HomeMy WebLinkAbout1973-02-19Monday, February 19, 1973
Special Meeting '
The PLA~ BOARD held a special meeting on Monday eventng, Febr-a~y 19, 1973
at 7:30 P.M. in the Town Office ~,t1~.~ meeting room ~ri~h the following members
present and voting: Charles W. ?romblyt Jr., Chair~ Fritz Ostherr, Olerk~
William Chepulis and John J. Monteiro. Mr. Xeirstead ,as out-of-to, a and unable
to attend.
There were 10 people present for the meeting.
~r. Mo~teiro made a motion to aceept the minutes of the previous meetings~
Ostherr seconded the motion and the vot® was
"A~ CIRCLE" SUBDIVISION:
Atty. Naurice Schwartz amd ~r. Espusito, the angimeer, appeared before the
Board to request that a hearing date be. set for their proposed subdivision off
Andover ~trest. At the previous meeting, a date was not set because a linen was
not submitted of the profile and ut4~4tie8 plan. They did not thiak that a linen
was required since a profile and utilities plan is not recorded at the Registry.
Mr. Chepulis said that the Board has alwa~ required a linen of the profile and
utilities plan.
Mr. Mo~teiro said the Subdivision sub-come, tree has looked over the land and
know all about the development, He felt the Board could set a hearing date pending
receipt of the limen.
Mr. Esposito said he could have the l__imen into the office before the and of the week.
Mr. Monteiro made a motion to set the hearing date for ~arch leth, pending receipt
of the linem~ Mr. Chepulis seconded the motion and the vote ~as unanim~_s.
J. & ¥. REALTY TRUST
A bamk book i~ the ~t ~ $10,~
~ a ~sion ~ t~ ~ee ~e ~rf~ce ~f fha ~rk to be d~e ~n the
"CheWer Co~" s~s~. It was noted
~e Bo~ at a ~e~ous meot~-~ was n~
Mr. Monteiro made a motion to accept the bond filed'by J~' & V' Eealt¥ Trust.
Mr, Chep,,~ s amended the motion to state ~ the conditioa of perfOrm~,g .~ 'the
necessary work by September 15th; Mr. Ostherr seconded the motion and ~he vote was
~m~4 molls,
A letter ~ ~ be sent to jay Burke notifying him that the Board has accepted the
bond and to state that the work ~ast be finished by September 15, 1973.
WATEr,ED S~ ~O~$[ITTEE: '
Mr. Ostherr pre~ented copies of the Watershed Study Cmmaittee report t~ eaeh
of the members of the Board.. He said the committee has made acme preliminary
conclusions and have some recommendations to make. He could like the Board to
Febr-_~ry 19, 1973 -cont.
adopt the s~irit of the report in some fashion and recommend the adoption of
it t~ the Board cf Health, since the regulaticas would cone under the Juris-
diction of the Board of Health. ' '
John Willis did not ~gree with a portio~ of the out~4-e of the watershed area
designated in the vicinity ef Barker Street; he suggested cha~i~ the b~undary
line slightly. He also spoke about the 500 ft. requirmaent on each side of a
brook, m~,"~ a total of 1,000 ft, which is alot of area.
Mr. Ostherr said this was Just a suggestion; it needs more study. Mr. W411~
said l~itations should be made according to state statute and not set up on
your o~n. These recem~e~dstions are in excess of the state requirements and he
feels the Board is excee~ its authority.
Mr. Monteiro made a motion te accept the report and to connend the Watershed Study
Cmmittee for its report.; Mr- Chepulis seconded the motion amd the vote was
CONSULTANT ~YIC~:
Mr. Nonteiro explained the Nerrimack V=11 ey Planning Commission' s letter
relative to eonsultaat services available threugh the commission. The AdvisOry
Board did not allow the $2~00 the Planniag Board had requested for consultant
services. Nr..Ostherr said ee can ask for money from the reserve fund it'if
becomes necessary. Mr. Trembly said that the Advisory Board more or less.
promised us we could get the money if we needed it.
