Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING BOARD EXECUTIVE SESSION � s The 'North Andover Planning Board held a regular meeting on Thursday evening, June 28, 1990, in the Town Hall, Selectmen' s Meeting Room. The regularly scheduled meeting was for June 21 , 1990, but due to thellack of a quorum, was rescheduled. The meeting was called to order at 8: 31 p.m. by the Chairman, George Perna, Jr. Also present were John Simons, Clerk, Erich Nitzsche and Jack Graham. John Draper arrived at 8: 43 p.m. Public Hearings 203 Turnpike Street - Site Plan Review John Simons read a letter from Christian Huntress, Town Planner to Stephen Stapinski, Merrimack Engineering. A letter was received from Merrimack Engineering in response to the concerns of the Board. A letter was also received from Merrimack College. That letter follows: Mr. ' Christian Huntress June 27 , 1990 Town Planner Town of North Andover 120 Main Street North Andover, MA 01845 Dear Chris: I have had the opportunity to review the plans for the proposed addition to the North Andover Office Park. I see no major impact to Merrimack College and it ' s property. However, I would request the following stipulations be imposed by the Planning Board prior to the construction phase. 1 . At the request of Mr. Peter Johnson, Merrimack College will permit the temporary use of a small designated area of our property for , construction management or staging during the course of construction. This area would be required to be securedby appropriate fencing and the college would held harmless for such use , Upon completion of this project, Evergreen Reality, D.B.A. North Andover Office Park would be responsible for regrading, loam and, seeding of the designated area. Also, the college would request the existing fencing and gate way be replaced to the college ' s specifications. Details regarding the specifications are to be agreed upon prior to the start of construction. 2 . Prior to the commencement of work, Evergreen Reality, D. B. A. North Andover Office Park will remove all existing parking areas that are presently on Merrimack College property. During the removal of the parking areas , granite curbing or some other aesthetically pleasing barricade must be installed to stop vehicles from exiting the parking lot over college property. All areas that are presently damaged from traffic exiting from these areas are to be graded, loam, and seeded. 3 . Under no conditions will Evergreen Reality, D. B.A. North Andover Office Park be permitted to store or dispose of construction debris, trash or hazardous materials on Merrimack College property and will assume any and all responsibilities of any damages of such improper disposal of the same by its employees or contractors. Should you require any further information regarding the aforementioned stipulations to the construction of the proposed addition to the North Andover Office Park, please don ' t hesitate to contact my office . Sincerely, Scott A. Cote ' , Associate Director of Physical Plant, Merrimack College George Perna asked Christian Huntress if there were any outstanding is's'ues . Stephen Stapinski stated that there would be extensive landscaping and that islands have been added. A planting schedule was presented to the Planning Board. Plans have been revised to accommodate those plans which the State has to widen Route 114 in the same area. Peter Johnson, Evergreen Reality, gave the Board a construction schedule. Mr. Johnson stated that an average of 80 cars are parked in the parking area, leaving 125 to 130 vacant spaces. If additional parking is needed, Merrimack College will cooperate . George Perna stated that the Board would review the screening of the property after construction. The Building Inspector will review the site during construction. Erich Nitzsche asked that an As-built Plan be submitted A motion was made by Erich Nitzsche to close the public hearing on 203 Turnpike Street, dated April 9, 1990, revised June 1990 and instruct staff to draft a conditional approval of the Site Plan for July 12 , 1990. The motion was seconded by John Draper and voted unanimously by the Board. 296 Salem Street - Special Permit Watershed District Christian Huntress, Town Planner, updated the Board on the application before them. John Simons has contacted I .E.P . John did not receive any additional feedback from them and will not change his mind. John Simons gave the Board copies of a draft decision for a denial. Christian Huntress gave the Board copies of a draft approval. The Board took a few minutes to review both drafts. John Draper asked that an Erosion Control Bond be added to the decision in the amount of $5 ,000. George Perna asked that a sentence be added to number 5 o the Finding of Facts to read " in particular the applicant has provided an extension to the sewer system which will enable adjacent property owners currently on septic systems to be connected to the Town ' s sewer line. " Erich Nitzsche asked that the following be added to the decisions 1 . A bond in the form of a Tri-Party Agreement between the Town of North Andover through its Planning Board, the Applicant and a qualified lending institution, shall be posted to insure proper erosion control methods are established and followed throughout construction. This bond shall be set at five thousand dollars ( $5 ,000 ) . The applicant shall post this bond prior to receiving a permit to build. 2. Prior to receiving a Certificate of Occupancy the applicant shall submit a certified copy of an As-built Plan, which shows all construction including, sewer lines, leach pits and other pertinent site features. This As-Built Plan shall be submitted to the Town Planner for approval and shall be stamped by both a certified land surveyor and practicing engineer. John Simons commented on his position in this matter. He said that it ;was difficult for him, not being in favor of the proposed. He said that the rules apply to individuals as well as developers and he ' stated that this falls just out side the scope of what was intended in the Bylaw and asked that this be considered. George Rand, attorney representing Mr. Olenio, wanted the bond in the form of a Tri-Party Agreement. A motion was made to close the public hearing on 296 Salem Street, Olenio. The motion was seconded by John Draper and voted unanimously by the Board. A second motion was made by Erich Nitzsche to approve the Special Permit for the Olenios, 296 Salem Street in accordance with the draft decision as amended. The motion was seconded by John Draper. In favor of the motion were Erich Nitzsche, John Draper and Jack Graham. John Simons was opposed. The Chairman voted in favor of the motion. 316 Salem Street - Special Permit - Common Driveway John Simons read a letter from the Fire Chief . George Perna stated that this Special Permit is before the Planning Board at the Board' s request. Christian Huntress, Town Planner, gave the Board copies of a draft decision . Erich Nitzsche asked that under the Special Conditions the following be added: 1 . add "encased in cement. " 2 . The Form A Plan be filed along with the easement documents. A motion was made by Erich Nitzsche to close the public hearing on the Special Permit for a Common Driveway for 318 Salem Street. The motion was seconded by John Simons and voted unanimously by the Board . Erich Nitzsche made a second motion to approve the Special Permit for a Common Driveway on Lot A and B, in accordance with the draft decision as amended. The motion was seconded by John Draper and voted unanimously by the Board. Johnston Country Store - Site Plan Review/Repetitive Petition John Simons read a letter from Christian Huntress, Town Planner, to Mr. Bain. A letter was received from Mr. Bain answering the concerns of the Board. George Perna asked what the setback was from the street. Chris Huntress stated the setback was 52 . 5 feet. The Board reviewed the letter from Mr. Bain. The Chairman asked for comments. John Simons stated that the only issue in the reason for denial from the Board of Appeals that had been addressed or that there was a change in was the first reason. The Board of Appeals now has input from the State. There were no other changes in the application before the Board. George Perna asked Chris if there was anything he wanted to add. Chris stated that he had drafted decisions for which ever way the Board voted to vote. George Perna asked Mr. Bain if there was a possibility of connecting to the abutting property, such as a roadway. Erich Nitzsche suggested a walkway. The Board reviewed the old plans in comparison to the new plans. Mr. Bain stated that the original plans had an entrance and an exit. The new plans showed one curb-cut. A motion was made by Erich Nitzsche to close the public hearing on the Repetitive Petition. The motion was seconded by John Simons and voted unanimously by the Board. A second motion was made By Erich Nitzsche that the Board find that there has been substantial changes in the Site Plan and that the Board vote to approve the reconsideration. There was no second. John Simons offered another motion that the Board votes unfavorable action on the Repetitive Petition in this matter, relating to Johnston Country Store Application for Repetitive Petition. The motion was seconded by John Draper. John Simons withdrew his motion and John Draper withdrew his second. Jack Graham seconded Erich motion to approve the reconsideration. The Chairman asked for a vote . Erich Nitzsche and Jack Graham voted in favor of the reconsidering the application. John Simons and John Draper opposed the reconsideration. The Chairman voted in favor of the reconsideration. The motion did not carry. The application for Repetitive Petition was denied. A motion was made by Erich Nitzsche to close the public hearing on the Site Plan Review for Johnston Country Store . The motion was seconded by John Simons and voted unanimously by the Board. Christian Huntress, Town Planner, gave the Board members copies of a draft decision for denial on the Site Plan Review for Johnston Country Store. The Board reviewed the decision. John Simons asked that number 2 of the Outstanding Issues stated that the proposed does not conform to the Zoning Bylaw requirements more specifically Table 2 and stated the reasons. A motion was made by John Simons to deny the Site Plan Review for Johnston Country Store for the reasons delineated in the written de'c'ision plus as amended by verbal conservation, adding that the application does not conform to Zoning. The motion was seconded by Jo'h'n Draper. George Perna stated that there were very few reasons why a Site Plan Review can be denied. Site Plan Review is a review and should be conditioned. In this case the applicant has not received the necessary variances