduction to Fiscal Impact Analysis in Land Use Planning, principally authored by Michael L. Siegel of Public and Environmental Finance Associates. The original Fiscal Impact Analysis assumed eleven children would live at Kittredge Crossing. In response to questions and comments from the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals, the Applicant revised the Analysis to show the impact of up to three times the number of children. Both the original and revised Analyses showed a positive fiscal impact to the Town,with a break even point in excess of 52 children. The Applicant proposed the Citizens' Housing and Planning Association (CHAPA), as the agency to monitor the resale of the affordable units. The North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals asked what the options were for such agencies and was told that the choices are a non-profit housing advocacy agency like CHAPA,the local housing authority,or a regional housing authority.The Applicant indicated that there was a conflict of interest in choosing the local housing authority and that CHAPA was the preferred agency. The Applicant has agreed with CHAPA for these services and will sign a contract with them to this effect. FINDINGS 1. The Applicant.The Applicant,Terra Properties, LLC is a"limited dividend organization"as that term is used on M.G.L.Chap.40B§21 and 760 CMR 30.02 and will sign a Regulatory Agreement with the funding agency to limit profits, and is eligible to apply for and receive a comprehensive permit. Terra Properties is a qualified applicant pursuant to 760 CMR 31.01 in that it is a limited dividend organization,the project is fundable by the Federal Home Loan Bank of Boston's(FHLB/B) New England Fund through a participating lender, and has control of the site as that term is used in 760 CMR 31.01 in that Terra has entered into a Purchase and Sale Agreement for the acquisition of the property from Dorothy J. Rennie, Individually and Trustee and Carol Ryan Rennie, Trustee of Old Town Village Realty Trust, the present owners. 2. Statuto[y Minima for Low and Moderate Income Housing.The Town of North Andover has not met any of the statutory minima set forth in M.G.L. Chap. 40B § 20 or 760 CMR 31.04. 3. The Project. The Project, as shown on the final Site Plan, consists of a total of 126 condominium units in four residential buildings and an additional community building, including forty-two (42) one bedroom units, eighty-four(84)two bedroom units and a total of 202 parking spaces with related improvements. The Project is to be known as"Kittredge Crossing." Page -6- 4. Affordable Housing to be Provided.Twenty-five per cent(25%)of the units or 32(thirty-two) units will be "low or moderate income housing" as that term is defined in MGL Chap. 40B § 20. Terra Properties, LLC has agreed to a restriction on affordability.The duration of the affordability restriction shall be for a term of 99 years or, in the event of approval of the affordability restriction by Massachusetts" Department of Housing and Community Development, in perpetuity or such other term contained in such restriction, from the date of this Decision, as specified in the Conditions to this Decision. 5. Access and Traffic Issues.The only means of access to and from the site will be via a main access way from Chickering Road. The North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals found that the proposed access is properly designed and safe to accommodate the needs of the Project for ordinary and emergency services. 6. Support by Town Board and Agencies. During the course of the public hearings,the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals sought and received comments and concerns from Town boards including the Department of Public Works,the Police Department,the Fire Department,the Conservation Commission, the Planning Board, and the Board of Health. The Applicant has addressed these concerns adequately, and there are no outstanding issues. DECISION Based on the above findings and a 5-0 (unanimous)vote of the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals taken on October 24, 2001, a Comprehensive Permit for the Project, subject to the following twenty-two general conditions, thirty-four specific conditions, and thirty waivers, is hereby APPROVED with the following conditions. Comprehensive Permit Conditions A. General Conditions 1. The site, as shown on the plan endorsed by the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals shall not be substantially changed, altered or reconfigured in any way without an amendment to this Comprehensive Permit, after notice and hearing by law. a. Plan Titled: Preliminary Site Plan,Kittredge Crossing, North Andover, MA Sheets 1-3 &5-7, Sheet 4 Page -7- Prepared for: Terra Properties, LLC 231 Sutton Street, North Andover, MA 01845 Prepared by: Merrimack Engineering Services, Inc. 66 Park Street, Andover, MA 01810 Date: September 12,2001 (Sheets 1-3&5-7); September 7,2001. (Sheet 4) b. Plan Titled: Preliminary Landscaping Plan, Kittredge Crossing, North Andover, MA Prepared for: Terra Properties, LLC Prepared by: GSD Associates-Architects, Inc. Date: September 12, 2001 C. Plan Titled: Preliminary Architectural Plans, Kittredge Crossing, North Andover, MA Prepared for: Terra Properties, LLC Prepared by: Gregory P. Smith, GSD Associates-Architects, Inc. Date: September 12, 2001 2. All requirements of the New EnglandFundas administered by the Federal Home Loan Bank of Boston are to be met. The Regulatory Agreement and Declaration of Restrictive Covenants are to be executed by the Applicant as required by the program prior to the issuance of a building permit and shall be recorded at the Essex North Registry of Deeds in Lawrence with marginal notations. 3. The number of units to be constructed under this Comprehensive Permit is one hundred twenty six (126). The affordable units shall comprise twenty-five per cent (25%) of the total or thirty two (32) units which shall be indistinguishable from the outside as being affordable. No two affordable units shall be located adjacent to each other.The utilities, equipment,fixtures,and appliances in the affordable units shall be the same as those in the standard market rate units at time of first conveyance. This shall not be construed to prevent buyers of standard market rate units from upgrading the utilities, equipment, fixtures, and appliances, among others, in those units. 4. All affordable units are to be sold through a lottery process in accordance with Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development guidelines.All fees and facilitation are to be the responsibility of Terra Properties, LLC. Seventy per cent(70%) of the affordable units shall be set aside for North Andover residents according to a policy to be developed by Terra in conjunction with the Town of North Andover Community Development Department, and approved by the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals. 5. Occupancy for each unit is expected to take place as soon as is reasonably practicable after completion of construction, issuance of Certificate(s) of Occupancy by the building commissioner and conveyance to individual unit owners, if not sooner. Page -8- 6. During construction, all local, state and federal laws and regulations shall be followed regarding noise, vibration, dust and blocking Town ways. At all times, the Applicant shall use reasonable means to minimize inconvenience to the residents in the area. and codes pertaining to 7. The Applicant shall comply with all bylaws, rules and regulations, p g the development of the site, unless expressly waived herein. 8. Before beginning any construction under this Comprehensive Permit, the Applicant shall furnish evidence to the Building Commissioner that this decision and the plans with the revisions necessitated by this decision, have been recorded with the Essex North Registry of Deedsin Lawrence. All plans shall include both an Engineer's and an Architect's stamp. Documentation of recording, including either a document number or a book and page number shall be provided to the Building Commissioner. 9. A certificate of insurance, which shall include coverage for general liability; automobile liability; umbrella coverage; and Workmen's Compensation, shall be submitted to the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals, prior to the beginning of construction, including site preparation. 10. Prior to obtaining a building permit,the Applicant shall submit to the Building Commissioner and to the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals for review and approval final construction drawings and final site plans signed by a Registered Architect and a Registered Engineer. 11. The Building Commissioner shall be the authorized agent of the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals and/or the Town of North Andover for the purposes of enforcement of any of the conditions, restrictions, or requirements of the comprehensive permit and is authorized to enforce any of these provisions in the Superior Court of the Commonwealth. 12. The comprehensive permit is granted based on the Application and no use and no other improvements substantially different from those contemplated by the Project Plans shall be deemed permitted by virtue of the granting of the comprehensive permit. 13. The comprehensive permit shall run with the land. 14. The comprehensive permit shall become void in the event the Applicant does not obtain a building permit in connection with the Project within two years of the date hereof, not including such time required to pursue or await the determination of an appeal from the grant of the comprehensive permit or Page -9- the issuance of an Order of Conditions from the Conservation Commission, or to pursue or await the determination of an appeal from the issuance of the Order of Conditions. 15. Any substantial deviation from the Project Plan shall require the approval of the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals. 16. The Applicant shall not be permitted to receive a building permit (other than for the community building and site work) until such time as the Applicant has executed and delivered a Regulatory Agreement substantially in the form as shown in Exhibit H (the Regulatory Agreement). The North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals acknowledges that the form of the Regulatory Agreement may be revised with respect to the details of reporting and similar requirements regarding the methods of achieving and monitoring compliance with substantive goals, based upon review of the form by the monitoring agent to be selected. 17. The waivers from local law requested and granted are attached.All other regulations remain in full force and effect. 18. The comply Project shall IY with all applicable state and federal regulations including but not J p limited to State Building Code, State Sanitary Code, Architectural Access Board Regulations, and Plumbing, Electrical and Fire Codes. 19. Thirty days prior to the application for a building permit, the Applicant shall submit for the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals' review and comment a construction mitigation plan that shall include, but not be limited to, measures to control erosion and sedimentation, tree and brush clearing, grading and general site mitigation measure. 20. To the extent permitted by the law, residents of the Town of North Andover are to be granted a local preference for the affordable units. In no case shall local preference be granted for more than seventy per cent (70%) of the affordable units. 21. The Project shall comply at all times with the Regulatory Agreement. 22. Handicap accessibility shall be governed by the Massachusetts Architectural Board Rules and Regulations, 521 CMR. Page -10- B. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS 1. Terra Properties, LLC will be responsible for the snow removal, trash removal, rubbish removal, recyclable materials removal, road maintenance, and storm drainage maintenance on the premises until such time as control of the development is handed over to the organization of unit owners for the condominium.Terms to this effect will be incorporated in the condominium documents for Kittredge Crossing. 2. Terra Properties, LLC will develop and sell these units as condominiums and not as rental units. The rules and regulations of the condominium shall contain a provision which is not less restrictive than the following: Any lease or rental of a unit by a Unit Owner, other than by the Declarant,shall be subject to the following conditions: a. Such lease or rental agreement shall be in writing; b. The lease or rental agreement shall apply to the entire unit, and not a portion thereof; C. The term of the lease or rental agreement shall be for a term of not less than six(6) months; d. The occupancy of the unit shall be for not more than two (2) unrelated people; e. The lease or rental agreement shall expressly provide that the lease or rental is subject to the Master Deed, the Organization of Unit Owners and the Rules and Regulations of the Condominium; and f. A copy of the lease or rental agreement shall be provided to the Organization of Unit owners. g. Leasing or renting of the affordable units shall be prohibited, except as governed by the provisions of the Regulatory Agreement and Deed Rider. Page -11- 3. Terra Properties, LLC will develop a preference policy for sale of the affordable units in conformance with guidelines established by the Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD).Terra Properties, LLC will work with the Town of North Andover towards this goal. 4. Terra Properties, LLC will hire as an outside monitoring agency Citizens' Housing and Planning Association (CHAPA), which will work with the North Andover Housing Authority to ensure that affordability guidelines are met. 5. Twenty-five percent (25%) of the total units in the Project shall be available for purchase by persons whose income is no more than 80%of the area median as determined by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.These affordable units shall be mixed with and indistinguishable from market value units throughout the buildings in the project. Before any unit is sold in the Project, the Applicant shall submit to the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals the proposed form of Deed Rider to be attached to and recorded with the Deed for each and every affordable unit in the Project at the time of each sale and resale,which Deed Rider shall restrict each unit in accordance with this requirement in perpetuity in accordance with therequirementsof MGL Chap. 184 §§ 31-33. Prior to submitting the proposed Deed Rider to the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals,the Applicant shall use its best efforts to obtain any necessary governmental approvals for such a deed restriction in perpetuity. In the event that the Department of Housing and Community Development(formerly the Executive Office of Communities and Development, EOCD) ("DHCD") is required by law to approve but declines to approve the perpetual restriction, the proposed Deed Rider shall set forth a period of affordability which shall be the longest period allowed by law and approved by the DHCD, but in no case less than ninety-nine years as offered by the Applicant. In this event, the Applicant shall submit to the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals written evidence of the Applicant's efforts to secure approval of the perpetual restriction,the written denial thereof, and the grounds for denial; and the Applicant shall also grant to the Town of North Andover or its designee in the Deed Rider a right of first refusal, in a form mutually acceptable to counsel for the Applicant and to Town Counsel, covering each and every affordable unit in the Project triggered upon the expiration of the affordability period. 6. Terra Properties, LLC will exchange the fee interest in Wood Lane for an approximately 5,000 square foot parcel of land at the southwesterly corner of the site, presently owned by the Trustees of Reservations. Terra Properties, LLC will present evidence of an agreement to this effect. Page -12- 7. There will be four(4) residential buildings containing 126 units, 25% (or 32 units) of which will be affordable units. There will be a total of 202 parking spaces for a parking ratio of 1.6 spaces per unit. 8. Terra Properties, LLC will provide handicapped accessible curb cuts at all locations where sidewalks cross over streets on the entire site. 9. Terra Properties,LLC will provide a trash compactor and an under-sink disposal in each unit as well three trash dumpsters, each ten cubic yards in size,located on the site as shown on the final plan. 10. There will be one consolidated driveway to the site, located on Chickering Road.The sight distance of the driveway when constructed will be at least 400 feet in both directions. 11. Terra Properties, LLC will place one master fire alarm box at the entrance to the property. 12. Terra Properties,LLC will equip all buildings with a sprinkler system as per State regulations and building code. 13. Terra Properties, LLC will install hydrants in accordance with the final plans. 14. Fire Lanes for each building will be clearly marked at the site. 15. Signs will be posted in the area of the driveway connecting the front and rear portions of the site indicating that vehicles will be towed at their owner's expense if they are blocking access to emergency vehicles.Terms to this effect will be incorporated in the condominium documents for Kittredge Crossing. The condominium management will be responsible for enforcement of this provision. 16. Terra Properties, LLC will install an opticom at the junction of Chickering Road and Massachusetts Avenue pending State approval. 17. Terra Properties, LLC will file a Notice of Intent under the 310 CMR 10.00, the Wetlands Protection Act Regulations, with the Conservation Commission. Replication of lost Bordering Vegetated Wetlands and compensatory flood storage areas will be provided consistent with 310 CMR 10.00. Page -13- 18. Terra Properties,LLC will provide a tee cut into the water line on Chickering Road as shown on the final plans. 19. Terra Properties, LLC will use 45-degree bends rodded together with restraining bands on the main water main connecting buildings. 20. Where possible, Terra Properties, LLC will work with the North Andover Department of Public Works to loop water lines where reasonable. Terra Properties will comply with State standards regarding the number of hydrants, gates, as shown on the final plans. 21. Terra will submit detailed drainage calculations to the North Andover Department of Public Works for review and approval, which shall not be unreasonably withheld and shall be issued in a timely fashion, including information about Total Suspended Solids and subsurface infiltration systems. 22. Terra will submit evidence of compliance,with Massachusetts Department of Environmental, Protection Stormwater Management Policy to the North Andover Conservation Commissions at the time of the filing of the Notice of Intent for the Project. 23. Terra will submit evidence of receipt of a Massachusetts Highway Department Permit for entrance onto Route 125/Chickering Road before a building permit is issued. 24. A fire protection system will be designed by a licensed fire protection engineer. 25. Cross connection details and proper backflow information regarding water tie-ins and the type and size of water services will be provided and approved by the North Andover Department of Public Works; such approval shall not be unreasonably withheld and shall be issued in a timely fashion. 26. Terra Properties, LLC will provide details on the sewer main and sewer services including profiles of the utility. Terra will use two 45 degree bends instead of 90 degree bends in the sewer force main. 27. Drawings and specifications of the sewer pumping station design will be submitted to the North Andover Department of Public Works for review and approval, if a pumping station is required;such review and approval shall not be unreasonably withheld and shall be issued in a timely fashion Page -14- 28. All artificial lighting used to illuminate the exterior premises shall be arranged and shielded so as to prevent direct glare from the light source into any public street or private way or onto any adjacent property. 29. Screening and landscaping shall be substantially in compliance with a landscaping plan submitted on April 12, 2001, and revised on July 10, 2001. 30. A drainage system maintenance manual shall be provided. 31. A report by a Professional Engineer accompanied by certified As-Built plans of the construction of the drainage improvements shall be submitted and accepted prior to the issuance of any building permit other than a foundation permit or a building permit for the construction of the community building. 32. This comprehensive permit is conditional on the Applicant obtaining fee simple interest in the real estate. 33. Whenever residents of Kittredge Crossing are eligible for school busing, the bus will pick up and discharge students at the entrance to the driveway only. 34. The condominium documents shall include a provision that no vehicle shall park so as to impede travel in the access lanes at any time,except those allowed by regulation of the Americans with Disabilities Act or those vehicles temporarily on the site,including but not limited to vehicles for the purpose of delivery or moving, construction, repair or maintenance, public or private transportation, or those vehicles of an emergency nature. No vehicles shall obstruct the fire lanes except those allowed by law. Page-15- Approved Waivers to the By-Laws and Regulations in Effect in the Town of North Andover For the Approved 126 Unit Residential Housing Project To be known as Kittredge Crossing at 200 Chickering Road, North Andover, Massachusetts Based on final revised plans and drawings prepared by Merrimack Engineering Services, including sheets 1 of 7, 2 of 7, 3 of 7, 5 of 7, 6 of 7, and 7 of 7 dated September 12, 2001, and sheet 4 of 7 dated September 7, 2001 and plans and drawings prepared by GSD Associates, including sheets A1.1, A1.2, A1.3, A1.4, A2.1, and A2.2 dated 09/12/2001 submitted and based upon the Zoning Bylaw as amended through the Annual Town Meeting of May 13, 2000, which was approved by the Attorney General on October 12, 2000, posted October 25, 2000, and the Special Town Meeting of December 1,1, 2000, the following zoning waivers are granted: Section 1 - Purposes: 1. A Waiver is granted from this section where the regulations vary and/or are in conflict with the regulations as provided by Chapter 40-B of the General Laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, which shall govern this application, where they are in conflict. Section 4 - Buildings and Uses Permitted: 1. A Waiver from Section 4.1.1.1 is granted which states: In the zoning districts above specified,the following designated buildings and alterations and extensions thereof and buildings accessory thereto and the following designated uses of land,buildings,or part thereof and uses accessory thereto are permitted. All other buildings and uses are hereby expressly prohibited except uses which are similar in character to the permitted uses shall be treated as requiring a Special Permit. A waiver from this section is granted since the proposed use as a multi-family building is not allowable in the Business -1 and Residential - 4 district. The waiver shall state that a multi-family use does not require a Special Permit. 2. A Waiver from Section 4.1.1.3 is granted which states: When a zoning district boundary divides a lot of record on June 5, 1972 in one ownership, all the zoning regulations set forth in this Zoning Bylaw applying to the greater part by area of such lot so divided may,by Special Permit,be deemed to apply and govern at and beyond such zoning district boundary,but only to an extent not more than one hundred(100) linear feet in depth (at a right angle to such boundary) into the lesser part by area of such lot so divided. 