Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1973-01-22Monday - January 22, 1973 Special Meeting //~ The PLANNI~ BOARD held a special meeting on Monday evening, January 22, 1973 at 7:30 P.M. in the fire station meeting room with the following members present and voting: Charles W. Trombly, Jr., Chairman; Donald N. Keirstead, Vice Chairman; William Chepulis and John J. Monteiro. Fritz Ostherr was out- of-to~n and unable to attend. There were over 50 people present, This meeting was called specific-lly to listen to the representatives of the Archdiocese of Boston relative to their townhouse proposal on Waverly Road on the cemetery land. Chairman Trombly gave a brief background of the Archdiocese proposal for a townhouse development on the cemetery land on Waverly Road. Father Michael Groden was present and explained that Atty. Dolan was ill and unable to be present this evening. They are presenting new plans which they. feel will now conform to the reqUirements of the Subdivision Rules and Regulations and the Zoning By-Law. Mr. Stephen Diamond presented the new plans which show. a completely new layout. The townhouses front on streets which will be' built. The street enters from Waverly Road and makes a single loop back to Waverly Road. There are 1/~ town- houses on this plan. Each is located on a piece of land which is 3,000 sq.. ft. or more and has the required frontage of 18 feet. Each group of buildings is separated by 50 feet ~nd they do not have more than one family in each townhouse. The townhouses are two stories with a kitchen, dining room and living room on the first floor and bedrooms on the second floor. They will look like individual houses - like single family homes. 3 or ~ acres of land. in 'the center will be left in its natural state, to conserve the' trees, etc. There will be a substantial buffer of trees around the development. Open space can be developed to be used in conjunction with a community building. The people will own a share 'lin the community building also. Outdoor play facilities will be Provided and indoor space for social activities. Parking is located at the entrance of each of the rows of attached townhouses. Each family unit has its own front door and front patio and private back yard. They now feel that every requirement of the town has been met. Mr. Monteiro made a motion to refer the plan to the Subdivision Control Sub- committee for report at the February 5 meeting; Mr. Keirstead seconded the motion. Mr. Keirstead amended the motion to add that the plans also be referred to the Building Inspector as to compliance with zoning. Mr. Diamond went on to explain that they are also submitting new amandedplans for a preliminary site plan, drainage plan, sewerage plan and plot plan. He said all of the streets as shown will be built and he would like these plans to be substituted for any plans that are presently on file. Mr. Chepulis brought out the point of th~ townhouses being capable of being sold individually because the previous plans showed one living unit over another. Mr. Diamond said they have eliminated those units and do not have any one bedroom units at all; and each ~unit is capable of being sold with its own lot. The new plans show 75 - 2 bedroom; 53 - 3 bedro°m and 16 - ~ bedroom units. January 22, 1973 - cont. They next looked at the drainage plan. Mr. Diamond thinks it will improve the area by a pipe system and they will install catch basins on the. paved areas. Mr. Keirstead said a drainage easement:, probably for 30 feet, would be required along the drainage path. He asked that they clarify the point of drainage where it comes onto Waverly Road; he questioned whether it was a culvert. He requested they submit something to writing to clarify it. Discussion was also held as to whether the Conservation Commission should be consulted at this time. Mr. Diamond agreed that they will have to go into the drainage problem in greater detail. The Board agreed that they should have their engineer come up with something more definitive and also try to pick up the flow from the Farr apart- ments. Mr. Diamond said they do not intend to use Wood Lane at all. Mr. Chepulis brought out about the vacant areas not being shown as lots - how are they going to be designated? How about parking spaces? If a lot is sold, does he also own a parking space. We should have some of these questions straightened out in advance. Mr. Dismond said the roadways are 50 feet, with 26 feet paved; however, theywill do whatever the Board wants on the width of the roadways. Discussion was held as to the 60-day time limit of approval of a prellwinary plan. Mr. Dismond said the time didn't matter to them; that the next meeting on February 5th is al/ right with them. The Board then voted unanimously in favor of the motion to refer the plans to the Subdivision Control Sub-committee andthe Building Inspector for report at the February 5 meeting. Several people present requested to be heard. It was explained that this was just a presentation of preliminary plans, that when they submit definitive plans there is a public