Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990-05-15 Correspondence DENIED DIPRETE ■ MARCHIONDA & ASSUCIATES, INC. ENGINEERING AND PLANNING CONSULTANTS 185 New Boston Street, Woburn, Massachusetts 01801 (617) 938-1037 MEMO To : Files From: Clifford E. Carlson Re : Route 114 Offices Subject : Curb cut meeting with District 5 Date : December 17 , 1985 Attending: Joseph D ' Angelo David Chareth Tom Donahue Clifford Carlson Discussion: The proposed driveway entrance location and acceleration and deceleration lanes for the Route 114 offices site were discussed. The results of this meeting are as follows : The existing passing area between approximate Stations 200 and 228 will be remarked with thereto-plastic markings to provide for a center turn lane and one lane directional traffic on either side of the center lane . The acceleration and deceleration lane will consist of twelve feet of pavement, a three foot gravel shoulder and guardrail. The guardrail will also be removed and reset or a new guardrail provided and terminal end section provided as required in accordance with state standards. The entrance radii for the driveway will be increased from 35t to 50 ' or whatever radius is required such that a WB-50 can enter the driveway without encroaching onto the left lane of the driveway or onto the travel lane of Route 114 when coming from the site . After our meeting with Mr . D ' Angelo, Tom Donohue and my- self went downstairs and met Fred Harney. Vie explained the results of our meeting with Mr. Harney. He indicated to us that upon submission of the revised curbcut work that he could have our approval in approximately ten days to two weeks. ) . F k Cliff E. Carlson cc : Joe D ' Angelo , Fred Harney, Pat Cone , Jackie Wilkins & Karen Nelson R F D 0 6 150 Midway Road Manchester,New Hampshire 03103 Cranston,Rhode Island 02920 (603)434-8725 (401)946-1030 i 019theerhg�.oevelopmenr&Construction Inc. February 9, 1990 fit Chris Huntress P NI- BOARD , Acting Town Planner 120 Main Street North Andover MA 01845 Re: W.B. Kent& Sons Proposal 2070 'Turnpike Street/Route 114 North Andover MA 01845 Dear Chris: Attached are sheets showing mihor revisions to our proposal that I think will be relevant to the departmental advisory reports by you, Department of Public Works and Fire Department. Changes are hi-lited for your convenience. Sincerely, f2 James Bourgeois, R.A. President Cy: William Hmurclak, North Andover D.P.W Lt. Fountain, North Andover Fire Dept. NEW MEADOWS PROFESSIONAL BUILDING 447 OLD BOSTON ROAD TOPSFIELD, MA 01983 PHONE (508) 887--9066 FAX (508) 887-•3480 "film 4 T-7?l1l- 2, IFLDIVITZ --OR FKAN�;' 6)CA rEP T 26M& SAI-EN TZIMPIAZ�, M.7pr rAl I-OlVD01 YOK.11 Tr 4 17-T-N7.1,01V 0(.1R /-0/Z 01VIN&-' ("'ONCEPTIV9.- 111,4F R.? 7-1-11-17 Z,'1'7L-- AS SI-FIMF ZOMEZ.) AS py' ,Vi RTAI AIVPOf-€R, 'S cY-A.A11Vl1V9 r S E.,rMF ZFV IN A (.-YL LA 6K L ZONED 2V-qrRQ.'T- IT I,:; 71-1,4T rl-ITS I ARC171- IS ZN F,467- aA'Wf-ly f.-YLI-MYE AS,' A1,4,9 (A)Z;67.1 A7­ 06IR TOW p)/qg 490. IN AODYTIOAN, AM6' SF-F-11119 INC,"TKARI.-D LY-W47:R.1C"7--{6W, C6?1Vq,7,,TVCrl(W OF ,:) 7101W AECISFA77'ON 4.9 Al--Z-L AS,, -ROI-OSET A-E-SYPEA1771"I'M 170AIN TAIZ-5, 011Y.7 CY7 Jyl,'a A INE--FA16"rIVEFIFEW lvl--I,,IL 57ORM:7F PWAVINN" A117AI ITS SINP-4 Y' DOE-S 1110V F-17- ZNTO 7;AIE i9Z-NE}:W. SA.YFfEZZ) L0("-'ATZ:- 7hIE FT. ME 7-. FpcVl 71-1Z-- RE15'a"TE1117YAL OT LZ 5 0 / 1 A' AT 2��-16 -8EAf'1VY' 67- THE Wo SERRY S 7. AND 9. S PRO� - q -Y 4N DY 7F.- �-�-AIW rkV StIPILI Y TO Pg: L 6? ­70EP TV A AIFZ.4 9 4 0 P, .125 FT, FP01V 7nZ-.- 6TSUZ--N. IF MO T ,4L L C.F- THE ASU7"Tf--R,5 L.OCO 7T-,'-) OW /04-'77" 912)AF 6*- (,-E .PWF.IR /,/IFZ IL5, 7-1--2) IN /:WVN7" OF 4 0 IVI'7-,q ) p 6; F 71-IFZR SEPTI�-." SY-57;-SMIF LOCAIZY? Z/V `;47E' AlEAR. -s" e-2C '- 1--(,)AI " AiF . 4 TRW Y-G -"7-06) CL OSZ, YC-M-W !,16,74fiT pfil?ZX7RE rHZ- -17P'ST-041 7V .OFF._ LC e",47EZ.? FL.AITAII-W AA40" iROW A ��,r� 6.)(,IR /4/1:) 0C/R PRORVUY' LrNFg Sc? 45 NOr R--1 A RAPT-Y Y' AND T'#----- I.OC-)rEZ? OW 7-,W-- SlrE- 547 1-7-. 2?61FF�7 , 50 F& N7' Pi'_AN-5' PIE RIEVVfIeF-P I'UAFk-R AND SF- 7-bl,40i'6' OF FLEET. 4/rr 69VIR74M As TO &AFTRIERV 7AN nXIOW&M 1-07-.5 ,,,)N-P TA1,41l.fiR PARliYN(F 1Vl'1"111'N TAF-92F 9'F"774467i& ARA- 7-011,W ZONIM7 ME 4/-50 k077 7131EE- PROPe.9S41- 6-Y- THE ZTrL--C770N rJ 6 ,:-7-. Sr0(."1l',*4)yF Fz--"AA'L4- IN P/ZF _70NE - AN' 453' MOMM 46' 76.) TYE PtIRP6?SF 6Y-- 7717S ic-Z.-M Ea ME- TR6&T 7-H,,:Ir A A Nor to scma-All 717F MOV TAIAF STORe)jz-- R.trz.011116. /X-:- R?, ME "M5019147701 6K RE REWI/rMl-"D SO AS R.'? Aff)A?L- dc; .5-e:7fi'EZ--N. A 6; T /VZU- N4',17" 60 - 4R r11I I-1.fZ)jrNU A 5.7 17r. 00V ;, Jl/C g NO, TWIT' 1011-15111 /"AR77f.-M1-AR A 772. V7_16W /96/`5'r RE 7AAE-N TO ANP` R6W 01V70 7-17'—Z::- LOMAZY-D ON THE EAZq7- 5-Mi-c' -REXrPrY S7. 7-7-IF 547M T4545 IS ETMENIZ P' 1-1161-1 IN 7HI--- ARi--A, E-qP,Z-C1AZ-/- )" 7-1-1-F /-' 0 r.lT OF F X- Z), H,41YZI, R-W, AND Z--, &- L. ATTI. TIRIE-59E L(.,)75' IVIP-1 TI-1,47' OF F. X /I*'- -MURPllk' AfiF 10047TV DIRETTZ P" ACR{:kFg jr-iqON 7-,,'16- PROPML,"k-Z) SMPINY ANO lTlq7 7f--;V,4N7'- R.-IMN OFFICZAL6" F �q M? 7N PROP?.'�91--79 7ENIJNr Ti?re - T, K IF /0114 I'. }i',rNr X- INC. A OCXX 11A)�.-VN67 AND -577-01e,')9E 6VAIPAIV TAIE 2',,:`)N1/ViF Z-554-1h- IS f) .&V Fri e.9F rM:- PE'(--EZ tV�S AN T1-1,F -R1.1,FZD,r.116 I ,ALL MEP 77c) CONS57-RUCTI:T, ME- TIONS --)BOUr 4 111M.qNS CO&FWNY 2?Z-'71V(Y ALL OMET TO -RS- /-OC4 71---Z7 ,�D -1,41, I-1061R-q OF ON A 517F 1-l1HZ6"11 1,51' SC --) NY "y"774 OPEM4 7YOV 19 01VE CW O: IR c'.7CM14'.WMS. AS AN A&ENT OF NOR f.-,4N L.!Alf---- /i/drZ./­ ME -RE FORCF-V 70 1,-57Z7V TO 7RU01-:9 CO/"IMF "Pyv tic AT A 7' AL I- ATANOT Ch' PqK PA J-` AND N.f(Y1-17-.:-"l PO VrZ6)N IS AN0777EPr rHON(51-17' Of` 6F 061Al C01VCFRA16. NO ONE MEZZZIWIES 71-IE TN4 7 ARE r(i TE sr(igE17 IN IET141Z-I-N rHlz' SJTOM46�F- -PUR PINcy AND TME- A� S7 A-surrz-R-,7. 