3. Waiver from Section 4.1.1.5 is granted which states: No private or public (1985/20) way giving access to a building or use or not permitted in a residential district shall be laid out or constructed so as to pass through a residential district.A waiver from this section by deletion of it entirely is granted to allow such access since the private or public ways are located in and through a residential district that does not allow multi-family residences. Page -16- 4. A Waiver from Section 4.122.1 is granted which states: One residential building per lot. A waiver from this section is granted to allow multi-family residential uses since the project is a multi-family residential development on a single lot that has a total of four(4) residential buildings and one community building located within a portion of a Residence 4 District. Waiver shall include the ability to have multi- family residences in this zone. 5. A waiver from Section 4.122.12 is granted which states: Swimming and/or tennis clubs shall be permitted with a Special Permit.A waiver is granted from this section so much as the proposed pool may be considered a swimming club. The pool is for the exclusive use of the residents and their guests and may not be operated as a swimming club for non-residents. 6. A waiver from Section 4.124.12 is granted which states: Swimming and/or tennis clubs shall be permitted with a Special Permit.A waiver is granted from this section so much as the proposed pool may be considered a swimming club. The pool is for the exclusive use of the residents and their guests and may not be operated as a swimming club for non-residents. 7. A Waiver from 4.126.9 is granted which states: Residential Uses including one and two family dwellings. Apartments shall be allowed where such use is not more than 50% of the total area of the building. A waiver from this section is granted to allow for up to 100% of the building floor area since the multi-family dwellings have residential uses in up to 100% of the building floor area. 8. A waiver from Section 4.124.11 is granted which states: Swimming and/or tennis clubs shall be permitted with a Special Permit.A waiver is granted from this section so much as the proposed pool may be considered a swimming club. The pool is for the exclusive use of the residents and their guests and may not be operated as a swimming club for non-residents. 9. A waiver from Section 4.2 Phased Development Bylaw is granted in its entirety. This waiver is granted as it may be construed to hinder the development of this project. 10. A waiver from the Table 1 Summary of Use Regulations is granted.This waiver is granted to allow for multi-family dwellings and associated uses in each of the zoning districts which the property is located where it is not permitted by right. Section 4.1, District Use Regulations, Table 1, Summary of Use Regulations a. Change "no" to "yes" in R-4 column for Multi-family Dwellings and Apartments. b. Change "yes*" to "yes" in R-5 column for Multi-family Dwellings and Apartments. (eliminate *) Section 7 - Dimensional Requirements: 1 A waiver from Section 7.1.1 Contiguous Buildable Area(CBA) is granted which states `As of April 28, 1986, the area of any new lot created, exclusive of area in a street or recorded way open to public use, Page -17- at least seventy five(75)percent of the minimum lot area required forzoning shall be contiguous land other than land located within a line identified as wetland resource areas in accordance with the Wetlands Protection Act, Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 131, Section 40 and the Town of North Andover Wetland Protection Bylaw, Chapter 178 of the Code of North Andover. The proposed structure must be constructed on said designated contiguous land area.„A waiver is granted from this section so much as the addition of the 5,000 SF t of the Trustees of Reservations's land area to the main portion of the lot constitutes a new lot, or that the project would be required to meet these requirements. 2. A waiver from the dimensional requirements of Section 7.3 Yards (Setbacks) is granted for all zoning districts listed. This waiver is granted to construct the buildings as indicated on the site plan. See the specific listing in Table 2 below. 3. A waiver from the dimensional requirements of Section 7.4 Building Heights is granted for all zoning districts listed.This waiver is granted to construct a three story building with a basement and a sloped roof as indicated on the Architectural Drawings. See the specific listing in Table 2 below. 4. A waiver from the dimensional requirements of Section 7.5 Lot Coverage is granted for the zoning districts listed. This waiver is granted to construct the buildings as indicated on the site plan. See the , specific listing in Table 2 below. 5. A waiver from the dimensional requirements of Section 7.6 Floor area Ratio (FAR) is granted for the zoning districts listed. This waiver is granted to construct the buildings as indicated on the site plan. See the specific listing in Table 2 below. 6. A waiver from the dimensional requirements of Section 7.7 Dwelling Unit Density is granted for all zoning districts listed. This waiver is granted to construct the buildings as indicated on the site plan. See the specific listing in Table 2 below. 7. The following list of waivers as described above are granted from Table 2,Summaryof Dimensional Requirements, as referenced throughout the By-Law: Table 2 changes are listed below for all zoning districts. TABLE 2: The following waivers are required as listed in this table: a. Change height to 55'from 35' in the R-4, R-5, B-1 Zone b. Change front and rear setback to 10' from 30' R-4, R-5, B-1 Zone C. Change side setback from 15' in R-4 Zone, 25' in R-5 Zone and 20' in B-1 Zone to 9.83' in these three zones. d. Delete FAR requirement in B-1 Zone. Page -18- e. Delete lot coverage requirement in R-5 and B-1 Zone f. Permit density of 19.90 units/acre in R-4, R-5 and B-1 Zone for "Density Max/Acre" line. g. Delete note 2 requirement for an additional 15' buffer zone adjacent to a residential district as this note may apply to this project. h. Delete the note 6 requirement for townhouse dimensions as this note may apply to this project. L Delete the note 7 requirement for additional requirements for apartments and townhouses as this note may apply to this project. j. Delete the note 12 requirement for multi-family structures and site plan review requirements as this note may apply to this project. Section 8, Supplementary Regulations 1. A waiver from Section 8.1.2 listing of Uses and Minimum Spaces Required for Off-Street Parking. This waiver is granted to allow for the parking ratios indicated on the site plan. Change Minimum Spaces Required from 2 spaces per unit to 1.6 spaces per unit.This includes all associated accessory uses such as the complex office and common spaces. 2. A waiver from Section 8.1.7 is granted which reads:A parking space shall mean an area of notless than 9'x18; accessible over an unobstructed driveway not less than 25'wide. A waiver from this section is granted to allow for driveways of 24' wide adjacent to parking spaces and 20' wide where driveway is used for two way access between parking areas in which no parking space is directly accessed from the 20' wide driveway. 3. A waiver from Sections 8.1.8 is granted which reads: For multifamily dwellings the front yard shall not be used for parking for accessory uses.A waiver from this section in its entirety is granted in as much as this section could be construed to prohibit parking as indicated on the site plan. 4. A waiver from Sections 8.1.9 is required which reads: In all residential districts the front yard shall not be used for parking for accessory uses.A waiver from this section in its entirety is granted in as much as this section could be construed to prohibit parking as indicated on the site plan. 5. A waiver from Section 8.3 Site Plan Review in its entirety is granted in as much as this project is regulated by the requirements under a Comprehensive Permit (Chapter 40B) and is exempt from such review. Page -19- 6. A waiver from Section 8.5 Planned Residential Development(PRD) is granted in its entirety since this project is regulated by the requirements under Comprehensive Permit(Chapter 40B)and are exempt from such review. 7. A waiver from Section 8.7 Growth Management is granted in its entirety in as much as this section could be construed to hinder the development of this project. 8. A Waiver from Section 8.10 Lot/Slope Requirements is granted in its entirety in as much as this section could be construed to be applicable to this project.A waiver is granted since the application for the Kittredge Crossing project was made prior to the Town Meeting of May 15, 2001, at which this item was added to the zoning by-law. Section 10 - Administration: 1. A waiver from Section 10.3 Special Permit is granted in its entirety in as much as this section could be construed to be applicable to this project. References are made to various special permit granting authorities that are in conflict with the requirements under a Comprehensive Permit(Chapter 40B)and are exempt from such review. Section 11 - Planned Development District: 1. A waiver from Section 11 Planned Development District is granted in its entirety in as much as this section could be construed to be applicable to this project.This project is not located in an I-S district and this project is being submitted under the requirements of a Comprehensive Permit(Chapter 40B)and are exempt from such review. The following waivers are also granted: Wetlands Bylaw A waiver from the entire North Andover Wetlands Bylaw is granted.The project will meet the requirements of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts as promulgated in 310 CMR 10.00, Wetlands Protection Act Regulations. Bonds A waiver from all Town of North Andover's requirements for all cash bonds related to this Project is granted. In lieu of such cash bonds, surety bonds shall be provided of the same value.The Applicant will execute a performance bond agreement in substantially the same language and form as put forth in Form F, Performance Bond Agreement,of the North Andover Planning Board, Exhibit I,and incorporated herein by reference. The amount of the surety bond is to be determined by Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc., when construction plans and specifications are provided,priorto site development,exceptfor bond requirements of the Conservation Commission, which shall determine the bonding amount in relation to the Order of Conditions. In lieu of all such cash bonds, including bonds required by the Conservation Commission, surety bonds shall be provided of the same value. Page -20- 10/04/02 12:33 FAX Q 001 COPY COIVXMoNWEALTH OF MASSACIXUSETTS ESSEX, SS. SUPERIOR. COURT DEPARTMENT OF THE TRIAL COURT CIVIL ACTION NO. 01-2154-D NINA M. ROMANO, LANCE JOHNSON, LISA ) NEUKACKATZ, JOE ED SMITH, and ) KAREN FARRIS, as Trustees of the ) HERITAGE GREEN CONDOMINIUM TRUST, Plaintiff, ) v. ) WILLIAM J. SULLIVAN, WALTER F. SOULE, ) RAYMOND VIVENZIO, ROBERT FORD, JOHN ) PALLONE, ELLEN MCINTYRE, and GEORGE EARLY, as they are members of the TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER ZONINGBOARD OF APPEALS, and TERRA PROPERTIES, LLC, Defendants 1 r STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL Pursuant to Mass.R.Civ.P. 41 (a)(1)(ii), the parties to the above-entitled action hereby stipulate that said action be dismissed, with prejudice as to all claims and without costs to any party, waiving all rights of appeal. Donald F. orenstein, BBO#566810 Law Office Of Mark B. Johnson Attorney for Heritage Green Condominium Trust 12 Chestnut Street Andover,MA 41810 (978) 475-4488 Robert W. Levy, BBO # 297840 'Thomas J. Urbei , SBO # 506560 Eckert Seamans Cherin & Mellott, LLC Urbelis, Fieldsteel & Bailin, LLP Attorney for Terra Properties, LLC Attorney for Zoning Board of Appeals One international Place of the Town of North Andover Boston, MA 02110 155 Federal Street (617) 342-6800 Boston, MA 02110 (617) 338-2200 Date: September `k, 2002 KO232738.0} i t TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK 120 MAIN STREET NORTH ANDOVER,MASSACHUSETTS 01845 Joyce A. Bradshaw,CMMC Telephone(978)688-9501 Town Clerk Fax (978)688-9556 pORTFf Ot�t�ao �a1ti F i ,ssgCHUst� FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL FORM DATE: ADDRESSEE: / NAME: FIRM: STREET: CITY: r� FAX NUM: 7 f°- FROM: NAME: JOYCE A.BRADSHAW,CMMC DEPT.: TOWN CLERK 120 MAIN STREET NORTH ANDOVER,MA 01845 TELEPHONE: (978) 688-9501 FAX NUMBER: (978) 688-9556 TOTAL NUMBER OF PAGES,INCLUDING COVER LETTER: a ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: O �� o?o 7"� ..� 4 0 oa ire e 19-9111-11 Y4 .��ply ��. _ � ._.....--���, �� :�.�,�•�..-----����/� 7� , G' v -,xvlo� 1 ,9 �a �• �ct,c 2e. Grp-�t-�t � .. _. . a � .-vr CIL 0 A 7 } ,,. n� , Y ;7-7 440 -------------- 4 6 4 .......... J . ` 0 ,J a t c - . . _ f ...._..- L>b/✓'ti.:..... CVic'4,,.... ... a or v A ' _ POAF .SAA L 1 rn z ca lC M, » C Ye F p t ' �S�� ,�.../t,�v. f..�*�G-�.✓'/=ii/G/L�aCf.�'�+....or ...:...._Li� .-.-._ L..2~''7t.-LL.e'1�L.:._..� t .. :... .... ........ c. ... L�-,--'G� E.'C�.�d�,�.......,.. `►.e.If:L:C«�C./LeF.� � ......- ._ .. 6 .:.. .._-�G� (/F�..:..LCL ... ,.. ...-... _-. f _ e c t ✓ -- -- '-)1Q Cull; 10.90 Form 5 DEP Fire No. [ 242-856 I •••`�, (10"awwM by UEfy Commonwealth Cdy.lown North Andover TV t of Massachusetts �oor�canl Scott -Companies 1 Order of Conditions Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act G.L. c. 131 , §40 and under the Town of North Andover's Bylaw Chapter 3.5 From NORTH ANDOVER CONSERVATION COMMISSION To Scott Companies Dorothy J. Rennie (Name of Applicant) ((Janne of property owner) 12 Rogers Road 200 Chickering Road Haverhill, MA 01835 North Andover, MA 01845 Address Address This Order is issued and delivered as follows: ❑ by hand delivery to applicant or representative on Idate) 12 by certified mail, return receipt requested on ,Q� 1�0?4�' 9S�L �7� (date) This project is located at 200 Chickering Road The property is recorded at the Registry of Nnrt•harn Fcgnx _ Book • 798/826 Page 49/33 Certificate (if registered) The Notice of Intent for this project was filed on February 7, 1997 (dale) The public hearing was closed on May 21, 1997 (dale) Findings The North Andover Conservation Commission has reviewed the above•relerpriced,Notice of Intent and plans and has held a public hearing on the project. Based on the information availaole to the NACC at this time. the_—rI1�C(' _ has deternimed that j the area on which the proposed work is to be done is significant to the following interests m accord, v.itlt the Presumptions of Significa(:hCt ? "go to the regulations for each Area Subject to Protection Under the . 178 Recreation Act (check as appropriate): Ch.178: V Prevention of Erosion & Sedimentation Ch.178.1 Wildlife Pubiio water supply Flood control ❑ Lind containing shellfish Private water supply Storm damage prevention Fisheries 1 Ground water supply l`}�) Prevention of pollution � Protection of wildlife habitat Total Filing Fee Submitted $525.00 State Share $251J.00 City/Town Share 275.00 (?'_ fee in excess of S25) Total Refund Due S City/Town Portion S State Portion S (1/2 total) (1i2 total) r t DEP FILE #242 - 856 FINDINGS OF FACT: Overview: Request for Determination QLADDlicabft The applicant filed a Request for Determination of Applicability(RDA)with the North Andover Conservation Commission(NACC) on November 13, 1996; an initial public hearing was held within the 21 daytime requirement(December 4, 1996) and was posted appropriately in the North Andover Citizen. No work was proposed under this filing as the applicant was simply requesting confirmation of applicable wetland resource areas. The applicant requested a continuance of the public hearing until December 18, 1996 in order to provide the NACC with proof of abutter notification and additional technical data requested by the Conservation Administrator. At the December 18, 1996 public hearing the applicant submitted proof of abutter notification and it was determined by the NACC that the application was now complete and in accordance with M.G.L. C. 131. S.40, "Topic#14 of DEP's Guide to Abutter Notification" (dated April 8, 1994) and the North Andover Wetland ByLaw&Regulations (C. 178 of the Code of North Andover). The wetland delineation depicted on the plan of record (dated 12/11/96)was approved in the field by the Conservation Administrator and accepted by the NACC. The applicant requested that no determination be made with regards to the recently enacted River's Bill. As such, the NACC issued a Positive Determination of Applicability referencing the BVW delineation only and not the Riverfront Area. The public hearing was closed on December 18, 1996. Notice of Intent: The applicant filed a Notice of Intent with the NACC on February 7, 1997; an initial public hearing was held within the 21 day time requirement (February 19, 1997) and was posted appropriately in the North Andover Citizen(M.G.L. c.39 s.23B). At that time proof of abutter notification was submitted and it was determined by the NACC that the application was complete and in accordance with M.G.L. C. 131 s. 40, "Topic#14 of DEP's Guide to Abutter Notification" (dated April 8, 1994) and the North Andover Wetland ByLaw&Regulations (C. 178 of the Code of North Andover). In accordance with 310 CMR 10.05(5)(b)(2)the public hearing was continued to the following agreed upon dates: • March 19, 1997 • April 2, 1997 • April 16, 1997 • May 7, 1997 • May 21, 1997 The above referenced continuances were announced to all parties and people present at each respective public hearing. On May 21, 1997 the NACC closed the public hearing and issued this decision on June 4, 1997. CAWinword\00C\242-856.doc 1 NACC6/5/97 DEP FILE #242 - 856 Wetland Resource Areas-STATE: Proposed work included construction of 16, 900 square foot retail project with associated site access, parking and stormwater management system within the Buffer Zone of a Bordering Vegetated Wetland. The stream which was questioned through the RDA process by concerned parties and the NACC was observed"dry" on two occasions by the North Andover Conservation Administrator, however, due to it's juxtaposition on the site and its proximity to the proposed limit of work(greater than 200') no determination was made or warranted under the state Riverfront Acta FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps(dated REV 6/2/93)do not depict a floodplain deemed jurisdictional under the Act or local ByLaw. Thus, it was the opinion of the NACC that no work was proposed within the limits of any jurisdictional floodplain. Wetland Resource Areas—LOCAL: Areas subject to protection under the ByLaw differ from those protected under the Act in that additional areas are protected by this ByLaw. The additional areas subject to protection under the ByLaw include the buffer zone, smaller ponds, vernal pools and certain freshwater wetlands that may not meet the definition of BVW's under the Act. Section M (p.18) of the North Andover Wetland Regulations references and describes the 25' No-Disturbance and 50'No-Construction Zones. No activity is allowed in the No- Disturbance Zone and building construction of any kind is prohibited in the No- Construction Zone. This includes but is not limited to dwelling construction, buildings, porches, decks, additions, and/or sheds. Driveways and fences may be allowed in the No- Construction Zone. The imposition of these additional zones is established since, in the considerable body'of experience of the Commission, alteration of land immediately adjacent to a wetland invariably results in the alteration of the wetland itself. Such wetland alterations have been observed during construction such as siltation, over-grading or depositing construction debris. Such alterations have been observed after construction from improper land use such as unregulated filling, cutting of vegetation, extension of lawns or the depositing of yard waste. Such alterations have been observed resulting in increased runoff, siltation and temperature or nutrient loading resulting from the change in land use immediately adjacent to the wetland. These subsequent alterations cannot be regulated without the imposition of the restricted zones detailed above. Since the Commission cannot allow unregulated alteration of wetlands, these restricted zones will likely be imposed on all projects. Such findings have compelled the Commission to engage in research into the literature and regulations concerning the function and necessity of such zones. The project, as proposed, does not encroach upon nor does it infringe into the above mentioned setbacks. The applicant did not request a waiver of the No-Disturbance Zone or the No-Construction Zone and the NACC did not review or approve any such requests. CAWinword\OOC\242-856.doc 2 NACC 6/5/97 DEP FILE # 242 - 856 DEP's Stormwater Management Policy-STATE: The proposed stormwater management system discharged into the 100' Buffer Zone and as a result the NACC mandated that the applicant comply with"DEP's Stormwater Management Policy" (dated 11/96). The regulations contain explicit jurisdiction over point source discharges, including stormwater(310 CMR 10.05(6). In accordance with Section 178.11 of the North Andover Wetland ByLaw a"Consultant Services Account" was established. The purpose of this account is to fund a third art drainage review b p � party g Y an engineering firm approved and hired by the Town. Of great concern to the NACC under this application was a thorough review of the drainage design and compliance with the complex state policy. The goal of the stormwater management policy is to improve water quality(pollutants) and address water quantity(flood control)problems by the implementation of performance standards for stormwater management through Best Management Practices (BMP's). BMP's reduce or prevent pollutants from reaching water bodies and control the quantity of runoff from a site. Therefore, and after a lengthy and detailed drainage review, it is the majority opinion of the NACC that all nine(9) standards of the Stormwater Management Policy have been satisfactorily complied with and the applicant has demonstrated that there will be no adverse impacts to applicable wetland resource areas. In addition, the applicant has also complied with the performance standards outlined in Section VI(C) of the North Andover Wetland ByLaw and Regulations. CAWinword\00C\242-856.doc 3 NACC 6/5/97 DEP FILE # 242 - 856 Therefore, the North Andover Conservation Commission (hereafter the "NACC") hereby finds that the following conditions are necessary, in accordance with the Performance Standards set forth in the State Regulations, the local ByLaw and Regulations, to protect those interests noted above. The NACC orders that all work shall be performed in accordance with said conditions and with the Notice of Intent referenced above. To the extent that the following conditions modify or differ from the plans, specifications or other proposals submitted with the Notice of Intent, the conditions shall control. GENERAL CONDITIONS 1. Failure to comply with all conditions stated herein, and with all related statutes and other regulatory measures, shall be deemed cause to revoke or modify this Order. 2. This Order does not grant any property rights or any exclusive privileges;it does not authorize any injury to private property or invasion of property rights. 3. This Order does not relieve the permittee or any other person of the necessity of complying with all other applicable federal, state or local statutes, ordinances, by-laws or regulations. 4. The work authorized hereunder shall be completed within three years from the date of this order. 5. This Order may be extended by the issuing authority for one or more periods of up to one year each upon application to the issuing authority at least thirty days (30) prior to the expiration date of the Order (Refer to Section VIII (p.15) of the North Andover Wetland Regulations). 6. Where the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) is requested to make a determination and to issue a Superseding Order, the Conservation Commission shall be a party to all agency proceedings and hearings before the Department. 