approved because of the Repetitive Petition being denied. On that, the Chairman asked for a vote. The Board voted unanimously to deny the Site Plan Review. Jack Graham left the meeting at approximately 9: 30 p.m. Discussions Edgewood Life Care Christian Huntress told the Board that Town Counsel has reviewed the Conservation Easements for Edgewood Life Care and has approved them. A motion was made by John Simons to accept the Conservation Easement for Edgewood Life Care. The motion was seconded by Erich Nitzsche and vote unanimously by those present. Chestnut Street - Common Driveways Christian Huntress, Town Planner, told the Board that the case has been remanded by the court. The Board has to direct Town Counsel to enter into Settlement of Judgement. Ben Osgood, Jr. was present. George Perna asked that one lot be removed. The Board ask that Town Counsel be contacted for their options. Fuller Farm John Simons read a letter from Paula Barrett into the record. Mr. Chris Huntress April 30, 1990 Planning Board i North Andover, MA Dear Chris, Per our telephone conversation last week I am writing to you to request that the issue concerning finishing the top coat of the cul-de-sac on Fuller Meadow Road be placed on the next earliest agenda of the next Planning Board meeting. Not much progress has taken place over the last 2 years concerning the taking of the $10,000 bond by the Town to finish the circle. Please notify me when you have a date so I can notify my neighbors who will most likely be in attendance also. Thank you again, Paula Barrett 27 Fuller Meadow Road - North Andover, MA 01845 i A letter was also received and read from Bill Hmurciak, D. P.W. The Board wants the developer brought in for the next Planning Board meeting. The item is to be placed on the July 12, 1990 agenda for pulling the bond. The Board asked that Chris send a letter to the developer. Bob Barrett, 27 Fuller Meadow Road, stated that originally a $24,000 was to be posted, now there is only $10,000. Chris was asked by the Board to get prices from Bill Hmurciak, D.P.W. on the work that is remaining. ApAroval Not Required Form A Plans Great Pond Road- Changing Lot Lines A Motion was made by Erich Nitzsche to deny the Form A Plans dated June 5 , 1990 because it is a subdivision. He asked that Town Counsel be contacted for an opinion. The filing fee will be waived on the next submission. The motion was seconded by John Draper and voted unanimously by those present. Erich Nitzsche left the meeting due to illness. Bond Release Sideri Place John Simons read a letter from Joseph Cushing, of Richard F . Kaminski Associates. The applicant is requesting that $5,000 being held for erosion control be released by the Planning Board. Christian Huntress, Town Planner, stated that he has spoken to Bill Hmurciak, D. P.W. and Bill asked that nothing be released at this time . Christian Huntress asked that the $5 ,000 bond being held for erosion control now be held for continued maintenance and operation, roll over the amount being held for erosion control. A motion was made by John Simons to roll over the bond being held for erosion control and hold for continued maintenance and operation until the road is accepted by the Town. The motion was seconded by John Draper and voted unanimously by those present. Lot Release Ani Road - Sideri Place A motion was made by John Simons to release Lots 1 , 2 and 3 for Sideri Place . The motion was seconded by John Draper and voted unanimously by those present. Minutes May 17, 1990 & June 7 , 1990 A motion was made by John Draper to approve the minutes of May 17, 1990 and June 7 , 1990. The motion was seconded by John Simons and voted unanimously by those present. The Chairman asked for a roll call voted to go into Executive Session to discuss Mifflin v. Z .B.A. A notion was made by John Simons to go into Executive Session to discuss Mifflin v. Z .B .A. The motion was seconded by John Draper and on a roll call vote: John Simons - Yes John Draper Yes George Perna - Yes the Board went into Executive Session. The Chairman stated that upon completion of the Executive Session the Board would reconvene the public hearing and adjourn the meeting. A motion was made by John Draper to come out of Executive Session. The motion was seconded by John Simons and on a roll call vote: John Simons - Yes John Draper - Yes George Perna - Yes the Planning Board came out of Executive Session at 10: 35 P. M. A motion was made by John Draper to adjourn the meeting. The motion was seconded by John Simons and voted unanimously by those present. The meeting adjourned at 10: 35 p.m. George Perna, Jr. , Chairman Janet L. Eaton, Secretary COWWOML The Chairman asked for a roll call voted to go into Executive Session to discuss Mifflin v. Z . B. A. A motion was made by John Simons to go into Executive Session to discuss Mifflin v. Z .B.A. The motion was seconded by John Draper _ And on a roll call vote: John Simons - Yes John Draper aper Yes George Perna - Yes the Board went into Executive Session. The Chairman stated that upon completion of the Executive Session the Board would reconvene the public hearing and adjourn the meeting. On June 28, 1990 the North Andover Planning Board went into Executive Session at 10: 30 p. m. The following member were present: George Perna, Jr. , Chairman, John Simons, Clerk and John Draper. Mifflin v. Z.B.A. Christian Huntress, Town Planner briefed the Board on the case. The Planning Board is not presently involved in this matter. Joel Bard, Town Counsel, asked if the Board wanted this matter on the next agenda to formally ask the Board for their involvement at the request of the judge. George Perna stated that he would act as a mediator, as a private citizen, not as the Planning Board Chairman, to help in the discussions. The Planning Board does not want to discuss this matter on the July 12, 1990. Christian Huntress will ask Joel Bard if George Perna could be involved as a private citizen. A motion was made by John Draper to come out of Executive Session. The motion wa seconded by John Simons and on a roll call vote : John Simons - Yes John Draper - Yes George Perna - Yes the Planning Board came out of Executive Session at 10: 35 P.M. CON`IIICNTIAL The North Andover Planning Board went into Executive Session on November 2, 1989 at approximately 8s40 p.m. to discuss stratigity on Angus Realty Trust, Abbott Village and Coolidge Construction, all of which are in litigation with the Planning Board. The following members were present and voting: George Perna, Jr. , Chairman; John Simons, Clerk; Erich Nitzsche, Jack Graham and Jahn Draper. Also present was Joel Bard, Town Counsel. Coolidge Construction Joel Bard, Town Counsel, gave his impression that it was a constructive approval. John Simons stated that it was confusing on who was the granting authority at that time. John Simons stated that under the old Bylaw the applicant should have gone for a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals and to Conservation for an Order of Conditions. A Special Permit was also needed for a Common Driveway. Joel Bard stated that the suit was very narrow and that the applicant would win. The applicant is still required to get all the necessary permits. Any major changes will have to be addressed by the Planning Board in the form of a modification. Motion: By Erich Nitzsche to authorize Town Counsel to settle the suit consistent to the comments made by the Board. Second: John Draper Votes Unanimous of those present. Abbott Village Joel Bard stated that the legal issue was that the applicant had an approval but the easement to connect to Woodbury Lane was never recorded. A suit was brought against the Osgoods and indirectly the Town of North Andover by Batal. Judgement was for Batal. The applicant then came before the Planning Board, again. The application was approved constructively. An extension was never received in writing from the applicant, only verbal from an associate, with a written one forth coming. The Planning Board then filed under Chapter 41 S. 81W to place conditions on the subdivision. Joel Bard stated that he had met with George Perna, Chairman; Karen Nelson, Director of Planning and Community Development and the Osgoods to go over a list of conditions with comments. George ' Perna stated that the Board really gained on this application. Lot 38 will be taken off the plans. The sewer will be placed down the middle of the road. Sidewalks will be placed along Abbott Street. The applicant is still in litigation with the Conservation Commission. Any major modifications to the plans will be brought to the Planning Board for review under modification of a Definitive Subdivision. The Special Permits for the common driveways were denied by the Planning Board because the Definitive Subdivision constructive approval was rescinded. The question of the applicant resubmitting for the Special Permits on the common driveways was brought up. Joel Bard stated that the remand says the matter is remanded back to the Planning Board for reconsideration. The public hearing on the subdivision will not come back to the Planning Board, only the Special Permits for Common Driveways. Motion: By Erich Nitzsche to accept the approval subject to the correction of typographical errors. Second: John Draper Vote: Unanimous of those present. Motion: By John Simons that the Planning Board hereby agrees on the remand of the Special Permit. Second: Jack Graham Vote: Unanimous of those present. A discussion on common driveways took place between the Board members and Town Counsel. In the opinion of Town Counsel, , if it is allowed in the Bylaw it cannot be refused, only conditioned. Joel Bard stated that in the remand from the courts, the Planning Board will advertise for a public hearing and approve the Common Driveway for Lot 6 and Lot 7 . Joel Bard read from the agreement on the subdivision. Basically th6t agreement shall enter modifying the plan in accordance with and subject to the conditions stated in Exhibit 1. Angus Realty Trust Joel Bard, Town Counsel, stated that the legal issue was what does the special permit grant. John Simons questioned if abutters were notified on the application. Joel Bard stated that those were procedural defects and there is a limit of 120 days for an appeal. John Simons stated that there were several issues: 1. Special Permit had expired 2 . What actually was approved is not what they ended up with. 3. Plans that were shown to the Planning Board were not what was approved of by the Zoning Board of Appeals. John Simons expressed his views relative to the size of the building, parking, and the strip mall look. Joel Bard stated that the applicants have moved for Summary of Judgement. The documents and legal issues will be reviewed. The Board wants