Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1973-04-02Mondax - April 2, 1973 Regular Meeting - The PLANNIH} BOARD held its regular meeting on Monday evening, ~April 2, 1973 at 7:30 P.M. in the To~n Office Building meeting room. The following me~bers were present and voting.- William Chep,,l~s, Chairman~ John J. Monteiro, Vice Chair- man; Paul R. Lamprey, Clerk; Donald N., Keiretead and Fritz Ostherr. There were approximately 30 people present for the meeting. Mr. Ostherr made a motion to accep~ the minutes of the previous meeting; Mr. Keirstead seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. "JOHNSON CIRCLE" ~UBDIVI$ION: Scott Giles was present and submitted the linens of the approved subdivision as had been requested by the Board. Mr. Chepulis explained that official notice of approval of the subdivision was not given to the Town Clerk a~d would not be until the Board received the necessary linens of the plans. The time will start running fro~ ~he date the decision is filed with the Town 01erk. Mr. Keirstead noted that there should be an easement shown on the plans on the lines at the end of the turnaround. Mr. Monteiro pointed out that Mr. Cyr, the new Nighway Surveyor was present and that he should be considered on all of the subdivisions. Mr. Cyr said he had looked at the situation and that he wished he would have been able to have some- thing to say and that he would like to have an opportunity to take part. "SALEM GARDENS" SUBDIVISION: Mr. Monteiro reported that the Highway Surveyor and the Bldg. Inspector had viewed the area with the Subdivision Control Sub-con~ittee (Monteiro & Ostherr). The Board went over the several suggested changes and found that they had all been met. Mr. Ostherr suggested that the two proposed catch basins on Salem Street be relocated within the entrance to Barman Drive and be connected to the other catch basina withinthe subdivision. This could be made a part of the conditions of approval. Mr. Monteiro recommended disapproval of the plans because the developer did not meet the requirements on page 8 of the Subdivision Rules & Regulations; Section B, 1 (d). Mr. Keirstead said that this subdivision does not come in under the new regulations. Mr. Ostherr said that it should be called to the attention of the developer that the Board does not endorse each and every lot because they did not meet the percolation tests. Highway Surveyor Oyrthi~ks half of the lots would be no more thananopen sewerage ditch to Mosquito Brook. Mr. Monteiro feels this development is not good for the health, safety and welfare of the town and he would deny it on that basis. Mr. Monteiro then made a motion to der~ the subdivision. April 2, 1973 - cont. Mr. Keirstead read the statute as to the Board's requirements to state reasons for disapproval. Mr. Lamprey seconded th~ motion. Robert Morris, the engineer for the d~velo~ment, asked What reasons the Board was denying the subdivision. Mr. Monteiro said the first par~ of Section 81-~ of the GeneralLaws having to do with the health, safety and welfare on the inhabitants of the town, inadequate perc tests and the drainage problems that cannot be taken care of by the developer. The vote was 2 to deny; Monteiro and Lamprey and 3 votes against the motiBn; Keirstead, Ostherr and Ohepulis. The motion failed. Mr. Keirstead then made a motion to approve the subdivisibn subject to the usual conditions and the relocation of the two catch basip~ as stated earlier; Mr. Ostherr seconded the motion and the vote was 3 votes for approval; Keirstoad, Ostherr andOhepulis and 2votes against approval; Monteiro and Lamprey. The subdivision receivedapprovalby a majority vote. "APPLEDORE" SUBDIVISION: Atty. Victor Harem appeared.before the Board to discuss the preliminary subdivision plans of the "Apple~r~" development. A large number of the residents of the area were present' The development comprises 31 lots; 'Discussionwas held on the septic system a~M the possibility of a lift station also being used. Mr. Harem said that perc tests will be taken on the development before arching more is done. Highway Surveyor Cyr asked what percentage grade would the slopes be. 9% grade is proposed and Mr. Cyr said he is concerned with water run-off and erosion of the shoulders of the road withthat percentage; the culverts will not handle the run-. off. Plowing is no problem. He would like to see granite curbing. He said there should be a 25 ft. leveling-off space at the intersection of the circle. Mr. Harem said granite curbing would be very expensive. Mr. C~ said he is saving the developer alot by going along with a 9% grade so that he should be willing to go along with granite curbing. He would rather have a 6% grade but would agree to 9% and granite curbing. He said there should be a sleuthway besides the width of the roadway and granite berm. The Board questioned the status of Glen Road, as to whether or not it was on a previously approved subdivision. James Cunningham, Sandra Lane, and other neighbors were concerned that the character of the neighborhood was being changed and that Sandra Lane should not be extended through this subdivision. There are many children in the area and they are con- corned