7. The proposed work includes: Construction of a 16,90 square foot retail project with associated site access,parking and stormwater management structures within the Buffer Zone of a Bordering Vegetated Wetland(BVW). C:\Winword\00C\242-856.doc 4 NACC 6/5/97 DEP FILE #242- 856 8. The work shall conform to the following (except as noted in the remainder of this document where revisions may be required): Notice of Intent filed by: Scott Companies DATED 2/7/97 Plans prepared by: MHF Design Consultants,Inc. Entitled"Title Sheet-Sheet 1" DATED 10/7/96 Entitled"Existing Conditions Plan-Sheet 2" DATED REV 4/1/97 Entitled"Existing Conditions Plan-Sheet 3" DATED REV 12118/96 Entitled"Plan Of Land-Sheet 4" DATED 11/4/96 and certified on 3/17/97 Entitled"Site Development Plan-Sheet 5" DATED REV 5/4/97 Entitled"Grading,Drainage&Erosion Control Plan-Sheet 6" DATED 5/4/97 Entitled"Grading,Drainage &Erosion Control Plan-Sheet 7" DATED 12/18/96 Entitled"Utilities Plan-Sheet 8" DATED 5/4/97 Entitled"Landscape Plan-Sheet 9" DATED 4/1/97 Entitled"Site Details-Sheet 10" DATED REV 5/14/97 Entitled"Landscape Details-Sheet 11" DATED 10/7/96 Entitled"Drainage and Erosion Control Details-Sheet 12" DATED REV 4/07 Entitled"Sewer/Water Details-Sheet 13" DATED 10/7/96 Entitled"Sewage Pump Station Details-Sheet 14" DATED REV 5/15/97 Entitled"Stormwater Detention System Details-Sheet 15" DATED REV 5/14/97 CAWinword\00C\242-856.doc 5 NACC 6/5/97 DEP FILE #242- 856 Report(s) prepared by: MHF Design Consultants,Inc. Entitled"Stormwater Mgmt Report for Old Town Retail" DATED REV 5/14/97 Entitled"Operations and Maintenance Plan"' NOT DATED 9. The following wetland resource areas are affected by the proposed work: Buffer Zone to Bordering Vegetated Wetland (BVW). These resource areas are significant to the interests of the Act and Town ByLaw as noted above. These resource areas are also significant to the recreational and wildlife interests of the ByLaw. The applicant has not attempted to overcome the presumption of significance of these resource areas to the identified interests. 10. The NACC agrees with the applicant's delineation of the wetland resource areas on the site as shown on the plans referenced above. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Compliance, the applicant will submit a plan showing the site's wetland delineation at a scale identical to the Town wetland map for this location. 11. IMPORTANT: Issuance of these Conditions does not in any way imply or certify that the site or downstream areas will not be subject to flooding or storm damage. 12. IMPORTANT: The conditions of this decision shall apply to, and be binding upon, the applicant, owner, its employees and all successors and assigns in interest or control. 13. The NACC finds that the intensive use of the upland areas and buffer zone proposed on this site will cause further alteration of the wetland resource areas. In order to prevent any alteration of wetland resource areas a twenty five foot(25') No-Disturbance Zone and a fifty foot(501 No-Construction Zone shall be established from the edge of the adjacent wetland resource area. The Conservation Administrator and/or other agents of the NACC do not have the authority to waive these setbacks as established under the local bylaw. No disturbance of existing grade, soils or vegetation is permitted in the No-Disturbance zone. (See Appendix 5 of the local Regulations). 14. All catch basins shall contain oil/gasoline traps, and it shall be a continuing condition of this order, even after a Certificate of Compliance is issued, that the oil/gasoline traps in the catch basins be maintained. All catch basins shall be free of all accumulated silt and debris before a Compliance is issued and the owner or his/her agent shall so specify in the request for Compliance. ' Attached hereto as an appendix and made a part hereof. C:\Winword\OOC\242-856.doc 6 NACC 6/5/97 DEP FILE # 242 - 856 15. The sewer lines on the site shall be tested for water tightness in accordance with North Andover DPW standards. PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION 16. No work shall be undertaken until all administrative appeal periods from this Order have elapsed or, if such an appeal has been filed, until all proceedings before the Department or Court have been completed. 17. This Order shall be recorded by the applicant at the Registry of Deeds immediately after the expiration of all appeal periods. No work shall be undertaken until the Final Order has been recorded in the Registry of Deeds or the Land Court for the district in which the land is located, within the chain of title of the affected property. In the case of recorded land, the Final Order shall also be noted in the Registry's Grantor Index under the name of the owner of the land upon which the proposed work is to be done. In the case of registered land, the Final Order shall also be noted on the Land Court Certificate of Title of the owner of the land upon which the proposed work is to be done. The recording information shall be submitted to the North Andover Conservation Commission on the form at the end of this Order prior to commencement of the work. 18. A sign shall be displayed at the site not less than two square feet or more than three square feet in size bearing the words "Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection,File Number 242-856." 19. Any changes in the submitted plans caused by the applicant, another Board's decision or resulting from this Order of Conditions must be submitted to the NACC for approval prior to implementation. If the NACC finds said changes to be significant, the NACC will call for another public hearing (at the expense of the applicant).Within 21 days of the close of said public hearing the NACC will issue an amended or new Order of Conditions. Any errors found in the plans or information submitted by the applicant shall;be considered as changes. The proposed project may be still under review by other local or state boards or agencies. This may result in changes to the project plans or wetland impacts. If any such changes occur a revised plan and an explanation of the revisions shall be submitted to the NACC for review and approval prior to the start of construction. No work shall begin on a project until written approval has been granted by the NACC. 20. The applicant shall contact the Conservation Office prior to site preparation or construction and shall arrange an on-site conference with an NACC representative,the contractor and the applicant to ensure that all of C:\Winword\00C\242-856.doc 7 NACC 6/5/97 DEP FILE # 242- 856 the Conditions of this Order are understood. This Order also shall be made a part of the contractor's written contract. The applicant or contractor shall notify the NACC in writing of the identity of the on-site construction supervisor hired to coordinate construction and to ensure compliance with this Order. 21. The applicant shall submit a construction schedule/sequence to the NACC detailing the proposed sequence of work on site to complete this project. 22. Wetland flagging shall be checked prior to start of construction and shall be re-established where missing so that erosion control measures can be properly placed and wetland impacts can be monitored. 23. A row of staked hay bales backed by trenched siltation fence shall be placed between all construction areas and wetlands. The erosion control barrier will be properly installed and placed as shown on the plans approved and referenced herein and shall be inspected and approved by the NACC prior to the start of construction and shall remain intact until all disturbed areas have been permanently stabilized to prevent erosion. All erosion prevention and sedimentation protection measures found necessary during construction shall be implemented at the direction of the NACC. 24. The applicant shall have on hand at the start of any soil disturbance, removal or stockpiling, a minimum of thirty (30) hay bales and sufficient stakes for staking these bales (or an equivalent amount of silt fence). Said bales shall be used only for the control of emergency erosion problems, and shall not be used for the normal control of erosion. 25. A check payable to the Town of North Andover shall be provided in the amount of$15,000 which shall be in all respects satisfactory to Town Counsel, Town Treasurer, and the NACC, and shall be posted with the North Andover Town Treasure before commencement of work. Said deposit of money shall be conditioned on the completion of all conditions hereof, shall be signed by a party or parties satisfactory to the NACC, and Town Counsel and shall be released after completion of the project, provided that provision, satisfactory to the NACC, has been made for performance of any conditions which are of continuing nature. The applicant may propose a monetary release schedule keyed to completion of specific portions of the project for the NACC's review and approval. This condition is issued under the authority of the local ByLaw{Section X(A)(p.17). C:\Winword\OOC\242-856.doc 8 NACC 6/5/97 DEP FILE #242 - 856 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT 26. All construction and post-construction stormwater management shall be conducted in accordance with supporting documents submitted with the Notice of Intent, the Department of Environmental Protection Stormwater Management Policy and as approved by the NACC in this Order of Conditions. 27. All stormwater best management practices shall be maintained as specified in the Operation and Maintenance Plan submitted with the Notice of Intent and incorporated in the Order of Conditions. Evidence of maintenance of the stormwater management system shall be provided to the NACC in a manner and form deemed acceptable by the Conservation Administrator on an annual basis. 28. There shall be no increase in the post development discharges from the storm drainage system or any other changes in post development conditions that alter the post development watershed boundaries as currently depicted in the Notice of Intent and approved by this Order of Conditions, unless specifically approved in writing by the NACC. 29. Water quality in down gradient BVW's shall not differ significantly following completion of the project from the pre-development conditions. There shall be no sedimentation into wetlands or water bodies from discharge pipes or surface runoff leaving the site. 30. The applicants, owners, and their successors and assignees, shall maintain all culverts, collections basins, traps, outlet structures, subsurface storage areas, and other elements of the drainage system, in order to avoid blockages and siltation which might cause failure of the system and/or detrimental impacts to on-site or off-site resource areas, and shall maintain the integrity of vegetative cover on the site. DURING CONSTRUCTION 31. IMPORTANT: Immediately upon completion of the building foundation, and prior to further construction activities associated with the site, the applicant shall complete a plan prepared by a Registered Professional Land Surveyor (R.P.L.S.) which accurately depicts the foundation location and it's proximity to wetland resource areas as approved under this Order of Conditions. Said plan shall be submitted to the Conservation Administrator for approval. C:\Winword\00C\242-856.doc 9 NACC 6/5/97 DEP FILE # 242 - 856 32. Upon beginning work, the applicant shall submit written progress reports every month detailing what work has been done in or near resource areas, and what work is anticipated to be done over the next period. This will update the construction sequence. . 33. Any fill used in connection with this project shall be clean fill, containing no trash, refuse rubbish or debris, including but not limited to lumber, bricks, plaster, wire,lath paper, cardboard, pipe, tires, ashes, refrigerators, motor vehicles or parts on any of the foregoing. 34. No exposed area shall remain unfinished for more than thirty (30) days, unless approved by the NACC. 35. Slopes of steeper grade than 2:1 (horizontal: vertical) in the Buffer Zone shall be rip-rapped to provide permanent stabilization. 36. There shall be no stockpiling of soil or other materials within twenty-five (25) feet of any resource area. 37. Washings from concrete trucks, or surplus concrete, shall not be directed to, any drainage system, or wetland resource area. 38. All waste generated by, or associated with, the construction activity shall be contained within the construction area, and away from any wetland resource area. There shall be no burying of spent construction materials or disposal of waste on the site by any other means. The applicant shall maintain dumpsters (or other suitable means) at the site for the storage and removal of such spent construction materials off-site. 39. Accepted engineering and construction standards and procedures shall be followed In the completion of the project. 40. IMPORTANT: Members of the NACC or its agent shall have the right to enter upon and inspect the premises to evaluate and/or effect compliance with this Order of Conditions. The NACC reserves the right to require, following field inspection, additional information or resource protection measures. 41. During and after work on this project, there shall be no discharge or spillage of fuel, or other pollutants into any wetland resource area. If there is a spill, discharge or discovery of any pollutant during any phase of construction the NACC shall be notified by the applicant within one (1) business day. No construction vehicles are to be stored within 100 feet of wetland resource CAWinword\00C\242-856.doc 10 NACC 6/5/97 DEP FILE #242 - 856 areas, and no vehicle refueling, equipment lubrication, or maintenance is to be done within 100 feet of a resource area. AFTER CONSTRUCTION 42. No underground storage of fuel oils shall be allowed on any lot within one- hundred (100) feet of any wetland resource area. This condition shall survive this Order of Conditions, and shall run with the title of the property. This condition is issued under the authority of the Town's Wetland protection Bylaw. 43. Fertilizers utilized for landscaping and lawn care shall be organic and low- nitrogen content, and shall be used in moderation. Pesticides and herbicides shall not be used within 100 feet of a wetland resource area. This condition is issued under the authority of the Town's Wetland Protection ByLaw. 44. Upon completion of construction and grading, all disturbed areas located outside resource areas shall be stabilized permanently against:erosion. This shall be done either:by loaming and seeding according to SCS standards. If the latter course is chosen, stabilization will be considered complete once vegetative cover has been achieved. 45. Upon completion of the project, the applicant shall submit a letter to the NACC from a Registered Professional Civil Engineer certifying compliance with this Order of Conditions and the approved plans referenced herein (or approved revisions). Certification includes, but is not limited to, verification that the limit of work coincides with the approved "NO- DISTURBANCE/NO-BUILD" zones. A stamped "As-Built"topographic plan of all areas within the jurisdiction of the Wetlands Protection Act and ByLaw shall be submitted when a Certificate of Compliance is requested. This plan will include: a) "As-Built' elevations of all drainage structures constructed within 100 feet of any wetland resource area; b) "As-Built' elevations and grades of all filled or altered wetland resource areas; c) Distances from structures to wetland resource areas. Structures include (but are not limited to) septic systems, stone walls, pools, retaining walls, and approved decks; d) A line showing the limit of work. "Work" includes any disturbance of soils or vegetation; CAWinword\00C\242-856.doc 11 NACC 6/5/97 DEP FILE #242 - 856 e) Location of all subsurface utilities entering the property; f) Location of existing erosion controls. 46. Operation& Maintenance Plan-In order to assure long term compliance with DEP's Stormwater Management Policy and to assess the functionality of the stormwater system, the system itself will not be eligible for a Certificate of Compliance until five (5) calendar years from the date it goes "on line". Furthermore, the following information must be submitted to the NACC when requesting a Certificate of Compliance: a) The name and address of the current landowner; b) The name and address of the individual/trustor corporation to whom the compliance is to be granted; c) The street address and assessor's map/parcel number for the project; d) The DEP file number; e) A statement certifying compliance with the Order of Conditions and approved plans. 47. The following special conditions shall survive the issuance of a Certificate of Compliance (COC) for this project: • 25' No-Disturbance Zone and a 50' No-Construction Zone shall be established from the edge of adjacent wetland resource areas except in those locations approved under DEP # 242-856. Future work within 100' of existing wetland resource areas will require a separate filing with the NACC (refer to Section XI (page 18) of the Regulations for performance standards within these zones) The Conservation Administrator and/or other agents of the NACC do not have the authority to waive these setbacks as established under the local ByLaw; • Maintenance of catch basins and the approved stormwater mgmt system in accordance with the approved O&M Plan attached and referenced herein and Condition #30; • Discharge or spillage of pollutants; CAWinword\00C\242-856.doc 12 NACC 6/5/97 DEP FILE # 242 - 856 • Condition #27: Evidence of maintenance of the stormwater management system shall be provided to the NACC in a manner and form deemed acceptable by the Conservation Administrator on an annual basis. • Prohibition of storage of fuels underground; • Limitations on the use of fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides. CAWinword\OOC\242-856.doc 13 NACC 6/5/97 _OPERATIONALVD MAINTENANCE SCHEDULE FOR PROPOSED RETAIL FACILITY Maintenance Item Proposed Schedule 1. Sweeping of parking lots Monthly(March-June) Monthly(September-November) 2. On site litter pickup Weekly 3. Catch basin cleaning Every 2 months or after a major storm event.* 4. Sediment collection systems inspection Monthly or after a major storm event Sediment collection systemscleaning Four times a:year 5. Underground detention system inspection Monthly or after a major stone event Underground detention system cleaning As needed depending on results of inspections Underground roof infiltrator systems Inspect monitoring wells after a major storm event 6. Water quality swale inspection Semi-annually Inspection of outlet protection Yearly or after a major storm event apron and level spreader * A major storm event is definded for purposes of this report as a 25 year storm or greater. OPERA TION AND MAINTENANCE PROCEDURES FOR OLDS VILLAGE SHOPPING CENTER 200 CHICKERING ROAD NORTHANDOVER, MASSACHUSETTS An effective Site Operation and Maintenance Plan is essential for the proper operation of the stormwater management systems that are designed to provide for water quality and quantity measures. The stormwater management system owner will be the same as the current owner of the property and will be responsible for implementation of the operation and maintenance plan for the site. As with any development for this type of use, a maintenance company is employed to deal with the routine operation for the facility including maintenance of the building,;trash disposal, snow removal and landscaping. Some of these items are routinely done on a weekly, monthly or seasonal basis. The maintenance company employed for the site will be responsible for implementing the operation and maintenance procedures outlined l herein for the stormwater management systems. Routine and non-routine maintenance tasks which are part of these procedures are defined and listed for the Operation and Maintenance Plan and the schedule for the proposed maintenance plan is outlined in this report. It is also suggested that the Operation and Maintenance Procedures for this site be made part of the conditions of approval for the Order of Conditions that may be issued for this project and a copy be put on file with the Town of North Andover. In addition, maintenance and inspection reports prepared for the owner as part of this project can also be submitted to the Town of North Andover, if required. I. PARKING LOT SHEEPIN Sweeping of the parking lots shall be done early in the spring season once the snow has melted. This early sweeping will remove much of the sand and other debris that is often left as a result of snow plowing. Snow removal from the site or placement of snow outside of paved areas will also prevent sand and debris accumulation in the paved areas and reduce the amount of materials that could potentially enter the storm drainage system. Accumulated sediment in non-paved areas from snow storage areas shall be removed as well. In addition, sweeping of the parking areas shall be done in the fall after the majority of the leaf drop occurs but prior to the fiist snowfall. H LITTER CU NTRDL Litter control involves removing litter such as leaves, lawn clippings, pet wastes, and trash from parking lots and landscape areas before materials are transported into the on-site drainage systems. There are several ways to control litter. An effective program of trash and garbage collection will reduce the amount of material entering surface waters. Lawn clippings and leaves will be removed from the site as part of the landscaping maintenance program. Weekly maintenance of the landscape areas of the site will commence in the early spring months and continue through the summer and taper off to twice a month' through the fall months into early winter. Recycling programs will be encouraged by the individual tenants and a recycling container will be provided in the centralized trash enclosure area of the site. In addition,the trash receptacle for the entire site has been located in one area to minimize the amount of trash receptacles onsite,thereby reducing the potential for litter. Trash and recylables removal will be on an as-needed basis, depending on the amount of materials generated by the tenants of the site. Litter collection in the parking areas will be done weekly. In addition to litter control,the use of fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides shall be limited on the site. Proper pesticide and fertilizer application shall be encouraged, including proper timing and application reduction. Buffer areas between the landscape areas and the downstream wetland areas are provided. The specific limits of the fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides to be used on-site will be provided by the landscape maintenance company. ILL CATCH BASIN CLEANING The removal of sediments and associated pollutants and trash occurs only when inlets or sumps are cleaned out, therefore regular maintenance of the catch basin sumps is essential to the longevity of the stormwater drainage system. The more frequent the cleaning,the less likely sediments and trash will be resuspended and discharged downstream to the drainage system. Frequent cleaning also provides more volume for future storms and enhances overall performance. In areas of potentially high sediment accumulation such as parking lots, inlets should be inspected frequently, and cleaned as necessary, after every major storm event. Minimum requirements for cleaning of inlets and sumps for catch basins as recommended under the Stormwater Management policy are four times a year. However, for this site,the recommended inspection and cleaning schedule will be every two months or as needed based upon inspection. IV. SEDIMENT COLLECTIONSYSTEMS Sediment collection systems have been provided at the downstream end of each catch basin inlet in the parking lot. These systems are designed to provide for sediment collection of stormwater prior to entering the underground detention systems. Removal of sediment and associated pollutants occurs when sediment collection systems are cleaned, therefore regular maintenance is required. The more frequent the removal of accumulated sediments, the less likely sediments will be resuspended and adversely affect the downstream drainage systems or downstream receiving waters. Inspection