1101V A1,4NY OF p#--"5F L,4N c?N -477�E..- 1VF PON"7" L 00/1" TO .1VIAL ZMF Z.?ZEY--Z- FNAIES OR 11576WYNE 70 MI MI' 7MC70% AS THEY MLOAZI 7HI---ZR Ofi` 'HER CONC;ERN IS OF P07-1-?VTf e ll- HOOIC-61,4' 719 MIMN6 TAMEWS! AM MON IS 7 BE El i r o /F-1 rl-IER F ,4 N} le2S-006NIZE IRF 54CT wr 4N ommw SWS 7XV LES41 gllqr TO ji-i,rl op lvl-IA r ze Riev-17nIL Z P" Hl-.-17. AIZ-- A-5- 4-NU7-7Z--1-r,5- AL"SC? //,4�--F- "T1151-Irs. C. IiIHICH IS 7`0 AE ARI F TO PE4 C-FFI-11-L P" COEXIST 111rTly 06/R NE. Mr SMOTT 7AM 7- 7-1-116- lZ--1VAN7.- FVrLl NOT 41-Z 6MV NORTH 4 L,,i1vT)o1vN ATMIX L 134AFIC 57-1&7k�- AINEIV A IVOR77-1 ?jND0f,!FR TOMN OkT-76,4L 711?jr T�.) //15' AMOMLE-T62F A TF--J1--F-fC rNp,,:)CT SR&nk' 1-1,4D Ne:-')7- ZNPICA; J0, 70 E�'J'Z7' BeRRk' ST, AND 6,.�F,GN IT 19 PRV.7,;EZY 4154S7- ON RC-7VTiF- 114 Azc.')/,/ Z,)&W-INF "NOVI,4L .96151NE9-c7 444-7 AfiiF C'0Nt.7,C--PrNF-y) 71-1,,ir 1,1171K71V 7'1-11--- NUMMAY xWOF L0674rF-19 " ",IV '1;41.., / � c.�N Prc)V72 - J4 IS (VIER,47-10A141- MY9 A541 M -S,'Af) -172-Tc'.-14770N. lilb- C:,4NM?r 116-LP .8(17' 7RUCAS FN7f-RIN6 ANV ,I',r7*zlyfT sr, A r Tq,,JN THE PeWrTT SPF-EW LINIT A/2ZL ONZ MAFFIC FLOW. M/F 71-1,!1Nll-' P"OU F(,')Iv YeXIR LOF 061W Ct'21116",RNS ---)NO TR�4�5'T ME IVEV6125,57 TO I?E' NPTrFIFP 0� ANY' AND AZ 6,"A,;41VtFZ-7S 7�:-? 71-IE R,!AIWT rl-1,11- X"O" RF S'Vb,",41y,r7zY) SY 7,yF NVIE, AA dk- V sk UIVIII-01-- 3 kk MA 33 jjt. aKtw-.t /-P 01 SK 9 Engineering wDevelopment d construction Inc. February 12, 1990 Mr. Chris Huntress Acting Town Planner 120 Main Street North Andover, MA 01845 Re: W.B. Kent and Sons Proposal 2070 Turnpike Street/Route 114 North Andover, MA 01845 Dear Chris At the Technical Review committee meeting of Wednesday January 24th a number of questions were raised concerning the particular activities and characteristics of use that the proposed relocation of W.B. Kent and Sons Moving Company to 2070 Turnpike Street would entail. These questions included the nature of the business present and future, the use of the building, the use of the property and its relationship to adjacent properties. The following profile is intended to make this information available to the Town Departments and to the abutters and Boards for reference prior to the Public Hearings. 1. The Business W. B. Kent and Sons is a moving company which is presently located at 550 Turnpike Street and Hillside Avenue opposite the Fellowship Bible Church. The company has been in North Andover since 1932, and is a licensed agent for North American Van Lines. The business has three principal ares of operation: local moving, long distance moving which involves relocation of employees and their families around the US, and specialized contract work moving computers for High Tech Corporations. The facility proposed for 2070 Turnpike Street will house business offices, storage and vehicle parking of which 95% will be devoted to the local and inter-state moving aspects of the business. A very limited part of the business also involves distribution of Maytag appliances. 2. Use of Building The proposed 24,000 sf building will have approximately 2,000 sf of business offices. The balance of the space is devoted to staging areas, a drive-thru loading bay and high-stud space for modular storage containers which will account for 90% of the storage in the building. The storage is entirely related to W.B.Kent moving activities. There is no rented self-storage on the premises nor are there plans to have any at any time in the future. NEW MEADOWS PROFESSIONAL BUILDING 447 OLD BOSTON ROAD TOPSFIELD, MA 01483 PHONE (508) 887-9066 FAX (508) 887-3480 3. Use of the Property The proposed facility would be accessed from Route 114 only via a curb cut designed to the standards of the State Highway Department. It would provide more than enough parking for a work force which ranges from 18 persons up to 30 persons during the busy summer months. The work force will keep normal business hours, arriving at 7:AM and departing at 6:00- 7:30 PM depending on the season. The company is closed evenings and on weekends with the exception of an occasional trailer load of goods which may arrive at off hours and remain on the property until it can be unloaded. The truck roster consists of two hardbed trucks and two tractor cabs which typically leave the property in the morning and return at the end of the day. These trucks would be parked In an area designed on the North East side of the building along with no more than 112 dozen tractor trailers which North American will occasionally rotate on and off the property. There will be no underground fuel storage tanks. Other daily vehicular activity on the site would be limited to a handful of trucks which may circulate through to use a truck weighing scale which will be relocated from the present site. This scale is licensed by the State and the Town, and as the only such scale which remains In North Andover, provides a public service. The proposed building will be served by an underground septic sewage disposal system. Preliminary calculations Indicate that the design demand for this system will be very low- comparable to that which a residence would require. Wells on adjacent properties have accurately been located by a survey crew, and the placement of the system will respect applicable setbacks and Town Regulations. 