Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990-05-15 Decision SPR DENIED 5 ! TOWN OF NOItT11 ANDOVE, It p MASSACItUSL '1. TS nAHIFL T OV11., r 1.is RK NORTH 10100qER 4. MAI I� II 33 tl Any appeal shall be filed 'ss �N�sE` y within'(24) days after the date of filing of this Notice NOTICE OF DECISION In the Office of the Town Clerk. Date . May. l.';, �990. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May 3, 1990 Date of Hearing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Petition of Baryyiela Company . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Premises affected z©�o Turnpike .Street • . • • . ♦ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . ♦ . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . Referring to the above petition for a special permit from the reclulrements of the . . . . . .NPFth.4 Pygr.4ggn rt% B-Vj A ,. SErvti q*,Q$ 4 .: Ai LA Raaa. ttevi.ew. . . . . . . . . . so as to permit , the, cons truct�i.orl oL ,a, �;�,ppp. Yq,4 storage building . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . After a public hearing given ou the utbove date, the Planning Hoard voted DENY SITE PLAN REVIEW to .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .the . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . based LEp011 the following conditioals cc: Director .of Public Works Board of Public Works Highway Surveyor Building Inspector Sigtled Board of Health 5 Conservation Commission George Perna, airman Assessors . . . . Police Chief John Simons, Clerk Fire Chief • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Applicant Erich N.iLzsche Engineer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . File Jack Graham Interested Parties . . . . . , . • • • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . John Draper • • . . .iS�EIIIEIiilg• 13U;1z'c; of rsors the � � � OFFICES OF: a��' °m Town of 120 MaIli Streel BUILDING k ,., : NORTH ANDOVER North Andover CONSERVATION A9ciS5�i('l1lkS[',lt 01845 HEALTH @®ACHV6�4 DIVISION OF (508)682.6483 PLANNING PLANNING &t COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT KAH N 11.11. NFI.SON, I)WF,(A'O!t May 14 , 1990 Mr. Daniel. Long Town Clerk Town Ball 120 Maim Street North Andover , MA 01.845 Re : 2010 Turnpike Street; Bayfield Company Site Plan Review Dear Mr. Long : The North Andover Planning Board held a public hearing on February 15 , 1990 , upon the application of Bayfield Company, 242 Neck Road, Haverhill, HA requesting Site Platt Review approval under Section 8 . 3 of the North Andover Zoning Bylaw. The hearing was duly advertised in the North Andover Citizen on February 1 and February 8 , 1990 , and all parties of interest were properly notified . The following members were present: George Perna , Chairman, John Simons , Clerk, Erich Nitzsche and John Draper. Jack Graham was absent. The petitioner seeks site plan approval for the construction of a 24 , 000 sq. ft . , one story building to be used for offices and storage . The premises affected is located at 2070 'Turnpike Street, Route 114 and Berry Street; , in a Village Residential 'Zoning District. John Simons read the legal notice to open the public hearing . Letters were received from abutters and portions thereof react . Letters were also received from the engineer . All letters are Available in the .file for inspection , Christian Huntress , 'Town Planner, tole! the Board that the applicant has been before the Technical Review Committee . Bill Hmurciak, D . P .W . , is reviewing the drainages calculations . Page 2 , 'John Simons asked Jim Bourgeois , engineer, when the lots were created . Jim' s response was that the lots were created in 1985 , the ANR Plan in 1981 . Tom Neve , Thomas B . Neve Associates , stated the use was frozen because of the ANR Plan. Jim Bourgeois, B . D . C . , tnc . , was present representing the Bayfield Company. Also present were bike Rice and Jeff Donahue , from the Bayfield Company and 'Perry 'Tuttle from W . B . Kent Company. Jim Bourgeois gave a brief overview of the parcel located on Route 114 , The applicant is proposing a 24 , 000 sq. ft , building . There will be a curb-cut on Route 114 for access and egress . A 360 degree access around the building has been provided for the Fire Department. The proposed project meets the dimensional requirements . An area of 13 ,000 sq . ft. will be used for modular storage . George Perna asked what the building would look