ports are provided at each end of the sediment collection system for visual checks of the system. At a minimum the sediment collection systems shall be cleaned four times a year and inspected monthly. Monthly inspection reports can be furnished to the Town of North Andover upon request. V UNDERGROUND DETENTION SYSTEMS There are five underground detention systems proposed for the site. Pretreatment through the use of deepsump hooded catch basins and sediment collection systems and the proper maintenance of these pretreatment systems as described above will eliminate sediment and litter accumulation within the proposed underground detention systems. Inspection and maintenance requirements are outlined by the manufacturer and should be used as the minimum requirements for this site. It is essential to any subsurface system to detail and perform proper inspection and maintenance program. The inspection and maintenance of these systems will be performed by the site maintenance company that is employed by the owner of the property. The manufacturer specified for these proposed systems is "Infiltrator Systems Inc.", 123 Elm Street, Suite 12, Old Saybrook, Connecticut 06475, (203) 388-6639. Each infiltrator chamber is provide with a"knockout"in the center of the unit. This may be used to provide an inspection port at grade level. A 6"PVC pipe is placed through the access port as a riser to grade and then capped with a cast iron cover in the paved areas as needed. Inspections shall be conducted following major storm events(25 year storm or greater) so that potential sediment levels and draw down times can be determined. Sediment removal will be accommodated through the use of the deepsump and sediment collection systems. Should the pretreatment structures be not completely effective in silt removal and sediment enters the chamber system,then the Infiltrator chamber may be maintained through the access ports,which are supplied on the proposed systems. For removal of sediment from the underground systems,the outlet pipe from the chamber system can be plugged at the downstream manhole and water injected into the system which will put the fine sediments into suspension. The water and suspended sediment can then be pumped out and removed from the site. This method can also be used for sediment removal in the collection systems. Various types of equipment are available commercially for clean out of drainage systems. The most commonly used equipment and techniques used for cleaning systems are vacuum pump and water jet spray. Both systems are generally mounted on a self contained vehicle and can effectively remove stones, leaves and sediment deposits from sumps and chambers. The underground detention r ` t systems shall be inspected monthly or after a heavy rainfall and cleaned as needed, depending on the amount of sediment accumulation in the systems. The underground systems to be used for roof drainage infiltration shall have monitoring wells installed in the system with an at grade access cap. These monitoring wells shall be inspected after a major storm event(25 year storm or greater) and then 72 hours thereafter to ensure the proper operation of these systems. In addition to the monitoring wells, several access ports are located within the underground systems to check various areas of the system. VI WATER QUALITY3WA1 E Water quality swales should be inspected at least semi-annually, and maintenance and repairs made as necessary. Additional inspections should be made during the first few months after construction to make sure that the vegetation has been adequately established. Repairs and reseeding should be done as required. Water quality swales should be mowed once a year and grass clippings be removed.-Grass must not be cut shorter than 4 inches and excessive mowing is discouraged. Sediment and debris removal should be done manually, at least once a year. The seed mix for the water quality swale is a specified below and is also shown on the design plans. WATER QUALITY SWALE PLANTVVG SPECIFICATION Tall fescue 20 lbs/acre or 0.45 lbs/10,000 sf Creeping red fescue 20 lbs/acre or 0.45 lbs/10,000 sf Birdsfoot trefoil 8 lbs/acre or 0.20 lbs/10,000 sf Lime and fertilizer should be applied prior to or at time of seeding and incorporated into the soil. The following rates are recommended: Agricultural limestone 2 tons/acre or 100 lbs/1,000 sf Nitrogen(1) 50 lbs/acre or 1.1 lbs/10,000 sf Phosphate (P205) 100 lbs/acre or 2.2 lbs/10,000 sf Potash (K20) 100 lbs/acre or 2.2 lbs/10,000 sf (This is equivalent to 500 lbs/acre of 10-20-20 fertilizer or 1,000 lbs/acre of 5-10-10). Attached to this report is a revised Operation and Maintenance Schedule which has been included as part of the Stormwater Management Form under the Stormwater Management Policy. 242-856 1` slued , 77 Ccnseriat,ar: :r,!;sslCn j; o This Crder must 'ae signed by a majcnty of the'Conserlation Ccmmissicn. On thin 4th day of June 1 97 before me personally ..GGe'red Joseph W. Lynch, JR. to me'xnawn to be the person described in and who executed the fare'going instrument and acknowledged that he-,she executed the same as his/her free act and deed. December 11, 2003 'Val^ry pubilc Nly Commission expires The accticant. na owner. any psrscn aggneved by this Orcer. any awner at Land abutting Nie land upcn which the arcocsea-ark is to de done.cr any ten residents at tate qty or town in wnich such land is located.are hereby notified et,Hair rgrt to request trio Cecanment of cnvvcnmental prctecucin to issue a Superseding Order,providing the recuest is made by c,ridied matt or hand delivery to ine t0ecarment. with tne apprecnate tiling tee and Fee Transmtaal Farm as prcvided in 310 cmp lo.c3(-tj,within ten days from ine date of issuanca of lnts Cetermination.A copy at the request snail at the same time n sent by certified mail or nand asi,uerf to the Conservation Commission and the dCGtCanC. I5 you wish to appeal this decision under the Town Bylaw, a complaint must be riled in Superior Caurt. A RECEIPT FROM THE REGISTRY OF DEEDS i2UST BE SUBMITTED TO THIS OFFICE SHOWING THAT THIS ORDER OF CONDITIONS HAS BEEN RECORDED AT THE -NORTH ESSEX REGISTRY OF DEEDS. North Andover Con err i prior to commencement at-arx Oetach an Batted line and submit to the �RdoveL i4.,Q L845.„ ............................... ..... 1.6 Main_Street, `To ......_. ........ . ' .. 'SSc:�g.^utPCrrty North Andover ConservationCommission `o ?lease ce advised that the Craer al Conditions for the protect a 21-2-856' ,as been retarded at me p4als~v at Deeds Essex North Distriat ;nc _•ie vum^2r nas teen netea:n ine chain ct eine at the arfecteq areeerry�n acCcrcan c5 w in Genesi Cafidttian 3 on t 4 it ,ac-raec Lana. inu e trtsament numnoer whim,aenatia ""'s` -s3c-en'3 It regtste(ec land. ine cecurnent number wntcn,denahes Iht9 '710sact:on.5 3 Town of North Andover f *_� Flu .t r ,•.r +, o CLEF, fice of the Zoning Board of Appeals F Cunity Development and Services Division 27 Charles Street P 2. S North Andover,Massachusetts 01845 D. Robert NicettaTelephone(978)688-9541 . Fax(978)688-9542 Building Commissioner Minor Modification to Notice of Recision Year 2001 Property at 200 Chickering Road NAME: Terra Pr rhes,LLC DATE: December 10,2002 ADDRESS: 231 Sutton Street,Ste. 1A PETITION: 010-2001 North Andover,MA 01845 BACKGROUND On August 23,2002,Terra Properties,LLC(the"Applicant")submitted a status of the general and specific conditions put forth in the Notice of Decision issuing a Comprehensive Permit under MGL Chapter40B Section 20-22(the"Permit")issued by the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals(the"ZBA")on October 24,2001. On August 29, 2002,the Applicant met with the ZBA to review any outstanding issues.The Applicant submitted a set of final site plans to the ZBA for their review. These plans were dated as follows: Plan titled: Site Plan,Kittredge Crossing North Andover,MA Sheet 1 and Sheets 2-9 Prepared for: Terra Properties,LLC 231 Sutton Street,North Andover,MA 01845 Prepared by: Merrimack Engineering Services,Inc. 66 Park Street,Andover,MA 01810 Date: November 01,2001 (Sheets 1-9) Revised August 28,2002(Sheet 1); July 15,2002(Sheets 2-9) At the August 29,2002 public hearing,the ZBA presented the Applicant with a letter dated August 19,2002 from Vanasse Hangen,Brustlin,Inc. (VHB)to the Building Commissioner proposing a security amount of$1,263,224. The ZBA requested that the Applicant post a security in the amount of$1,300,000.The Applicant agreed to the security amount requested by the ZBA On August 29,2002,the ZBA requested that the Applicant submit for their review details of the settlement agreement with Heritage Green,Draft of Condominium Documents,and a clarification of the discrepancy in dates of the final landscaping plan designated in the Permit(second page of cover letter,pgs. 8 and 15 of the Permit). Additionally on August 29,2002 the ZBA authorized Chairman William Sullivan to,gather additional information and finalize a minor modification of the Permit for the ZBA to approve at a future.date. On September 5,2002,the Applicant submitted a draft version of the settlement agreement with Heritage Green and the July 10,2001 landscaping plan.Additionally,the Applicant submitted copies of the landscaping plans prepared for the North Andover Conservation Commission during the NOI process. Also,the Applicant submitted a landscaping buffer plan along the Heritage Green property line.The Applicant stated that they would provide the ZBA with a single landscaping plan that would incorporate all three of these plans into one comprehensive landscaping plan.That plan was submitted to the ZBA at the October 22,2002 public meeting BOARD OF APPEALS 688-9541 BUILDING 688-9545 CQ13SUVATION 688-9534 BEAI.TH 688-9540 P2,ANNII3CJ 688-9535 On September 17,2002,the ZBA granted the Applicant a thirty day extension to post a surety bond.The ZBA authorized the Building Commissioner to allow the Applicant to start site preparation prior to the posting of the b allowed to post a letter of credit in lieu of a ted that the e bond. On September 20 2002,the Applicant requested y p p pp q surety bond due to the difficulty in obtaining a surety bond of the value requested.The Applicant's request was submitted to Town Counsel for his review and approval. On October 15,2002,the ZBA gave the Applicant another extension to post the bond.This extension was granted since the surety bond vs.letter of credit issue had not been resolved.For safety reasons,the Building Commissioner felt it prudent for the Applicant to continue site preparation. At the October 22,2002 public meeting the ZBA discussed the surety bond/letter of credit issue.Town Counsel spoke at the meeting and explained the Performance Guaranty and Letter of Credit Agreement proposed by the Applicant in lieu of a Surety Bond. The Performance Guaranty and Letter of Credit Agreement will accompany a Letter of Credit issued by Banknorth which names the Town of North Andover as the beneficiary.There were a few concerns raised by the ZBA. Town Counsel and Applicant's counsel resolved all outstanding issues.The ZBA asked the Applicant to send a copy of the Letter of Credit along with the Performance Guaranty and Letter of Credit Agreement to each member of the ZBA via certified mail prior to the November 12,2002 meeting.At the November 12,2002 meeting,the ZBA voted to substitute the Performance Guaranty and Letter of Credit Agreement for the surety bond. On October 25,2002 the Permit,dated October 24,2001,was recorded at the Essex County Registry of Deeds (Book: 7200 Page:126). On December 10, 2002,the ZBA voted to approve this minor modification and authorize the Chairman to sign on behalf of the ZBA. Page 2 I MODIFICATIONS At a public meeting held on December 10,2002,the ZBA voted to make certain minor modifications to the Permit. The ZBA determines this to be a minor,non-substantive modification and updating of the Permit as it corrects clerical errors or omissions and provides a status of the compliance with certain conditions of the Permit;does not grant relief different from that which was originally sought;does not change the result of the Permit;and no one relying on the Permit will be prejudiced by this modification. Upon review of the Permit,it has been determined that there was a typographical error intheplan date for the landscaping plan.The error occurs on both the second page and page 8 of the Permit.The reference to the landscaping plan should have been as follows: b. Plan titled: Preliminary Landscaping Plan,Kittredge Crossing North Andover,MA 01845 Prepared for: Terra Properties,LLC Prepared by: GSD Associates-Architects,Inc. Date: July 10,2001 The plans that were originally submitted to the ZBA and included in the Permit were preliminary.The plans have since been developed more completely.Revised plans,which are substantially the same as the preliminary plans,are as follows: a. Plan titled: Site Plan,Kittredge Crossing North Andover,MA Sheets 1-9 Prepared for: Terra Properties,LLC 231 Sutton Street,North Andover,MA 01845 Prepared by: Merrimack Engineering Services,Inc. 66 Park Street,Andover,MA 01810 Date: November 1,2001 (Sheets 1-9) Revised: October 15,2002(Sheets 1-9) b. Plan titled: Landscape Plan,Kittredge Crossing North Andover,MA 01845 Prepared for: Terra Properties,LLC Prepared by: Huntress Associates,Inc. Date: October 17,2002 C. Plan titled: Building Elevations,Kittredge Crossing North Andover,MA 01845 Prepared by: Opechee Construction Corporation Date: July 17, 2002 Additionally,the Applicant has secured committed funding with Banknorth,NA a participant in the Federal Home Loan Bank of Boston's New England Fund.A regulatory agreement,required under Chapter 40B,was executed and recorded at the Registry of Deeds on October 25,2002(Book:7200 Page: 148). The following are minor modifications to the General and Specific Conditions of the Permit: General Condition 1: Since the final site lans previously submitted to the ZBA dated November 1,2001,Revised August 28,2002(Sheet P 1 of 9)and July 15,2002(Sheets 2-9 of 9)were not in the format required by the Registry of Deeds,the ZBA provided the Applicant with 60 days to revise the plans into recordable format.The ZBA also authorized the Page 3 Applicant to begin construction upon issuance of a Building Permit,prior to the recording of the mylars. The Applicant has completed the revision of these plans and has provided the ZBA with mylars for signature at the October 22, 2002 public meeting.The ZBA signed the mylars at the October 22,2002 public meeting.The mylars will be recorded along with this minor modification to the Permit. a. Plan titled: Site Plan,Kittredge Crossing North Andover,MA Sheet 1 and Sheets 2-9 Prepared for: Terra Properties,LLC 231 Sutton Street,North Andover,MA 01845 Prepared by: Merrimack Engineering Services,Inc. 66 Park Street,Andover,MA 01810 Date: November 1,2001 (Sheets 1-9) Revised:October 15,2002(Sheets 1-9) b. Plan titled: Landscape Plan,Kittredge Crossing North Andover,MA 01845 Prepared for: Terra Properties,LLC Prepared by: Huntress Associates,Inc. Date: October 17,2002 C. Plan titled: Building Elevations,Kittredge Crossing North Andover,MA 01845 Prepared by: Opechee Construction Corporation Date: July 17,2002 General Condition 4: The following is added to General Condition 4.The Applicant and the Community Development Department will devise a lottery process acceptable to the ZBA within twelve months(12)of this minor modification. General Condition 10: The ZBA grants the Building Commissioner the authority to review and approve the final construction drawings and site plans.The review of plans and drawings for each building will occur prior to issuance of a building permit for that building.The issuance of a building permit will be deemed approval of the plans for such building. If the Building Commissioner deems these changes to be a"substantial deviation"from the plans of record,he will notify the ZBA.Review and approval of this"substantial deviation"by the ZBA will be required. General Condition 15: Any changes to the Project Plan will be submitted to the Building Commissioner for review.If the Building Commissioner deems these changes to be a"substantial deviation"from the plans of record,it will require the ZBA will be required. General Condition 16: The Regulatory Agreement was referred to as Exhibit H,however,should have been referred to as Exhibit G. General Condition 19: The Applicant submitted a construction mitigation plan to the ZBA on August 5,2002,to which the ZBA had no comment.The ZBA grants the Building Commissioner the authority to approve the construction mitigation plan.The issuance of a building permit will be deemed approval of the construction mitigation plan. Page 4 Special Condition 2: The Applicant has provided the ZBA with a draft copy of the Condominium Documents.The final Condominium Documents will be recorded at the Registry of Deeds prior to the conveyance of the first unit.The Applicant will provide the ZBA with a copy of the recorded Condominium Documents. Special Condition 20: The Applicant worked with the North Andover Division of Public Works(the DPW)to loop the water lines, however, looping was not possible. Special Condition 21: In a letter dated September 13,2002 from Tim Willet of the DPW to William Sullivan of the ZBA,the DPW states that VHB will review the drainage calculations.The Applicant submitted the drainage calculations and their subsequent revisions to the DPW.VHB performed an independent peer review of the drainage calculations.VHB provided the Building Commissioner and the DPW with a satisfactory review and approval of the drainage calculations.VHB's final approval dated September 26,2002 is on file with the ZBA. Special Condition 25: Backflow information will be provided to the DPW for their review and approval at the time of application for a building permit. Special Condition 26: The Applicant has included this information into the October 15,2002 plans as requested by the DPW. Special Condition 27: Drawings and specifications of the sewer pumping station design were submitted to the DPW on November 21, 2001.The Applicant has received a state sewer extension permit from the Massachusetts DEP approving the sewer connection. Page 20"Bonds": The waiver from all Town of North Andover cash bonds remains.On November 12,2002,the ZBA voted to accept the Performance Guaranty and Letter of Credit Agreement in lieu of any other bonding requirement.The Performance Guaranty and Letter of Credit Agreement will accompany a Letter of Credit issued by Banknorth which names the Town of North Andover as the beneficiary.The Performance Guaranty and Letter of Credit Agreement was executed by the ZBA and the Applicant on November 25,2002.The document is on file with the ZBA. APPROVED NORTH ANDOVER ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS WILLIAM J. ULLIVAN CHAIRPERS N Page 5 RE E XN v JOYCE BRAD;3 A , LAW OFFICE OF TOWN CLERK PETER G. S A EEN � NORTH ANDOVERCHESTNUT GREEN ; 565 TURNPIKE STREET,SUITE 81 E+ 3 12 si Pi's 15 PETER G.SHAHEEN* NORTH ANDOVER, MASSACHUSETTS 01845 TELEPHONE 508 689-0800 MEGAN J.TAYLOR FAX `ADMITTED IN MA a NH 794-08989 0 September 3, 1997 HAND DELIVERED Joyce Bradshaw Town Clerk Town of North Andover 120 Main Street North Andover, MA 01845 RE: Rennie vs. Town of North Andover Dear Ms. Bradshaw: Pursuant to Massachusetts Rule of Civil Procedure 4 (d) (4), enclosed herewith please find my clients' complaint. Please file this is the usual manner. I understand an issue has been raised that this complaint is an appeal under MGL.c.40A. Please be advised that is not correct. Our appeal is pursuant to MGL. c.231A and for other common law counts. Thank you for your attention to this matter. ftr ��een E 0 '! JOYCE 8RA0_f8 A W COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS NORTH ANDOVIR SUFFOLK,SS. LAND COURT 12 51 PY MISC.#240275 Dorothy J. Rennie ) and Scott Construction Company,Inc., ) Plaintiffs ) VS. ) Richard Nardella,Alison Lescarbeau, ) John Simon,Alberto Angeles,Richard Rowen, ) &Joseph V.Mahoney as they comprise the ) North Andover Planning Board and the ) Town of North Andover, ) Defendants ) AMENDED COMPLAINT 1. The plaintiff, Dorothy J.Rennie,is the owner of the property located at 200 Chickering Road in the Town of North Andover, Massachusetts, and more particularly described in a deed recorded in book 798 page 826 in the Essex North Registry of Deeds. A copy of the deed is attached as exhibit A. 2. The plaintiff,Scott Construction Company Inc., is a New Hampshire corporation with a principal place of business at 395 Main Street, Salem, NH. Plaintiff Scott Construction Company, Inc., currently has the property at 200 Chickering Road, North Andover, under agreement for sale with plaintiff Dorothy J.Rennie. 3. The defendants,Richard Nardella,Alison Lescarbeau,John Simon,Alberto Angles,Richard Rowen and Joseph Mahoney, at all pertinent times, are the duly appointed Planning Board 1 for the Town of North Andover. (hereinafter"the Planning Board'). 4. The defendant, Town of North Andover(hereinafter"the Town')is a municipal corporation established on April 7, 1855. 5. The Planning Board is appointed by the Town Manager. The Planning Board is charged with authority by the Town to grant permits for site plan approval, so called "special permits", pursuant to section 8.3 of the Town's zoning by-laws. A copy of the said section is attached hereto as exhibit B. 6. The plaintiff, Dorothy Rennie's property,as described,above, lies within the R-4 Residential District and the B-1 Business District as established under the zoning by-laws of the Town, duly adopted in 1972 and as amended, in full force and effect at all times relevant to this action. 7. On or about November 5, 1996, the plaintiffs, Dorothy Rennie and Scott Construction Company,applied to the Planning Board for site plan approval for a 16,000 square foot retail center to be built upon approximately 1.8 acres of plaintiff,Dorothy Rennie's,above-described property lying within the B-1 Business 1 District, (hereinafter"B-1"). This type of use is allowed as of right in"B-1"under the Town's zoning by-laws. A copy of said application is attached here to as exhibit C. 8. The Town's zoning by-laws require that an applicant for site plan approval provide specific 2 information and meet certain criteria in order to obtain site plan approval. Section 8.3 1 of the by law states that the purpose of site plan review is to review plans to protect the health,safety, convenience and general welfare of town inhabitants. Once the applicant meets the criteria set forth in the by-laws, the Town must grant the site plan approval. The plaintiffs, over the course of six months and five public hearings,met with the Planning Board,the Town Planner, various Town consultants and the Town's director of community development in order to satisfy the Town's by-laws.The Plaintiffs hired engineers,attorneys,architects and consultants to work with the Town in order to satisfy the Town's by-laws. 9. On May 20, 1997 the Planning Board closed the public hearing on the plaintiffs application. At that time,Joseph Mahoney,Chairman of the Planning Board, stated that the plaintiffs had met all of the requirements for obtaining site plan approval and that a permit could,therefore, not be denied the plaintiffs. None of the members of the Planning Board disagreed with this evaluation and the Planning Board staff was directed to draft a decision approving the application. 10. On June 3, 1997 the Planning Board voted 3-2 in favor of granting site plan approval. Despite this vote, the Planning Board has refused to issue a site plan approval permit. The Planning Board interprets M.G.L. c.40A Sec. 9 as requiring a super majority, at least four affirmative votes of a five member board, for approval of site plans. A copy of the Planning, Board's decision is attached here to as exhibit D. 11. ar Bo d members Nardella and Lescarbeau voted against approval of the Plaintiffs' site plan.. 3 They offered no substantive reasons for this denial and neither could identify what element of section 8.3 7(a)(iii)of the Town's zoning by-laws the Plaintiffs had failed to meet. Both Nardella and Lescarbeau suggested that traffic at the site was a concern, yet neither could point to anything specific to substantiate this belief. Said Board Members were aware that the Town's own traffic consultant had confirmed that there was, in fact,no traffic problem at this site. Moreover, they were aware that the Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs and Massachusetts Highway Department had found no significant traffic(issues and, in the case of the latter,had issued a curb cut permit onto Route 125, a state highway. When Nardella and Lescarbeau took this action,the Chairman of the Board stated"I thought we had come to a consensus about this". Nardella and Lescarbeau had been advised by both the Chairman of the Board and the Director of Community Development that they had no valid reason to deny the permit. 