Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1975-04-07Monday - April 7, 1975 Regular Meeting The PT.A~NINa BOARD held its regular meeting on Monday evening, April 7, 1975, in the ?o~n Office Meeting Room. The following members ~ers present and voting: William Chepulis, Chairman; Fritz Ostherr, ¥ice-Ohairma~; William N. ~alemme, Clerk; Paul R. Lamprey and Joh~ ~. Monteiro. Member Salem~._e made a motion to accept the minutes of February 8 and 18, 1975. Mr. Monteiro seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. PLAN~ NOT i~[I~UXRIN(~ APPRO'TAL~ 1. BErry D. Berry - ~tr~pike St.: Mr. Ostherr made a motion that the PLA~NIN~ B~ endorse as not requiri~g approval under subdivision control law the Plan of La~d owned by Ronald Pascucci dated January 197.5. Mr. Monteiro seconded and the vote was unanimous. SCOTT PP~PE~TIE$ - Re Harold Parker Estates, Penni Lane: A discussion took place in relation to establishing a bond for the subdivision. A letter fro~ the Highway S~trveyor dated April 7, 197.5 was received and read in which he recommends $52,000.00. Mr. Monteiro asked Mr. Cyr if that figure was to cover the cost of putting the road in and Mr. Cyr stated that it was and that it breaks do~ to approximately $33.00 per foot. This does not cover fire hydrants, etc. Scott Follansbee represented Scott Properties and informed the BOARD 'that the type of bond he would like to use is called a "mortgage bc~d". With this type of bond the bank pledges the money, a type of mortgage on the property. It is advantageous to both the To~n and the developer, he said. On the time limit, a sufficient amount would be with- held for the final coat. The BOARD noted %bat the letter received from Mr. Turtle is relative to the road ~only and that figures must be obtained for everything else. Member Ostherr inquired about how this bond differs from the regular bond that we use. Mr. Follansbee stated that this is much easier to work with and has bean used ~y quite a few to~s since it has been adopted. It m~kes it easier for the developer to post a larger amount of money than he might normally po~t. A motion was made by Mr. Ostherr to refer the bank bond to To~n Counsel for a ruling as to form and to formally request rec~endations from the departments that have not replied to date. Also, the PLAIg~IN~ ~AP~D ~ill table action until the next regular meeting, April 22, 197.5. Mr. Monteiro seconded the motion and the vo~e was unanimous. Chairman Chepulis read the letter from Mr. l~atem dated March 1~, 1975 asking for an indication of work incompleted. Mr. 0stherr asked Mr. Cyr if anything more had been done. Mr. ~r replied that he had not inspected it since the last letter. Mr. ~an Osgood said he does not agree with what has to be done. Mr. Monteiro ~ade a motion to send a copy of the letter from Mr. Cyr dated December 26, 197~ to Mr. Harem inasmuch as no further information has come before us. Mr. Lamprey seconded and the vote was ttrAanimous. E~ROLD PAREER ESTATES: The BoArD checked over the corrected plans. The secretary was directed to change the date on Mr. Cyr's letter from am,. incorrect 4/14/7.5 to 2/14~.5. April 7, 1975 - cont. PLANNING BOARD DECISION ON ENVIRGNMENTAL CONTROL DISTRICT: Mr. Monteiro maple a motion that the PT,A~NING BOARD recommend unfavorable action o~ the two zoning articles submitted by A. Charles Eostandin and others. Mr. Ostherr seconded the motion. Mr. Monteiro gave his reasons as follows: an apparent wide discrepancy between the report received from the developer and the report from the ad hoc committee; the Master Plan suggests a iow density in this area and this type of zoning is not proper at this time; enough information has not been received as to what possible use this can be to the Town and there may be 'better suggestions that come before us in the future; there were also discrepancies in the soil ~rveys. Mr. Ostherr voiced agreement in general with Mr. Monteiro. We are being asked, he said, to make a comment on the Zoning By-Law and not on a developer. We should concentrate on what the law says and had the following comments to make: the proposed amendment was hastiXy conceived and would not want to wish this on the Town; does not see any social need for high density housing in North Andover but if we were going to do something like this we would .choose some other area of