hearing and then everyone can speak and the Board votes on that hearing. Maybe there was a misunderstanding. As Father Groden of the Archdioceses was leaving, he announced to everyone present that they will hold a meeting on Wednesday, January 31st, at St. Michael's hall to discuss the proposal with everyone. The Board then held discussion of the proposal with several of the people present. Mr. Keirstead explained that if a developer meets the statute requirements and the Board's regulations, that the Board has to approve the subdivision. If they don't meet them, the Board can disapprove it and if they then meet the requirements, the Board has to approve it. However, it was brought out that court action could be taken within the 20-day appeal period once the decision is filed. Discussion was held as to the number of children, taxes, etc. Mr. Keirstead explained that theywill now be taxed - that the town will collect taxes from this development; the Archdiocese are going to turn it over to a private developer. Several people were concerned because no taxes have been paid on this land and now the church is going to make money by selling it. It was also January 22, 1973 - cont. mentioned that someone on the Planning Board is involved in this and that he should disqualify himself. The people also felt it was unfair that they should be charged for the sewer assessments along Waverly Road and the Archdiocese didn't have to pay anything and will now get the benefit of it. They asked if the church will have to pay now. Mr. Monteiro pointed out that he does not agree entirely with Mr. Keirsteed; there can be a denial of a subdivision bya majority vote of the Board and the petitioner can take the Board to court. Chapter 77~ was mentioned and noted that the petitioner is not coming in under this law. A letter was read by erie of the abutters that was distributed by St. Michael's church asking the people to be considerate but he commented that the Archbishop is not being considerate of the townspeople. Cooperative ownership was discussed. Mr. Keirstead said that the Board does not feel type of ownership comes under their consideration. He explained what cooperative ownership was and that Town Counsel ruled it is allowed. The Board announced that the February 5th meeting will be held in the High School auditorium. Many of the people were concerned because there is a serious drainage problem there now and it would be even worse if the area were developed. HOUSI~ STUDY COMMITTEE: Mrs. Marlen Stekert appeared before to request the Board's permission to go to the Tri-Oity Council for rehabilitation studies. The council has hired an architect and an attorney and the committee would like to get more information to see what help could be provided the town for a rehabilitation study. Mrs. Stekert said the council is meeting on January 31st in Lowell and she would like the Board's authorization to attendt primarily for information. She will then report back to the Board before final joining. Mr. Monteiro made a motion to authorize Mrs. Stekert to attend the meeting and report back; Mr. Keirstead seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. MISCELLANEOUS MATTErS: Mr. Keirstead read an answer from Town Counsel relative to dates of sub- mission of preliminary plans, etc. to the Planning Board. The letter was read and filed. The new Subdivision Rules and Regulations have been printed and are available for $1.OOper copy. Mr. Keirstead reported that the Watershed Study Committee will be ready to make a report soon; they have defined the watershed area. January 22, 1973 - cont. The P.U.D. Study Committee has no report to make at this time. Discussion was held as to the $2500 that had been appropriated last year for consulting services for the Planning Board. The Advisory Board will not agree to carry the balance over to 1973. The Board feels that they will probably need money for consulting services for the Watershed study. Mr. Monteiro will get a figure from the Merrimack Valley Planning Commission as to the cost of a consultant for the study and report at the February 5th meeting. Mr. Ostherr will also be notified of this for the Study committee meeting. PLANS NOT REQUIRING APPROVAL: 1. Maloney- Boston Street. Mr. Keirstead made a motion not to sign the plan because it shows a subdivision; Mr. Monteiro seconded the motion and the vote was U21animOUS. 2. Carney - Campbell Road. Mr. Monteiro made a motion not to sign the plan because it does not show adequate frontage for lot "2"; Mr. Chepulis seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. SOLID WASTE: Mr. Monteiro feels the Board should discuss the solid waste problem in the region. A definite stand should be taken by the town because with the sewerage treatment plant being located in North A~dover,'he feels we have enough and have done our share and should not have something else forced upon us; let some other community be considered. This will be discussed more thoroughly at some future meeting. The meeting adjourned at 10:OOP.M. Chairman (Charles W.~Trombly, jr.) ecretary