4. Screening and Lighting The Kent company operations do not contain any equipment or processes that might be considered hazardous or otherwise undesirable from the standpoint of hours of operation, nolse, odors or unusual lighting. They also have the benefit of a large site which has wooded areas along most frontages. However, the company has co-existed with residential abutters for many years at its present location and proposes to recognize the concerns of future abutters along Berry Street by construction in the 50 foot landscape buffer zone of a six foot high stockade fence supplemented on both sides by deciduous and coniferous trees of 3"-6"trunk diameter to continue the existing tendency of trees to establish themselves along that frontage. The company also proposes to mask all lighting so that it will not shine onto adjacent properties. 5. Expansion The project as designed will provide for any foreseeable expansion needs. This condition can also be observed to be reinforced by site constraints such as building setbacks and wetland resource areas. There has also been some discussion of the development potential of upland areas toward the Route 114 side of the property. The Kent company does not have any plans to develop this land. Were this to change in the future additional improvements of any kind would be entirely at the discretion of the Zoning Board of Appeals in addition to the Planning Board under those provisions of the Bylaw which would require such action prior to an increase of the use on what in the future would become a non-conforming lot devoted to a permitted industrial use in a residential zone. Conclusion The preceding profile describes a business and facility which will have a rather modest impact on its surroundings from the standpoint of traffic, extent of land use, hours and characteristics of operation and general visibility. The proposed site represents a substantial Improvement over the company's present location, is ideal from a traffic standpoint and will free up the Hillside Road property for uses consistent with Town Zoning. The relocation of the Kent company would also insure that the property Is developed In a manner consistent with adjoining properties along Route 114 thus avoiding the problems associated with random arrangement of residential and industrial uses. Thank you for your consideration. Additional questions may be addressed to me or Mr. Terry Tuttle, President of the W.B. Kent& Sons Company. Sin erely, James Bourgeois, R.A. President cc: North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals Town Departments and Administrators Mr. Terry Tuttle, President, W.B. Kent& Sons Mr. Michael Rice, Bayfield Company 00 Town of qFFI(fES OF: �? North Awhver BUILDING NORTH ANDOVER 0 1845 CONSERVATION (508)68:�-(j483 HEALTH DIVISION OF PLANNING PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEWELOPME1 NJ' KAREN H,P, NELSON, DIRECTOR TO: Zoning Board of Appeals FROM: Planning Board George D. Perna, Chairman DATE: February 17 , 1990 RE: Kent Movers, Special Permit Application The Planning Board is currently reviewing the above referenced application for Site Plan Review. It has been brought to our attention that your board is currently reviewing a petition with regard to the same site for a Special Permit pursuant to Section 4 . 11 (1) of the North Andover Zoning Bylaw. The Planning Board would like to formally go on record with your board that we feel this application is not an allowed use under Section 4 . 131 ( Industrial 1 District ) of the Zoning Bylaw. The Planning Board makes this conclusion from the following points of fact: 1. Sections 4 . 131 (14&16) of the Zoning Bylaw specifically state that warehousing shall be permitted only as a secondary use . Further, that the "parking, indoor storage , and other accessory uses customarily associated with the above uses shall be allowed, provided that such accessory use shall not be injurious, noxious or offensive to the surrounding neighborhood. " 2 . The applicant has proposed a building which is to contain the following breakdown of it ' s 24 , 000 square feet: 2 , 000 sq. ft. Office 9 , 000 sq. ft. Staging & Unloading 13 , 000 sq. ft. Indoor non-industrial storage This breakdown clearly indicates that warehousing is to be the applicants primary use within the proposed facility . The side effects of the warehousing are the trucks whicli W11-1 be in use at the facility on a daily basis. After a site visit this morning it is the Planning Board ' s opinion that these trucks would be injurious, noxious and offensive to the neighborhood. e f 71 k 3 . Section 10. 31 (1) of the Zoning Bylaw states that the Special Permit Granting Authority shall not approve an application for a Special Permit if the use as developed will adversely effect the neighborhood. Section 10 . 31 ( 1) goes on to read, "the Special Permit Granting Authority shall not grant any special permit unless they make a specific finding that the use is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of this bylaw. " Again, it is the Planning Board ' s opinion that this use as proposed is clearly not in keeping with the intent of Section 4 . 131 ( Industrial 1 District ) of the North Andover Zoning Bylaw. If your Board has not already done so, the Planning Board would .like to recommend that a site visit be conducted prior to your issuing a decision with regard to this Special Permit. The Planning Board visited this site earlier this morning and became aware of many issues that were not apparent through the normal presentation and public hearing process. Please keep us informed as to the status of this application. ou. cc: Karen H. P. Nelson, Director DPCD Sw�DS4T�+3x SAIt(31oNFr ATTORNEYS AT LAW 32 CHESTNUT STREET C ANDOVER,MASSACHUSETTS 01810 IJ V TELEPHONE(508)476-1300 FAX(608)474.0478 i'''•''„ , IRVING W.SARGENT(1903.1973E ARTHUR SWEENEY(1913-1978) �- MICHAEL W.MORRIS P G BOARD LAURENCE J.ROSS) MARSHA K.ELIAS DANIEL A.HAYES,JR. February 28, 1990 Ms . Katherine Walsh--Murphy 296 Berry Street North Andover, MA 01845 Mr , Franklin G. Hamilton, Jr . 