the Town rather tba~ the shores of Lake Cochiche- wick; we should not be mislead by the title of Environmental Control District and the PLANNING BOARD shou/d make it clear in its recommendations what .the trade-off involved is - 200 ft. buffer zone for 300 units of housing. Mr. Chepulis stated that he felt everyone concerned was in concurrence and Members Lamprey and ~lemme a~read. Mr. Chepulis stated he did not consider the construction of a sewer system an economical alternative at this time, and the creation of the subject district would open all Amads around the Lake causing more pollutants and run-off. It was noted that even with a sewer this would begin to kill the Lake. The vote on the motion was taken and all members voted unanimously. BOARD C~ APPEALS DEOISIO~ - ~W~EXLIAN: The BOARD acknowledged receipt and read the decision. MVPC: Mr. Monteiro stated that a notice has been received regarding the capital tax. The Budget now in existence has deteriorated and they would like to take the i~nds in escrow in conjunction with the increased assessment. They are in this predicament because of 4 or 5 major studies which are funded by the per capita tax, the state, and when the studies are completed then they bill the agencies. These studies have not been completed, therefore they can't get the funds. Mr. Monteiro said we are actually getting them out of a bind by the per capita tax and, although he is not opposed, the ~reason behind it is poor manage- mont. The law states that the money has to come back to the Town's credit and he is of the opinion that we should put that particular assessment in the Town Warrant. Also, if we refuse to pay we may have to withdraw from the Pla~ing district. Mr. Lamprey said that he and the Methue~u representative both Voted against the increased assessment. A discussion followed regarding whether or not there is a possibility of disbanding the organization or redistributing the number of votes in the Commission. Mr. Lamprey read the letter Re 208 ~nding sent by the Board of Selectmen to the MVPO. Mr. Ostherr inquired about Bike Paths and Mr. Monteiro said that Congressman Narrington would be glad to send someone in to speak with the Board about it. Mr. Menteiro was ~o get some information regarding designation of these paths on the roadway and have it avail- able for the nex~ meeting. April 7, 1975 - cont. Legislative Items - Paul ~amprey spoke regarding House Bill 5600 (?), Ch. 40A Enabling Legislation, and said he would draft a letter to the State Representatives. The letter from County Pl~er O'Leary, dated March !4, 1975, on Ch. 40A revisions was acknowledged the Mr. Nonteiro asked what actually has happened to the Missile Site to date and Would we want to send a letter to the DN~ concerning this matter. A letter is to be drafted by Mr. Chepulis inquiring as to the present'status of the Missile Site. MISCELLANEO~SNATT~S:' Letter sent to the ~ designating John J. Non%sire a~ the new alternate was read by the BOARD. Notice of course at Bradford College to be posted on the Bulletin Board. Mr. M~nteiro Brought up the subject of e~tablishing a '~or~hAndoverDay" in the State House in conjunction with the Bi-Centennial. His thoughts were to have the High School Band play in the Hall of Flags on a Saturda~ or Sund~y in September with WCCM covering it. Townspeople to visit the State House on this day. Nrm. ?hila Slade, a visitor, suggested approaching the Bi-Centennial Committee about this. Mr. Ostherr made a motion that the PLANNING BOAED endorse Mr. Menteiro's idea and suggest it to the Committee. Mr. Salsmme seconded and the vote was unanimous. Member Salemme told the BOARDthat the landfill Committee will be meetingwith the Selectmen this weekto discuss the last phases of the purchase article for Town Meeting. The Committee is requesting a letter of recommendation in favor of the article from the Planning Board. Mr. Ostherr asked if anyone had done anything on our reasons for recommendations at Town Meeting and volunteered the following input: the proposed Emrth Removal ~-Law tightens up an area that perhaps was a little lax. The by-lawwas worked on by members of concerned Town Boards and Departments and, also, an earth removal operator. Messrs. Ostherr and 2alemme to conf~ on this before Town Meeting. the meeting adjourned at 9:30 P.M. ecretary /(~ilda Blackstock)