to see the Conservation Commissions Order of Conditions. II _ I Motion: By Jack Graham to come out of Executive Session. Second: John Draper Vote: Unanimous of those present The Planning Board can out of Executive Session at approximately 950 P.M. -z Motion: By John Simons to go into Executive Session to discuss Abbott Village. Second: Erich Nitzsche Vote : Unanimous of those present. The Planning Board went into Executive Session on September 28, 1989 to discuss Abbott Village. The following members were present: George Perna, Jr. , Chairman; John Simons, Clerk; Erich Nitzsche and Jack Graham. Abbott Village Christian Huntress, Planner, updated the Board on Abbott Village. Chris stated that the trial was set for October 5, 1989 and Town Co ►nsel wanted to straighten out what the outstanding issues were. Chris said that as he sees it the issue is the 1,800 foot cul-de- sac for the possible connection with Woodbury Lane. This issue is impossible to do because the easement was never recorded. George Perna clarified the Boards position on the length of the cul-de-sac. If the connection was possible the 1,800 feet would be acceptable, but, because it is impossible the Board has no interest in extending the roadway because of the wetlands and the hill. The Board wants the road to end at 1, 200 feet. Erich Nitzsche stated that other roads were approved with longer cul-de-sacs . Chris Huntress is to review the subdivision in the file and list those that are longer then the requirements of the Rules and Regulations . Bill Hmurciak, stated he preferred the 1 ,800 foot dead end road because he was getting the utilities 1 ,800 feet and there is a potential for getting an easement for the utilities rather than a roadway to connect with Woodbury Lane. John Simons did not agree. A discussion took place on the Planning Board Order of Conditions and the Conservation Commission Order of Conditions and the need for a Planning Board Member attending the Conservation Commission Meetings as well as a member of the Conservation Commission attending the Planning Board Meetings so that one Board is not used against another. George Perna stated that he would attend the Conservation Commission Meetings and suggest to the Conservation Commission that one of their members attend the Planning Board Meetings. John Simons wanted copies of the issues that were being contested so that they can be explained to Town Counsel. The Board went over the plans . The driveway at the end of the cul- de-sac being 600 feet from the end of the road was discussed. The possibility of sidewalks along Abbott Street was discussed. John Simons would like to meet with Town Counsel to discuss the issues. A 'meeting will be set up with Town Counsel, John Simons, George Perna and Bill Hmurciak. A, list will be provided by Bill Hmurciak on cul-de-sac lengths that were approved in the Town. Motion: By John Simons to come out of Executive Session. Second: Erich Nitzsche Vote: Unanimous of those present. The Planning Board came out of Executive Session at approximately 10: 35 p.m. � L George Perna, Jr. , Chairman Janet L. Eaton, Secretary ' ( I Notic,, vrich Nitzsche to go into Executive Session to discuss 1 ^70 Osgood Street which is in litigation. Secon_l pack Graham Vote ; Unanimous of those present. T 7 :l.arrning Board went into Executive Session on August 10, 1989 The following members were present: George Perna, Chairman; Erich Nitzsche , Jack Graham and Paul Hedstrom. John Simons was absent. 1070_�jsggodStreet - Site Plan Review Chris Huntress updated the Board on the case . The issue is the geohydrolog .cal tests . George '`ernes stated that test were to be done on the groundwater, borings done . The study was performed but the Board did not agree with the methodically of the report. George Perna and Erich Nitzsche both felt that the water goes to the Lake . The court ;could like more detail on actually what it is the Planning Board is looking for. Motion; By Erich Nitzsche to come out of Executive Session. Second: Jack Graham votc-: Unanimous of those present. MOTION: By John Simons to go into Executive Session to discuss Abbott Village SECOND: Michael Leary VOTE : Unanimous. The North Andover Planning Board went into Executive Session on February 16 , 1989 at 11 : 15 p.m. to discuss Abbott Village . The following members were present: Paul Hedstrom, Chairman; George Perna, Vice Chairman; John Simons, Clerk; Erich Nitzsche and Michael Leary. Abbott Village Paul Hedstrom summarized his meeting with Town Counsel and Ben Osgood relative to the sewer and the length of the cul-de-sac. John Simons stated that he wanted to look at the topography. The Board scheduled March 2 , 1989 as the date to see if they could settle the case on Item 4B, 7 and 8 of the decision The Board is to review the revised draft decision and the original decision and schedule a meeting on March 21, 1989. MOTION: By George Perna to come out of Executive Session. SECOND: John Simons VOTE: Unanimous The Planning Board came out of Executive Session at 11 : 26 P.m. MOTION: By George Perna to go into Executive Session to discuss Desiliets vs N.A. P. B. SECOND: John Simons VOTE : Unanimous of those present. The North Andover Planning Board went into Executive Session at 10:22 p. m. on April 6 , 1989 to discuss Desiliets vs N.A. P.B. The following members were present: Paul Hedstrom, Chairman; George Perna, Vice Chairman; John Simons, Clerk and Erich Nitzsche . Michael Leary was absent. Desiliets Attorney Robert Brintz, Joseph Cushing and Mr. and Mrs Desiliets were present . Attorney Brintz stated that they were trying to settle the case out of court. He also stated that the Order of Condition from the Conservation Commission had been extended. Reasons for denial were read by George Perna and answered by Mr. Brintz. John Simons questioned were the sewer was going to end on Great Pond Road. Paul hedstrom stated that the reasons for denial have been addressed. John Simons would like conformation from the Board of Health and be assured that it will have no environmental impact on wetlands. MOTION: By George Perna to come out of Executive Session. SECOND: Erich Nitzsche VOTE: Unanimous of those present The Planning Board came out of Executive Session at 10: 43 P.M. MOTION: By John Simons to go into Exective Session to discuss Coolidge Construction which is in litigation. SECOND: George Perna VOTE : Unanimous The Planning Board went into Executive Session at 11 : 10 p. m. on April 27 , 1989 . The following members were present: Paul Hedstrom, Chairman; George Perna, Vice Chairman; John Simons, Clerk; Erich Nitzsche and Michael Leary. Coolidge Construction Great Pond Road Lot B and South Bradford Street Attorney Robert Brintz was present to discuss both cases . Great Pond Road, Lot B is being litigated because of decisions made by the Planning Board and the Board of Appeals. The property is within a tributary to the watershed. . The plans are to be reviewed by the Department of Public Works. Staff to work on the merits. South Bradford Street was also for a Special Permit and will be discussed further on May 11, 1989. MOTION: By George Perna to come out of Executive Session. SECOND: John Simons VOTE : Unanimous The Planning Board came out of Executive Session at 11 : 30 p.m. MOTION: By John Simons to go into Executive Session to discuss Coolidge Construction which is in litigation. SECOND: Michael Leary VOTE: Unanimous The Planning Board went into Executive Session at 11 : 30 p. m. The North Andover Planning Board went into Executive Session on May 11, 1989 to discuss Coolidge Construction. The following members were present: Paul Hedstrom, Chairman; George Perna, Vice Chairman; John Simons, Clerk; Erich Nitzsche and Michael Leary. Great Pond Road John McGarry, Bob Brintz and David Zalogo were present. The application was for Special Permit, 100 ' of a tributary of the lake . Great Pond Road is all set. MOTION: By John Simons to come put of Executive Session. SECOND: Michael Leary VOTEt Unanimous The Planning Board came out of Executive Session at 11 : 45 p.m. MOTION: By Erich Nitzsche to go into Executive Session to discuss Coolidge Construction on South Bradford Street. SECOND: Michael Leary VOTE: Unanimous The Planning Board went back into Executive Session at 11 : 50 p.m. The North Andover Planning Board went into Executive Session on May 11 , 1989 to discuss Coolidge Construction. The following members were present: Paul Hedstrom, Chairman; George Perna, Vice Chairman; John Simons, Clerk; Erich Nitzsche and Michael Leary. South Bradford Street A brief discussion on the common driveway, zoning, conservation and Title V took place between the Board members and Attorney Bob Brintz. MOTION: By George Perna to come out of Executive Session. SECOND: Michael Leary VOTE; Unanimous The Board came out of Executive Session at 12 :00 p.m. EXECUTIVE MEETING - MARCH 14, 1989 RE: COOLIDGE CONSTRUCTION v. NORTH ANDOVER BOARD OF APPEALS & PLANNING BOARD The Board of Appeals held an executive meeting on Tuesday evening, March 14, 1989 to discuss the above-mentioned case. Members present at this meeting were: Frank Serio, Jr. , Chairman, Alfred Frizelle, Vice-chairman, Augustine Nickerson, Clerk, William Sullivan, Walter Soule, Raymond Vivenzio, Anna O'Connor and Louis Rissin. Town Counsel, Joel B. Bard, was present at this meeting to provide legal imput on this case. The meeting was called to order at 7:05 p.m. in the Conference Room of the North Andover Town Building. Attorney Bard informed the Board that the Planning Board did not act on a petition presented to them in March of 1985 regarding the water- shed, because of an upcoming Zoning change due at the April Town Meeting. The petition was then filed with the Board of Appeals in May and denied by that Board in September. Attorney Bard stressed that the continuation of this petition from May to September was legal. The petitions were regarding South Bradford Street and,Great Pond Road. The petitioner then filed against both the Planning Board and the Zoning Board of Appeals, questioning the Special Permit. According to Attorney Bard, the petitioner at the end of last year wanted the case dismissed and filed for a rejudgement. Attorney Bard suggested trying to settle it with the petitioner. Scott Stocking, former Planner thought this matter should be handled by the Board of Appeals. Attorney Bard stated that this decision happen- ed during the moratorium period and that may have been the reason for the denial. Mr. ',Vivenzio stated that this did not have any effect on the Board's decision. Attorney Bard feels that the enviromental period has passed and it does not have the same meaning today. Mr. Frizelle read the decision to the members and it was discussed by the Board. The ,Board said that