Mr. Konteiro made a motion to accept and file the letter.
Atty. Dolan and Mr. Dimond appeared before the Board. Chairman Trembly
expl-4ned that Atty. Dolan had called h~m earlier.in' the evening mad asked if they
could sub,it sene material to the Board.
Atty. Dolan presented a letter to the Board and proceeded to expln~ its contents.
They had studied the list of reasons received fr°m th~-Board and would like to
get the Board's reaction'on parts of their letter. There are items they felt
are not required on prel~ plans; item ~ for e~nmple, referring to an access
road. 'He asked if the items Could be re-stated in a way' that ~ould be ~ore use~
ful to them,
Mr. Monteiro said that his m-~- objection was that almost all of the people in the
area are concerned whether or not this project is good for the health, safety and
welfare of the tow~__~people. He would like to meet with them and possibly cone up
with a more acceptable plato', He does not want to hurry this project, he feels
the Board has not had enough time to ~ake a decision on this; there have
been only four meetings on this matter.
Mr. Ostherr suggested that the com~n areas he c~1led "parMs"$ and stated that
items 5, 8 & 10 can be h~l_ed on. the definitive plan..
Mr. ~onteiro suggested that the Board accept this letter this evening amd t_~ke it
under advisement for further study by the Board. Mr. Keirstead is not present this
February 19, 1973 - cont.
evening and it is not fair to make an~ c~ents on it tonight.
Atty. Dolan said Mr. Xeirstead has not seem the letter. He would lime to have
the Board 4~dieate that they can co~e in periodicall~ to discuss the proposal
~ith the~. He would like to show the Board, probably at the nex~ ~eeti~g, how
they plan to sho~ the 'ce~men~ areas.
Mr. Ostherr suggested a working meeting ~ith the Archdiocese, probably on the 19th,
to discuss their points of clarification.
Atty. Dolan said he w.dld prefer just a dialogue betwee~ them and the Board and
not get the people involved.
~r. Ostherr suggested a~l~ about an hour for discussion with the Board and
themallo~questi, ns frae the fleer. Mr. Ostherrmade a motion to meeton
~arch 19th with the Archdiocese; Mr. Monteiro seconded tho metione~ the vote was
l~ous.
QUESTIONNAIRE: League of Wo~enVoters.
A questionnaire cas received free the League of Woaen Voters relative to
To~nGovernment. The Board could take no action on this because the questions
per~-4- to individuals rather than a Board.
Mr. Hon%eiro made a motion to accept the letter and notify the League of W~en
Voters that the Board could not m~e an~ e~ents. Mr. Ostherr seconded the
mo~ionand the vote was u~animous.
~lS~S MATT~ ·
P.U.D. 8TUD~ CO~TTEE:
another ~eek or so.
Mr. Oetherr said the co~aittee will tr~ to meet in
SOLID WASTE 3TUDY= Mr. ~onteiro suggested that the Board make a decision
on this matter at some tine. ~here it is going to be placed sight be asked of
the to~n and maybe a aub-c_~m~ttee should be for~ed to stud~ it.
SUBSIDIZED HO~s Mr. Monteiro said the Merrimack Valley Pla~ 0c~=~ ~sion
has some material available and that ee should ask for several copies of ~hat they
have, for the me~bers and also Mrs. ttekert.
PLANS NOT R~QUIRIN~ APPROVAL=
~r~. Ootherr sade a motion to aiga the following plans; Mr. Chepulis seconded
the motion and the vote was unanimous.
1. Falanga. 2. Old N.A. Realty Trust.
/HU~HE~ PLANS~
The Board was usable to alga the Hughes subdivision plems because there ~as not
a linen of the utilities & profile plan.
The meeting adjourned at 9=30 P.M.
Chairman