310 Berry Street North Andover, MA 01845 RE: Bayfield Development Company - Wm. B. Kent & Sons , Inc. 2070 Turnpike Street, North Andover, Massachusetts Dear Mr , Hamilton and Ms . Walsh-Murphy: Pursuant to our conference of February 22, 1990 , you have requested our office to prepare an opinion on three issues that have been raised relating to the above captioned proposed development project . It is our information that the above proposal would require a special permit from the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals and, further, approval from the North Andover Conservation Commission and site plan approval from the North Andover Planning Board. The three key issues which you and other concerned abutters raised through your attendance at the above mentioned Boards ' public hearings for three consecutive nights on February 13 , 14 and 15, 1990 are as follows : I . What is the effect of the recording of a Form A subdivision plan on April 27 , 1987 by the owner of the parcel, as it relates to the rezoning of the parcel from Industrial One to Village Residential after the recording of said Form A plan. II . Whether the proposed primary use of the subject premises is warehousing and storage and thus should be barred under the North Andover Zoning By--Law as warehousing is only .allowed in an Industrial One District as a secondary use. 1 v i 1 Mr . Katherine Walsh-Murphy Mr . Franklin G. Hamilton, Jr . February 28, 1990 Page Two III . Whether the fact that a Traffic Impact Study was not done for this project although it would appear the project is a "major development" under North Andover Zoning By-Law and thus should not be given final approval until this study is completed. I will address each issue as presented in numerical order. I . What is the effect of the recording of a Form A subdivision plan on April 27, 1987 by the owner of the parcel, as it relates to the rezoning of the parcel from Industrial One to Village Residential after the recording of said Form A plan. Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A, Section Six reads as follows ,. "when a plan has been submitted to the Planning Board and written notice has been given to the city. or town clerk, the use of the Land shown on such plan shall be governed by applicable provisions of Zoning By-Law in effect at the time of the submission of such plan, while such plan is being processed under the subdivision control law, including the time required to pursue or await the determination of an appeal referred to in said section, and for a period of three years from the date of endorsement by the planning board, that approval under the subdivision control law is not required or words of similar impact. " Thus , if a Form A plan .is signed by the Planning Board with the notation "approval not required" as the April 27, 1987 plan submitted by the owner was in the instant matter the plan is entitled to a zoning freeze for the use then applicable for the zoning district for a period of three years from the date of the signing of the plan by the Planning Board. In this instance the Form A plan was signed on April 27 , 1987 and thus the zoning freeze would expire on April 27, 1990 . Further, the subject parcel was rezoned from Industrial One to Village Residential by town meeting in 1987 subsequent to the signing of the subject Form A plan. Though the statute is clear to what begins the three year statutory freeze period (i .e. the signing of the plan) it is unclear to what affirmative act or actions taken by the owner would toll the three year freeze on the locus . Under Massachusetts case law it is clear that litigation and appeals pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 40A section 81P during the freeze period will suspend the three year period and that town officials inaction will also suspend the running of the three year period. However, it is equally clear that to date no such impediments have been placed in the way of the developer and I i 1 Mr . Katherine Walsh-Murphy Mr . Franklin G. Hamilton, Jr , February 28, 1990 Page Three it is my opinion that the developer must have in place all approvals for this project by April 27, 1990 . If the approvals are not obtained by April 27, 1990, it is my opinion that the parcel would then only supports uses that are allowed in a Village Residential District . This proposed use would not be allowed in a Village Residential District. Support for this position is found in the case of Louis T. Falcone v. Zoning Board of Appeals of Broct n, Mass . App. 389 N.E. 2d 1032, ( 1979) . In this case a land owner attempted to argue that he met the three year freeze requirement by filing an application for a building permit one day before the running of the three year statute after submission of the plan to the Planning Board. The Court ruled that where a land owner does not apply for a permit until the last day before the protective period thus making it impossible to secure the approvals necessary for the issuance of the permit before the expiration date he finds himself at risk (Id. at 1034) . The Court further stated that the filing of the permit application gave the owner no vested rights and that the risk - of a zoning change was on the applicant . The denial of the building permit application was controlled by the zoning ordinance in effect at the time the decision on the application was made and not the prior zoning ordinance (Id, a 1034) . In the factual situation at hand the developer has waited until two months before the expiration of the three year statute to file for his necessary approvals . T believe that all affirmative decisions