it was strange that it came before this Board for a Special Permit when they had received a Form A approval from the Planning Board. The Form A gives them zoning protection for three (3) years and filing with the Planning Board gave them this protection prior to the Town Meeting. They had the right to file and receive the approval of the Planning Board because of this ruling. Mr. Vivenzio stated that he does not feel that this land is appropriate for the use planned. Attorney Bard stated that he feels that the Court will give them approval and charge the Planning Board with the error, in that the Planning Board failed to act upon the application filed with them, and as a result the applications were constructively approved. Attorney Bard suggested that the Planning Board would come up with an agreeable solution that the petitioner would approve and recommends that the Board of Appeals look at that plan before it goes to the Court again. He said that the zoning in effect at the time of the application, the Planning Board would have approval rights. The Board decided to sent this back to the Planning Board so they can talk to the petitioner and try to reach an agreement. Original plans may not be approved, but maybe it could be improved on and returned to the Zoning Board of Appeals for review. Adjourned at 7:35 p.m. Z Q. , Audrey Tayl , Secretary Fran Seri , Jr., 6 airman On October 26 , 1988 the North Andover Planning Board went into executive session at approximately 10: 30 p. m. to discuss Batel vs North Andover Planning Board . The following members were present: Chairman, Paul Hedstrom; George Perna, Vice chairman; Erich Nitzsche and Michael Leary Batel vs North Andover Planning Board Scott Stocking stated he had received a call from Town Counsel regarding the existing or non existing access easement on Mr. Batel ' s land. This is a joint suit with the Town of North Andover and Ben Osgood against Batel . Town Counsel is asking the Board if they want to continue the suit for the Town. Paul Hedstrom stated that the Board should direct Town Counsel to work with Mr. osgood' s attorney and see what he is going to do and ask Town Counsel to send a letter to the Board describing what Mr. Osgood' s plans are for the case. Once the Board finds out, direct Town Counsel accordingly. While in executive session Scott Stocking spoke to the planning Board regarding lack of interest in the Planning Board as well as attendance. The Board members disagreed. Board members on some occasions had business commitments which conflicted with Board meeting. Scott Stocking stated that some issues that are important come up to a project and are not addressed by the Board till the end of the public hearing. MichaeL Leary suggested a starting time of 8:00 p.m. rather than 7: 30 p. m. Scott agreed with an 8:00 p.m. stating time . Scott Stocking questioned if the Board could have seven members ( 2 alternates) . Paul Hedstrom said that it would have to be through the Town Charter. Scott Stocking said there was a basic disagreement with how the Board should be run. Michael Leary said that communication was an important thing. Scott Stocking said that the issue of four members being present for a quorum was a big problem. George Perna stated that lack of quorum for what ever reason does not mean lack of interest. The Hoard members cited the circumstances years ago when there was not enough staff . Erich Nitzsche wanted to go on record that he has a vote of confidence in the Town Planner and commended him for the job he is doing. MOTION: By Erich Nitzsche to come out of Executive Session. SECOND: Michael Leary VOTE: Unanimous of those present. The North Andover Planning Board went into Executive Session at 10, 40 p.m. on December 15, 1988. The following members were present: Chairman, Paul Hedstrom; George Perna, Vice Chairman; John Simons, Clerk and Michael Leary. Erich Nitzsche was absent. Deseliets vs Planning Board Bob Brintz, attorney, spoke to the Planning Board citing that this case started back in 1985, The applicant is within 100' of a tributary to the lake . Also present was Joseph Cushing. Bob Brintz read from the reasons for denial. Michael Leary excused himself from the meeting as he is an abutter. Mr. Brintz stated that he was trying to spare the expense of a trial and trying to come to some kind of an agreement. Joseph Cushing said that the Order of Condition is on file at the Registry of Deeds and is good till April 1989. Paul Hedstrom stated that one of the conditions states "no work in March, April or May" . The applicant needs a letter from the Conservation Commission granting an extension on the conditions they placed on this particular parcel, date of expiration is April 1989. The issues will be placed on the January 5th agenda, Executive Session. MOTION: By George Perna to come out of Executive Session on Deseliets vs Planning Board. SECOND: John Simons VOTE: Unanimous of those present. The Planning Board came out of executive session on Deseliets vs Planning Board at 11 : 15 p.m. MOTION: By George Perna to go into Executive Session on Coolidge vs. Planning Board. SECOND: John Simons VOTE : Unanimous of those present. The North Andover Planning Board went into Executive Session at 11: 15 p. m. on December 15 , 1988. The following members were present: Chairman, Paul Hedstrom; George Perna, Vice Chairman; John Simons, Clerk. Michael Leary excused himself from the meeting at 10: 40 p.m. Erich Nitzsche was absent. Coolidge vs Planning Board Bob Brintz, attorney, represented the applicant. The applicant was denied two separate approvals for Form A Lots. The Planning Board did not act on the application, the application was submitted after the public hearings for zoning changes and before the Town Meeting. The lots in question were 69 South Bradford Street and Lot B, Great Pond Road. The Board will get advise from Town Counsel. MOTION: By George Perna to come out of Executive Session. SECOND: John Simons VOTE: Unanimous of those present. The Planning Board came out of Executive Session at 11 : 25 P.M. November 9, 1987 At approximately 10:45, the Planning Board went into Executive Session to discuss Half Moon Woods. Present were Paul Hedstrom, George Perna, John Simons, John Burke. Erich Nitzsche was absent. MOTION: By John Simons to go into Executive Session. SECOND: George Perna VOTE: Unanimous of those present. Erich Nitzsche was absent. Attorney William Wagner and Joseph Casey were present. Attorney Wagner spoke to the Planning Board about the requirements the Board had asked of the applicant to put on the plans. The following issues have been addressed: 1 . The 100 year storm - has been provided 2. Access to State Forest - has been done 3 . The dry hydrant issue - No longer an issue, the plans show tying into the Town water. The Town Planner, Scott Stocking and George Perna are to work with the applicant to make a report to the Board for the Board to act on. MOTION: By John Burke that the concensus of the Board is to have the Town Planner and member George Perna work with the applicant and report to the Board so they can act on the application. SECOND: John Simons VOTE: Unanimous MOTION: By John Burke to close the Executive Session and go back to the open meeting. SECOND: George Perna VOTE: Unanimous of those present. November 23 , 1987 MOTION: By John SImons to go into Executive Session and discuss Half Moon Woods which is in litigation. SECOND: George PErna VOTE: Unanimous of those present. The Planning Board began its Executive Session at 11: 15 p.m. Present at the session were: Paul Hedstrom, Chairman; George Perna, Vice-Chairman; and John Simons, Clerk. Erich Nitzsche was absent. William Wagner, attorney representing Mr. Joseph Casey, was present as well as his client, Mr. Casey. The Board stated that the purpose of the Executive Session was to resolve the issues with the applicant that were contained in the decision issued be the Planning Board on June 18, 1986. This decision resulted in the applicant appealing in court. George Perna spoke regarding "lot 9" and that it was not a lot but a parcel. Also that the "parcel" was unbuildable. Joseph Casey stated that the parcel in question could be deeded to the Town as an easement. The cul-de-sac is to be paved. George Perna stated that the only problem he had concerns about was the dry hydrant and the applicant has addressed the issue by bring in the Town' s water line. Markers for the easement were requested by the Board, some type of permenant marker, possibly some kind of plaque containing language to be determined by the Board. George Perna questioned if Lot 5 was unbuildable. Mr Casey stated that if the lot fails the perc test, then it would he an unbuildable lot. George Perna to go over the 100 year storm event calculations . Scott Stocking spoke to Town Counsel and they advised that the Board should take it as a reconsideration of the application in an open meeting. Scott stocking to speak to Town Counsel regarding the procedures on having a public hearing after an Executive Session. The decision to be redrafted. MOTION: by George Perna to go out of Executive Session and continue thepublic meeting. SECOND: John Simons VOTE: Unanimous of those present. h> Plan„ siry 6o_ard .vent into Executive Session, June 30, 1988 at 11 :30 p .m. to discuse, the MacMiff Common Driveways in litigation . The f- lowing members were present : Chairman, Paul Hedstrom, George Perna, Fire-Chai -r,ia. John Simons , Clerk ; Erich Nitzsche and Michael Leary. pies.?r;t w_7e David McCul len and Bill McLeod . acM i ff_.- C ommg n Dr i vewav David McCullen, attorney representing MacMiff Development Corporation, stated that three years ago the MacMiff Development Corporation came be�ere the Board seeking a special permit for a common driveway on 163 Salem C'treet . The permit was denied and is pending an appeal in E.s-:ex District Court . They are before the Board in attempt to settle the aspect of the appeal . John Simons asked if part of the appeal was because of a variance. David McCullen that it was, with the Zoning D;oord of Appeals . Their plan is to re--apply to the ZBA on denial . Erich Nitzsche questioned why the septic system could not be moved . F3111 McLeod stated that neither house nor the septic system could be moved tc7 the street because it is in the watershed of Lake t:ochick.ewic;k and 100 ' from the drain . (?;jestiorna were raised as to which Board should the applicants appear before. Tliey would like to appear before the Planning Board to TlegOitate a permit for a common driveway and then go before the Board of An.3eals for the variance. C, Site visit r;rll take place before the meeting of July 21 , 19BB. 