HomeMy WebLinkAbout1971-11-01Monday - November l, 1971
Regular Meeting
The PLANNING BOARD held ~its regular meeting on Monday evenlng, November 1,
1971 at 7:30 P.M. in the ToE Office Building with the following members present
and voting: Charles W. Trombly, Jr., Esq., Chairman; Donald N. Keirstead, Vice
Chairman and Robert J. Burke. Mr. Chepulis & Mr~ Monteiro were unable to attend.
There were 20 people present for the meeting.
The minutes of the previous meeting had been read and Mr. Keirstead made a motion
to accept the~; Mr. Burke seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous.
RALEIGH TAVERN SUBDMSION:
Ben Osgood appeared before the Board to request partial release of the covenant
on "Raleigh Tavern Estates" as to Lots lA, 48, 47, 46, 45, 36, 35, 34 and 33. He
also submitted a Subdivision Bond in the amount of $16,O00 to cover the construction
of ways and installation of municipal services to service the same numbered lots.
A letter was received from the Highway Surveyor recommending the amount of $13,0OO
to cover the construction of Raleigh Tavern South and a letter from the Board of
Public Works recommending the amount of $3,000 to cover the cost of completion of
water mains on the same roadway.
Mr. Keirstead made a motion to refer the matter to the Subdivision Control Sub-
Committee (Burke & Chepulis); Mr. Burke seconded the motion and the vote was
una~ous.
PETITION TOAMEND ZONING BY-LAW:
Atty. Joseph A. Miragliotta presented a petition to the Board to amend the
Zoning By-Law concerning Rural Residence District, Section 4.11, so as not to
allow 2-family or duplex houses.
Chairman Trombly expls~ned that the members of the Planning Board had been subpoenad
earlier in the evening to desist from taking any action upon any petition for re-
zoning. They, along with the Board of Selectmen, are to appear in Superior Court
in Boston on Thursday, Nov. 4th~ at lO:O0 A.M. Mr. Trombly said the Plan~.Board
will take no action for the time being.
Mr. Keirstead made a motion to refer the matter to Town Counsel for action and
recommendation. Mr. Burke seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous.
"B~NTWOOD CIRCLe' SUBDIVISION:
A letter was received from Arthur Collins relative to the fire alarm system
in the "Brentwood Circle" subdivision. He stated the locations of the cables.
Mr. Keirstead made a motion to refer the matter to the Subdivision Control Sub-
Committee (Burke & Chepulis) and to the Fire Chief. He wanted the Fire Chief to
contact him also. Mr. Burke seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous.
REQUEST FORRE-ZONING:
A request to re-zone a parcel of land on Turnpike Street to General Business
was received from Ralph Somma who owns the area shown on an attached sketch. Mr.
Keirstead made a motion to take up the matter withMr. Brown. Mr. Burke seconded
the motion andthe vote was unanimous.
November l, 1971 - cont.
REPORT FROM DEPT. OF CO~TYAFFAIRS:
A report was received from the Dept. of Community Affairs relative to a
proposed Community and Environmental Development study. Mr. Keirstead made a
motion to refer the information to the Long Range Planning Sub-c~mmittee (Monteiro
& Keirstead); Mr. Burke seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous.
INFORMATION FROM SCHOOL DEPT.
At the Board's request, the School Dept. forwarded information to the Board
relative to the number of school chi~ldren from the several apartment developments
~town. ~
Mr. Burke made a motion to accept the information for future use; Mr. Keirstead
seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous.
SCHEDULES OF PAYMENTS: etc.:
Copies of material were received from John Brown relative to work items
completed, requisition for payment, etc. These were accepted and will be filed.
BOARD OF APPEALS HEARING& DECISIONS:
A legal notice of a hearing to be held by the Board of Appeals was received
upon a petition of John J. Reilly, Iii for a real estate sign to be larger than
is allowed under the Zoning By-Law. Mr. Burke made a motion that the Planniug
Board is not concerned and have no comment to make; Mr. Keirstead seconded the
motion and the vote was unanimous.
Mr. Trombly read decisions, all of which were granted by the Board of Appeals,
on the following petitions: McCarthy, Va]] iere, Trombly and Card.
MISCELLANEOUS MATTERS:
The Board signed two sets of plans "Not Requiring Planning Board Approval".
And they approved expense vouchers and noted the miscellaneous correspondence.
"FUTURE LAND USE AND CIRCULATIOn' REPORT FROM JOHN A. BROWN:
Discussion was held on the preliminary report from John Brown - "Future Land
Use and Circulation".
Mr. Keirstead informed the Board that the P.A.C. had met on Oct. 25th to discuss
the report and the maps submitted and that they had several suggestions to make.
They were not agreeable to the l~- acre zoning; they think the present one acre is
all right.
They propose showing the entire area to the rear of McLay's, etc. as industrial.
The area along Rea and Abbott Streets should be added to medium low density.
They thought a small business use could be provided in the Flatley apartment area,
such as stores, a sm~ll restaurant, etc.
They want to delete the area diagonally across from the new high school.
The existing business area across the street from the town building could be
expanded.
November l, 1971 - cont.
The areas around Sutton's and Osgood ponds could be cleaned and improved to make
a "mall" area - this is a long .range thing.
The P.A.C. recommended b!,ab the site of the K-mart proposal be moved farther south
along Turnpike Street, so that other streets would come to it to the rear and side
(Mill Rd. & Chestnut St.) for better access and less traffic.
The P.A.C. want the proposed Section 13 expanded and they~ant a sign by-law.
The circulation map showed a corridor road for Rte. 133 from Rte. 1]-4 near Johnson
Street to cut through the town to Dale and Winter Street to the Boxford line. The
P.A.C. want to take that corridor road out because it would be creating another
divider road through the town.
Atty. Willis asked what is going to happen to the present zoning? Mr. Keirstead
said we don't want to create non-conforming uses. Willis asked why couldn't he
blend what is there now with what he plans. A lengthy discussion was held on how
to handle the present zoning with future zoning.
Mr. Osgood thought that it had been agreed that Brown would not write up the
report ~mtil the F.A.C. and Planning Board had gone over it.
Mr. Keirstead said he doesn't intend to accept the report or map until certain
changes are made that the Planning Board and P.AC. suggest.
Mr. Willis suggested that some provision should be made for certain business
areas to provide living ~arters. He said hardly any lots in the present Village
res[d~nce area c,,nform and the lots should be treated with special consideration.
Yr. Ke~rstead mad~ a motion to restrict the discussion at the November 9 mee~,ing
to the Future Land U$,~ re2ort and map and to send a letter to John Brom~ informing
hi;~ so. ~.* that t1~,e the Board would like specific recomzendation~ as to how we
will trea~ [.h,- ~×t~tius ',usiness uses throughout the tovm under f,~ ~re land ~se
conceder.
Keirstead also m-~de a motion that before the final report of the Com2rehensive
Fla~u~ing ?rogra~ i.~ ~rinteJ~ all of the material to be ~cluded must first be
ap]~roved by the P]anninE 3oar~. A letter will also be sent to John ~lrown informing
this.
f~ ~'!iscussion wa~ then het~ on the possibility of requiring 1,? acre lots in the
u'atershe,-~ area an~t ~>lanned unit developments.
Yr. Ke~rstead sta%at that the P.A.C. set three major areas to be covereJ by John Brown:
1. ~'~ew Section 1] and ~lso areas to be re-zoned.
2. Sign By-Law.
5. Larger lots in wa%ershel area.
~he meeting 3dBourned at
Y/~/~]~D/. Chairman
~ ,c~'d~_~-~,_ Clerk
(Anna Donahue)