12. After voting to deny Plaintiffs' application,Nardella asked the plaintiffs if they wished to re- open discussions in an effort to "ameliorate" the dissenting members' concerns about the Plaintiffs' project. He was advised by the Chairman that this had been the purpose of the previous six months' of hearings and meetings. Chairman Mahoney admonished Nardella that he had exceeded his authority by voting to deny the site plan approval. 13. The denial of the Plaintiffs'application for site plan approval by Nardella and Lescarbeau was made with reckless disregard for the law and in bad faith in that when they voted against the application,they did so with full knowledge that the application met all criteria required by the Town for site plan approval. They further knew that they had no discretion to deny approval 4 and no valid reason to vote against it. The Plaintiffs, with authority from the chairman, videotaped the hearings held on May 20th and June 3rd, 1997. Nardella is heard to state on tape on two occasions during the May 20th hearing that he understood that the Plaintiffs had met all of the requirements set forth in section. 8.3 of the zoning by-laws . During the June 3rd hearing,after being informed by the Chairman of the Board that he did not have discretion to vote against the application, Nardella told the Chairman, who is a licensed,practicing attorney in the Commonwealth, " Don't lecture me on the law." COUNT I-DECLARATORY RELIEF C L c 231A-TOWN HAS NO DISCRETIONARY AUTHORITY TO DENY SITE PLAN APPROVAL 14. The plaintiffs reallege the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-13 above as if fully set forth herein. 15. The Town's zoning by-laws require that an applicant for site plan approval provide specific information and meet certain criteria in order to obtain site plan approval. Section 8.3 1 of the by law states that the purpose of site plan review is to review plans to protect the health,safety, convenience and general welfare of town inhabitants. Once the applicant meets the criteria set forth in the by-laws, the Town must grant the site plan approval.` The plaintiffs, over the course of six months and five public hearings,met with the Planning Board,the Town Planner, various Town consultants and the Town's director of community development in order to satisfy the Town's by-laws. The Plaintiffs hired engineers, attorneys, architects and consultants to work with the Town in order to satisfy the Town's by-laws and, in fact, the 5 Plaintiffs have met all of the criteria established for site plan approval. 16. The Town does not dispute that the Plaintiffs have met all criteria for site plan approval. 17. Section 8.3 7(a)(iii)of the zoning by-laws states as follows: "The Planning Board may deny approval of a site plan for the following reasons: a) The plan does not include all the materials or information required in this section,or has failed to adhere to the procedures for Site Plan Review as outlined in this section, and Section 10.3 (Special Permits),or; b) The plan as presented is not in compliance with Town by-laws,or; c) The plan has been drawn incorrectly or in such form that the Planning Board is unable to determine what information is being presented for review,or; d) The applicants have failed to incorporate and adhere to any condition(s)for approval granted by any Town Board,Department or commission, or requirementscalled for by any state or federal agency,which has proper authority upon which to place conditions on a matter before the Planning Board." (See Exhibit E). 18. The Plaintiffs say that the Town has no discretionary authority to deny the site approval because the Plaintiffs have met all applicable criteria. 19. An actual controversy exists between each of the Plaintiffs and the Defendants. 6 WHEREFORE,the Plaintiffs demand a declaratory judgment pursuant to G.L. c. 231A that the Town mast grant the site plan approval because it has no discretionary authority to deny it pursuant to Section 8.3 of the Zoning By-laws. COUNT H-DECLARATORY JUDGMENT SUPER MAJORITY NOT REO FD 20. The plaintiffs reallege the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-19 as if fully set forth herein. 21. The Town improperly denied site plan approval to the Plaintiffs despite the fact that the Planning Board voted 3-2 in favor of site plan approval. 22. A "super majority" is not required to grant site pian approval as the Town alleges. A simple majority is all that is required for approval. 23. G.L.c.40A section 9 applies to special permits for specific uses,not for approval of site plans, as provided in section 8.3 of the zoning by-laws. 24. An actual controversy exists between the Plaintiffs and the Defendants. WHEREFORE,the Plaintiffs pray for a declaration by this Court that: L A "super-majority" is not required for site plan approval;and ii. The majority vote of 3-2 in favor of site plan approval was sufficient, under all applicable laws to approve the site plan and that the site plan was in fact and in law 7 approved by the 3-2 vote in favor. COUNT III-INTFRFF ENC F MM CONMCIUAL RELATION HIP' 25. The Plaintiffs reallege the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-24 as if fully set forth herein. 26. The plaintiff,Dorothy Rennie's property upon which the proposed retail shopping center was to be built is zoned B-1. According to the zoning by-laws, of the Town the type of use proposed by her is allowed as of right. A copy of the allowed uses as established under the Town's zoning bylaw is attached hereto as exhibit E. 27. Under the Town's zoning by-laws,section 8.3 2(1),all buildings or construction which contain more than 2000 square feet of gross floor area are subject to site plan review. 28. Section 8.3b of said zoning by-law provides that all site plan review applications be submitted under G.L.c.40 Sec.9 and be reviewed by the Planning Board as a special permit. The Town interprets this as requiring a"super majority",i.e,.four members of a five member board must vote in favor of the permit. 29. By interpreting the law in this way,the Town has prevented the plaintiffs from using their land for its intended use and has interfered with the contract that exists between them for development of this land. 8 COUNT IV-REGULATORY TAKING 30. The plaintiffs reallege the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-29 as if fully set forth herein. 31. The plaintiffs ,Dorothy Rennie and the Scott Construction Company,Inc.,properly applied for site plan approval as established under section 8.3 of said zoning by-laws,and provided all of the information required for site plan approval. They relied upon these bylaws before making their investment in the development of this property. 32. After numerous hearings that spanned approximately 6 months, the plaintiffs met each and every criteria established by the Town for site plan approval. Section 8.3 7( a) (i) of the zoning by-laws states that the Planning Board shall approve a site plan if it complies with all current by-law requirements of the Town and the site plan has been submitted in accordance with the rules and regulations of the zoning by-laws. 33. Section 8.3 7(a)(iii)of the zoning by-laws states as follows: The Planning Board may deny approval of a site plan for the following reasons: a) The plan does not include all the materials or information required in this section, or has failed to adhere to the procedures for Site Plan Review as outlined in this section,and Section 10.3 (Special Permits),or; 9 b) The plan as presented is not in compliance with Town by-laws,or; c) The plan has been drawn incorrectly or in such form that the Planning Board is unable to determine what information is being presented for review,or; d) The applicants have failed to incorporate and adhere to any condition(s) for approval granted by and Town Board, Department or Commission, or requirements called for by and state or federal agency, which has proper authority upon which to place conditions on a matter before the Planning Board. 34. The Plaintiffs' site plan complies with all current by-law requirements of the Town and has been submitted in accordance with the rules and regulations of the zoning by-laws. Under section 8.3 7( a)( I) the approval must therefore be granted. The denial of the Plaintiffs' application does not comply with sec. 8.3 7(a)(iii), or even state reason for the denial and is therefore invalid. The Planning Board's decision was arbitrary and capricious and exceeded its authority. 35. The Plaintiffs, in reliance upon the zoning by-laws expended substantial sums of money in the form of fees for engineering, legal,architectural,and other professional services in order to comply with the established criteria of the Town's site plan approval. To date, the Plaintiffs' have spent over$120,000 on such fees. 10 36. The Planning Board and the Town have, through improper permit denial, caused a regulatory taking of the Plaintiffs' property without reasonable compensation. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs demand that: 1. The decision of the Planning Board be annulled and declared null and void. 2. The Planning Board and the Town be ordered to issue a special permit to Plaintiffs pursuant to their application for site plan review; 3. The Planning Board and the Town be ordered to immediately issue site plan approval to the Plaintiffs based upon the 3-2 vote in favor of site plan approval by the Planning Board; 4. The Town be ordered to compensate Plaintiffs for its regulatory taking of their property; 5. The Town be ordered to pay the Plaintiffs for damages they incurred by the improper denial of their site plan; 6. The Town be ordered to pay the Plaintiffs for all attorney's fees and costs incurred in this matter. 11 Respectfully Submitted, Dorothy Rennie and Scott Construction Company;Inc. B attorney, ? �� p f er G. Shaheen BBO#453010 Law Office of Peter G. Shaheen 565 Turnpike Street North Andover, MA 01845 508/689-0800 12 RECEiY�I? COtt JOYCE BRADSHAW TOWN CLERK NORTH ANDOVER JUN Z, 3 19 PM ' i 0 Il trucholl CO-0 Inc DIVISION OF SCOTT COMPANY June 21 , 1996 Town of North Andover Planning Board Main Street North Andover, MA 01845 ATTENTION : Kathleen Calwell Dear Ms . Calwell : Please accept this as notification of our formal withdrawal of our Application for Planning Board Hearing for the proposed Rennie ' s project located at 200 Chickering Road , N . Andover, MA known as Assessor 's Map #46 , Lot ' 34 , 35 and 46 . "Aincerely , Joseph Scot President J S : d I c I� 395 Main Street • Salem, New Hampshire 03079 12 Rogers Road• Wardhill, Haverhill, Massachusetts 01835 Telephone: (603) 894.4942 •(508) 374.0034. Fax: (508) 373-6944 07-15-1996 02:10PM FROM SCOTT CONSTRUCTION CO. TO 6889542 P.02 RECE' t i'i JOYCE BRAGS€ AW TOWN CLERK Cott NORTH ANDOVER j ' JUL ll 3 oo PM 96 o trud, Oq C0.0 1110 DIVISION OF SCOTT COMPANY i J XLY 1511 1996 i i i Town of North Andover . i Planning Board Main Street j North Andover, Ma, 01845 ATTEN70N: Kathleen Calwell Dear 'NO. Calwell : Please a�ept this as notification of our formal withdrawal of our Application for Planning Board Hearing for the proposed Rennie's project located at 200 Chickering Road, No. Andover! Ma, known as Assessor's Map #46, lot 34, 35 and 46. i Sincerely Steve Dubois j Project nager!Estimator i f 395 Main Street • Salem. New Hampshire 03079 �4 Q,--, n......1 . 18:..,...!4.:11 Ll...._..L:,, An--__... - ----- RE CEIt D JOYCE BRAS- AW TOWN LURK f NORTI,ObOVER AY Z8 2 27 ? 6 67i 19 i r s.. 4 jjf 3 F � f e 1 COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS LAND COURT ALL 81W DEPARTMENT OF THE TRIAL COURT CIVIL ACTION No. 240275 Dorothy J. Rennie and Scott Companies, Inc. , Plaintiff(s) u e w C =° V. a 0 u o > .2 2 .2 The Town of North Andover, et al , Defendant(s) E o U ,Q O C w SUMMONS � d � s To the above-named Defendant: Town of North Andover You are hereby summoned and required to serve upon Peter G. Shaheen o " ' U y U � plaintiffs attorney, whose address is 565 Turnpike St. , Suite 81, North Andover,, an answer to y the complaint which is herewith served upon you, within 20 days after service of this summons upon you, ex- clusive of the day of service. If you fail to do so,judgment by default will be taken against;you for the relief cdemanded in the complaint. You are also required to file your answer to the complaint in the office of the Recorder of this court at Boston either before service upon plaintiffs attorney or within a reasonable time thereafter. c Unless otherwise provided by Rule 13(a), your answer must state as a counterclaim any claim which you 3 g may have against the plaintiff which arises out of the transaction or occurrence that is the subject matter of the plaintiffs claim or you will thereafter be barred from making such claim in any other action. oT PETER W. KILBORN 15th Witness, , Chief Justice. at Boston, the day of Jul ninety-seven in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and u y H F E "UEC Pit,>� C Z z � w RECORDER Ws W y O C NOTES: w o o U 1. This summons.is issued pursuant to Rule 4 of the Massachusetts Rules of Civil Procedure. U >. 2. When more than one defendant is involved, the names of all defendants should appear in the caption. If a separate osummons is used for each defendant, each should be addressed to the particular defendant. Z F 3. TO PLAINTIFF'S ATTORNEY: PLEASE CIRCLE TYPE OF ACTION INVOLVED (1) EQUITY—(2) OTHER Lc s-a(10192) COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS SUFFOLK, SS. LAND COURT Misc. # D Dorothy J. Rennie ) and Scott Companies, Inc., ) Plaintiffs ) VS. ) Richard Nardella, Alison Lescarbeau, ) John Simon, Alberto Angeles,Richard Rowen, ) & Joseph V. Mahoney as they comprise the ) North Andover Planning Board and the ) Town of North Andover, ) Defendants ) COMPLAINT 1. The plaintiff, Dorothy J. Rennie, is the owner of the property located at 200 Chickering Road in the Town of North Andover, Massachusetts, and more particularly described in a deed recorded in book 798 page 826 in the Essex North Registry of Deeds. A copy of the deed is attached as exhibit A. 2. The plaintiff, Scott Companies Inc., is a Massachusetts corporation with a principal place of business at 12 Rogers Road, Haverhill, Massachusetts. Plaintiff Scott Companies, Inc., currently has the property at 200 Chickering Road,North Andover, under agreement for sale with plaintiff Dorothy J. Rennie. 3. The defendants, Richard Nardella, Alison Lescarbeau, John Simon, Alberto Angles, Richard Rowen and Joseph Mahoney, at all pertinent times, are the duly appointed Planning Board for the Town of North Andover. (hereinafter"the Planning Board"). 1 4. The defendant, Town of North Andover(hereinafter"the Town") is a municipal corporation established on April 7, 1855. 5. The Planning Board is appointed by the Town Manager. The Planning Board is charged with authority by the Town to grant permits for site plan approval, so called "special permits", pursuant to section 8.3 of the Town's zoning by-laws. A copy of the said section is attached hereto as exhibit B. 6. The plaintiff, Dorothy Rennie's property, as described, above, lies within the R-4s idential District and the B-I Business District as established under the zoning by-laws of he Town, duly adopted in 1972 and as amended, in full force and effect at all times relevant to this action. 7. On or about November 5, 1996,the plaintiffs, Dorothy Rennie and Scott Companies, applied to the Planning Board for site plan approval for a 16,000 square foot retail center to be built upon approximately 1.8 acres of plaintiff, Dorothy Rennie's, above-described property lying within the B-1 Business 1 District,(hereinafter"B-1"). This type of use is allowed as of right in" B-1" under the Town's zoning by-laws. A copy of said application is attached here to as exhibit C. 8. The Town's zoning by-laws require that an applicant for site plan approval provide specific information and meet certain criteria in order to obtain site plan approval. Section 8.3 1 of the by law states that the purpose of site plan review is to review plans to protect the health, safety, 2 i convenience and general welfare of town inhabitants. Once the applicant meets the criteria set forth in the by-laws, the Town must grant the site plan approval. The plaintiffs, over the course of six months and five public hearings,met with the Planning Board,the Town Planner, various Town consultants and the Town's director of community development in order to satisfy the Town's by-laws. The Plaintiffs hired engineers,attorneys, architects and consultants to work with the Town in order to satisfy the Town's by-laws. 9. On May 20, 1997 the Planning Board closed the public hearing on the plaintiffs application. At that time, Joseph Mahoney,Chairman of the Planning Board, stated that the plaintiffs had met all of the requirements for obtaining site plan approval and that a permit could,i herefore, not be denied the plaintiffs. None of the members of the Planning Board disagreed with this evaluation and the Planning Board staff was directed to draft a decision approving the application. 10. On June 3, 1997 the Planning Board voted 3-2 in favor of granting site plan approval. Despite this vote, the Planning Board has refused to issue a site plan approval permit. The Planning Board interprets M.G.L. c.40A Sec. 9 as requiring a super majority, at least four affirmative votes of a five member board, for approval of site plans. A copy of the Planning Board's decision is attached here to as exhibit D. 11. Board members Nardella and Lescarbeau voted against approval of the Plaintiffs' site plan. They offered no substantive reasons for this denial and neither could identify what element of section 8.3 7 (a)( iii) of the Town's zoning by-laws the Plaintiffs had failed to meet. Both 3 Nardella and Lescarbeau suggested that traffic at the site was a concern, yet neither could point to anything specific to substantiate this belief. Said Board Members were aware that the Town's own traffic consultant had confirmed that there was, in fact, no traffic problem at this site. Moreover,they were aware that the Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs and Massachusetts Highway Department had found no significant traffic issues and, in the case of the latter,had issued a curb cut permit onto Route 125, a state highway. When Nardella and Lescarbeau took this action,the Chairman of the Board stated " I thought we had come to a consensus about this". Nardella and Lescarbeau had been advised by both the Chairman of the Board and the Director of Community Development that they had no valid reason to deny the permit. 12. After voting to deny Plaintiffs' application,Nardella asked the plaintiffs if they wished to re- open discussions in an effort to "ameliorate" the dissenting members' concerns about the Plaintiffs' project. He was advised by the Chairman that this had been the purpose of the previous six months' of hearings and meetings. Chairman Mahoney admonished Nardella that he had exceeded his authority by voting to deny the site plan approval. 13. The denial of the Plaintiffs' application for site plan approval by Nardella and Lescarbeau was made with reckless disregard for the law and in bad faith in that when they voted against the application,they did so with full knowledge that the application met all criteria required by the Town for site plan approval. They further knew that they had no discretion to deny approval and no valid reason to vote against it. The Plaintiffs, with authority from the chairman, videotaped the hearings held on May 20th and June 3rd, 1997. Nardella is heard to state on 4 tape on two occasions during the May 20th hearing that he understood that the Plaintiffs had met all of the requirements set forth in section. 8.3 of the zoning by-laws. During the June 3rd hearing, after being informed by the Chairman of the Board that he did not have discretion to vote against the application,Nardella told the Chairman,who is a licensed,practicing attorney in the Commonwealth, " Don't lecture me on the law." COUNT I-DECLARATORY RELIEF G L c 231A TOWN HAS NO DISCRETIONARY AUTHORITY TO DENY SITE PLAN APPROVAL 14. The plaintiffs reallege the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-13 above as if fully set forth herein. 15. The Town's zoning by-laws require that an applicant for site plan approval provide specific information and meet certain criteria in order to obtain site plan approval. Section 8.3 1 of the by law states that the purpose of site plan review is to review plans to protect the health, safety, convenience and general welfare of town inhabitants. Once the applicant meets the criteria set forth in the by-laws, the Town must grant the site plan approval. The plaintiffs, over the course of six months and five public hearings,met with the Planning Board,the Town Planner, various Town consultants and the Town's director of community development in order to satisfy the Town's by-laws. The Plaintiffs hired engineers,attorneys,architects and consultants to work with the Town in order to satisfy the Town's by-laws and, in fact,the Plaintiffs have met all of the criteria established for site plan approval. 5 16. The Town does not dispute that the Plaintiffs have met all criteria for site plan approval. 17. Section 8.3 7(a)(iii)of the zoning by-laws states as follows: "The Planning Board may deny approval of a site plan for the following reasons: a) The plan does not include all the materials or information required in this section, or has failed to adhere to the procedures for Site Plan Review as outlined in this section, and Section 10.3 (Special Permits), or; b) The plan as presented is not in compliance with Town by-laws, or; C) The plan has been drawn incorrectly or in such form that the Planning Board is unable to determine what information is being presented for review, or; d) The applicants have failed to incorporate and adhere to any condition(s) for approval granted by any Town Board,Department or commission,or requirements called for by any state or federal agency,which has proper authority upon which to place conditions on a matter before the Planning Board." (See Exhibit E). 18. The Plaintiffs say that the Town has no discretionary authority to deny the site approval because the Plaintiffs have met all applicable criteria. 19. An actual controversy exists between each of the Plaintiffs and the Defendants. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs demand a declaratory judgment pursuant to G.L. c. 231A that the Town must grant the site plan approval because it has no discretionary authority to deny it pursuant to Section 8.3 of the Zoning By-laws. 6 COUNT 11-DECLARATORY JUDGMENT NT SUPER AJORITY NOT REQUIRED 20. The plaintiffs reallege the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-19 as if fully set forth herein. 21. The Town improperly denied site plan approval to the Plaintiffs despite the fact that the Planning Board voted 3-2 in favor of site plan approval. 22. A "super majority" is not required to grant site plan approval as the Town alleges. A simple majority is all that is required for approval. 23. G.L.c.40A section 9 applies to special permits for specific uses,not for approval of site plans, as provided in section 8.3 of the zoning by-laws. 24. An actual controversy exists between the Plaintiffs and the Defendants. WHEREFORE,the Plaintiffs pray for a declaration by this Court that: i. A "super-majority" is not required for site plan approval;and ii. The majority vote of 3-2 in favor of site plan approval was sufficient under all applicable laws to approve the site plan and that the site plan was in fact and in law approved by the 3-2 vote in favor. COUNT HI-INTERFEMCE WITH CONTRACTUAL RELATIONSHIP 7 25. The Plaintiffs reallege the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-24 as if fully set forth herein. 