Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1968-02-26Monday - February 26, 1968 Special Meeting & Hearings The PLANNING BOARD held a special meeting on Monday evening, February 26, 1968 at 7:30 P.M. in the Town Office B~41ding Meeting Room. The fo]lowing members were present and voting: William Chepulis, Jr., Chairman; Robert J. Burke, Vice Chair- man; Howard G~lw~n, Secretary; James M. Bannan and George B. Farley. There were 14 people present for the hearings of the evening. 1. ~EZONING HEARING: Norman E. Lentz. Mr. G~lman read the legal notice upon a proposal to amend the Zoning By-Law, Section 4.7 by changing the words "in any zoning district" to "in General Business Districts". This petition was submitted by Norman E. Lentz. He spoke on behalf of the amendment saying that the intent of this article is to remove apartments from residential zoning. The PlaBB~g Board should be responsible for this but can see that they are taking no action ~so that the people will have to do it. He said people dontt want to have apartments in their back yards. General Business districts seem to be about the only area that apartments should be put in. There was no opposition to the petition. Mr. Hamori also spoke in favor of the amendment. Mr. Chepulis asked several questions of the petitioner. Mr. Barman made a motion to take the petition under advisement. Mr. Burke seconded the motion and the vote was una~us. 2. ~EZONING HEARING: Andras Hamori. Mr. Gi!mn read the legal notice upon a proposal by Andras Hamori to ~e~nd the Zoning By-Law, Section 4.73 by adding the fo]lowing paragraph: "When in a residential zone, the mi~m~ lot area per d~elling unit shall be the larger of 3,500 square feet or 1/3 of the minimum lot area re- quired for a single family dwelling." Mr. Hamori spoke on behalf of the ~mendment saying that this would safeguard the residences of the town. This would set a fair rule for residences and that apartments cannot come into to~n indiscriminately. The main objection is to the density of apartments in the area - they would be proportioned as single family units. It is not beneficial to the town to put ~high density apartments into small density areas. Mr. Stemke and Mr. Lentz were in favor of the amendment. Atty. John J. Willis spoke in opposition to the petition. -He thinks the present By-Laws are adequate. Charles Nelson, 31 Grey Street, spoke about there being a ratio to apply to all zoning areas - thinks this would be fair. Mr. G~]~n made a motion to take the petition under advisement. Mr. Barman seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. February26, 1968 - Cont. 3. RE ZONING HEARING: Louis J. Kmiec, J~. Mr. Gilman read the legal notice upon a proposal by Louis J. Kmiec to change from Rural Residential to General Business a parcel of land on Turnpike Street near the Camping Supply Store and McLay's Garden Center, containing approx~ 30,000 square feet. Mr. Kmiec presented plans to tB~Board and ~explained that hewouldlik~ to relocate his real estate office on this particular piece of ~1~ land. The pro- posed building would appear as a split level with lawns, shrubs and setting of trees. He showed a sketch of what is proposed. There is 470 ft. frontage on Turnpike Street and the building would set back about 60feet from the street. Parking wottld be in the rear. It would be residential in appearance and would not detract from the area. Mr. Chepnlts explained that once a piece of land is zoned it can be used for what- ever is allowed under that zoning. Speaking in opposition was Grank Gelinas, Grey Street. He said he is concermaA about what is being put on Turnpike Street. Many people have ~de promises to the Board and have not lived up to them~ He named the various businesses on the Turnpike, signs being put up, etc. Others speaking in opposition were: Mark Henry, Chickering Road. Charles Nelson, Grey Street Mr. Cushing, Grey Street. Norman Lentz, Bradford St. Their main concern was about spot zoning and m,~ug the Turnpike another Route 1. Mr. Nigrelli, 01d Village Lane, said he is new in North Andover and likes the Town. He would like to bring business to North Andover but is getting the feeling that he shoLuldn't come to Town. He says his business is a quiet, clean operation and wo~ld benefit the toMn. Mr. Chepulis explained that he should not get the wrong impression over what is being said tonight. The Planning Board is aware of what is needed in town. Mr. Burke made a motion to take the petition under advisement. Mr. Gilman seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. 