with their safety if traffic in the area is increased. Lengthy discussion was held. Mr. Keirstead felt that the preliminary plans presented were not complete as required in the Subdivision Rules & Regulations. April 2, 1973 - cont. Mr. Hatem asked if the 85ard would go over the plans and come up with something definite. Mr. Xeirstead said they could give tentative approval 'to the grades of the roads only, with conditions of the berm, etc. Mr. Chepulis said he is very concerned about the 9% grade and he felt mole time was needed. He asked ±f an extension of time would be allowed. Mr. Harem said he would grant the Board a 30-day extension. Mr. Keirstead made a motion to r~fer the plans to the Subdivision Control Sub- committee and establish their recommendations based on this evening's discussion and follow the recommendations of the co~mmittee; report to be made at the ~ay 7th meeting. Mr. Chepulis read letters received from several Of the departments to wkich the plans had been referred. The Bldg. Inspector reported that the subdivision conforms to zoning. Mr. Ostherr seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. The Sub-committee, Highway Shrveyor, Bldg. Inspector and developer will meet on Saturday at i:OOP.M. at the Town Building for further discussion of this development. "CEDAR LANE" SUBDMSION: Forest Street. Mr. Joseph Barbagallo presented preliminary plans of a proposed subdivision on Forest Street. The development Comprises 8 lots. The roadway is 1000 ft. long with a 22 ft. paved way. There is a 2% pitch on the surface drains. He showed the topo, profile and plot plans to the Board. He said perc tests have been made on every lot under the supervision of Mr. Frank' Gelinas, the new sanitary engineer for the town. There is no' water available, wells will be provided. Mr. Keirstead said the plans need a key map and he should change the cross section. Mr. Xeirsteadthen made a motion to refer the plans to the Subdivision Control Sub- Committee and to the various other boards and officials for report at the next 'meeting. Mr. 0stherr seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. The Sub-cOmmittee and others will meet at 5:00p. M. On Friday oh the site. "ANDR~CIHCLE" SUBDMSION: A "Covenant Running with the Land" was filed with the. Board for the approved "Andrew Circle" subdivision on Andover Street. This. will be referred to Town Counsel for approval and will then be recorded by the secretary. PLANS NOT REQUIR~ APPROVAL: Discussion was held as to the signing of plans' not requiring approval. Mr. KeirStead made a motion that hereafter all plans be stamped as follows: "The above endorsement is not a determination as to conformance with zoning regulations." Mr. Ostherr seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. The secretary will order the necessary stamp. April 2, 1973 - cont. M~SCELLANEOUS MATTERS: The Board received copies of decisions made by the Board of Appeals. A legal notice was received for a hearing on the petition of Trombly Bros. Inc. for an automobile service center. Mr. Keirstead made a motion that the Board makes no comment; ~r. Ostherr seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. A copytof a letter sent to the Bldg. Inspector from Town Counsel relative to condominiums, was received. Mr. Salisbury stated that condominiums are allowed in the R-5 District. The "Enow Your Town" exhibition will be held on Sunday. ~r. Lamprey was authorized to have 1000 copies of the Watershed Report printed for distribution at the exhibit, Mr. Ostherr and Mr. Lamprey reported on theRegional Sewerage plant report. from the Marrimack Valley Planning Commission. They said the report is outdated and does not contain much useful information. There are at least three areas that should be up-dated in the report. PLANS ~OTREQUIRI~APPROVAL: Mr. Ostharr made a motion to sig~ the following plans; seconded by Mr. Lamprey and voted unanimously. 1. Ippolito 2. Wertz 3. Xurycki-division of land. ~. Xurycki - drainage easement. The meeting adjourned at 11:30 P.M. (William Chep~s~ Secretary LAWRENCE EAGLE-TRIBUNE, Lawrence, Mass.--Tuesday, May8, 1973 Peggy Stone Photo RESIDENTS view plans. Disputing drainage proposals are, left, Hilton Carney, 17:l Conrail St. and Louis Spinelli, 154: Contuit St. Townhouse work session causes heated discussion NORTH ANDOVER -- Two and a hlaf hours of patience ended with near pan- demonium at the planning board -- Archdiocese townhouse "working session" in North Andover High School cafeteria last night. Almost 100 residents waited while the board waded through 10 other items on their agenda. Finally came the discussion with the Catholic Archdiocese of Boston on their proposal for iow and moderate in- come housing on thirty acres off Waverley Road. 144 units are planned abutting Holy Sepulchre Cemetery. The development will back up to Heritage Green Apartments which face on Chickering Road. VAlle both tim board and Archdiocese ,resentatives later termed the working ~ssion "profitable," lack of microphones the conference table arrangement hearing more than a few comments impossible to the assemblage. Drainage, sewer and parking plans were discussed but William Chepulis, planning hoard