HomeMy WebLinkAbout1967-06-13T~esday -June 13, 1967
Special Meeting & Hearings
The PLANNING BOARD held a Special Meeting on Tuesday evening, June 13, 1967 at
7:30 P.M. in the Town Office B,,41ding. The following members were present and voting:
Robert J. Burke, Acting Chairman; Howard Gilman, Secretary an~ George B. Farley. Mr.
Chepulis will arrive later, due to illness in the f~m41y.
There were about 18 people present for the re-zoning hearings of the evening.
1. HEARING: Re-zeroing - Danvers Street and Massachusetts Ave.
Mr. Farley read the legal notice to -w~nd the Zo-~-g By-Law by changing from
ViLlage Residence District to General Business District a smaLl triangular parcel of
land at the corner of Danvers Street and Mass. Ave.
Atty. Harold Morley, Jr. represented the petitio~ior, the firm of Webber Lumber CoS~mny
fre~ Fitchburg. They are b~g the 1~ formerly o~ned by Glenniest Milk Co. and
intend to construct a buil&~g to sell l~ber. They also have a store in Lowell,
This store would be for retail sales and they would conform to aL1 requirements for a
business district. The only access to this property is by Danvers St. Rte. 495 abuts
directly and the t~-g of land by the State left this roll trAangular parcel. This
land is too roll to construct anything. They Just want it rezone~ to be in ccaformity
with the remaining parcel of land.
Nobody else spohe and there was no opposition.
Mr. G~lm~ made a motion to take the petition under advisement. ~r. Farley seconde~
the motion and the vote was unanimous.
2. HEARING: Recreation Areas.
Mr. Farley read the legal notice upon a proposal by Dr. Raymond La~ and
others, to amend the North Andover ZoB~g By-Law by the addition of the foLlowing
section,
"Section 4.8 - Private Recreation Areas
Private recreation areas including sw~,~ug and/or tennis clubs shall be per-
mitted in ~ zoB~-g district in acco~ with standards set forth by the Board
of Appeals so as to not be detrimental to the neighborhood where it is to be
located; and only after a public hearing by the Board of Appeals with due notice
given on application for a building permit and only after a site plan review and
approval by the Board of Appeals endorsed in writing on the site plan with or
without any conditions."
Atty. Robert L. Hermann spoke as representing the petitioner and a number of
people interested in private recreation areas. This would not concern one particular
area, but would be for the town in general. This would be for the protection of the
residents because people would have to go to the Board of Appeals for a special
permit. The present By-law does not cover private recreation areas at all. He then
explained about a group of neighbors desiring to form a s~mm~ and tennis club
which would be open for membership. They could have requested re-zoning a particular
parcel of land to Business but felt that this method would be of benefit to the
toun and residents.
J~me 13, 1967- cont.
Nobody else spoke. There was no opposition.
Mr. O~l~u made a motion to take the petition under advisement.
seconded the motion and the vote was un~imous.
Mr. Farley
3. HEARING.. ~der-sized lots.
Mr. Farley read the legal notice upon a proposal by the Building Inspector to
amend the North Andover Zoning By-Law as follows:
"By striking therefrom Section 6.61 thereof, or to amend said Section by ~
specifying a minimom permitted lot area, or by changing the presently required
yard space requirements, or both, or by making other ch~ges in said Section, which
has to do with the use of sub-standard sized lots."
Charles H. Foster ~spoke, explaining his problems as Building Inspector With small
lots~, and of the number of small lots presently existing in tows. He expladmed that
the State law presently states that a lot may be built upon if it has 50' frontage
and 5,000 sq. f~,, provided the structure built upon the lot will have the setbacks
as required by the local Zoning laws. Mr. Foster telkod this problem over with the
Board of Appeals~ and that they agree that they would like to see the State require-
ments. Section 6.61 as it now reads does not state any 14m~t. There are lots as
small as 4,500 sq. ft.. This new amendment would protest residential areas in town.
Mr. O4~ean asked what would happen to the lots left in town that are u~dersized?