'The Board would like to resolve the issues for a vote at the next meeting . MOTION- By John Simons to go out of Executive Session and continue the public meeting . SECOND: Georqe Perna +1'1)TE: Unanimous of those present . The North Andover Planning Board went into Executive Session on July 21, 1988 at 11 :00 p.m. to discuss MacMiff Common Driveway Application which is in litigation. The following members were present: Paul Hedstrom, Chairman; John Simons, Clerk; Erich Nitzsche and Michael Leary. MacMiff - Common Driveways Scott Stocking, Town Planner, stated that the litigation was for a common driveway on Salem Street which has been tied up in litigation for a few years. The issues are: 1 . Watershed District 2 . Title V, dealing with septic systems The attorney for the applicant spoke to the Board saying that his client is trying to resolve the issues. His client is going back to the Board of Appeals to take another look at the same plans as well as a new plan which shows the house in a reversed position with the driveway coming out to Salem Street which would not need a special permit from the Planning Board. He stated that the original plan was preferred because of safety. There would be less paving with a common driveway than with two separate driveways. Erich Nitzsche stated that he preferred two driveway. John Simons stated that he preferred the common driveway. He pointed out safety, looks and having less pavement and one crossing of the wetland. Erich disagreed on the issue of less pavement, citing the width of the common driveway and paving it. MOTION: By John Simons to have a letter drafted and sent to Town Counsel recommending to come out of litigation and support the common driveway application and prepare those documents. SECOND: Michael Leary VOTE: Three In favor - John Simons, Michael Leary and Paul Hedstrom One opposed - Erich Nitzsche MOTION: By Michael Leary to come out of Executive Session SECOND: Erich Nitzsche VOTE : Unanimous The Planning Board came out of Executive Session at 11: 14 P.M. �I The 'North Andover Planning Board went into Executive Session on August 18, 1988 at 10 : 35 p.m. to discuss MacMiff Common Driveway Application which is in litigation. The following members were present: Paul Hedstrom, Chairman; George Perna, Vice-Chairman; John Simons. Clerk; Erich Nitzsche and Michael leary. The Planning Board discussed the Agreement for Judgement. Paul Hedstrom stated that in paragraph #4 the wording should be changed. Should read: "Plaintiff will have the cost" MOTION: By George Perna to approve the wording change in paragraph #4 and notify Town Counsel. SECOND: Michael Leary VOTE: Unanimous MOTION: By Erich Nitzsche to come out of Executive Session. SECOND: John Simons VOTE : Unanimous MOTION: By Erich Nitzsche to go into Executive Session to discuss two cases of Coolidge vs N.A. P.B . ; Angus Realty Trust vs. N.A.P.B. and Deseliets vs N.A. P.B. SECOND: George Perna VOTE : Unanimous The North Andover Planning Board went into Executive Session on January 19 , 1988 at 10: 20 p. m. to discuss cases in litigation: Coolidge vs N. A. P. B. ; Angus Realty Trust vs. N.A. P.B. and Deseliets vs N.A.P.B. The following members were present: Paul Hedstrom, Chairman; George Perna, Vice Chairman; John Simons, Clerk; Erich Nitzsche and Michael Leary. Coolidge vs N. A.P.B - 69 Bradford Street Coolidge vs N.A. P.B - Lot B Great Pond Road Scott Stocking, Town Planner gave some background on the cases stating that both started in 1985 . Both cases involved the watershed District. 69 Bradford Street Applicant applied for a special permit (Watershed) on April 12 , 1985. it appears the Planning Board never accepted the application, no formal action was taken. The applicant applied to the Board of Appeals in May of 1985 under the 1986 Zoning Bylaw (variance ) . The Board of Appeals denied the application. The applicant appealed both decision. No notice of intent was filed with the Conservation Commission. The lot is in their jurisdiction. Lot B Great Pond Road The applicant filed for a special permit (Watershed) with the Planning Board in March 1985 . The Warrant was published after their submittal which changed the special permit with the Planning Board to a variance with the Board of Appeals. The applicant has a legal Form A Lot prior to the moratorium and the publishing of the warrant Article. Scott SAID he believed the 1985 Zoning Bylaw applied. Action is required by the Planning Board. The applicant refused to withdraw the application. The Planning Board did not act on the application. The applicant applied to the Board of Appeals for a variance under the 1986 Zoning Bylaw (variance ) . The Board of Appeals denied the application. The applicant appealed their decision within twenty ( 20) days. Lot B has an Order of Condition from the Conservation Commission, but it appears to be expired. The Conservation Commission will require a new filing. Paul Hedstrom said that the issue is dimensional and they should go before the Zoning Board of Appeals and the Conservation Commission. The Planning Board should not act on it. t Angus Realty Trust vs . N.A P B Scott Stocking, Town Planner, stated that he and the Chairman, Paul Hedstrom had met with Town Counsel to try and resolve the case pending. After that meeting, the representatives of Angus Realty agreed to discuss the matter and attempt to settle the differences out of court. The major issues to be resolved are : 1 . Access to the site ( curbcut) 2 . Location and design of the retaining wall . 3 . Location and size of the structure . 4 . Conservation Commission concerns related to an enforcement order and a wetland replication plan. Scott told the Board that up to three days before the meeting he had not received an ENF Report. After looking at the report he found that the access was different, it was a different plan. The applicant told Scott at the meeting that they were not required to furnish the Board with the report. Scott disagreed. The Board requested that the applicant file a Notice of Intent with the Conservation Commission prior to further discussions on this matter. Dese,liets vs N.A. P .B . Michael Leary left the meeting at 10: 45 p. m. because he is an abutter to the case in litigation. Scott Stocking, Town Planner, stated the no one was present to discuss the case in litigation. He gave the Board some brief background on the pending case . The Planning Board denied a special permit (Watershed) in the Spring of 1985 based upon the following: 1 . Applicant had not shown an alternative access. 2 . Problems with upstream flooding driveway causing a dam. 3. Lack of drainage calculations. The applicant appealed the decision based upon the merits of the decision by the Planning Board. The Planning Board also denied a petition to reconsider within two (2 ) years of the denial. Lot l has an Order of Condition, but it appears it will expire prior to the applicant beginning construction. The Conservation Commission will require a new filing. Paul Hedstrom asked what the field conditions were. Scott said that it was very wet and the only way to access the property was over wetlands. Erich Nitzsche added that he was not sure if it met Title V. relative to septic systems. Scott is to look into the matter further. Paul Hedstrom asked Scott to report back to the Board at the next meeting on his view of the physical conditions at the site. MOTION: By John Simons to come out of Executive Session. SECOND: Erich Nitzsche VOTE: Unanimous of those present. The !Board came out of Executive Session at 10x48 p. m. i The North Andover Planning Board held a regular meeting on Thursday evening, December 7, 1989 in the Town Hall, Selectmen' s Meeting Room. The meeting was called at to order at approximately 8: 10p. m. by the Chairman, George Perna, Jr. Also present were John Simons, Clerk and John Draper. Jack Graham and Erich Nitzsche were absent. On a roll call vote: John Simons - yea John Draper - yea- George Perna - Yea The Planning Board went into Executive Session to discuss the etratigity in the litigation of Butcher Boy, Angus Realty Trust. Christian Huntress, Town Planner updated the Board on the matter of Angus Realty Trust. He has spoken to Town Counsel and asked the Board to resolve this matter. John Simons brought up the issue of zoning. Christian Huntress stated that the applicant went to the Zoning Board of Appeals for the retaining wall. John Draper asked why the retaining wall. George Perna stated that the retaining wall was for drainage and parking. Members of the Planning Board mentioned the height and location of the building and that both had changed. John Draper asked, if under the old zoning, how close would they be to the lake. Christian Huntress stated that the applicant was Within 250 feet of the lake. The reason the applicant went to the Zoning Board of Appeals was to build the retaining wall within that 250 foot area. John Simons expressed his feelings that should the Board settle this suit he wanted the applicant to come before the Board with a new application. George Perna expressed his feeling about the building size and that it should not be allowed. The Board wants a chronology of this application. George Perna would like to see: 1 . A different type of retaining wall, not all concrete'. Similar to that which will be built behind Messina' s on Main Street. 2 . Variations in the roof , not a flat roof. 3 . Construction of the front of the building made of wood and brick. Christian Huntress expressed his concerns about the Board out stepping the scope of Site Plan Review. John Simons did not agree . The Board would like the parking in the rear of the building, no parking in the front. They also want a S0 foot buffer in the front. .