26. The plaintiff, Dorothy Rennie's property upon which the proposed retail shopping center was to be built is zoned B-1. According to the zoning by-laws, of the Town the type of use proposed by her is allowed as of right. A copy of the allowed uses as established under the Town's zoning bylaw is attached hereto as exhibit E. 27. Under the Town's zoning by-laws, section 8.3 2(I),all buildings or construction which contain more than 2000 square feet of gross floor area are subject to site plan review. 28. Section 8.3b of said zoning by-law provides that all site plan review applications be submitted under G.L. c.40 Sec. 9 and be reviewed by the Planning Board as a special permit. The Town interprets this as requiring a"super majority", i.e,. four members of a five member board must vote in favor of the permit. 29. By interpreting the law in this way,the Town has prevented the plaintiffs from using their land for its intended use and has interfered with the contract that exists between them for development of this land. COUNT IV-REGULATORY TAKING 30. The plaintiffs reallege the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-29 as if fully set forth herein. 8 31. The plaintiffs , Dorothy Rennie and the Scott Companies, Inc.,properly applied for site plan approval as established under section 8.3 of said zoning by-laws, and provided all of the information required for site plan approval.They relied upon these bylaws before making their investment in the development of this property. 32. After numerous hearings that spanned approximately 6 months, the plaintiffs met each and every criteria established by the Town for site plan approval. Section 8.3 7(a)(i)of the zoning by-laws states that the Planning Board shall approve a site plan if it complies with all current by-law requirements of the Town and the site plan has been submitted in accordance with the rules and regulations of the zoning by-laws. 33. Section 8.3 7(a)( iii) of the zoning by-laws states as follows: The Planning Board may deny approval of a site plan for the following reasons: a) The plan does not include all the materials or information required in this section, or has failed to adhere to the procedures for Site Plan Review as outlined in this section, and Section 10.3 (Special Permits), or; b) The plan as presented is not in compliance with Town by-laws, or; etl or in such form that the Planning Board C) The plan has been drawn incorrectly � is unable to determine what information is being presented for review, or; 9 d) The applicants have failed to incorporate and adhere to any condition(s) for approval granted by and Town Board, Department or Commission, or requirements called for by and state or federal agency, which has proper authority upon which to place conditions on a matter before the Planning ` Board. 34. The Plaintiffs' site plan complies with all current by-law requirements of the Town and has been submitted in accordance with the rules and regulations of the zoning by-laws. Under section 8.3 7( a)( I) the approval must therefore be granted. The denial of the Plaintiffs' application does not comply with sec. 8.3 7 (a) (iii), or even state reason for the denial and is therefore invalid. The Planning Board's decision was arbitrary and capricious and exceeded its authority. 35. The Plaintiffs, in reliance upon the zoning by-laws expended substantial sums of money in the form of fees for engineering, legal, architectural, and other professional services in order to comply with the established criteria of the Town's site plan approval. To date,the Plaintiffs' have spent over $100,000 on such fees. 36. The Planning Board and the Town have, through improper permit denial, caused a regulatory taking of the Plaintiffs' property without reasonable compensation. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs demand that: 10 1. The decision of the Planning Board be annulled and declared null and void. 2. The Planning Board and the Town be ordered to issue a special permit to Plaintiffs pursuant to their application for site plan review; 3. The Planning Board and the Town be ordered to immediately issue site plan approval to the Plaintiffs based upon the 3-2 vote in favor of site plan approval by the Planning Board; 4. The Town be ordered to compensate Plaintiffs for its regulatory taking of their property; 5. The Town be ordered to pay the Plaintiffs for damages they incurred by the improper denial of their site plan; 6. The Town be ordered to pay the Plaintiffs for all attorney's fees and costs incurred in this matter. Respectfully Submitted, Dorothy Rennie and Scott Companies, Inc. By t omey, Pe G. Shaheen BBO# 453010 Law Office of Peter G. Shaheen 565 Turnpike Street North Andover, MA 01845 508/689-0800 11 aUR. i�at ll4luuwrlCseuab r: D camb4F 1 t 1 •.;65. T P IY:}PPnnd the above John. P...Wrtiu•and R1 Wtin }' wd'atimowlgd`od;hp f iosamoem a be th fra deed. ° ` oretoi� • .before me. • nj C 4` Pe nd A. er " No{vypuy,o } ' 1ly m.ei..lw agirn, h.113 e)�IL'� v, • ` i Eaeex, s. corded`Dec. 15, 1955 at 41a.past /,P.M., �f41 I, George--Rennie, ye. ,f of Derry, Rockingham C&wf• ioe*norWW.X fQc,cwddeud=n id m-t eo David Rennie, .7r., and Dorothy Aennie;:husband end wi e, as tenants by..the entirety both of Korth-"Andover .Essex C:,unty, L'assachusetts with r ` all my rightM;:.t;tle, an:: interest in the�+adlo the said tows of Aurth Andover, boundedand d£soribed:as x• follower "Beginning at the northeasterly corner of the premises at the inter-.- section•of�Chiokering Road and Hessaohusetts Avenue,. formerly'knowa• • as the'Alr-Line Road;.thence'.running wasteriy by.-land now.or.-formerly " of Edward Adams.1877•feet, more or less, .to an.sngle in-the wall; , the Apiaagsouthwesterly by land of owners unknown and by�an old r�usaa 1�(ocd;Lane,..748 feet more or.less, to a stone bound; thoude- ng southgatsterly by said old.road known on-Wood Lane 84.85::feat. ,y" ktoDouud•,"thence running southeasterly but In a"more:easterly diroot; on Dy'var;oua courses by.said old road known as Wood Ung. 1274.$1,-feet to a atone bound at land now or formerly of the-heirs>of,. Henry,J 3tavens; `thence running noitherly"by•vaid land now or.to m+, �. erly-of<the•'hoira of.nervy J. Stevens and land-now. or formerly of.:• Ronnie,:676.t et,-..more or less, to an angle in the wall; thsnceigupning �. , sastsrly by.said land now or formerly of Rennie 404 feet, sors,orsless,- r' to an`angle "the wall; thence- running southerly by said land now.'" or formerly-of,Ronnie-109 feet, more or less, to an angle in the wall; thence amaning':easterly by said land now or formerly of howde about ,. 50 feet: toOhiokering Road; and thence running northeasterly by e Chickering -Road 1016 feet, more or less, to Massachudetts Avenue and z �. the point'of beginning." ' Containing 43.1 acres, more or less. Being the same premises conveyed to George Rennie and David Rennie, Jr., by deed of Harold B. Thompsot dt al. dated Larch E4, 1947, recorded in the Korth Essex District Hegistry .- of ]Seeds in Book 696 at Page 2E6. j ai�a y e,:con$ deraL onAn thi.i:_daed4is.A*sx*Uu a�tori .shUndradrdo3rrsis I, Virginia(Rennie, of acid 8�. wife .r [elate to.said gaotee all.dSbta of. tead tbo=mesadd other ioteewts theseio. ` v k t �tdtea/w.4ut w Mode and Wl s tbit. ...1�t11.....,,,..,dq v y. s 'r 4:r�',."a, w-.Sbk•'77x'��,-., Monday - June 14, 1971 Regular Meeting & 5 Hearings The BOARD OF APPEALS held its regular meeting on Monday evening, June 14, 1971 at 7:30 P.M. in the Town Office Building with the following members present and voting: J. Philip Arsenault, Chairman; Kenneth E. Pickard, Vice Chairman; Dr. Eugene A. Beliveau, Clerk; Arthur R. Drummond and Frank Serio, Jr. Associate Member William N. Salemme was also present. There were over 30 people present for the hearings. 1. HEARIM: David & Dorothy Rennie. Chairman Arsenault disqualified himself from sitting on this petition and desig- nated Vice Chairman Pickard to sit as Chairman and appointed Assoc. Member Salemme to sit as a member of the Board. Dr. Beliveau read the legal notice in the appeal of David & Dorothy Rennie who requested a variation of Sec. 1 .17 & 1 .18 of the Zoning By-Law so as to permit the continued bale of nursery plants not grown on the premises, packaged fertilizers and garden supplies excluding garden tools or mechanical implements; on the premises located at the west side of Chickering Road; approx. 21000 feet distant from the corner of Massachusetts Ave. and known as 200 Chickering Road. He also read a letter from the Building Inspector to the Rennies stating that they are in violation of the Zoning By-Law because their premises are being used for purposes not allowed in a residential district. Retail selling is limited to farm produce and the stand cannot be used as a place where merchandise other than farm produce can be sold. He ordered them to discontinue selling non-farm produce by June 15, 1971, which would allow him time to dispose of his present supplies without imposing a financial hardship and also time to appear before the Board of Appeals. The letter was dated May 26, 1971. Atty. Maurice Rappaport represented the petitioner, who explained that they have always been allowed to conduct the sale of fruit and vegetables. It is now necessary to seek a variance in order to make a living. This could be a limited variance; they need some means to keep the place together. No one in the neighborhood is against what they are doing or complaining. This is their only income. They have a small truck garden now. The only opposition is from competitors. The only thing other than shrubbery that they are selling is packaged fertilizers and this would be stored in the garage. These people have been living here for a long time and are entitled to sustain themselves. The request is reasonable and he asks that the Board grant the variance for the specific items asked. John J. McLay, Turnpike Street, spoke in opposition stating he went to the Building Inspector opposing it. He said he has never been opposed to any business in town but they should conduct their business on an equal basis. They should have their property zoned for business and they should have proper parking area; they are now parking on both sides of the street. Other businesses need parking areas, entrances, exits, etc. They are allowed to sell products grown on their land but they are now expanding and selling other things. They do not have the proper conditions to run a business there. Mr. McLay said he re-zoned his area to business. If this was a properly zoned area he would not be opposed. They had asked to be allowed to sell the merchandise they had for Mother's Day and Memorial Day and they would not bring any other stock in. They did bring other stock in after they said they wouldn't do _ so. This was in violation of their promise. co 0 ! s June 14, 1971 — cont. Henry Lund, also spoke in opposition and agreed with everything Mr. McLay had stated. He too had to rezone his property to business in order to sell the same products the Rennies are presently selling. Peter Romano, lives across the street from Rennie, and asked if the variance was granted and they do sell other than what is allowed, how much could the business expand. Building Inspector Foster explained they could only sell what the variance allows. He also pointed out to the Board the fact that they are not asking for an appeal from his ruling but are asking for a variance. Don Boyle explained that he is involved in the business, he is a son—in—law to the Rennes. He stated that he did not bring any other products in after he said he wouldn't and explained that it was a special job he was doing. Mr. McLay then said he is doing a landscaping business also if he is doing that special job. Member Drummond stated he was surprised that a special permit was not asked for instead of a variance. Mr. Drummond made a motion to take the petition under advisement; Dr. Beliveau seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. 2. HEARING: Henry K. Hyder, Jr. — Tennis Club. Chairman Arsenault presided again and the five regular members sat on this F petition. Dr. Beliveau read the legal notice in the appeal of Henry K. Hyder, Jr. who requested a Special Permit under Sec. 4.8 of the Zoning By—Law so as to permit an Indoor Tennis Complex on the premises located at the south side of Salem Turnpike, Route 1141 adjacent to 757 Turnpike Street. Atty. Henry K. Hyder, Jr. stated that he is the petitioner and attorney for the principals involved in this petition. There is a purchase and sales agreement with the Dandeneaus and the area will be purchased regardless what this Board does. Approx. 8.9 acres are involved. He read Section 4.8 of the Zoning By—Law which allows tennis clubs. Robert F. Hatem of Lowell, explained the project in more detail. He stated this terms club would be a first in this area. There is an increased interest in physical education and sports and this proposed club will satisfy a year—round opportunity for children and parents. There are 5 indoor courts. He showed large pictures and drawings and explained that the building would contain lockers, showers, sauna baths, a large lobby with the second floor of the lobby providing seating for spectators, a pro—shop selling supplies, equipment, etc., coffee shop; this would be a private club, with memberships. The facilities would be used principally from October to June. They will keep the trees and greenery and build on approx. 10/ of the area. There will be no problem as to traffic and parking. There would be a maximum of 20 persons playing on the courts at one time. The facility would cost around $400,000 and have no plans for future expansion. They will just have a tennis club and nothing more. No one else spoke and there was no opposition. kndummond made a motion to take the petition under advisement; Mr. Pickard ed the motion and the vote was unanimous. 4 June 14, 1971 - cont. Chairman Arsenault read a letter from the Planning Board in which they made recommendations as to the petitions before the Board of Appeals. The Planning Board was opposed to the tennis club because they are presently engaged in the formulation of a Master Plan, a great part of which will be concerned with the future development on Route 114. This also seems to be a profit making business rather than a private tennis club as required by the Zoning By-Law. Atty. Hyder said the letter is just a letter of opposition. Under the Zoning By-Law, the petitioner has the right to come before the Board of Appeals. 3. HEARING: Anna Garon & Salvatore LaRosa Dr. Beliveau read the legal notice in the appeal of Anna Garon and Salvatore LaRosa who requested a variation of Sec. 6.31 & 7.23 of the Zoning By-Law so as to permit the division of a lot of land into two parcels, both having less than the required area and frontage, and the erection of a dwelling on the newly formed lot nearer the rear lot line than the required 30 feet; on the premises located at the west side of Lexington Street at the corner of Concord Street and known as 24 Lex- ington Street. Mrs. Garon explained that she would like to give land to her son-in-law; her husband died and she is alone and the son-in-law could be nearby to help her out taking care of the property, etc. Mr. LaRosa explained he is asking for 'a setback, area and frontage variance. He showed a plot plan of the general area in which there are other small lots. He said it would be a hardship if the variance was not granted. Sewer facilities are available and the street is paved. � Mr. McAuliffe, Bunker Hill Street and Mr. Martin, Concord Street, abutters, said they had no objection to the division of the land. Dr. Thomas Ceplikas was opposed in behalf of his mother who is also an abutter. He said the dwelling would be directly across the street from his mothert's home. The entire lot has only 10,000 sq. ft. and already has one house on it. He doesn't have enough area to start with since 12,500 sq. ft. are required with 100 ft. frontage. A traffic hazard would be created from parked cars on the narrow street which is not a hot-top road. A fence is presently there over 6 ft. high and on town property by 1-12- feet. This petition was rejected by the Board before. He also understands that they plan to move a two-story house to this lot - the McCafthy house that is presently on Manganots land at the corner of Concord Street. This is too great a deviation from the Zoning By-Law. Building Inspector Foster pointed out that there are other lots in the area that are 50x100. He also said this is a corner lot and any side can be chosen as the frontage. Mr. Garon stated that the fence is going to be taken down. Mr. Pickard made a motion to take the petition under advisement; Mr. Drummond seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. 4. HEARING: George H. Farr. Dr. Beliveau read the legal notice in the appeal of George H. Farr who requested a variation of Sec. 6.33 of the Zoning By-Law so as to permit the division of a parcel of land into two lots, both having the required frontage but one lot not having th- required area; on the premises located at the east side of Salem Street appro- feet south from the corner of Foster & Boxford Streets. r June 14, 1971 — cont. Atty. John J. Willis represented the petitioner and explained that Mr. Farr has a first class development along Salem Street and has contributed approx. $11,000 to the town to extend the 12" water main along Salem Street. He is requesting the oar& F' division of a parcel of land into two lots. There is a house presently on lot #3 d,. .- which meets all of the zoning requirements; however: the second lot is vacant and lacks only area. The lot contains 41,525 sq. ft. and 44,000 sq. ft. are required. There is a frontage of 266 feet, which is more than adequate since only 150 feet are required. No one else spoke and there was no opposition. Mr. Serio made a motion ta,,take the petition under advisement; Mr. Pickard seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. 5. HEARING: Arthur J. Dufresne Dr. Beliveau read the legal notice in the appeal of Arthur J. Dufresne who requested a variation of Sec. 6.32 & 7.22 of the Zoning By—Law so as to permit the division of a parcel of land into two lots, each having less than the required frontage and area; and the erection of a dwelling on one of the lots formed, having less than the required lot line setbacks; on the premises located at the south side of Adams Avenue at the corner of Massachusetts Avenue and known as 517 Massachusetts Avenue. Mr. Dufresne appeared on his own behalf and he explained that he wants to give his son a lot of land so he can build a house. The land was purchased many years ago so that the children could build there but when the present Zoning By—Law was adopted it changed the lot size requirements and now he is coming to the Board to allow the division of the land. His son Robert, explained that water and sewer facilities are available. :") Selectman Arthur Kirk spoke in favor of the petition because he feels that there is a hardship involved. Building Inspector Charles Foster explained that there are many small lots in the area; that this is a problem area and that none of the lots there meet the requirements. In fact, the lot immediately abutting the Dufresne lot is 50x100 and he would have to issue a building permit if applied for. Selectmano J seph Guthrie would Like to see them be able to build and thinks that there is a hardship; they have to move from where they. are presently living. There was no opposition and no abutters were present. Mr. Drummond made a motion to take the petition under advisement; Mr. Pickard seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. The Board then discussed the petitions of the evening. 1. RENNIE: The members seem to feel this is not a proper petition to come before this Board. Mr. Drummond made a motion to take no action for 60 days; Mr. Pickard seconded the motion. Dr. Beliveau then made a motion that the variance be dismissed because it is not a proper petition and not within the Board's jurisdiction. This should be a matter for re—zoning. Mr. Serio seconded the motion. Four members voted in favor of the motion and Mr. Drummond abstained from voting. June 14, 1971 — cont. 2. Henry Hyder, Jr. — Tennis Club. Mr. Pickard made a motion to grant the permit in principle subject to conditions to be made at a later date. The matter was discussed further and the 'members felt that the conditions should be spelled out at the same time of the granting. It was decided to defer action for 30 days and invite the petitioners back to the next meeting for more specifics and also view the premises. 3. GARON & LaROSA. Mr. Drummond made a motion to DENY the variance. Mr. Serio seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. The Board feels that to grant a lot with an area of 5,040 feet in a Village Residence district where 12,500 sq. ft. are required would be in substantial derogation gat on of the Zoning By-Law. 4 GEORGE H. FARR Mr. Drummond made a motion to GRANT the variance; Mr. Pickard seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. The Board found that the lot in question has more than adequate frontage, 266 feet, which is more than the required frontage of 150 feet. The lot would be only 2500 sq. ft. less than the required area which would be something less than a 60/4 variance from the area requirement. The Board felt this was not a substantial change from the required area. The lot is unique owing to its peculiar shape. An economic hardship would result if the petition for a variance were denied. 5. ARTHUR DUFRESNE. Mr. Drummond made a motion to GRANT the variance; Mr. Pickard seconded the motion and three members voted yes and Dr. Beliveau and Mr. Arsenault voted no. The petition is denied since a majority vote of the Board of Appeals is 4-1. The three members that voted to grant the variance found that there were other small lots in the immediate area. They also felt there was hardship involved because the land had been purchased a number of years ago for the purpose of building a home for his children and that because of the adoption of the Zoning By—Law they were prohibited from building on the lot. They also found that the lot in question had access to municipal water and sewer facilities. The two members that voted in opposition found that the creation of a lot with an area of 6200 sq. ft. in a zone where 25,000 sq. ft. was required would be too substantial a variance from the By Law. The meeting adjourned at 10:45 P.M. Chairman Philip Arsenault o"�'A� Secretary Anna Donahue 1 Wednesday — June 30, 1971 Special Meeting The BOARD OF APPEALS held a special meeting on Wednesday evening, June 30, 1971 at 8:00 P.M. in the Totim Office Building with the following members present and voting: Philip Arsenault, Esq., Chairman; Kenneth E. Pickard, Vice Chairman; Dr. Eugene A. Beliveau, Clerk; Arthur R. Drummond and Frank Serio, Jr. Bill Plante the Eagle—Tribune reporter was also present. TENNIS CLUB: The Board members and three of the principals petitioning for a special permit for an indoor tennis club met at the site on Turnpike Street to further discuss the petition. Upon returning to the Town Building, Atty. Hyder, Mr. Regan and Mr. Hatem, the petitioners, and the Board members thoroughly discussed what conditions and restrictions would be placed upon the special permit. Mr. Pickard made a motion to grant the special permit under Section 4.8, subject to the conditions as set out; Mr. Serio seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. The Board found that all of the requirements as set forth in Section 4.8 of the Zoning By Law were being complied with. The conditions are as follows: 1. Building shall be a "Butler building" construction with vertical metal siding of baked enamel finish or its equivalent. As an alternative, the clubhouse can be covered with natural wood shingles. The exterior color of the building is to blend with the environment. 2. The existing trees, shown as Area "A« on the plan, to be left as they are for screening. 