like from Berry Street. Jim Bourgeois did not have plans showing the elevations from Berry Street, but tried to explain to the Board . George Perna asked about the parking around the building and if there was any landscaping planned . Jim Bourgeois stated that there would be a screen of: pine trees around a stockade fence . Hardwood trees , 12 feet high would also be planted . George Perna stated that the Board would view the Berry Street side as the front of the building and it should be attractive . Jim Bourgeois stated that he had been before the Board of Appeals on Tuesday for a special permit for use of industrial storage being an accessory use , but storage is the prime use in this particular business . Jim Bourgeois gave the Board some background on how the Zoning Bylaw came about regarding storage and it being a permitted use in the industrial- 1 (I-1 ) 'Zoning District . The- Board went over Section 4 . 11 of the Zoning Bylaw. The Board raised the question of is it an allowed use . Terry Tuttle , W . B . Kent Company, told the Board that this was not a self storage business , the storage is only temporary and for household goods only, not hazardous materials . George Perna skated that if storage was the primary use then it was not allowed , William McCullom, an abutti�r, stated that cwarehousing is warehousing, whether its household goods or not . John Simons asked Christian Huntress to send a letter to the Board of Appeals on the issue of use . Erich Nitzsche commented on the hardwood trees being used for screening . His comment was that during winter the leaves would have fallen, leaving no screening . He would rather see evergreens planted . s Page 3 : -John Draper stated that his prime concern., if he lived in the area; would be the idling of the trucks . Terry Tuttle stated that there are laws that prohibit the idling of vehicles for more than ten ( 10 ) minutes . Ile also told the Board members the hours of operations would be from 7 : 00 a . m. to 5 : 30 p . m. John Draper asked about the sound being buffered . Jim Bourgeois stated that it would be possible to have a five ( 5 ) toot berm, then a fence . The Board requested elevations for the Berry Street side . When asked about the lighting, Jim Bourgeois told the Board that there would be lighting on the building . George Perna requested information on the lighting fixtures . Upon review the Board would either approve the type to be used or make recommendations for another type of fixture . Regarding signs , Jim Bourgeois stated there will be a ground sign, to code . George Perna said the biggest concern is screening along Berry Street. Jim Bourgeois showed the Board a different scenario for the placement of the building . Wetlands would be disturbed , approximately 30,000 sq . ft. Ed Pedi , an abutter, expressed concerns of truck drivers coming in at midnight letting the trucks idle with their lights on . Terry 'Tuttle spoke to the Board on different areas trucks stop and the policing of those areas . lie suggested that a gate be installed near the building so the trucks could go no further . Tom Neve , Thomas E . Neve Associates, went over the wetlands with the Board . A plan was shown to the Board with Riparian Realty Trust, Elm Square and W . B . Kent properties . Tom Neve went over the technical drainage system with the Board . Erich nitzsche Grants to see the under drains . Tons showed Erich a rough draft of the catch basins . Erich requested spot elevations regarding the water. George Perna asked about the water that flows along Berry Street and it it would increase or decrease . 'Toni stated that it was in his report and would find the correct page . The Board will schedule a site visit:. John Simons asked Tom what was the position of the Board of Health . Tom told John he has a letter !_rom Bike Graf_ and the wells Are outside of: the 100 Loot. area. Geeorge Perna asked that the distance be further than the 100 foot requirement. Tom said he would look into it. Erich Nit- z,sche asked for peak tests and deep hole tests that were taken by Tom Neve . 'Torn told Erich he would secs that he gets those tests . 