� John Simons questioned the wetlands and if it was in the watershed District, by definition its a tributary to the lake. John Simons also questioned if the proper permits were obtained from the Zoning Board of Appeals. Did the applicant apply, if not they have to. George Perna questioned the access road with easements. (Stetson Lane ) The Board further discussed construction within 100 feet of a tributary and that the applicant never applied for this particular permit. The Special Permit Granting Authority was discussed. The Board would like to see a lighting plan with details. The Board would also like to see the type of signs to be used on the buildings and at the entrance. The Board discussed the possibility of a crosswalk on Great Pond Road for access to the ice cream stand from the Butcher Boy site. The pressing issues are: 1 . Chronological order of events 2 . Is it a tributary to the lake . Christian Huntress, Town Planner, to draft a letter for the Board to review and send to the attorney for the applicant. Motion: By John Draper to direct the Planner, Christian Huntress, to draft a letter for the Boards review listing the issues discussed. Second: John Simons Vote: John Simons - Yea John Draper - Yea George Perna - Yea On a roll call vote: John Simons - Yea John Draper - Yea George Perna Yea the Planning Board came out of Executive Session at approximately 9: 10p. m. CONrMCNM The North Andover Planning Board went into Executive Session on Thursday evening, January 4, 1990 at approximately 9: 25 p.m. to discuss Angus Realty Trust. Motion: By John Draper to go into Executive Session to discuss Angus Realty Trust. Second: Erich Nitzsche Vote: John Simons - Yea John Draper - Yea Erich Nitzsche - Yea George Perna - Yea John Simons spoke on the location of the building. He also asked if there had been an appeal on the original decision from the Board of Appeals. If there was no appeal, the decisions is not valid as the time has elapsed for the Special Permit granted by the Board of Appeals. A lengthy discussion took place on the legal merits of this case. The Board wants the material in front of the building changed. The mechanicals of the building to be covered so they are not visible from the street. The Board discussed having a Special Meeting with Town Counsel to resolve some legal issues. Motion: By John Simons to come out of Executive Session. Second: John Draper Vote . John Simons - Yea John Draper - Yea Erich Nitzsche - Yea George Perna - Yea The Planning Board came out of Executive Session at approximately 10:00 P.M. The North Andover Planning Board held a special meeting on Thursday afternoon, January 11, 1990, in the Town Hall, Library/Conference Room. The meeting was called to order at 2e19 p.m. by the Chairman, George Perna, Jr. Also present were John Simons, Clerk, Erich Nitzsche and John Draper. Jack Graham was absent. Joel Bard, Town Counsel, Kopelman & Paige was present. A motion was made by John Simons to go into Executive Session to discuss Butcher Boy Litigation. The motion was seconded by Erich Nitzsche . A roll call vote was taken. In favor of the motion were Erich Nitzsche Yea John Simons Yea John Draper Yea George Perna Yea The vote was unanimous of those present. Upon completion of Executive Session the Board will open the meeting to the public. Joel Bard, Kopelman & Paige, Town Counsel, gave the Board some background on the case . Joel stated that the Site Plan Special Permit from the Planning Board was denied based on the Zoning Board of Appeals decision being invalid. He brought up, John Simons concerns on the case being: 1 . The Special Permit granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals showed a building 35,000 sq. ft. 2. The Special Permit granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals became invalid because of the time that had lapsed. The applicant went to the Zoning Board of Appeals for the building and the retaining wall. The Zoning Board of Appeals granted the special permit for the wall. The Board explicitly left out the building in their decision. The extension was granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals on the time of which the applicant had received his permit to commence work. That time frame was within the two year period in which the permit was granted. John Simons stated that what was approved by the Zoning Board of Appeals was not the same as that which was presented to the Planning Board. The plans submitted to the Zoning Board of Appeals did not show a detention pond. The only issue is where is the special permit for the detention pond and the mechanicals for the building. A' lengthy discussion took place on the time frame of receiving a variance and extending that time period once a variance is granted. Also discussed was the variance itself. John Simons expressed his feelings that the applicant has not complied with the zoning. The Board discussed the size of the building and the location. Joel Bard reminded the Board that it was out of their jurisdiction on relocating the building and the size of the building. The Board discussed alternatives and options on settling the case out of court. The Board wants the applicant to come before them for a special permit for the detention pond which is in the buffer zone and the mechanicals of the building. Christian Huntress, Town Planner, stated that the detention pond will only be used for the 100 year storm event. All other drainage will be pumped down Clark Street to the Merrimack River. Joel Bard was asked by the Board the likelihood in court on the time frame in which the applicant asked for an extension. His response was that the courts would probably go with the applicant, that they were within the time frame. Joel Bard stated that what is outside of the buffer zone is by right according to the Zoning Bylaw. The Board reviewed the concessions from the applicant: 1 . Retaining wall 2 . Landscape Plan 3 . Parking with more islands 4 . Sewer line extended. Christian Huntress stated that the scope of work for the detention pond should be spelled out: 1 . detention pond 2 . pipes leading into pond 3. size of pond 4 . Location of pond 5. Necessity of the pond. The Board discussed the time frame in which construction must start with the possibility of extending the time in which the proposed is to be completed. The important issue at this time is tieing into the sewer. Before construction of the retaining wall starts, the septic system has to be removed as per Board of Health Regulations. The time frame to be worded: Any cause for extension shall be due to substantial and reasonable cause outside of the applicants control. George Perna recapped the following: I� 1 . Board wants to settle the case . " Items to be taken care of: 1 . What the wall will look like. 2 . Covering the Wall with ivy. 3. Plantings in the front of the proposed project. i4 . Taking care of the mechanicals of the building. Based on those items the Board would agree to settle the case . The applicant must understand the following: 1 . Special permit is needed for the detention pond. 2 . In order to clarify further, the Zoning Board of Appeals decision, the septic system has to be removed according to Board of Health Regulations. 3. Extension of the permit will be addressed if the reasons are beyond their control. 4 . Lighting shall be down cast; what the Zoning Board of Appeals stipulated, not what the applicant has shown. Motion: By Erich Nitzsche to come out of Executive Session. Second: John Draper Voted The Chairman asked for a roll call vote . Erich Nitzsche Yea John Simons - Yea John Draper - Yea George Perna - Yea On a unanimous vote the Planning Board came out of Executive Session at approximately 3: 40 p.m. The Chairman asked for a roll call voted to go into Executive Session to discuss Mifflin v. Z. B.A. A motion was made by John Simons to go into Executive Session to discuss Mifflin v. Z. B.A. The motion was seconded by Jahn Draper and on a roll call vote: John Simons - Yes John Draper Yes George Perna - Yes the Board went into Executive Session. The Chairman stated that upon completion of the Executive Session the Board would reconvene the public hearing and adjourn the meeting . On June 28 , 1990 the North Andover Planning Board went into Executive Session at 10 : 30 p.m. The following member were present: George Perna, Jr. , Chairman, John Simons, Clerk and John Draper. Mifflin v. Z.B.A. Christian Huntress, Town Planner briefed the Board on the case. The Planning Board is not presently involved in this matter. Joel Bard, Town Counsel, asked if the Board wanted this matter on the next agenda to formally ask the Board for their involvement at the request of the judge . George Perna stated that he would act as a mediator, as a private citizen, not as the Planning Board Chairman, to help in the discussions. The Planning Board does not want to discuss this matter on the July 12, 1990. Christian Huntress will ask Joel Bard if George Perna could be involved as a private citizen. A motion was made by John Draper to come out of Executive Session. The motion wa seconded by John Simons and on a roll call vote : John Simons - Yes John Draper - Yes George Perna - Yes the Planning Board came out of Executive Session at 10: 35 P.M. t � TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER- OFFICE NDOVEROFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK •n"gig SACNUSE 120 Main Street TEL: (978) 688-9.102 North Andover, Massachusetts FAX- (978) 688-9536 ; 01843-2493 Joyce A. Bradshaw, C.M.MC. Town Clerk This is to certify that the following minutes are from the minutes of the Planning Board for the Town of North Andover in my custody. Please do not hesitate to contact me at any time should any additional information be required. Joyce A. Bradshaw, CMMC, Town Clerk 1 The North Andover Planning Board held a regular meeting on August 24 , 1989 , in the Town Hall , Selectmen' s Meeting Room. The meeting was called to order at 8: 15 p. m. by the Chairman, George Perna, Jr. The following members were also present:. John Simons, Clerk; Erich Nitzsche and Jack Graham. Public Hearings Florence $states Modification John Simons read the legal notice to open the public hearing. Bill Hmurciak, D. P. W. would like to go over the plans with the engineer. There seem to be problems with utilities crossing Summer Street . Veronica Mandry, abutter, questioned the septic systems and the distance from her house . Mr. Masse stated the distance was seventy six feet ( 76 ' ) . Ms. Mandry also asked about the catch basins. She expressed concerns about excessive water on her property. Joel Averka, abutter, asked which lot was eliminated from the plans. Mx. Masse stated that Lot 3 was split and now part of Lot 2 and Lot 4. Erich Nitzsche asked about retention ponds and detention ponds to mitigate run off. Mr Masse said the amount of run off has been reduced because of the shorten of the roadway by three hundred feet plus. George Perna asked if the catch basins were on the down side of the cul-de-sac. The Board would like to see existing and proposed condition at the intersection of Rea Street. The Board will ensure that the driveway on Lot 2 does not catch water from the cul-de-sac. Motion: By John Simons to close the public hearing and take the matter under advisement. Second: Jack Graham Erich Nitzsche would like to review the plans of the old subdivision for the compliance with the drainage . Vote : Unanimous of those present. Edgewood Fife Care - Special Permits Bill Rockwell , abutter, expressed concerns with crossing the access road. A discussion took place on the drainage . Mitigation of run off will incorporate all off site flow to the 100 year storm event. Other issues discussed were : the common driveway access to the farm being used, security issues and agreements with trustees . Motion: By John Simons to close the public hearing and take the matter under advisement. -r_ond : Erich Nitzsche Vc C:� : 'Unanimru-T ;oze Riparian Realty Trust, Berry Street - Site Plan Review John Simons read a letter to the applicant from Christian Huntress, Planner, with a list of concerns . Bill Bergeron spoke to the Board on the site plan. Modification i of that plan relative to retaining walls , per Conservation j Commission and a note on the plans relative to landscaping. Plans were given to the Board members. The Board wanted the heating and air conditioning shown in the elevation, along with the screening of same. The Board expressed concerns with the building along Route 114 and the flat roofs. .They would like to see front and side views of the buildings . The Board members expressed their concern of being uncomfortable with what the building will look like, would prefer seeing jogs in the footprint, not all flat. Mr. Osborne spoke to the Board on landscaping the property. Plans of the landscaping were presented to the Board for review. Mr. Osborne went over the different types of tree plantings that will be used at the site . John Simons spoke on the density being too high, over development of the wetlands. Brad Latham gave figures on the percentage of pavement, building, landscaping and wetlands. Their are 186 ,000 sq. ft of wetlands for a total of 309,000 sq ft of undisturbed land. Total paved area, 145, 575 ; footprint, 49, 600 sq. ft. ; sidewalks 7, 120 sq. ft for 31 . 