HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994-08-16 Abutter Comment i
July 31 , 1994
Dear Dick and other members of the Board,
As is obvious, I am not able to attend the August 2 Board meeting because
are on vacation. Since the Osco Drug Site Plan review will be on the
agenda, I would like to reiterate my views on this subject,
Because t have strong views on this project, I would request that your
postpone making a decision on this matter until the following meeting
when I return from vacation. if you do feel compelled to vote at the
August 2 meeting, I would feguest that you enter this letter into the
record as a statment of my opposition to this project as proposed.
My reasons for continuing to advocate an unfavorable vote are as follows:
1 . When the rezoning was proposed for this property, there were
very explicit representations about the type of structures to be built. The
essence of these representations was that the steeple and other key
features of the existing structure would be retained and incorporated into
the new development. Also, the scale and sighting of the buildings would
be similar to that of the Church.
The Planning Board reviewed the design drawings from the developers at
several meetings and further requested that the developers put their
commitment In writing that the designs shown to the Planning Board
would be those submitted for Site Plan review. The developers
subsequently provided such a letter.
The debate at Town meeting on this rezoning was very heated. People
were very apprehensive regarding the type of structure that could be built
on the site. In mar view, the rezoning would not have passers if we did not
have the scale drawings and the letter of stipulation that " what you see
now is what you get."
My primary problem with this proposal is that it is much different than
what was promised at the time of the rezoning. Frankly, if this structure
had been brought forward at that time, the rezoning would have failed. I
believe that the Planning Board should adhere to the spirit and letter of
that rezoning and reject the Osco Drug proposal that is currently before
us.
. The design of the building has definitely improved since our first
meeting, But I still believe if is a mediocre building at best. The
structure is a one story box set in a sea of parking. It is fundamentally a
strip mall approach as opposed to the village concept that we have been
trying to promote. If you remember the design features that Chris
Huntress showed us in numerous slides (and in books from the Center for
Rural Massachusetts and others), they stressed moving the buildings up a
close to the street as possible and in varying roof nes, building facades,
etc•
The problem with a poor design is that is forever! We don't pet a chance to
fix it. We should strive for buildings with character and architectural
distinction - particularly at the gateway to North Andaver. And there are
numerous local examples of commercial buildings that are visually
appealing, very successful and in keeping with the historical character of
the area. For example, Middleton Center is an attractive anchor to the
center of Middleton. Many of the new buildings in downtown Andover are
appealing while still retaining functionality.
There are also examples of lost opportunities in the vicinity. The
1HDIBurger icing Mail at Wilson's Corner was once the site of a beautiful
cottage with spectacular rose gardens. Yet, no vestige of this former use
remains to enrich us and provide a sense of historical continuity.
3. What this decision comes down to in the end is whether we want to
maintain a sense of place in North Andover. The church steeple is a local
landmark. We associate this location with the steeple and church. The
world does change, but: that does not mean we have to lose all association
with the past. The Osco Drug, as proposed, could be virtually anywhere. It
really has no inherent relationship to this site, If we build it, we lose a
bit of what makes N. Andover special.
Thank you for your patience and attention,
V
of
lot
°✓a '
� �.^'*W � � ,�^''�� 'r �"� � �w� ,r*�9�00��_� Pd ', � ����° W i^"� n�r'P"" ,�� ��✓�fir°"
4-7
Pat
121.
w..
r
pp
um„
mm
u
1 G� 4
°