3. 40 parking spaces to be provided in the parking area. f' 4. Roadway will be paved from Rte. 114 to the parking area according to appropriate state requirements. The roadway will be completely maintained, plowed, sanded, etc. by the petitioners and will be 24 feet wide. 5. The presently existing stone wall will remain except where necessary to provide for entrance and exit. (Atty. Arsenault will check with Town Counsel as to the status of Willow Street) . ARTHUR J. DUFRESNE: The Board called the special meeting for this evening upon the request of Mr. Dufresne for reconsideration of the decision dated June 16, 1971, which had denied the variance,by a vote of 3-2. Arthur Dufresne, airs. Robert Dufresne, Atty. John Willis and Building Inspector Charles Foster were present. Mr. Drummond made a motion to reconsider the petition. Mr. Pickard seconded the motion. Atty. John Willis represented the petitioner and argued the motion by clarifying the request for reconsideration and for the variance. The same information was presented as in the original hearing but greatly elaborated by Atty. Willis for greater clarification to the Board. The vote was 4-1, with member Arsenault voting no. { i e June 30, 1971 — cont. Mr. Pickard made a motion to GRANT the variance; Mr. Drummond seconded the motion. The attorney for the petitioner argued the 'motion in than no additional evidence is being given. There was legal precedent for granting the variance. The Board felt there was hardship involved because the land was purchased a number of years ago for the purpose of building a home for his children and that because of the adoption of the Zoning By Law they were prohibited from building on the lot. They also found that the lot in question had access to municipal water and sewer facili— ties. There is a 50x100 foot lot adjacent to the locus which could be legally built upon and which was similar to the locus. The Board found that it was not in substantial derogation from the intent and purpose of the Zoning By—Law and that the lot in question was unique. The vote was 4-1, with member Arsenault voting no. The meeting adjourned at 10:00 P.M. Chairman Philip Arsenault � -x�/ 4a'z Secretary Anna Donahue I 1 Monday — July 19, 1971 Regular Meeting — 2 Hearings The BOARD OF APPEALS held its regular meeting on Monday evening, July 19, 1971 at 7:30 P.M. in the Town Office Building with the following members present and voting: Philip Arsenault, Esq., Chairman; Kenneth E. Pickard, Vice Chairman; Arthur R. Drummond and Associate Members William N. Salemme and Atty. Joseph A. Miragliotta who sat in place of regular members Dr. Beliveau and Frank Serio who were unable to attend. There were 10 people present for the 2 hearings of the evening. Bill Plante the Eagle—Tribune reporter was also present. 1. HEARING: Edward H. Kollen Mr. Pickard read the legal notice in the appeal of Edward H. Kollen who re— quested a variation of Sec. 4.11 of the Zoning By—Law so as to permit the re— modeling of one side of a duplex dwelling to two apartments; on the premises located at the north side of Church Street, 113.13 feet from the corner of dater Street and known as 58 Church Street. 11r. Kollen appeared on his own behalf and explained that he wants to make two small apartments on one side of the duplex building. He presently,; lives on the other side and will make no changes there. He said he will conform to all requirements of the Zoning By—Law and that there is a need for apartments in town. There is a 3—stall garage on the lot that is fully occupied. I Building Inspector Foster said he would meet the requirements as to the exits. Mr. Kollen showed the floor plans to the Board and said there would be no change to the exterior of the dwellinS. Frederick Redman, an abutter, said he had no objection to the petition. No one else spoke and there was no oppo; i tion. Mr. Pickard made a motion to take the petition under advisement; Atty. Miragliotta seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. 2. HEARING: Trinitarian Congregational Church. Mr. Pickard read the legal notice in the appeal of Trinitarian Congregational Church requesting a variation of Sec. 7.23 of the Zoning By--Law so as to permit the erection of a youth activities building nearer the lot line than is allowed under the Zoning By—Law; on the premises located at 72 Elm Street and the corners of Church and Cross Streets. Robert W. Friis, chairman of the trustees for the church, represented the petitioner. The church is asking for a variance to permit the location of the youth activities center on the rear of the church p:l:;perty, to be located 20 feet from Church Street and 5 feet from the Redman lot line. This building would cover less than 4/ of the total area of the property, which is 45,600 sq. ft. He presented a brief history of the former scout cabin, which is presently one foot from the Redman property line. He said the sills and interior have deterior ated so that meetings cannot be held in the building any longer. Mr. Friis distributed a brochure depicting the future plans of the church. He said families of the scouts and the church people will help with the labor. He explained that the placing of the building in this particular location was necessary in order to avoid hardship and practical difficulties in Town of North Andover RECEIVED OFFICE OF JOYCE BRADSNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND SERNjjR Nps ,� tI 30 School street - . North Andover. Massachusetts 01845 DUH 1l 12 �� �,••;; WILLIAM!.SCOTT •r•c5 Director ss�CHU NOTICE OF DECISION Any appeal shall be filled within (20)-days after the E }{ 00 date of filling this Notice in the Office of the Town L Clerk. Date' June 25, 1997 Date of Hearing i2/3/9t, .12/17/96, -1/7/97, 2/4/97,3/4/97, 4/8/97, 4/15/97, 5/20/97,6/3/97 Petition of 200 Chickering Road (Rennies) Premises affected :1nn Vh i cL ri nq unad Referring to the above petition for a special permit from the requirements of the North Andover Zoning Bylaw Section 8.3 so as to allow the construction of a concrete masonry & wood. Oise story 16, 900 SF building for commercial use located at 200 Chickering Road After a public hearing given on the above date, the Planning Board voted to DENY the Special Permit- site plan review based upon the following conditions: Signed_ �( � CC: Director of Public Works Richard Rowen, Chairman Building Inspector Natural Resource/Land Use Planner Alison Lescar_-beau, V. Chairman Health Sanitarian Assessors John Simons, Clerk Police Chief Fire Chief Richard Nardella Applicant Engineer Joseph V. Mahoney File Interested Parties Planning.Board CONSFRV.A'nom 0MR-0iM HEALTH M9540 MANNIM, 69&0535 ZO'd ZV96 899 809 -nap -WOO -AOAOpub 41-AON d6z :'60 L6-Oc-unr Town of North Andover f ,.OR71 OFFICE OF �o�.•••� ,•,tic COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND SERVICES �� 30 School Street WILLIAM J. SCOTT North Andover.Massachusetts 01845 tri•o,•;�o',',.•t�` Director 4C CNO June 25, 1997 Ms. Joyce Bradshaw Town Clerk 120 Main Street No. Andover, MA 01845 Re: Special Permit/Site Pian Review 200 Chickering Road Dear Ms. Bradshaw: The North Andover Planning Board held a public hearing on Tuesday evening, December 3, 1996 at 7:30 p.m. in the Senior Center behind the Town Building, on the application of Scott Companies, I2 Rogers Road, Haverhill, MA_018"t'-- i special permit under Section 8..3 (Site Plan Review) of the North Andover Zoning,.,,_ -rhe legal notice was properly advertised in the North Andover Citizen on November 13 and November 20, 1996 and all parties of interest were duly notified. The following members were present:-Joseph V. Mahoney, Chairman, Richard Rowen, Vice Chairman Alison Lescarbeau, Clerk, John Simons and Alberto Angles, Associate Member. Kathleen Bradley Colwell, Town Planner was also absent. The petitioner was requesting a special permit to allow to allow the construction of a concrete masonry&wood. One(1) story 16,900 SF building for commercial use located at 200 Chickering Road, North Andover,MA 01845 in the Business -1 (B-1)Zoning District. Mr. Rowen read the legal notice to open the public hearings. Peter Shaheen was present representing Scott Companies for Old Town Village a 16,900 square foot retail subdivision. The property is located off of Rt. 125 (Rennes Florist) on 18 acres of land. Some of the types of businesses that have approached the applicant have been a hairdresser, , Mailboxes Etc., and a travel agency. Mark Gross is the site engineer, he stated that there is no residential property involved. The property is zoned B-1 surrounded by R-5,R-4 and R-3 residential zonings. Rennes Florist will still occupy one unit, it will be the in the front of the building. There will be approximately nine units ranging from 2,000 to 1,000 SF to size. There will be a green pedestrian area in the front provided with landscaping. The existing vegetation in the rear of the building will be maintained to be supplemented with a 5' fence and landscaping to buffer the residential area. The original plan was to have two entrances and exits with one close to Farrwood. A revised plan will eliminate the driveway access adjacent to Farrwood Drive. The Technical Review Committee CONSERVATION 6W9530 HEALTH 68&9340 PLANNING 6M9535 £O'd Zb96 899 909 'Aea •wa' -40AOPUV 41-AON V6Z 60 L6-O£-unC requested that compact car spaces be dispersed around the site, not clustered in one area and to disperse handicap parking spaces. Fire access will be provided around the building. There are no large delivery trucks anticipated. The elevation of the building will be broken up horizontally and vertically. There were concerns about storm water management and the catch basins and whether or not the drainage can be off site. The sewage will be pumped up to Rt. 125. The lighting will be 12' poles with down cast boxes, and low level pedestrian lights. Safety lights at the rear will be downcast over the doors. They produced a cross section of the site. The roof line will create a false facade with roof top units hidden inside to buffer noise. An RDA was filed with ConCom however the applicant requested a continuance in order to produce soil testing to the ConCom. An ENF was filed with the state. A traffic study has been prepared. Town will hire an outside consultant to review. t Mr. Simons asked why not orient the building towards Fanwood Drive. Rayner Cooke the architect, stated that the reason why they faced the orientation the way they did is because the sun faced the three sided greenhouse, also it was the best fit for the shape of the lot. Mr. Simons stated that he would like it to be oriented towards Farrwood, for example a gate or fence at the west end for pedestrian's to walk through to get to the shops. Mr. Gross stated that they are going to screen the site from the neighbors to make it as least intrusive as possible and consider pedestrian access if so desired. Mr. Rowen was concerned about where the drainage will go. Mr. Gross stated that the natural flow is towards Farrwood, but the plan channels the water to the opposite side of the lot. Ms. Colwell asked how they have designed the drainage. Mr. Gross stated that there is an underground system currently proposed, but is more expensive and is of high maintenance. Mr. Mahoney question what kind of materials they are planning to use. Mr. Cooke stated that they are going to use clapboard siding and brick with colonial style store fronts and wood doors. They will have carved wood signs with outside lights. There will be roofscape with dormers and windows to make a village theme. Mr. Rowen asked about the slope of the gables and commented that steep roofs are preferred. Mr. Simons is also concerned with the slope of the roof. Ms. Colwell suggests that they take a look at the slope of the roof at Osco Drug and check plans vs. actual. b0'd Zb96 899 80s -A00 -woo ...ianopurd W"ON VO7 :6o L6-Oc-unr Mr. Dermot J. Kelly of Kelly& Associates, Inc. reviewed the traffic study. The counts that were done at the entrance of Farrwood and on Rt.114 estimated that 23,000 cars per day during the week pass the site. These studies were conducted during the hours of 7:00 a.m. till 9:00 p.m. and on Saturday during the hours of 11:00 a.m. till 2:00 p.m. there were 17,000 cars. At the peak hours 1600 cars passed in the a.m. 1900 cars passed in the p.m. Saturday's peak hours showed 13 00 cars passing. Some_traffic growth needs to be assumed. There is only a 16' lane for entering traffic. There should be no planting on the site entrance and, there should also be stop signs at each exit. Mr. Mahoney asked about how much more traffic is going;o be generated with the project. Joe Bolen, 27 Farrwood Avenue is concerned about the traffic volume in the a.m. and p.m. Peggy Walsh, 27 Farrwood Avenue is concerned about the traffic when she is trying to take a left turn in the a.m. out of Farrwood, she is also is concerned about the dumpsite pickup and snow removal. Hillary Cannor, 98 Edgelawn Drive#7, is concerned about the orientation of the building and the ability to rent the units at the end and is concerned about customers missing the entrance and turning around on Farrwood Drive. Mr. Cooke stated that not all retail tenants require visibility from the road. Mr. Gross explained that no one would be able to see the building if it were oriented towards Farrwood Drive. Mark Johnson, representing the Condominium Association, is concerned about the traffic and believes it should be revised with new entrances. Mr. Johnson also had concerns about the level of service increases in the future with the level of traffic. He also expressed some concern about the orientation of the building, and thought that the building should face Rt. 125 with a smaller project. Vera Curcio, 23 Edgelawn Drive, brought to the Boards attention that there was a denial for a building on the site of Rennies in the past, based on the problems with the traffic and stated that she will look into that more fully. Ms. Curcio also stated that she has checked with the State Department of Public Works and says they have received no information on this project. Ms. Curcio is against this project and feels that it will lower her property value and bring more problems to the adjacent properties. Ms. Curcio also stated that she was not informed about the meeting until a few days before. Jeff Cannor, 98 Edgelawn Drive, expressed some concern about the sign that would be placed in the front of the project. SO 'd ZbS6 999 9OS -AOO -U103 „ OAOPUV 41-40N VTC :6o L6-O£-unc Mr. Gross stated that they would like to have an identifying sign at the entrance and will have a facade sign. They will be submitting a plan of the sign. Jim McCarthy, an abutter was concerned about the hours of operation. Mr. Bolero, was concerned about how long will the construction time be in affect. fi4r: Gross stated that the approximate time on the construction would be about 4 months. Ms. Curcio submitted a letter to the Planning Board outlining her concerns. The letter will be placed in the Planning Board files. The public hearing was continued to the December 17, 1996 meeting. The North Andover Planning Board held a regular meeting on December 17, 1996. The following members were present: Joseph V. Mahoney, Chairman, Richard Rowen, Vice Chairman, Alison Lescarbeau, Clerk, Richard Nardella and John Simons. Kathleen Bradley Colwell, Town Planner was also present. The applicant requested a continuance until January 1, 1997. The North Andover Planning Board held a regular meeting on January 7, 1997. The following members were present: Joseph V. Mahoney, Chairman, Richard Rowen, Vice Chairman, Alison Lescarbeau, Clerk, Alberto Angles, Associate Member, Richard Nardella and John Simons. Kathleen Bradley Colwell, Town Planner was also present. Mr. Rowen read a letter from Scott Construction asking for a continuance until February 4, 1997 in order to complete the traffic review and requested plan review. The North Andover Planning Board held a regular meeting on February 4, 1997. The following members were present: Joseph V. Mahoney, Chairman, Richard Rowen, Vice Chairman, Alison Lescarbeau, Clerk, Richard Nardella and John Simons. Kathleen Bradley Colwell, Town Planner was also present. Mark Gross of MHF Design, was present to discuss the traffic study. Mr. Gross stated that they have filed an Environmental Notification Form. Mr. Gross has spoken to Mass. DEP.and Mass. DPW and they stated that they are free-to go ahead and file for curb cut permit. Dermot Kelley, President of DJK Associates was present to give an overview of the traffic study. Mr. Kelley showed a plan with a single access as far away as possible from Farrwood Ave. A stop line and a stop sign will be installed at the exit onto Rt. 125. Mr. Kelley stated that he has requested data from the state regarding the number of accidents but has not received it yet. Mr. Nardella stated that his major concern is the number of accidents that could occur. Mr. Kelley stated they cannot determine the number of accidents. Mr. Mahoney asked if they could 90 'd ZVS6 989 80S -AOC -u►o' „ OAOPUV 44.AON VZE s 60 L6-o£-uno get data from the Town's Police Department on the number of accidents that have occurred on Farrwood entering and exiting. Mr. Nardella asked what the distance is from center line of the access drive to the center line at Farwood. Mr. Kelley stated 250'. Mr. Kelley stated that Ms. Colwell, Mr. Hajec and himself went out to Chickering Road to observe the traffic flow. Mr. Kelley stated that the traffic flows in cycles every 70 seconds. They observed that the traffic flows from one direction for 30 seconds and from the other direction for 40-50 seconds. For 20-30 seconds the traffic is lessened. So people who are exiting and entering Farrwood have 30-35 seconds of no traffic and for 45 cars turning onto Farrwood there was no queuing. Mr. Nardella asked the number of cars that could que up out of 200 Chickering Road. Mr. Kelley stated that 3 could. Paul Hajec, President of Hajec Associates, the town's traffic consultant was present to jexplain what he has observed. Mr. Hajec stated that everything that Mr. Kelley has said is correct. Mr. Hajec stated that they did not observed more than 2 cars at a time queuing. There could be some traffic problems when Rt. 495 is blocked up and people use this as an alternative route however that is a rare occurrence and is not one that the applicant should be expected to fix. l�Cs. Lescarbeau asked what would happen if there was a dar turning into the plaza and there was a car behind them that is turning into Farrwood. Mr. Hajec stated that they could use the shoulder of the road. It is a paved road and the shoulder is Vto 10' wide. Mr. Hajec stated a traffic light would have to be approved by the state and Mr. Hajec thought that would be very unlikely. The traffic lights would make unnecessary delays and more accidents usually occur when there is a traffic light. Dave Johns of 209 Chickering Road, stated that it is difficult to take a left hand turn out of his driveway and that people walk on the shoulder therefore it is very hard to pass in the shoulder. Lisa Neukuckatz of 68 Fernview Ave. stated that her children walk on Chickering Road to and from school and believes it is dangerous if people use the shoulder to pass. Joseph Balliro of 27 Farrwood Ave. stated that he is a criminal defense lawyer and thinks it is not a legitimate point to use the shoulder. 1t may be legal but it is not safe. Peggy Walsh of 27 Farrwood stated too many things are happening (too many other driveways)within the 250' of road. Mr. Nardella asked as residents if they had any ideas to make the flow better. Mr. Balliro stated that they should put in a dedicated turn lane and possibly a yellow blinking light. LO'd ZVS6 889 SOS -AOO -WOO „Aanopuy ya..AoN t>£E-6o L6-o£-unc Jim McCarthy stated that during the 20.30 second delay if there is somebody coming out of the 99 Restaurant or Bulgers Animal Hospital then the delay is shortened. Mark Johnson who represents Heritage Green Estates asked that there should be no heavy trucks on the site and questioned the level of service. Is E or D? Mr. Gross responded by saying that they are not planning to have any trailer trucks on the property just box trucks and are willing to put that in the decision as a condition. Mr. Johnson stated that level D represents a condition with long delays to minor street traffic. The levels go from A- F and A being the least amount of delays and F being the longest. Chickering Road and Farrwood currently operates at a level of service at C or better. Under 2001 Build weekday evening peak hour conditions the service will decrease to Level D. Mr. Balliro asked why the exit could not be changed to the back of the property. Mr. Gross stated that access to commercial property has to be through commercial property and cannot be through residential property. Ms. Curcio, 23 Edgelawn Ave. questioned the zoning for the site. Ms. Colwell stated that the site is zoned B-1 for business but is surrounded by residential property. Ms. Colwell suggested that Ms. Curcio come into the Planning Office to took at the zoning map. If she had additional questions she can review the zoning with the Zoning Code Enforcement Officer. Continued the public hearing until the March 4, 1997 meeting. The North Andover Planning Board held a regular meeting on March 4, 1997. The following members were present: Joseph V. Mahoney, Chairman, Richard Rowen, Vice Chairman, Alison Lescarbeau, Clerk, Alberto Angles, Associate Member and John Simons. Kathleen Bradley Colwell, Town Planner was also present. Atty. Peter Shaheen was present representing 200 Chickering Road. Mark Gross, MBF Design Inc. the site engineer stated that the Conservation Commission has also requested review of the drainage from John Chessia, the Town's consultant therefore he will respond to both the Planning and Conservation drainage issues at the same time. , Dermit Kelley of DJK Association conducted traffic counts white Merrimack College was in session as requested by the Town's traffic consultant and the counts were less than the original ones. Mr. Kelley stated that he received a copy of all the accidents that occurred in North Andover from Mass. Highway and none have occurred on Fanwood. Mr. Kelley stated that in his opinion a left turn lane is not required. He is concerned about widening the shoulder as that may cause traffic to travel faster along Rt. 125. Mr. Kelley stated that while Ms. Colwell, Mr. Hajec and himself went out to the site people were turning into Farrwood and passed on the left hand side. 80'd ZV96 889 809 'AOd -WOO -40AOPUV 44-AON Vb$r60 L6-Oc-unr Sgt. Fred Soucy of the North Andover Police Dept., stated that a middle turn lane would benefit the Town but it would have to go from Rennies to Mass.Ave. Possibly the costs could be borne by all property owners along that stretch of roadway. He is not in favor of widening the shoulder. If a middle turn lane is not constructed the roadway should remain as. If there are two vehicles and one went to pass on the right there would be adequate space to pass. Joseph Balliro, of 27 Farrwood Drive, asked if that was legal to pass on the breakdown lane. Mr. Soucy stated that they need to determine if it is a breakdown lane. ` Lisa Neukuckatz, of 68 Farrwood Drive, stated that people will start to pass on both sides of the street and make it a 4 way street and what about the pedestrians that are walking. Mr. Soucy stated that there is a sidewalk for the pedestrians. , Carol Rennie, owner, stated that there has never been an accident in front of Rennies. Ms. Lescarbeau stated that there was just one store there now however with this complex there will be more. Atty. Peter Shaheen stated that Mass.Highway has jurisdiction over Rt. 125 and the plans have been submitted for their approval. P.J. Piantadosi stated that these people live off of a state highway what do they expect. He would like to see a mall come into this town instead of going over Andover to spend his money. Ms. Curcio, of Farrwood Drive, stated that once the mall goes in the accidents will start to occur just like they did when Osco Drug went in on Rt. 114. She stated that 9 accidents have occurred. Jim McCarthy, Heritage Green property manager, stated that he does not want to see Rt. 125 turn into a Rt. 28 in Salem, NH. Carol Rennie stated that the mall would be a benefit to the town and it will have a country atmosphere. P.J. Piantadosi stated that the Rennes have,lived in this town their whole life and they are not planning on putting up the mall and leaving town. , Mark Gross, site engineer, stated that there would be 4 underground systems designed to store a IQO yr. Storm. Mr. Gross stated that'they have been before ConCom and they have asked John Chessia to look over the drainage because they will be discussing that with ConCom. Mr. Mahoney asked where the runoff would go. Mr. Gross stated that it would go into the wetlands on the Renniesro ert . P P Y Ms. Colwell stated that the building inspector had concerns with the proposed drainage structures off site and suggested that the applicant check with him regarding this issue. Mr. Gross stated that all the runoff goes through the infiltration. 