5% being disturbed. The Board requested the following information: 1 . Look of the buildings 2 . Show material to be used 3. Show top of the buildings along Route 114 and the screening 4 . what the signs will look like 5 . type of lighting to be used The Board expressed concerns with the following: 1 . Appears to be over development of the site 2 . area of wetlands vs area of uplands. New landscape plans will be submitted to the Board for review. Christian Huntress stated the deadline on this application was September 6 , 1989 . A rough draft will be available on September 7 , 1989 . An extension will be needed till the end of September. The applicant will provide the Board with an extension till September 26 , 1989 . Erich Nitzsche to review the drainage calculations of May 10th. Motion: By Erich Nitzsche to continue the public hearing to September 7 , 1989 , accept the extension to September 25 , 1989 and direct the planner to draft a decision. V :� . Jnan_mous D _Icsa ^rese:lt. Discussion North Andover Business Park Thomas Neve, Thomas E . Neve Associates, spoke to the Board on the plans for the proposed roadway for the North Andover Business Park. The radius of the cul-de-sac is seventy feet ( 70 ' ) . Bill Hmurciak, D. P.W. , said that sixty feet would be adequate . Erich Nitzsche wanted to see an alternative to the turn at the T intersection. Public Hearing Merrimack College - Site Plan Review Scott Cote was present to display a model of the proposed. Gabriel Yaari, Sasaski Associates, gave an architectural presentation of the proposed science building. George Perna wanted to know why the number of ventilation pipes could not be reduced. The answer was that each vent has a fan and by code , they cannot be tied into one another. John Simons asked if there were any activities being conducted that would have to be reviewed by the Board of Health. The answer was, "no" . Motion: By John Simons to close the public hearing and take the matter under advisement and direct the planner to draft a decision. Second: Jack Graham Vote : Unanimous by those present. Boston Hill Ski Hill - PRD Chris Huntress, Planner, updated the Board with the application before them citing concerns the Board still had: 1 . phase development 2 . erosion control Bill Hmurciak, D . P.W. , expressed concern with the road grade shown on the plans still being 10% . Ken Greenleaf, H.W. Moore, stated that during the meetings with the Technical Review Committee, the road grade was originally at 12% . Bill Hmurciak stated the issue was safety, especially during the winter. The Board went over a letter from the D. P.W. listing sixteen comments on the development. Each of the comments were addressed on the plans or will be addressed and subject to review by the Board. Bernice Fink, an abutter, spoke to the Board on the drainage. Ken Greenleaf went over the system of drainage to explain how it works . John Simons expressed concerns with the number of units and the tree cutting on the site. George Perna asked if there was a phasing plan on the development. Ken Greenleaf said that at the present time there was not such a plan available , but would provide a plan. An extension Is needed. Motion: By Jack Graham to close the public hearing and take the matter under advisement and accept an extension to September 26, 1989 . Second: Erich Nitzsche Vote: Unanimous of those present. English Circle - Definitive Subdivision John Simons read a letter that was sent to the applicant from Christian Huntress, Planner, listing the concerns of the Planning Board. The major concern was drainage . Jack Louge spoke to the Board on the grading of the house on Lot 1 and Lot 3. The grading was changed to address some ' of the drainage problems . The Board expressed their concerns with the alignment of the roadway. The Board wanted the roadway aligned with Bannan Drive. George Perna recapped what the Board was looking for from the applicant: 1 . Realignment of the roadway. 2 . Need to review the drainage and grading plans 3. Detention easement to encompass all slopes Motion: By Erich Nitzsche to continue the public hearing to September 7, 1989 Second: Jack Graham Vote : Unanimous of those present. Sanlau Realty Trust - Site Plan Modification John Simons read a letter that was sent to the applicant from Chris Huntress, Planner. The letter was on the concerns the Board had expressed. George Perna stated what the Board is looking now, to put back the retaining wall as it was originally on the approved plans. Santo Messina spoke to the Board on the condition of the site as it relates to the retaining wall, citing that it was a mess. Mr. Messina stated that erosion from the Housing Authority was the reason for the conditions on site . Mr. Messina wanted to plant juniper trees to control the erosion. The Board wants a retaining wall , eight foot high. Hope Minicucci , Housing Authority Director, spoke to the Board on the easements not being recorded. Motion: By John Simons to continue the public hearing and set up a site visit and workshop. The Site visit will be September 6 , 1989 . Chris Huntress to set the time and notify Hope Minicucci, Anna O 'Connor, Santo Messina, Ann Messina and Bill Hmurciak. Second: Erich Nitzsche 'if_ _e : ii'na nein __ =r.,-3e ea The Planning Board held a regular meeting on Thursday evening, September 7, 1989 in the Selectmen's Meeting Room located in Town Hall. The following members were present when the meeting was called to order at 8:20 p.m. : George Perna, Chairman; John Simons, Clerk; and Erich Nitzsche. Christian Huntress, Town Planner and William Hmurciak, D.P.W. were also present. Public Hearings National Aerial Advertising - Opening of the Public Hearing Christian Huntress gave an overview of the project to the Board and all others present. Material which the Board had asked for at the previous meeting was presented by Ms. Kathy Egmont of National Aerial Advertising, Inc. This material included: revised site plan showing additional landscaping, and a tree line buffer, both existing and proposed. Motion: By Erich Nitzsche to continue the Public Hearing to the September 21, 1989 meeting. Second: John Simons Vote: Unanimous of those present. Riparian Office Park - Cont'd from August 24 1989 A letter from Christian Huntress to the applicant was read into the record. The Board expressed their concern with the view of the project from Route 114, size of the signs which are to be placed on the buildings, possibility to tie into sewer should it be extended past the property, and the ability of the surface drainage getting into the detention ponds. Mr William Bergeron, of Hayes Engineering stated that the signs being placed on the building will be less than 2 ' tall so as to fit within the ornamental brick strip on the facade of each structure. Mr. Bergeron went on to say that the septic system is in compliance with Title V as it is located 10' away from the property line of Berry Street. Motion: By John Simons to continue the Public Hearing to the September 21, 1989 Planning Board Hearing. Second: Erich Nitzsche Vote Unanimous of those present. Boston Brook - Cont'd Public Hearing Christian Huntress presented the Board with a request from the applicant to extend the time the Board has to act on the Special Permit to October 15, 1989. Motion: By John Simons to accept the extension subsequent to the applicant coming into the Planning Office and filling out the correct forms. Second: Erich Nitzsche Vote: Unanimous of those present. English Circle - Contvd Public Hearing The Board expressed concern with the alignment of English Circle as it relates to Bannan Drive. The Board wants the roadway moved and plans are to be presented at the following meeting. Motion: By John Simons to continue the public hearing, accept the written extension to September 26, 1989 and direct the Town Planner to draft a decision to be presented on September 21, 1989. Second: Erich Nitzsche t Vote: Unanimous of those present. Edgewood Life Care - Common Driveway - Opening Public Hearing j The public hearing was opened and the Board raised concerns about the use, and design of the common drive. Concerns were also raised about the access to the two lots being serviced by this drive. Plans shall be revised to better show the driveway into Edgewood Farm. Abutters from the Estate of Mary Charles were present and expressed concern about the fact that their lot should be able to access the common drive. The Board stated that they are in no way obligated to enhance development of an abutting property and thusly would not condition Edgewood to allow access to the Charles Estate. The attorney for Mary Charles, who did not make herself known, commented that they did not receive proper notification of the opening of the public hearing with regard to the SPecial Permits being granted under Section 8.3, 10. 3 , 10. 