must be made by April 27 , 1990 , for the developer to take advantage of the three year freeze . The developer, by waiting until this late date, has placed the use of the premises as an I-1 District at risk if he can not obtain all approvals and obtain a building permit for the parcel by April 27, 1990 . This is an issue that must be brought before the Planning Board for their thoughts on this matter . Further, it is an issue that could carry some weight on appeal if not considered by the Zoning Board of Appeals and approval and a building permit is issued after April 27, 1990 . T believe that if the developer does not have all necessary approvals by April 27, 1990 then the use of the subject parcel must be controlled by the amended zoning ordinance which pertains to a Village Residential District . IT . Whether the proposed use of the subject premises is primarily warehousing and storage and thus should be barred under the North Andover Zoning By-Law as warehousing is only allowed in an Industrial One District as a secondary use . r II I Mr . Katherine Walsh-Murphy Mr. Franklin G. Hamilton, Jr . February 28 , 1990 Page Four The question of whether the proposed use is primarily a warehouse use and secondarily a business office is a critical issue that must be decided by the North Andover Zoning Board of Appeals . ' Approximately Twenty Two Thousand (22, 000) square feet out of the available twenty four thousand (24 , 000) square feet of the building will be devoted to warehouse or warehouse type activities . If the developer satisfies the local Boards on the issue of the three year zoning freeze it must also be satisfied that the proposed use of the building for storage is a secondary use to the main use of the building as a business office. An accessory use is defined under Section 2 . 21 of the North Andover Zoning By-Law as a "use or structure subordinate to the principal use of a building on the same lot and serving a purpose customarily incidental to the use the (sic) principal building . " It can be strongly argued that Wm. B. Kent & Sons, Inc. is a storage company and that the use of the building for warehousing and storage is the principal use of the building and that the office use is the secondary use based on the actual square footage of the building presented by the developer . It believe that the revenue derived from the various activities is irrelevant and that the Boards , and a Court if necessary, must focus on what in fact is the principal use of the proposed building . A review of the proposed plan by the developer would indicate that the primary use is for storage and not a business office. Most of the activity in the building would involve the packing and unpacking of goods onto moving trucks who would deliver the goods to their eventual destination. The use would appear to involve warehousing activities more than the traditional business office type activities . III . Whether the '£act that a Traffic Impact Study was not done for this project although it would appear the project is a "major development" under North Andover Zoning By-Law and thus should not be given final approval until this study is completed. Under Section 8 . 37 of the North Andover Zoning By-Law, a Major Development is classified as a a project which contains 10 or more acres ; or contains fifty or more housing units ; or contains 25 , 000 or more square feet of building coverage in any new building; or contains 200 or more parking spaces ; . or will generate 1, 000 or more new vehicle trips per day. If the project meets any of the above criteria it is a Major Project and must satisfy certain informational requirements to comply with Planning Board Site Plan Review, one of which is a Traffic Impact Study. In this instance, the developer, through his representative, admits in his January 2, 1990 letter to the North Andover zoning Board of Appeals that the site contains 16 . 94 acres meeting the Mr . Katherine Walsh-Murphy Mr , Franklin G. Hamilton, Jr . February 28, 1990 Page Five requirement of a major development being over ten acres . If a Traffic Impact Study is not performed, the the applicant has not satisfied all requirements for site plan review and thus final' approval should not be given until this requirement is satisfied. I believe that the language of the Zoning By-Law is mandatory and this study must be filed with the Planning Board. I am surprised that this Traffic Impact Study has not been filed with the Planning Board as it would appear that a Traffic Impact Study is mandatory for a project which abuts a : state highway and should be submitted to the Executive Office of Environmental Affairs since a curb cut is necessary on the State Highway. I believe the above issues are critical and must be addressed to your satisfaction as abutters to this project . If you have any Comments or questions regarding the above, please do not hesitate to contact me. I am ready to discuss these issues at any time as the hearing and ultimately the decisions on this project are made. Thank you for your time and attention. Ve r t o/yj o rCy Daniel A yes, Jr . DAH/bep i r AAM WM. B. KENT & SONS, Inc. COMMITMENT TO SERVICE SINCE 1932 550 Turnpike Street C19 a ' NO. ANDOVER, MASSACHUSETTS 01845 508/683-9439 or603/893-9533 Bow March 8, 1990 PL.A�� NG B0;' Planning Board Town. of North Andover Main Street North Andover, MA 01845 To Whom It May Concern, I would like to answer the the two questions concerning the property on Berry Street. First, it would be economically unprofitable to operate out of two buildings on the proposed site. Also through my agency contract with North American Van Lines it prohibits us from doing business with a van line competitor. This is an industry