60' d ZV96 899 80S -AOa -woo „ OAOPUV y:"ON VS11 60 L6-O£-unc Mr. Mahoney asked what would happen if the sumps overflow. Mr. Gross stated that the property owner is supposed to maintain the system and keep it cleaned out. If it is not, silt will build up and go through the pipe and to the infiltration system and eventually be carried down the system. Mr. Rowen asked if something can be done to prevent this from happening. Mr. Gross stated that a hood structure will be placed over the pipes to prevent garbage and silt from getting through. Atty. Mark Johnson, representing Heritage Green, asked if the drainage that is going into the ` wetlands is on residential property. Mr. Gross stated yes. Mr. Johnson stated that he asked John Morin, of Neve Associated to look over the proposed drainage and he would like to be put on the cc: list when there is information on the drainage for this prpperty. Mr. Mahoney asked what the building looked like in elevation, lighting and landscaping. Mr. Gross stated that the original plan had all compact parking spaces together now they have them spread out throughout the parking lot. The lighting along the parking lot on the opposite side of Farrwood will have 12' high lighting standards that cast light down on the lot. They will have landscaping with a stockade fence 5'high along Farrwood. There will also be a picket fence along the front of the property. The signage will be reviewed by the building inspector. Mr. Gross stated that the HVC units will be located on the top of the Rennies building in a pocket to reduce the noise. Helene Wilder, of Farrwood Drive, asked what side of the building will be facing Farrwood with the lighting issues and what about delivery times. Mr. Gross stated that the back of the building would be facing Farrwood and the only lights that would be on the back would be emergency lights on the back doors facing down to the door for security purposes. There are no late night or early morning deliveries. Ms. Colwell stated that there would be restriction on the delivery times written in the decision. Mr. Shaheen stated that he would like to end this at the next meeting. They have designed the building to be safe and the traffic has been approved by the Mass. State Highway. Joe Balliro, of 27 Farrwood Drive, asked if.there was going to be any security with the overnight parking. Mark Johnson asked if there was going to be a buffer of trees where the fence is going to be. Mark Johnson also asked if there are going to be any trees coming down and if the area is going to be graded. Joe Balliro asked if there is going to be any restrictions on the construction hours. Ms. Colwell stated that the Police Department would be in charge of that. Continued until April 1, 1997. The public hearing was continued until April 8, 1997 due to a snow storm. 01 -d Zb96 889 909 '^aO -woo .Ac-VAOPUV 44-AON V9 :60 Z6-o£-unC 7_ The North Andover Planning Board held a regular meeting on April 8, 1997. The following members were present: Richard Rowen, Vice Chairman, Alison Lescarbeau, Clerk, Alberto Angles, Associate Member and Richard Nardella. Kathleen Bradley Colwell, Town Planter was also present. Peter Shaheen of NW Design was present on behalf of thea applicant. W. Shaheen is requesting PP eq estmg a conditional Site Plan approval. Mr. Shaheen stated that the only thing that remains to be done is a perk test, which will be done on Friday. Ms. Colwell stated that there are other outstanding issues. John Chessia, the Town's engineering consultant, received the revised drainage last ` Wednesday and needs 2 weeks to review them. Mr. Rowen stated that not everything has been finalized. There are some issues that can be resolved like the building, lighting and landscaping. Mr. Rowen stated he would like to wrap up the traffic issue tonight. Mr. Nardella asked what the number of parking spaces were there. Mark Gross, of MW Design, stated that they have moved the compact spaces around. The required size of the spaces are to be 84" and they are giving them 86 '/2. Mr. Shaheen stated that there will be no restaurant put in the plaza. Mr. Nardella asked if the dumpster was going to be enclosed with a gate. Mr. Gross stated that it would be. Ms. Lescarbeau asked if it was a compactor or a dumpster. Mr. Gross stated that it was going to be a dumpster. Ms. Lescarbeau asked how many units are there in the building. Mr. Gross stated that there are a total of 9 but some can be combined. Dermit Kelley, of DJK Associates, stated that the size of the road is 36' wide. Mr. Kelley stated that the shoulder is 5'-6' wide. Mr. Lescarbeau stated that even though you can't be cited for using the shoulder she is not going to approve a plan which requires passing in..the shoulder. Mr. Nardella stated that the road is not going to be lined for the use of the shoulder. Atty. Shaheen stated that Officer Soucy stated that it was not illegal to use the shoulder. Mr. Nardella asked what is the objection to spending a little money and put the road wider and put the stripes on the road. Paul Hajec, the Town's Traffic Consultant, stated that he agrees with the applicant's traffic consultant and with the state highway department that a turning lane is not warranted for this project. However, in the future, if there is increased development along Rt. 125, a turning lane may be warranted along this stretch of RT. 125. I I 'd Zb96 889 80S -nap 'w03 .AOAOPUV y-..AON VZC s 60 L6-Oc-unc Mr. Rowen asked if the road were widened at this point would the cars then go faster. Mr. Hajec stated probably yes, but it can't be said until it's done. Elvira Curcio, of 23 Edgelawn Drive, stated that Officer Sou stated that this a State a road and was wondering why there has not been a State Police Officer attend a meeting to address the traffic. Mark Johnson, representing Heritage Green Condominiums, is concerned with the traffic plan. He questioned what would happen if you did not allow the passing on the right. Mr. Rowen stated that cars would queue up. Mr. Rowen stated that given the fact that the two traffic consultants and the State have approved the traffic plan he would not require a center turn Iane. Mr. Gross spoke with the town's engineering consultant and stated that the most significant issue is with the down stream area. They plan to do a perk test. Mr. Rowen asked if they will have enough time to get the results in by the next meeting. Mr. Rowen stated that we will put them on the agenda for the next meeting but if they don't get the results back in time we'll take them off. Nfr. Nardella stated that he is looking for them to bring something back to the Board on a proposal for roadway improvement. Mr. Shaheen stated that the applicant is willing to do what ever anyone else is willing to do. Tom Neve, of Neve Associates, is working with the condominium association stated that his major issue is with the site drainage. He would like them to test every layer that exists and test in at least in 4 different areas. Mr. Neve's other concern is the maintenance of the sub-surface system. Mr. Gross stated that the maintenance for these systems could be put in the decisions. The North Andover Planning Board held a regular meeting on April 15, 1997. The following members were present: Joseph Mahoney, Chairman,Richard Rowen, Vice Chairman Alberto Angles, Associate Member and Richard Nardella. Kathleen Bradley Colwell, Town Planner was also present. MI-IF Design requested a continuance until May 20, 1997 in order to complete the required soil tests as required by Coler& Colantonio in their last correspondence. The North Andover Planning Board held a regular meeting on May 20 1997.. The following members were present: Joseph Mahoney, Chairman, Richard Rowen, Vice Chairman, Alison Lescarbeau, Clerk, Alberto Angles, Associate Member r John Simons and Richard Nardella. William Scott, Director of Community Development. 31 'd ZVS6 889 80S 'naa -WOO AOAOPUV W:"ON tf8£=60 Z6-0£-uno Mark Gross of N HF Design and Peter Shaheen were present. Mr. Scott stated that they did tests on Monday and the water tables were higher and they addressed the issues and sent them to John Chessia and he had no major issues. Mr. Gross stated that he could design a system on a 7 inch water table. Mr. Rowen stated that at the last meeting the attorney for Heritage Estates had brought up some issues at the last meeting and wanted to know if they have been addressed. Mr. Scott stated that they did additional testing. Mr. Rowen asked if they are planning on having a maintenance plan to include in the decision. Mr. Gross stated that there are 6 pages in the drainage report for maintenance. Mr. Gross stated that on site litter would be picked up weekly, sediment and underground tanks will be inspected monthly and the water swale will be inspected twice a year. The Board would like to have a maintenance plan put in the decision. Mr. Shaheen stated that he thought we addressed these issues at the last meeting and both traffic consultants agreed. Mr. Nardella asked if we had anything from Sgt. Soucy. Ms. Lescarbeau stated that there is a letter in our packets that states that you should not cross over the white line. Mr. Shaheen stated that it is a line to show that the width of the road is almost at an end. Ms. Lescarbeau stated that you are trying to make a bad situation worse by using the sides of the road. Why don't you just widen the road. Mr. Shaheen stated that at the last meeting we suggested that an inexpensive way to improve the road would be to add a patch of pavement to the side of the road so people could use it. Mr. Shaheen believes that if it is widened people might not slow down but, speed up and also they are not allowed to widen the road without the state to say it was O.K. Mr. Nardella stated that we a legitimate difference of opinion on that. Mr. Shaheen stated that the applicant meets all the requirements for site plan review so they should get the approval. Mr. Mahoney stated that Mr. Shaheen is right if they meet all requirements we cannot deny them. Mr. Nardella stated that he is not opposed for them to start construction and then widening the road. Mr. Nardella stated that when it snows and the plows are pushing the snow and it covers that side of the road how are the people then going to pass. £I 'd Zb96 889 80S 'naQ 'woo „40nopub yq.AoN V6£ =60 L6-O£-unr Mr. Rowen stated that we have had 3 traffic people say that the road should not be widened and that people would speed up if it was widened and that's not what we want. Mr. Mahoney stated that he agrees. Mr. Shaheen stated that the applicant might contribute to the cost of the road. Mr. Shaheen stated that we are willing to do extra to get the approval. Jim Mcartney stated that the City of Haverhill has approved to widen Rt. 125 and they don't have ` a concern with speeding. Mr. Mcartney also state that he would like the North Andover Police Department to write a letter stating that it is legal for people to pass over the white line. Also he would like it put in the decision that if the owner of the mall goes belly up that someone has to maintain the drainage system. Mr. Nardella stated that there will be a bond to ensure that you would be protected Mark Johnson, representing Heritage Estates, disagrees with Mr. Mahoney. In section 8.3 1A, the purpose of it is to protect the health and safety of the residents and people. This is a site which has a building as big as you can get on the site. The drainage is not easy to get to and if it fails the Heritage Green people will be the only ones who will get hurt. The building is so big they can't even put a detention pond on the site so it is underneath. The traffic configuration is not good for any of the residents. Mr. Johnson stated that his biggest concern is the statement "we have met all requirements so you have to approve it". ,Mr. Rowen stated that he shares concerns with the drainage but it would have been fool proof if Heritage green tie into their sewer. Jim Mcartney stated that in response to Mr. Rowen's comment, would you like it if someone used access on your driveway. It is private property. Mr. Rowen stated that my point was that they denied them to tie into the sewer so they will have to live with what happens. Elvira Curcio, 23 Edgelawn passed out packets to the Board members. , Mr. Shaheen stated that he is looking for them to accept the site plan review and close tate public hearing. On a motion by Mr. Nardella, seconded by Mr. Rowen the Board voted 4-1 to close the public hearing. On a motion by Mr. Rowen, seconded by Mr. Angles, the Board voted 4-1 to direct staff to draft a decision. tPi 'd ZVS6 889 80S -nap -woo .ABAOPUV 4�4-AON VOV-60 L6-O£-unr The Board agreed to set the bond for 200 Chickering Road for$25,000. On a motion by Mr. Rowen, seconded by Mr. Mahoney the Board voted 3-2 to approve 200 Chickering Road site plan review, the site plan review was denied due to the fact you need 4 votes. Mr. Nardella,asked if the applicant would like to know why they denied it. Mr. Shaheen stated that he thought the Public Hearing was closed. Mr. Nardella stated that the applicant should come back to resolve the issues of public safety and traffic issues. Mr. Nardella statedthat there ` is an open door for further reconsideration. Ms. Lescarbeau stated that she does not concur with items 4&3 of the decision. Ms. L'escarbeau stated that it that it is not an appropriate location, the building is not appropriate and it is a safety hazard to the town and area. Ms. Lescarbeau stated that she does not feel that she can be persuaded. Mr. Shaheen stated that if it meets the bylaws then the permit must be granted, that's what the law says. Mr. Mahoney stated that they have followed the laws and statute. Mr. Mahoney feels that we have no right not to grant this. In his view the applicant has done everything they were supposed to do. , Attached are the conditions. Sincerely, Richard S. Rowen, Chairman North Andover Planning Board r S t 'd Zb96 889 SOS -A00 -WOO „tanopUV 4'Z-40N 1 TV:60 L6-O£-unr 200 Chickering Road(Rennies) Site Plan Review-Special Permit 200 Chickering Road (Reanies) Site Plan Review - Special Permit The Planning Board herein by a vote of 3 in favor, 2 opposed, does not approve the Special Pcnnit/Site Plan Review for the construction of a 16,900 one story concrete, masonry&-wood building located at 200 Chickering Road in the Business-1 Zone. Scott Companies, 12 Rogers Road, Haverhill, MA 01835 requested this Special Permit. ` This application was filed with the Planning Board on November 5, 1997. The three Planning Board members in favor make the,following findings as required by the North Andover Zoning Bylaws Section 8.3 and 10.3: FINDINGS OF FACT: 1. The specific site is an appropriate location for the project as it is located in the Busines-1 Zone along a major roadway, surrounded by industrial and commercial uses: 2. The use as developed will not adversely affect the neighborhood as the site is designed to buffer adjacent uses; 3. There will be no nuisance or serious hazard to vehicles or pedestrians as identified through traffic analysis and review of such analysis by the Town's traffic consultant. 4. The landscaping approved as a part of this pian meets the requirements of Section 8.4 of the North Andover Zoning Bylaw; 5. The site drainage system is designed in accordance with the Town Bylaw requirements; '6. The applicant has met the requirements of the Town for Site Plan Review as stated in Section 8.3 of the Zoning Bylaw; 7. Adequate and appropriate facilities will be provided for the proper operation of the proposed use. Finally, the Planning Board members in favor fund that this project generally complies with the Town of North Andover Zoning Bylaw requirements as listed in Section 8.35 but requires conditions in order to be fully in compliance. 1 9T 'd Zb96 889 809 -A00 -WOO .ASAOPUV 4qaoN VZV=60 L6-o£-unr 200 Chickering Road (Rennies) Site Plan Review-Special Permit The two dissenting Planning Board members found: 1. Mr. Nardclla stated that the applicant should come back to resolve the issues of public safety and traffic issues. W. Nardella stated that there is an open door for further reconsideration. 2. Ms. Lescarbeau stated that she does not concur with items 1&3 of the decision'(as cited above). 3. Ms. Lescarbeau stated that it that it is not an appropriate location, the building is not appropriate and it is a safety hazard to the town and area. The Board further instructs that this decision is done without the prejudice of the two year stay from further applications for a Special Permit. The Board will allow reapplication within the two year period as setforth in 40A 16 without the need for steps required for reconsideration. cc. Applicant Assessors Building Inspector Conservation Administrator Director of Public Works Engineer File Fire Chief Health Administrator Planning Board Police Chief 2 Z1 'd ZV96 889 SOS *nap •woO .AOAOPUV ya..AON !1£b:60 L6-O£-unC 0SC Acs r NOTES: PLAN REFERENCES: 1 ) THIS PLAN IS THE RESULT OF AN ACTUAL FIELD SURVEY MADE 1 ) PLAN OF LAND IN NORTH ANDOVER, MASS. DRAWN FOR CAROL RYAN ON OCTOBER 8, 1996 AND OCTOBER 10, 1996. 200 CHICKERING ROAD, NORTH ANDOVER, MASS.; SCALE: 1 "=60'; F �e °2 �4 ��, COMMON DATE: JUNE 14, 1996 BY MERRIMACK ENGINEERING SERVICES. ESSEX 2) ZONE: R--4, R-5 AND B-1 DISTRICTS. NORTH DISTRICT REGISTRY OF DEEDS PLAN #12837. 2) PLAN OF LAND IN NORTH ANDOVER, MASS. DRAWN FOR CAROL RYAN 41 200 CHICKERING ROAD, NORTH ANDOVER, MASS.; SCALE: 1 "=60'; DATE: JUNE 21 , 1995 BY MERRIMACK ENGINEERING SERVICES. ESSEX NORTH DISTRICT REGISTRY OF DEEDS PLAN #12639. wood 4PQ `� 3) SITE PLAN FOR HERITAGE GREEN CONDOMINIUM IN NO. ANDOVER, MA,; 125 SCALE: 1 "=60'; DATE: JUNE 4, 1986 BY ALLEN & DEMURJIAN, INC.. �` �� SITE �u��" ESSEX NORTH DISTRICT REGISTRY OF DEEDS PLAN #10399. aFP � ' 2K' r r� h 4) PLAN OF LAND LOCATED IN NORTH ANDOVER, MASS. OWNED BY DAVID Jr. & DOROTHY J. RENNIE; SCALE: 1 "=60'; DATE: NOVEMBER 1972 BY FRANK C. " =S"os�= 'a+ GELINAS, C.E.. ESSEX NORTH DISTRICT REGISTRY OF DEEDS PLAN #6822. CVZke i MAP 46 LOT 73 MAP 46 LOT 71 N/F NEW HERITAGE TRUST N/F NEW HERITAGE TRUST LOCATION MAP w (NOT TO SCALE) a FARRWOOD (43' WIDE - PRIVATE) - - - - - - — AVENUE - - _ _ ZONE- R-5 ZONE B- 1 _ �= 1 14'28'25" DUE EAST 421 .46' - R=20.00' N5a04 5a E 2.12 / LOT COR. TO D.H. L=39.96' FOUND AT / STONEWALL END / / MAP 46 LOT 104 --� N/F MICHAEL & ROSE MARIE ARCIDIACONO w DRAINAGE EASEI�AENT� 223 CHICKERING ROAD ' ------- ------- ^ NORTH ANDOVER, MASSACHUSETTS 01845 � ^ BOOK 559 PAGE 117 f0' MAP 46 LOT 83 MAP 46 LOT 84 MAP 46 LOT 85 / PUNjW N/F NEW HERITAGE TRUST N/F NEW HERITAGE TRUST N/F NEW HERITAGE TRUST �� /� PARCEL 'A' L { p �O /�? 129,331 Sq.Ft. O L , 2,969 Ac.f 00 w / D DUE EAST ZONE R-5 713.00' /' LOT LINES PER _ PLAN REF. #1 �/� MAP 46 LOT 104 DUE NORTH - - - ---- - - ------ - - - - --- - - - - ---- - - - ---- - --- - - - - ._._. - - - - - - --- - - - - - - - --.—. - - � TO BE ELIMINATED /��' N/F MICHAEL & ROSE MARIE ARCIDIACONO ZONE R-4 2.99 , _ _ 223 CHICKERING ROAD ti r - - NORTH ANDOVER, MASSACHUSETTS 01845 6p. ZONE LINE i S6� °° � PROPOSED SUBDIVISION UNE PARCEL 'B' 141 ,569 .Ft .S / q w ,`y / MAP 46 LOT 5 3.250 Ac.f 6 N/F DAVID T. & MARYELLEN C. JOHNS MAP 23 LOT 2 (TO BE DEEDED TO THE w 209 CHICKERING ROAD N/F TRUSTEES OF RESERVATIONS TRUSTEES OF RESERVATIONS) r / 15' DRAINAGE EASEMENT NORTH ANDOVER, MASSACHUSETTS 01845 572 ESSEX STREET Z i , BOOK 1031 AGE 374 BEVERLY, MASSACHUSETTS 01915 *0 - ' p� ---sem- --- , ZONE B- 1 S06'42'01 "W 11 .15' _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -S89'37'39"W ZONE R-4 303.65' y� DH FOUND AT ENO OF (n STONEWALL ON PROPERTY 0 � UNE, BACK 4.70' FROM � CERTIFICATIONS R.O.W. LINE Off' 1h 1 ) 1 CERTIFY THAT THIS SURVEY AND PLAN CONFORMS TO THET ETHICAL, o PROCEDURAL AND TECHNICAL STANDARDS FOR THE PRACTICE OF co �4/`r� (.AND SURVEYING IN THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS. MAP 46 LOT 34 / ,` � w rn N/F TRUSTEES OF RESERVATIONS / �q` AZ 2) 1 CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN HAS BEEN PREPARED IN CONFORMANCE 572 ESSEX STREET 4 Cll)J� WITH THE RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE REGISTER OF DEEDS OF BEVERLY, MASSACHUSETTS 01915 / e�� � THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS. Q. /�,) X01 J�^ry ♦h OF MAP 46 LOT 33 -4 Z/ � h�. �� N/F TRUSTEES OF RESERVATIONS °' Cv Q ./ CHRISTOPHER H '4C FRANCHER 572 ESSEX STREET \ BEVERLY, MASSACHUSETTS 01915 �O/�� � 14- n►o. t�s S28 44 02 E 9.29 ti YE �a U f Z 1 8 S52'96'080E S52006'08"W 17.59' CHRISTOPHER FRANCHER, P.L.S. DATE .47 TO DH SW5a'17"E FOR REGISTRY USE17.51' TO BOU MAP 46 LOT 32 ! THIS PLAN DOES NOT REQUIRE APPROVAL PLAN OF LAND BOON N/F TRUSTEES OF RESERVATIONS HIGHWAY UNDER THE SUBDIVISION CONT�' L LAW. 572 ESSEX STREET BOUND FOUND BEVERLY, MASSACHUSETTS 01915 (MIDDLE-BACK-EDGE) AN V R P NNIN BOARD AS. MAP 46 — LOTS 35 & 46 200 CHICKERING ROAD (ROUTE 125) NORTH ANDOVER, MASSACHUSETTS PREPARED FOR: SCOTT CONSTRUCTION Co. , INC. 12 ROGERS ROAD HAVERHILL, MASSACHUSETTS 01835 LEGEND GRAPHIC SCALE OWNER OF RECORD: ,, 12-8 Manor Parkway 0 DRILL HOLE FOUND o za �o ,00 goo ' 50 DAVID, Jr. & DOROTHY J. RENNIE. �... Salm, Now Hampshire 03079 ..� ' � (603) 893-0720 200 CHICKERING ROAD ENGINEERS• PLANNERS • SURVEYORS NORTH ANDOVER, MASSACHUSETTS 01845 MN Design Consultants, Inc. o GRANITE BOUND FOUND IN FUT BOOK 798 PACE 49 1 ADD PRESERVATION NOTE MSG 8 6 98 SCALE: 1"� 50 DATE: JUNE 19, 1998 R.DWG 0 IRON PIN TO BE SET 1 inch 0 50 ft. BOOK 826 PACE 33 NO. DESCRIPTION BY I DATE DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: PROJECT N0. SHEET N0. REVISIONS CMF MSG 45996 4 Q Z V O(k Z . h FOR RE6/5TRY USE "CERTIFY MA7- TH/S PLAN CONFORMS TO +' THE RULES AND REGULAT/ONS OF THE RE6/5TRY OF H0F JEFFREY NIF NEW HERITAGE 7-R,1,57- Uri RU57- f'L.S. DATE T I4S' Y/DEATE) YALAVEIVOEFARRWOOD (SEr) .BND DUE EAST _ — CENO.) R•20.00' THIS PLAN DOES NOT REQU/RE APPRO0, 421. 46' �. L•39 98' UNDER T�`/E SURD/(//,5/ON CONT AL ROL LAW — --* — -- NORTH ANDOVER PLANN/N ,ROAR® N/F NEW HS ER/TAGE TRUT � O LOT (AND.) P, W C� DATE o ZONE L/NE R- 5 74,686 S•F. / V N/.c 715 AC. ARC/D/ACONO ZONELINE B-1 ----------------- fNOWgLLDUE EAST 713. 00' aeU,t t , — — _ - 192. 53' \ k"� N88°12'30"W NSF H A:�U�;Ylii Fur��iwc eoac —_ �\ ^ � �L COBBLESTON ZONE LINE R-4 ti J E cRoss/NG NOTkS : i REAL TY 7RUST 9 , V .- 1.1 PROPEW Y L/NE5sHOWV, LOT F/ELG' .x1RYEY �0 196, 065 S.F ti �a 2.1 SEE TOWN M,4P"ik 46, LOTS -#,35 4 *46 4. 5010 AC. N/F FOR S/TE. 0� ARC/D/ACO 3.1 5EE NO BOOK BOOK PG #4,7 AND k 826. PG. *,33 FOR DEED REFERENCE D11 s D.H.ISETJ� 6A TO S/TF END W LL Dc 4.1 ZONING /S B-1 �' R-4 D/STR/CTS. 303.65' 5.) F'L.41YN/NG,BpA,?p *VOORSEMEN7"/S NO T A OETE.P�tiJ//Vs17'/D ri/ T�1AT STh'UCTUrPES r ARE /N CONFp'4'y/An/C'E lt//T/!T�-1�S/DE CJ S6, S89°37'39,W �� V N/F YAAAlo SETBACK,QE O,� /jq o3a�.6s' 0 D CTA/L �P TRUSTEES OF RESER!/AT/ONS �� 4 �) TNS Lars ary r s�,p N�F � �� TO oyE TOlYi1/ OF NDPT/1 ANv TRU5 TEES OF RESER�AT/ONS � V 75/o C 6,4 o ti s titi o� SET)H pDs ��` 528°44 'OZ"E f30.4A3"'.4W— D.H. F ERy S.B. BKCTIF PLAN OF I-AND r / 6 06 ANDOPLc... 5 STA/L. D AWN FOR 6s' CqROL 9 Y4N 5/T E CSEr) ''�� ` S�B N�/�P "o 20 CH/CXER/NG ROAD, NORM ANDOI/ER JEFFREY �yc0 , MASS. HOFMANN 1'� SC L E: 1"-60' 30 60 JU #say NE 21; 1995 _ w J FJSIU�P ENO/NEE&'/NSG► ,5ERY/C'E3 � G6 PARK STREET A 001169, MASSACHUSETTS 01810 LOCUSAIAP SCALE 1" 600'