Mr. Foster said they would have to go before the 'Board of Appeals and would have to
conform to the general neighborhood. This would protect the neighborhood and st111
give them the right to build.
There was no opposition.
Mr. Farley made a motion to take the petition u~der advisement. Mr. Gilmau seconded
the motion and the vote was unanimous.
4. HEARING: Apartmanta.
Mr. Farley read the legal notice upon a proposal by the Board of Appeals, to
amend the North Andover Zoning By-Law as follows:
"To amend Section 4.72, sub-paragraph (a) to read: Multiple or group dwellings,
provided that there sB-11 be not more than twelve dwelling units per structure of
Class C or Class D, or eighteen dwelling units of Class A and Class B.
To amend Section 4.73, sub-paragraph (c) to read: There shell be a lot area
for each dwelling unit in mu2tiple-dwelling structures, in addition to the lot area,
if any, required for other permitted uses as follows:
Class As Studio Umits, not exceeding two functional rooms, 1500 sq. ft.
Class B, O~e bedroom ,m~t, not exceeding three f~mctional rooms, 2,000 sq. ft.
Class C, Two bedroom unit, not exceeding four functional rooms, 3,500 sq. ft.
Class D, for each functional room in addition to four, add 2,000 sq. ft. require-
mants."
June 13, 1967 - Cont.
John J. Shields spoke for the Board of Appeals, who are sponsoring the Article.
They feel that because of the Board's experience in the a~m~-~stration of the
Apartment section in the By-Law that changes should be made in the present require-
ments. Apartment developments are increasing in town, rather than single homes. The
requirements should be different for different types and n~ber of rocks. CerteS-
types of apartments would preclude children. Apartments would provide more revenue
to the to~n without ~w~.osing any additional tax req,,~_-ements.
~r. Phelan spoke in favor of the new apartment section amendments and explained how
apartments had saved the to~n tax-wise~ and that the apartments built in town are a
credit to the developers and to the town - they should be very proud of them.
Mr. Ot].~- made a motion to take the petition trader advisement. Mr. Farley seconded
the motion and the vote was unanimous.
Mr. Louis Kmiec ~as present and told the Board he wanted to point out somethi-g
about the Henry subdivision that had been overlooked at the hearing. He showed a
ci~vert on the plan that he was concerned about.
Mr. Barman arrived at about 8:45 P.M.
Mr. Chepulis arrived at about 9:00 P.M.
The Board then proceeded to discuss the hearings of the evening.
1. Danvers St. & Mass. Ave.
Mr. G~l~an made a motion to reco~..e~nd re-zoning from V~llage Residence to
General Business the ~11 parcel of Gle~e's land at Da~,~rs Street and Mass. Ave.
Mr. Farley seconded the motion amd the vote was
The reasons for reeo~=~nding approval are:
1. This would be extending an area that is already zoned for business.
2. The land could not be used for anytb4~g else.
3. This re-zoning w~ald not be detr~,~ental to the area.
2. Recreation area.
Mr. Barman made a motion that this article be stricken from the Warrant. The
Article as written is not definitive enough. This should probably be brought up at
a regular Town Meeting. Mr. GiVen seconded the motion and the vote was
3. Undersized lots.
Mr. B~n~A. made a motion! that this article be stricken from the Warrant. Mr.
Farley seconded the motion and the vote was u~a~mous. The Board feels that the
present By-law is adequate.
4. Apartments.
Mr. Banuan made a motionl that this article be stricken from the Warrant. Mr.
Chepulis seconded the motion and the vote was u~ous. The Board h~s not had
sufficient t~w~ to consider all ram~*ications. This could possibly be acted upon at
a regular ~own Meeting,
Ju~e 13, 1967- Cont.
T~e Board agreed to meet on Saturday morning at 10 A.M. in order to vote on the
Subdivisions for which hearings had been held on J~e 5th.
A notice had .been received from Aetna Insurance Company regardfug a bo_~d__ from
Maniaci about Mablin Ave. A check will be made with J~m~s Maker to see if he has'
a copy of the Bond.
The meeting adjourned at 10:00 P.M.
WO Chairman
AD Clerk