practice whereby you cannot do business with multiple van lines. Any questions please give me a call. Best regards Terry Tuttle President AGENT FOR norkhAmerlcanc,VAN LINES t� — Enyineering m,nevelopment&eonstruetion Inc It i March 8, 1990 Mr. Frank Serio, Chairman Zoning Board of Appeals 120 Main Street North Andover, MA 01845 Re: W.B. Kent Sons Proposal 2070 Turnpike Street/Route 114 North Andover, MA 01845 Dear Mr. Chairman On behalf of the Bayfield Company/Riding Realty Trust and the W.B. Kent & Sons Company, present and prospective owners of the property at 2070 Turnpike Street, I would like to take this opportunity to comment on the position of the Planning Board as expressed In a letter to your Board dated February 17, 1990. Contained therein are two essential criticisms of the proposal; first that the Kent company is not an Industrial - 1 use due the extent of storage in the building program and second, that the truck traffic on the property would be "injurious, noxious and offensive"to the neighborhood. As concerns the use issue, the applicants have acknowledged as a premise for the ZBA petition that the Kent company program does not, due to the extent of storage in the building, neatly fit the Bylaw's 1-1 criteria. The applicants are only asking the Board, according to the option that the General Provisions of District Use Regulations (Section 4.11.1) clearly makes available, to make a finding that the Kent business is similar In character to expressly permitted 14 uses. This finding should not be difficult to make and as evidence, the applicants would.ask the Board to consider that there are no characteristics of this proposal including the size of the building, its materials, the presence of tractor trailers on the property, exterior lighting, sire of work force, or hours of operation which would in any way cause it to stand out from light manufacturing and similar uses in an industrial area. In the past, (reference my letter of January 22, 1990) the Building Department has considered similar programs and came to precisely this conclusion. These findings Included the consideration that, like the Kent company, these facilities were to house'the principal business offices of local (or soon to be local) companies, and also reflected the interpretation that proportion of storage alone did not necessarily cause a business to be classified as a warehouse because the underlying Intent of the bylaw in separating warehousing and distribution facilities from I-1 uses was to closely regulate the location of large scale truck terminals and the heavy traffic and extended hours of operation that typically accompany such uses. As concerns the question of neighborhood compatibility, the applicants respectfully suggest that this is a very different issue that is the proper concern of the Planing Board to be addressed via the Site Plan Review process. During the two Public Hearing sessions that have been held to date, there has been considerable scrutiny of the proposal and its relationship to the nearby residences on Berry Street. The Planning Board must admit that these hearings have failed to Identify a single substantive feature of the proposal which does not meet or exceed the requirements of the Zoning Bylaw. The Planning Board must also admit that all the changes that they have endorsed or proposed have been incorporated into the project to mitigate its Impact on the Berry Street Neighborhood. These provisions Include: NEW MEADOWS PROFESSIONAL. BUILDING 447 OLD BOSTON ROAD TOPSFIELD, MA 01983 PHONE (508) 887-9066 FAX (508) 887-3480 P I I - construction of an earth berm of approximately 250 ft. length and at least 5 ft. height p before the building is constructed - construction of 480 feet of 6 ft, height stockade fence on top of the berm and beyond be the building Is constructed - substantial tree planting - relocation of parking spaces away from the Berry Street frontage - relocation of trailer parking to the North side of the building away from Berry Street - relocation of offices to the South side of the building toward Berry Street - installation of a gate and turn around to guarantee that no trucks will use the property at night - screening of al/ exterior lighting - extension of town water service to Berry Street plus installation of a hydrant - acceptance of an easement on the property to permit the improvement of Berry Street. When the Planning Board's assertion that the project is not compatible with the neighborhood is considered in the context of the foregoing program of improvements, it becomes obvious that the Planners have judged this proposal by standards that no Industrial projects could meet. The Planning Board is in effect saying that a cooperative applicant with a totally zoning conforming proposal cannot use his land as the law allows due to the general relationship of the developable portion to the Berry Street neighborhood. That the nearest of these residences were constructed and occupied after this land was zoned for Industrial use seems to carry no weight whatsoever. An objective review of this proposal will arrive at the conclusion that it meets or exceeds all Town requirements and is extremely responsive to the Intent of the bylaw that traffic associated with industrial uses should not pass through neighborhoods and that the boundaries between Industrial and residential uses should be carefully designed and adequately screened to preserve the quality of life of the nearby residents. This project is simply unpopular because of aesthetic considerations, and we hope that the Planning Board will reconsider its stated position before a vote Is finally taken. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, i6lv ,vJ 9 -r James Bourgeois, R.A President cc: North Andover Planning Board Mr. Michael Rice - Sayfield Company/Riding Realty Trust Mr. Terry Tuttle - W.B. Kent& Sons. 1 1 Too North Andover Board of Appeals North Andover Conservation Commission North Andover Planning Board * Concerns relating to the Bayfiel,d Company proposal to build a � * moving and storage site at 2070 Turnpike � i . Wells of abutting sites were missed during site planning. 2. What is the impact: of ::a heavy truck traffic? Has it been investigated? If not when will it Lae available? 3. Wh-,.At is the impact of water run-off? D. E . lµ a closed a re?}s-si.denti.:al site due to water backup created not significantly distant from this proposed site. They profer..e<,Wse'd site will cover a significant amount of current open land watershed surface with concrete and/or blacktop. What's to prevent run-off creating water level problems for the abutters ? 4. Why has the town flip-flopped on the zoning status? Mo9t of they area .is currently residential, why return to I- V? 5. In the proposed plate truly grandf:athe:=red or a result of whimsi.ca.l, filing? Does it pass the test of reason as well as legality? is The residents of Berry Street 1'reiost effected will not benefit" from this type of proposed property use. They will reside whe_irref commerce is a priority not neicll- borl-oinee`d tranquillity. What guarantee or cre`?dible assurance do the abutters have their neighborhood will not degrade rapidly'? !. Wi,.l.;l. setbacks, etcs , he strictly adhered to and will they he of adequate elevation, density, and attractiveness to protect abutters from unsightly commercial property? W . U . KPNF I SM'; DRAINAGF DrFICUMCM; 1 . Computations havo no doncriptiva narrative making GuquonLUL chocking difficult. The Subcot and rvocho" are not uniformly numbered . I ou"puck that Churn are Ono draf Ling errors but, withouL a uniform unalyBi " or at loant is norrativo to explain rouUny , f can not he q"r" . The Routing Buquonou qhould he roviGod to "how continuity . Without drainage plans of Cho upatroam areas , I can not roviow the Computations without any"ming that Chore are other dvf i clonci ua 2 . The un" of Reaches 1 , 4 , 5 , N 6 do not make 5onBu oinc(' Chose "houJd ba Unalhod oErIcLly an Pond outlets . K Now to it po2"jhlu to have more Pond storage Tor Pond 1:1. than conLribuUng area ? Computations chow storagn of 10 - 39 llc-Ft . on a 6 acre wahorshod LhaU has a considurablo devolopment. 4 . Your Roach OB haq an on Lie L of 9B . 16 el ova K!on accordi nq to the computationG but Cho plans "how an olovaLioll of MR . 5 . Pro-Onvolopment plan showy, two dotention Pond" numborod 2 (Pond 2 ) . TG the wMand all one ponding area with two ouhloLo or sho"Id it be two weparoto po"dq? Post OnvOoped.. mont LrvaU" the area aR two uaparato Po"dg - 6 . There in no Pond #2 in compuLatio"n for Cho Pro- Dovulopod 30 y0ar storm . 1 . Pond R2 indicatou a storage capacity of 7 . 4 Ac- Ft . at; ulavaLion 94 for the Pro- DnvulopmorlL but Post-Dovolopmunt ha" 6 . 61 no-M plou Pond D3 wtordgn of 2 . 48 Ac-n . At:: elevation 94 . Whnre did Cho uxtPn 6toraqu corn from? H . The culvert under the driveway in higher than the gro"nd elovation leaving trapped water . 9 . IF Meat 46 has a 100 your flow of 146 . 7 M . , how call Roach *3 have 149 . 3 cfa and Pond 02 have a peak inflow of only 123 . 7 ON? 10 . The P10110 Call for the Culvert under Route 114 to be a 24 " pipe , but the drainage comp"CaLionq cati Chu culvert to bo a 21 " pLpo . There 1" no explanation . I I Cho Eopographi c plans are imoomploto in th"t there Ni no data on the wo" t side or Pond 12 Lo indinaLo the 94 foot.,. contour , the twelve foot wide brook which 1G the inundmtod Roach 13 or Chlcr ditch dot 0 1 along Route 114 e- ri A Ix . rho watershed lines are inaccuraLo both in Lho Pro and Pout Dovolopmont analyst" . 13 . A comp ar"on butwoon Pro and Pout anoly"is of Lho compu to Lions Mina Let Lho L Pond H2 roisu" tho wa Lop ourf am., from ojovaUo" 93 . 0? La 94 . 6 feet . rho j "croaved flooding L a "o E con f't"od Lo the a pp L 1 c n Ls prof n r Uy C II Y r V r i j BAYFIELD DEVELOPMENT CORP. 2070 TURNPIKE STREET SPECIAL PERMIT APPROVAL, SECTION 8. 3 OF THE NORTH ANDOVER ZONING BYLAW. FINDINGS OF FACT: The Planning Board makes the following findings regarding this Special Permit as required by section 8 . 3 of the Zoning Bylaws : 1. The proposed use and site design for this lot are appropriate, due to it ' s location in Town. 2 . Adequate vehicular and pedestrian access into the surrounding site has been provided. 3 . The landscaping plan as shown and revised, meets the requirements of section 8 . 4 of the Zoning Bylaws. 4 . The site drainage system is designed in accordance with the Town Bylaw requirements. 5. The applicant has met the requirements of the Town for Site Plan Review as stated in Section 8 . 3 of the Zoning Bylaw. 6. Adequate and appropriate facilities will be provided for the proper operation of the proposed use. The Planning Board finds under Section 8 . 35 of the Zoning Bylaw that the proposed site plan generally complies with the Town Bylaw requirements but requires minor conditions in order to be completely in compliance with Town Bylaws. Finally, the Planning Board finds that this proposal complies with the Town of North Andover Bylaw requirements so long as the following conditions are complied with. Therefore, in order to fully comply with the approval necessary to construct the facility as specified in the Special Permit before us, the Planning Board hereby grants a Special Permit to the applicant provided the following conditions are met: SPECIAL CONDITIONS: 1. Any Plants, Trees or Shrubs that have been incorporated into the Landscape Plan approved in this decision, that die within one year from the date of this approval, shall be replaced by the applicant. 