1 3 Page 4 : -Tom Neve said there would be a 12 inch water main brought down t.o the site with an 8 inch pipe going into the site , ;Tim Bourgeois further stated that his client will put hydrants on Berry Street . Bill HcCullom, Berry Street, told the Board that he had bought the old l<arnum Homestead twenty years ago . Ile had hoped for a Village Residential setting . He further stated that it was "a hell of an impact to the neighborhood" for such a development. Frank Hamilton, Berry Street, expressed is concern with the businesses that are, now appearing in the neighborhood . He also would like to see a Village Residential setting . Tom Neve stated that he was prepared to ::lake the parcel as low impacted as possible . George Perna explained to the abutters that the Board had their concerns in mind and that the Board is very sensitive to their concerns . John Simons told the abutters that if a Form A Plan is filed, the use is allowed, within three years . George Perna stated that the Board can only condition a site plan . Bill McCullom asked which Board would determine the use . George Perna stated that the Board would have 'Town Counsel review the issue . Linda Pedi , a n abutter, asked the Board it they would visit the present site of W . B . Kent as well as the proposed site . Tim Nixon , 362 Berry Street, expressed his feelings on the proposal along with the marking that is associated with the soccer field off Berry Street. A motion was made by John Simons to continue the public hearing to March 1 , 1990 and schedule a site visit for Saturday, February 17 , 1990 at 8 : 30 a . m. The motion was seconded by Erich Nitzsche and voted unanimous by those present. The hoard requested that a letter be sent to the Board of Appeals . On March 1 , 1990 the Planning Board held a regular meeting . The following members were present : George Perna, Chairman , Erich nitzsche and Jack Graham. John Simons arrived at 8 : 15 p . m. John Draper was absent. John Simons react letter from the fire Department, attorney for the abutters and the Department of Public Works . The Board went over concerns from the .Last meet:inq : 1 . view from Berry Street 2 . size of the building 3 . screening on the Berry Street side 4 . parking area 5 . storage not in the hack of the building . I Page 5 . .Abutters expressed their concerns with : 1 . owner becoming an agent 2 . view from Berry St'reeL 3 . trucks parked with their engines running 4 . activity going on in the area 13. Issues still to be addressed : 1 . parking area 2 . storage area 3 . drainage 4 . legal issues Modifications will be supplied by the engineer, Tom Neve , to the Planning Board by Thursday, March 8, 1990 . The Board will review the modifications . A motion was made by John Simons to continue the public hearing to March 15, 1990 and direct staff to draft a first cut of conditions . The motion was seconded by Erich Nitzsche and voted unanimously by those present. On March 15 , 1390 the Planning Board held a regular meeting with the following members present: George Perna, Chairman, John Simons, Clerk, Erich Nitzsche and John Draper . Jack Graham was absent. John Simons read a letter from E . D . C . Tom Neve stated that tW owner of the parcel wants to build a spec building . John Simons asked that the applicant winhdraw the application before the Planning Board and resubmit and re-advertise . A lengthy discussion took place on the prospective owner of W. B . Kent, not the tenant. The use of the parcel is presently undefined. The question of who was the applicant was discussed . The Director of Planning and Community Development has reviewed . The signature is that of the Bayfield Company . Erich nitzsche and John Draper agreed with John Simons on needing a new submittal . Moran Counsel will be contacted to clarify . The following changes were made to the original plans : 1 . The offices were moved 2 . The truck access moved to the northwest portion of the plans. 3 . Two isiands were added to the planv , The berm along Berry Street could be made higher from 4 feet to 8 feet with a fence . . i Page 6 : -Ed Pedi , Berry Street, stated that the building was a building for a trucking company. The engineer stated that this type of building was generic for manufacturing . A motion was made by Erich Nitzsche to check with Town Counsel on the legality of the application and continue the public hearing to April 5 , 1990. The motion was seconded by John Draper and voted unanimously by those present. On April 5 , 1990 , the Planning Board held a regular meeting . The following members were present; George Perna, Chairman, John Simons, Clerk, Erich Nitz,sche and John Draper . (lack Graham was absent. Christian