chairman, expressed disappointment that the Archdiocese failed to make a more complete presentation. Some represen- tative of their traffic consultant should 'have been here, he said. The Archdiocese traffic consultant was present at the start of the pIanning board meeting at 7:30 but left a short time later to attend a meeting in another comnmnity. Ten items listed by the planning board after their refusal of the Archdiocese preliminary plans, formed the basis for the conversation Peter Ogren, tfayes Engineering, presented the proposed solutions to the drainage problems of the site. Redirection of the flow of one brook and the enclosure of a second brook were his math suggestions. Ogren blamed the "properties up on the hill" {Heritage Green) for diverting one brook from its natural course. He said that that property holder had assured the Archdiocese that the "flow would be directed to a more uatnral course." This would reduce the amount of water flow over the land by about half, said Ogren. The second brook, now flowing in an open channel, would be enclosed in a 24- inch pipe, he said. Ogren termed the effect of the Archdiocese development on the total amount of water as "insignificant." "We propose less flow than now," he said and assured the board that the major erosion problem now present would also be decreased. Chepulis questioned where the water would go. "We can't limit ourselves to a piece of of the site). If we get rid of the problem here, is it going to pop up somewhere else?" If the plan manages to ~ain planning board approval, he said, it will then come under consideration by the conservation commission. After the meeting Chepulis commented that he was sure the drainage problems could be solved. The question is, he said, whether it is economically feasible to solve them. ,lames Dolan, attorney for the Archdiocese ptanning office for urban af- fairs, stated, "We had a good working ses- sion witb the board. They had given us ten areas of eoncern~ the most serious one was drainage. We've made progress and I'm satisfied with the result." Jonothan Truslow of the Archdiocese planning office, said that by law the main presentation will be at the pubtie hearing when definitive plans will be presented. He did not suggest when that might be. Public reaction to the long, inaudible ses- sion was explosive. Finally allowed to view plans, residents tampeded the conference table, questions and commen~s tumbling from all sides. Chepulis attempted to explain what the Archdiocese plans encompassed to the ac- companiment of "It all looks good but it won't work. They're never' going to stop that water.' -- Mrs. Robert Hoar, 667 Waverley Road. "They're going to put that water right through my land," -- Henry Berube, 633 Waverley Road. · 'When has an engineer been right?" -- George Laird, 647 Waverley Road. "One of those culverts is the most dangerous one in town. I shudder when I hear of diverting water there." -- William Cyr, highway surveyor. -Go stand behind DeMoulas Market and look up. That hill is washing away." -- Ray- mond J. Canty, board of public works. "Every time it rains I lose 80 feet of my yard." -- Hilton Gormey, 171 Contuit, · 'We're emitting more heat than light. The procedure if this planning board meeting is ii1 planned." -- The Rev. ,lames Keller, 127 Glen Crest Drive. · '1 think maybe the Cardinal has a good idea but not for this area. It's not buildable because of traffic, water and fire hazard." -- Mrs. Robert Hoar, 667 Waverley Road. Three letters supporting the Archdiocese plans were read by Chebulis who addresssed the assemblage concermng both the con- troversial nature of the proposal and the legal responsibilities of the planning board. "It is our duty, by law and by your vote, to took at subdivision plans and decide if they comply with the law. I wish some of you could sit oo this side of the table." 12 LAWRENCE EAGLE-TRIBUNE,/awrence, Ma$$.--Tuesd~y, bA,Yg, lj~,~ Gr,I Make oveI' oB Here's what you get as SELECTED RESERVIST By ioinin~ the Veteran's Program, a man who has served in the service, makes sure those years are not wasted. You bring your sk~its back i~:to the Navy, and your former service years count toward retirement ... Every ori~) ~nd active duty for training accumulates points towards ~eturns far beyond what most people ~ve for their retirement each month. In fact, as an active member of the Selected Resale, after 20 years of satisfacto~ service you become entitled to substantial reti~ment pay. BENEFITS The Reserve ~s not a one-way street for the Navy. Many tior~. The principal' benefit you will get as a member is intongi~ie --- t~e saNsfoctian and pride of helping to protect ~he American way of life. PAY Whi~e attending drills yo~ receive one day (s) basic pay of yau~ ~c~'e/four drllis are credited for the weekend. You also ~eceive fuji pay and allowances while on annual troinlr~ cruise~. RETIREMENT As a Re.~.e~is~ you build credits toward retirement. PROMOTION There a~e opportunities for advancement in rating and to commissioned officer rank for men of ability who apply themseive~ to the iob, Here's OVER OVER OVER OVER OVE UNDER 2 ' 3 4 6 )Y~ 12.82 13.96 14.63 15.27 16.27 ,y~ ~2.33 13.02 13.77 14.85 15