Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1968-09-27Friday - September 27, 1968 Special Meeting & Hearing The PINNING BOARD held a Special Meeting on Friday evening, September 27, 1968 at 7:00 P.M. in the North Andover High School. The following members were present and voting: Wi21iam Chepulis, Jr., Chairmsn; James M. Bannan, William B. Duffy, Jr., Robert J. Burke and George B. Farley. BEN OSGOOD: Mr. 0sgood appeared before the Board regarding his subdivisions. Two letters were received from the Highway Dept. regarding release of bonds, etc. Highway Dept. had Brasseur Associates make an inspection; bonds for Raleigh Tavern Estates as follows: Carlton Lane - $9,000, Raleigh~avern N. - $4,420 and Raleigh Tavern S. - $2,634. Mr. Osgood said he did not receive any letters from Mr. Nicetta. Mr. Nicetta is asking for $15 per ft. Osgood thinks $9,070 is enough. HE~RING: 7:30 P.M. -Amendment to Zoning By-Law - 30 people present. 1. Apartment amendment. Mr. Duffy read the legal notice of the hearing, which was upon petition of the Selectmen. Chairman of the Selectmen Arthur P. Kirk spoke saying the intent of the Selectman was for an article which would halt apartment growth for the time being so the ~lanuing Board cotuld study the situation more closely. He said he was not totally pleased with the article as written, but indicated they were basically interested in seeing apartments slowed down while the towa's growth pattern was studied a bit. Norman E. Lentz, 63 Bradford Street - agreed with what Selectman Kirk said. A holding action is needed and the town needs a Master Plan. James Noble, 11 E~m~nds Road - favors the article - people are not looking for a permanent halt to apartments but rather a temporary stop until we see where we are going. Donald Yeirstead, Old Village Lane - he thinks an apartment district should be established so that people in residential areas would not have to worry about apartments being built in their bacl~ yards. Mr. Chepulis spoke about the wording of the legal notice and proposed article. No apartment district is spelled out - there is nothing specific - Just generality. The Planning Board agrees that something should be done. Atty. John Jo Willis said he is very concerned and thinks the apartment section should be amended properly. He said the article is improperly drawn and cannot be acted upon. No areas are described as apartment districts and no districts zoned and no notice given to people involved if certain areas are to be zoned as apartments. The procedures of Section l0 of the Zoning By-Law have not been complied with. He is a strong supporter of revamping the Zoning By-Laws. He is opposed to $2500 being appropriated for a planning consultant, thinks $20,000 should be appropriated to hire a qualified, experienced planner, we need a ~ster Plan and he would be the strongest supporter of such an article. A change in the Apartment section of the " 217 September 27, 19 68 - cont. Zoning By-Laws shoLu~d be considered at an Annual Town Meeting- after the Planning Board has been advised by a qualified plsnner so that the town can be planned logically. He compliments the Board of Appeals for the actions they have taken regarding apart- ment developments. He thinks the present law has operated very well under the Board of Appeals. Apartments are not bad - they are a great tax return to the town. He is opposed to this proposed amendment because it is illegal and improperly presented; it would be inoperable if passed; the present provisions and regulations control apart- ments. A lengthy discussion was held by Mr. Duffy and Atty. Willis regarding wording, etc. Mr. Cbepttlis and Mr. Bannan also joined the discussion. Mr. Barman made a motion to take the petition under advisement. Mr. Farley seconded the motion and the vote was 4-1 - Mr. Duffy voting no. 2. HEARING: Amendment to Zoning By-Law. Mr. Duffy read the legal notice of the hearing, upon the petition of the Plamning Board ~~q~.. This was to strike out the words "vacant, and" from Section 6.61 of the Zoning By-Law. Mr. Chepulis explained the purpose of the amendment and no one had any com~ents to make. Mr. Bannan made a motion to take the petition under advisement. Mr. Farley seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. At 9:0OP. M., after the hearings, the Board resumed the discussion with Ben Osgood as to the bonds, etc. Raleigh Tavern Estates Bond: Mr. Burke made a motion to ask for $9,500 for ~ 1,450 ft. Mr. Bannan seconded the motion - subject to the proper filing of a cevenant which has not as yet been filed. The vote was unanimous. Morningside, Meadowview: 1. Woodcrest Drive: Mr. Nicetta reco~ends keeping $5400. put up a new $5400 bond for the entire subdivision. Mr. Osgood says he will Mr. Bannan made a motion that Osgood post a bond for $12,000 for Morningside. No second. Mr. Burke made a motion that $8500 be posted. Mr. Barman seconded the motion. The vote was 3-2, Mr. Duffy &Mr. Cheptulis voting no. Coachm~n's Forest: Letters were read from High~ay Dept. and Brasseur Associates. A release of 2600 feet (12 lots) is being requested. Mr. Barman made a motion to post a bond for $15,000 for release of the covenant. Mr. Dully seconded the motion. The vote was 4-1 - Mr. Farley voted no. September 27, 196~ - cont. DISCUGSION OF HE~RINGS: The Board discussed the hearings of the evening. 1. Amendment to Apartment Section of ZBL; Mro. Bannan made a motion that the chairman be instructed to get a ruling from Town Counsel upon the legality of the article being in the Warrant and then meet again to discuss To~n Counsel's answer. Mr. Burke made a motion to refer it for the Annual Town Meeting. Further discussion was held. The Board Mill meet again before the Special Town Meeting. 2. Amendment to Section 6.61: Mr. Bannan made a motion to reco~nend approval of the change to Section 6.61. Mr. DufTy seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. The meeting adjourned at 11:00 P.M. WC AD Chairman Clerk