Huntress , Town Planner, told the Planning Board that he has spoken with Town Counsel regarding the application citing W. B , Kent as the possible tenant . it is of the opinion of Town Counsel the original application stated the applicant as being Bayfield Company and that it is alright to continue the public hearing. Christian Huntress gave the Board members copies of a draft decision. Members of the Board expressed their concerns of the owner/applicant issue . Thomas Neve , Thomas E . Neve Associates, told the Board that the proposed building will. be dropped 6 feet from a 30 foot high building to a 24 foot high building . Erich nitzsche wants to go over the drainage concerns with Tom Neve . A discussion to place on adding conditions . The board wants the plans showing the front of the building as facing Berry Street . Also discussed were : 1 . Loading docks on Berry Street side reduced, Board members questioned the need for 6 loading docks . 2 . Truck traffic signs will be a condition . Tom Neve stated that septic system testing was being don{ . Berms will be placed along Berry Street with no construction traffic on Berry Street . Kathleen Walsh--Murphy, an abutter, questioned if the proposed was going to be a warehouse . Tow Neve said , "no" The Board reminded the applicant that any other construction on the site will need Site Plan Review. The Board was told that all wetland areas will have a conservation restriction easement, which will be provided before occupancy is permitted . This conservation restriction easement will be on the deed and is perpetual . Page 7 : -Sean Murphy asked about the H . V . A . C . units . George Perna stated that there will be no mechanicals on the roof . The Board requested that an additional conclition be placed within the draft decision. Adding that a lighting plan will be submitted with lights casting down . A lengthy discussion tools place on the number of lots being one address. George Perna stated that the following issues had to be addressed : 1 . common driveway, because their are three lots 2 . drainage A motion was made by Erich Nitzsche to continue the public hearing to April 19, 1990 and add the items discussed to the draft decision . The motion was seconded by John Draper and voted unanimously by those present . The Planning Board held a regular meeting on April 19 , 1990 . The following members were present: George Perna, Chairman , John Simons , Clerk, and Erich Nitzsche . Jack {graham arrived at 9 : 05 p, m. John Draper was absent. Christian Huntress told the Hoard that he did not know the status of this application . Time runs out on April 27 , 1990 for the protecting of the zoning . `here is also a twenty day appeal period. Erich Nitzsche wants the drainage issues addressed . A motion was made by John Simons to close the public hearing , take the matter under advisement and direct staff to draft a negative decision . The motion was seconded by Erich Nitzsche and voted unanimously by those present, including the Chairman . On May 3, 1990, the Planning Board held a regular meeting . The following members were present: George Perna, Chairman, John Draper and Jack Graham. John Simons arrived at 8 : 30 p . m. Erich Nitzsche was absent,. Christian Huntress , Torun Planner, gave the Board a draft decision. The Hoard reviewed the draft . John Simons added two items : 1 . Plan does not conform to zoning, Form A Plan expired on April 27 , 1990 . 2 . Not an allowed use under present zoning, which is VR . A motion was made by John Simons to deny the Site Plan Review for 2070 Turnpike Street as drafted and amended . The motion was seconded by John Draper and voted unanimously by those present, including the Chairman . Page 8 , 'The reasons for denial are attached . a Sincerely, i PLANNING BOARD �4 George eerna, Chairman—(;K cc , Director of Public Works Board of Public Works Highway Surveyor Building :inspector Conservation Commission Board of Health Assessors Police Chief Fire Chief Applicant Engineer File BAYFIELD DEVELOPMENT CORP. 2070 TURNPIKE STREET SPECIAL PERMIT DENIAL. SECTION 8.3 OF THE NORTH ANDOVER ZONING BYLAW. FINDINGS OF FACT: The Planning Board finds under Section 8 . 35 of the Zoning Bylaw that the proposed site plan does not meet the requirements necessary for the granting of an approval under the Site Plan Review process. Further, the Planning Board makes the following findings regarding this Special Permit as required by Section 8 . 