4. AMENDMENT: Fire Station · Mr. Gilman read the legal notice upon a proposal to amend the Zoning By-Lawby inserting Section 4.0~ to read as follows: "Notwithstanding any contrary provision of this By-Law, the buildings, facilities and grounds of a municipal fire station ma__y be maintained upon any parcel of land acquired by the Town for such purposes." This was on petition of the Selectmen and Selectman Finneran and 0akes were present to explm~n its purpose. Selectman Finneran explained that this was expressly for the Fire Station and not any other facility; that it would be in keeping with the best interests of the Town. ToMn Counsel said this should be inserted in the February26, 1968 - Cont. By-Laws to cover whatever land is acquired by the Townin the Future. The site of Marbleridge Road, Dale Street and Appleton Street in proposed at present. There was no opposition recorded. Mr. Barman made a motion to take the petition under advisement. Mr. Gilman seconded the motion and the vote was u~nimous. ACCEPTANCE OF STREW. TS: 1. Marian Drive: The letter received from the Highway Dept. recommended non- acceptance. Discussion was held. Mr. Burke made a motion to recommend acceptance. Mr. Barman seconded the motion. 2. Elmcrest Road and Magnolia Drive. Atty. willis spoke about these streets an~ explained that the bond had been released and that a claim was settled for $500 which had been turned into the general funds instead of being used to repair these roads as was intended. The letter from the Highway Dept. w~s read. Mr. Gilman made a motion to recommend acceptance. Mr. Burke seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. 3. Lisa lane, Sandra Lane, Kieran Road. Atty. Willis spoke about these streets also and said the situation was somewhat similar to Magnolia Drive & Elmcrest Road. The bond has been released for the subdivision. The letter from the Highway Dept. was read. Mr. Bannan made a motion to recommend acceptance. Mr. Burke seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. 4. Village Green Drive, Leyden Street, Jefferson Street and Kingston Street. The letter from the Highway Dept. was read. Atty. Willis spoke on these streets also. He said the only issue is if the roads comply with the Subdivision Control Law. Mr. Nicetta's letter brought out that at the hearing held by the Board of Appeals for the apartment development the developer said there would be no expense to the town with the execptton of police and fire protection. Mr. Chep~,lts said the minutes of the meeting have no legal value. There is nothing in the decision that m~2s it a condition. Mr. Barman made a motion to recommend acceptance. Mr. Gilman seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. 5. Ferncroft Circle, Meadowview Rd., Highwood Way. Atty. WiS_lis also spoke about these roadways saying he and the developer were having trouble trying to satisfy the Highway Surveyor and that they could not get together on just what should be done on the roads. There is no finished surface yet. Mr. Chepulis read the letter from the Highway Dept. Atty. Willis said he Just wants a clear, concise answer from the Highway Surveyor as to what he wants done and they will do it. Ha said there has been a partial release on these roads - there is a covenant for two lots. Mr. Barman made a motion to take these streets under advisement. Mr. Burke seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. February26, 1968 - Cont. 6. Mark Road. Mr. Chepulis read the letter from the Highway Dept. and also the letter from the Board of Health. Atty. Willis said that the report of the Sanitary Engineer has nothing to do with the acceptance of the street. The road itself has been construeted according to the Boardts requirements. The bond was released. Mr. Bannan made a motion to reco~nd acceptance. Mr. Gilman seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. 7. Sylvan Terrace. Mr. Chepulis read the letter from the Highway Dept. approving of the Street. Mr. Gilw~n made a motion to recommend acceptance. Mr. Burke seconded the motion snd the vote was unanimous. 8. Cotuit Street. Mr. Chepulis read the letter from the Highway Dept., which road is not in good condition. Mr. Gilman made a motion to recommend acceptance. Mr. Farley seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. REQUEST FOR SUBDIVISION HEARING: Atty. WiLlis presented plans to the Board and requested a hearing for a subdivision. It is for Sutton Industrial Park, off Sutton Street - the Charles Matses property. He said Bride, Grimes, United Parcel and Sears, Roebuck are located there now. The hearing will be held on Monday evening, April 1st at 7:30 P.M. TOWN COUNSEL: A letter was received from Town Counsel relative to Article 25 of the Town Meeting Warrant. He explained that the Selectm~n can only recow~e~, they cannot instruct as is stated in the Article. The meeting adjourned at 10:30 P.M. ~' Chairman AD Clerk