2 . All drainage facilities including detention basins, shall be constructed and erosion controlled prior to any building permit being issued on the site. �I 'IE 3 . All Planning Board order of Conditions are to be placed upon the recorded Definitive Plan, ( Cover Sheet ) prior to endorsement and filing with the Registry of Deeds . 4 . The contractor shall contact Dig Safe at least 72 hours prior to commencing any excavation. 5. Gas, Telephone, Cable and Electric utilities shall be installed as specified by the respective utility companies. 6. All catch basins shall be protected and maintained with hay bales to prevent siltation into the drain lines during construction. 7 . No open burning shall be done except as is permitted during burning season under the Fire Department regulations . 8 . No underground fuel storage shall be installed except as may be allowed by Town Regulations. 9 . The building shall have commercial fire sprinklers installed prior to the issuance of the Certificate of occupancy, per order NAFD. 10. Prior to a Certificate of occupancy being issued for any structures, this site shall have received all necessary permits and approvals from the North Andover Board of Health. 11. Prior to a Certificate of occupancy being issued for the structure, the site shall be reviewed by the Planning Board. Any screening as may be reasonably required by the Planning Board shall be added at the owners expense . 12 . Prior to endorsement of the plans, all off site utilities shall be submitted to and approved by the North Andover DPW. 13 . The applicant shall be required to transplant both deciduous and evergreen trees from the site to the landscaped buffer. The Town Planner and the Conservation Administrator shall mark specific trees in the field and the applicant shall be responsible for completing that work. The applicant shall also inform the Town Planner as to when the trees are to be transplanted. 14 . The height of the proposed structure shall not exceed twenty four (24) feet. 15 . The provisions of this settlement shall apply to and be binding upon the applicant, it ' s employees and all successors and assigns in interest or control . 16 . All drainage and sewage facilities shall be approved by the r " ' 1 i i North Andover Division of Public Works prior to the Planning Board endorsing the record plans. 17 . A bond in the amount of $10, 000 shall be posted to ensure construction and/or completion of site screening and other pertinent public amenities. These bonds shall be in the form of a Tri-Party Agreement or Pass Book. This bond shall be posted prior to the applicant receiving a permit to build. 18 . In no instance shall additional pavement, construction or building additions be allowed at any time in the future after the final site plan has been approved except as allowed through Site Plan Review. 19 . The site shall be required to tie into the Town ' s sewer system should it become available in the future. The applicant shall make the tie in within one year from the date that sewer is available. the sewer connection shall conform to 314 CMR 7 : 00, shall be installed in accordance with the DPW rules and regulations and fee structure, and shall be subject to DPW policies requiring mitigation of existing infiltration/inflow from the receiving system. 20 . The water main and appurtenances shall be installed as shown on the February 90 Plan. The size, type of pipe and Location of the fire line and domestic water service should be shown on the plan. The water connections must comply with 310 CMR 22 .22 and the Town of North Andover By-law regarding Cross Connection Control. 21. A road widening easement should be provided along Berry Street. The easement should be sufficient width to allow approximately a 40 foot width for road construction purposes. 22 . The site plan survey should refer to U.S.G.S datum. 23 . The size of the culvert crossing Rt. 114 at the Easterly end of the site shall be verified prior to the endorsement of the record plans. State plans are not clear as to whether loll pipe under pavement of Rt. 114 was ever replaced with 1811 pipe. 24 . The proposed gate at the entry drive shall be secured by a touch pad coded electric locking device with a manual over ride if power fails. 25 . The applicant shall satisfy the Fire Department with regard to fire detection and fire supression systems prior to receiving a Building Permit. 26 . The following plans shall be deemed as part of the decision and shall not be changed or amended without prior approval from the Planning Board: Plan prepared for: Bayfield Development Co. Plan prepared by: Thomas E. Neve Associates, Inc. EDC Inc. Dated: most recent revision - 3/9/90 Sheets: L2-1, 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 DIPRETE • MARCHIONDA & ASSOCIATES, INC. 80 Maple Street DATE STONEHAM, MASSACHUSE17S 02180 �+.1� JOB No. 4V� r3 ATTENTION (617) �438.6121 TON A1114 I ji WE ARE SENDING YOU Attached ❑ Under separate cover via the fallowing items: ❑ Shop drawings ❑ Prints ❑ Plans ❑ Samples ❑ Specifications ❑ Copy of letter ❑ Change order N r' u COPIES DATE No. DESCRIPTION ` 0 THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below; For approval ❑ Approved as submitted ❑ Resubmit copies for approval ❑ For your use ❑ Approved as noted ❑ Submit copies for distribution ❑ As requested ❑ Returned for corrections ❑ Return corrected prints ❑ For review and comment ❑ ❑ FOR BIDS DUE 19 ❑ PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US REMARKS ► O f(OK Aso FT �a z 12 CO PY TO r- SIGNED:— nIIC124P2 ArEss Ire,crown M&M If enclosures are not as noted, kindly notify us at once.