3 of the Zoning Bylaws: 1. The Planning Board cannot determine, through the information provided, that the proposed site design for this lot is appropriate. 2 . The site drainage system is not designed in accordance with the Town Bylaw requirements. 3 . The applicant has not met the requirements of the Town for Site Plan Review as stated in Section 8 . 3 of the Zoning Bylaw. 4 . The plan does not include all materials or information required in Section 8 . 3 , and has failed to conform to the procedures for Site Plan Review as outlined in Section 8 . 3 and 10. 3 of the Zoning Bylaw. Finally, the Planning Board has requested information throughout the Public Hearing process which to this date the applicant has made no effort to provide. This information is with regard to both the existing and proposed drainage facilities on site. The following list of concerns still remain to be addressed by the applicant and are the basis for this denial : OUTSTANDING ISSUES: 1. Computations have no descriptive narrative making sequential checking difficult. The Subcat and reaches are not uniformly numbered. The Board is also under the impression that there are drafting errors but without a uniform analysis or at least a narrative to explain routing, the Board cannot be sure. The routing sequence should be revised to show continuity. Without drainage plans of the upstream areas, the Board cannot review the computations without assuming there are other deficiencies. i 1 ' J 2 . The use of reaches 1, 4 , 5 & 6 should be treated strictly as Pond outlets. 3 . There seems to be more storage for pond #1 than contributing area. Computations for pond #1 show storage of 10. 39 Ac-Ft. on a 6 acre watershed that has considerable development. 4 . Reach #5 has an outlet of 95. 15 elevation according to the computations but the plans show an elevation 97 . 8 . 5. Pre-Development plans show two detention ponds numbered 2 , (Pond 2) it is not clear to the board how this is to be treated. Post development treats the area as two separate ponds. 6. There is no _Pond #2 in computations for the pre-developed 10 year storm. 7 . Pond #2 indicates a storage capacity of 7 . 4 Ac-Ft. at elevation 94 for the pre-development. Post-Development has 6. 61 Ac-Ft. plus pond #3 storage of 2 . 48 at elevation 94 . It is not clear to the board where the additional storage has come from. 8 . The culvert at the driveway is higher than the ground elevation, this will result in leaving trapped water. 9 . The calculations for subcat 6 are incorrect. 10. The plans call for the culvert under route 114 to be a 241' pipe, but the drainage computation call for the culvert to be a 21" pipe. 11. The topographic plans are incomplete in that there is no data on the 'west side of pond #2 to indicate the 94 foot contour, the twelve foot wide brook which is the inundated reach #3 or 'the ditch detail along route 114 . Further, all stone walls within the property are not delineated. 12 . The watershed lines are inaccurate both in the pre and post development analysis. 13 . A comparison between the Pre and Post analysis of the Computations indicates that pond #2 raises the water surface from elevation 93 . 9 to 94 . 6 feet. The increased flooding is not contained to the applicant' s property. 1.4 . No Board of Health Approval has been granted for the on site septic system. 15. This site is situated in the Village Residential Zoning District and as such the proposed use is not in accordance with the allowed uses as provided under section 4 . 123 of the North Andover Zoning Bylaw. On April 27 , 1990, by failure to I r obtain a building permit, the Applicant lost all grandfathering rights under the previous 'Industrial Zone. Any future proposals will have to conform with the requirements of the Village Residential Zone. 6 E - The plans which the applicant has placed before the board for review, and on which this denial is based include the following: Plans entitled: Bayfield Company 2070 Turnpike Street North Andover, MA Plans prepared for: Bayfield Development Co. 242 Neck Road Haverhill, MA. 01830 Plan prepared by: Thomas E. Neve Associates, Inc. EDC Inc. Dated: most recent revision - 3/9/90 Sheets: L2-10 L3-1 cc: Director of Public Works Board of Public Works Highway Surveyor Building Inspector Board of Health Assessors Conservation Commission Police Chief Fire Chief Applicant Engineer File