31, 11,3 and 13 of the North Andover Zoning Bylaws. Christian Huntress stated that the Estate of Mary Charles was sent notification to the address listed with the Assessors Department and that the notification was returned to the Board. The Planning Boards legal obligation to notify an abutter has at that point has been fulfilled. Motion: By Erich Nitzsche to continue the public hearing to September 21, 1989. Second: John Simons Vote: Unanimous of those present. Decisions Edgewgod Life Care - Special Permit Draft decisions were distributed for all Board members, applicants and interested parties. South Cross Road - Definitive Modification Draft decisions were distributed for all Board members, applicant and parties of interest. Form A - ADuroval Not Required uplanA street - Creating One Lot Motion: By John Simons to accept the applicants withdrawal without prejudice. Second: Erich Nitzsche Vote: Unanimous of those present. —a George D. Perna, Chairman Janet L. Eaton, Secretary The North Andover Planning Board held a regular meeting on September 21, 1989 in the Town Hall , Selectmen ' s Meeting Room. The meeting was called to order at approximately 8 :00p. m. by the Chairman, George Perna, Jr. The following members were also present: John Simons, Clerk and Erich Nitzsche. Paul Hedstrom arrived at approximately 8: 15p.m. Jack Graham was absent. Approval of _nn Required u i cd Fern A clans Wiley Court George Perna expressed his concerns about the width, grade and construction of Wiley Court. The Board will visit the site . An access easement is shown on the plans. Motion: By Erich Nitzsche to schedule a site walk before taking action on the Form A. Second: John Simons Vote : Unanimous of those present. Christian Huntress will schedule the site walk and contact the proper people . Paul Hedstrom arrived at 8 : 15p.m. Extend Completion Date Cranberry Lane John Simons read a letter from Flintlock Realty Trust requesting an extension of time for the completion of the subdivision. Motion: By Erich Nitzsche to accept the request for the extension of time on the condition that D. P.W. reports to the Planning Board that there is sufficient bond to correct any problem on site . Second: John Simons Vote: Unanimous of those present. Public Hearings National Aerial Advertising The applicant presented the Board with plans that designated the no cut line . The Board reviewed the draft decision and added a condition that prior to a Certificate of Occupancy being issues for any structure the applicant shall submit a certified As-Built Plan. The plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Board. Motion: By Erich Nitzsche to close the public hearing and approve the draft decision as amended. Second: Paul Hedstrom Vote : Unanimous of those present. I Riparian Realty Trust - Site Plan Review The applicant has submitted an extension. George Perna said that the applicant needs approval from the Board of Health and the State D. P.W. George also stated that the mechanicals of the building should not be showing. The sign will have a 2 ` band around it. The applicant should meet with the Planner, Christian Huntress, on the over all safety along Route 114. Christian Huntress stated he would like to contact the State D. P.W. regarding the safety issue. George Perna also spoke on the issue of safety and the accesses to the property. Motion: By Paul Hedstrom to accept the extension. Second: John Simons Vote : Unanimous of those present. English Circle - Definitive Subdivision The Board reviewed a draft decision on English Circle Definitive Subdivision. George Perna updated the application. The alignment of the roadway, drainage issues and easements were reviewed on the revised plans submitted by the applicant. Amendments to the draft decision were added regarding paving and drainage. Motion: By Erich Nitzsche to close the public hearing and write —a a conditional approval with the inclusion of the following items: 17. The edge of pavement at the northwest intersection at Salem Street shall be constructed at a 35 ' radius . 18 . Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy on lot 2 , and final release of bond money, the applicant shall submit a topographic as built plan proving the surface runoff from the street enters the detention pond in overflow conditions. The Planning Board shall take a site visit to confirm compliance with this condition. 19 . Prior to the release of any lot from the statutory covenant the developer shall submit approved septic system designs to the Planning Board and certify that the grading of said lot is in conformance with the Definitive Plan and drainage calculations, and that said lot does not create adverse flooding on an adjacent property. Second: Paul Hedstrom Vote : Unanimous of those present. Boston Brook - PRD - Definitive Subdivision Christian Huntress spoke to the Board on an extension the Board had received from the applicant. The extension was written to October 14, 1989.' Christian Huntress asked for an extension to October 31, 1989andreceived his request. The Board' asked the Planner to review the number of buildable lots with regards to septic systems . Motion: By John Simons to accept the extension. Second: Erich Nitzsche Vote: Unanimous of those present. Edgewood Life Care - Special Permit Common Driveway Christian Huntress, Planner, spoke to the Board on -the application. At the last meeting, the public hearing was continued on the Special Permit Common Driveway. The discussion was on the abutters concern fpr use of the common driveway and the old access road into the site. Clifford Elias spoke to the Board on the common driveway. Also present was Nelson Hammer. George Perna reviewed the plans and asked how the houses were being serviced. He wants to see what the common driveway looks like . The Board requested the following information on the plans : 1 . Show access 2 . curb cuts 3. Size of Lots 4 . Show radius 5 . Show proposed drives The plans to explicitly show common driveways. Motion: By Paul Hedstrom to continue the public hearing until October 5, 1989 . Second: Erich Nitzsche Vote : Unanimous of those present. Bond Release French Farm John Simons read a memo from Karen Nelson, Director of Planning and Community Development to Chris Huntress, Planner. A letter was read from Ben Osgood requesting release of the bond on the French Farm Subdivision. Bill Hmurciak, D. P. W. stated he had written a punch list and recommends a release of $7 ,000 for work that was completed from that list. Motion : By John Simons to release $7, 000 as per the recommendations from the Department of Public Works . Second : Erich Nitzsche zd9or - ur-7h an.t ?aul Hedstrom Decisions South Cross Modification Draft decision was not ready for a vote. The issue to be addressed at the next meeting. Edgewood Life Care - Special Permits There are three applications and decisions to be made. Those decisions are for Special Permit, CCRC, PDD and Site Plan Review. The Board members added to the drafts that all relevant approvals must be obtained prior to issuance of - building permits. Incorporated into the decision will be concerns of the D.P.W. which are addressed in a letter from Bill Hmurciak. Covenants will be attached. Easements granted to the Trustees of the Reservation. Housekeeping, in language was done on Condition #5, Condition #17 and Condition #20. Motion: By Paul Hedstrom to approve the Special Permit Drafts for Site Plan Review under Section 8. 3; Section 13, Continuing Care Retirement Center; and Section 11 . 3, Planned Development Districts per discussion and drafts as marked up and directing the Planner, Chris Huntress to put in final form as discussed. Second: Erich Nitzsche Vote: Unanimous of those present. Note: Decision is part of minutes. Boston Hill Ski Area - PRD 3 Christian Huntress, Planner gave the Board copies of a draft decision for Boston Hill Ski Area, PRD . A letter was received from the applicant requesting an extension 'from the Board rendering a decision. The applicant would like to review the residential sprinkler system with the Fire Chief, Bill Dolan. Chris Huntress went over Condition #6 relative to building model units and the drainage. Construction of the roadway and the model units only to be done at the same time. Erich Nitzsche asked how many units were involved. Chris said that there were two structures for a total of eight (8) units. No other structures will be built until the roadway is complete. The erosion will be controlled. Motion: By John Simons to accept the extension until October 20, 1989 to render a decision. Second: Erich Nitzsche Vote : Unanimous of those present. Merrimack College - Site Plan Review Motion: By Erich Nitzsche to approve the Site Plan for Merrimack College . Seconds Paul Hedstrom Vote : Unanimous of those present. Note : Decision is part of the minutes. j -Motion: By Paul Hedstrom to adjourn the meeting. Second: Erich Nitzsche Vote: Unanimous of those present. The Planning Board meeting adjourned at 10 . 40p.m. George Perna, Jr. , Chairman Janet L. Eaton, Secretary 77 � av���rcNrt�r. South Bradford Street George Perna, Chairman, announced that the Planning Board would be going into Executive Session to discuss the settlement of the case now in litigation and that the Board would reconvene the public hearing after the session. A motion was made by John Simons and seconded by Erich Nitzsche to go into Executive Session to discuss the South Bradford Street Settlement. The Chairman asked for a roll call vote: John Simons - yes Erich Nitzsche - Yes John Draper - Yes On that vote the Board went into Executive Session at approximately 10: 30 p. m. On May 17 , 1990, the Planning Board went into Executive Session to discuss South Bradford Street settlement of the litigation. The following member were present George Perna, Chairman, John Simons, Clerk Erich Nitzsche and John Draper. Jack Graham was absent. George Perna stated that the applicant basically agreed to go from 5 Form A Lots to 3 Form A Lots. Christian Huntress, Town Planner gave the Board copies of a draft decision for review. The applicant has Board of Health approval . A Form A Plan will be submitted one the litigation is settled. Dry sewer lines will be placed in accordance with the Division of Public Works Regulations . George Perna stated that during the open meeting, he will ask for a motion requesting that Town Counsel submit a Summary for Judgement on behalf of the Planning Board. John Simons wanted to know if the applicant was going to the Zoning Board for a variance . Christian Huntress told John that the applicant was not going to the Zoning Board for a variance , as this was a portion of the settlement. A lengthy discussion took place on whether or not a variance was required, the size of the lots and whether the applicant is going under the 1985 Zoning Bylaw or the present Zoning Bylaw. In the draft decision, the following items will be pulled from the settlement and placed in the common driveway decision: Items 4, 5, 7 , 17 , 19 , & 20 . A motion was made by John Draper to come out of Executive Session. The motion was seconded by Erich Nitzsche and on a roll call vote : John Simons - Yes Erich Nitzsche - Yes John Draper - Yes the Board came out of Executive Session at approximately 11 : 15 p. m. 4 r COVML i The North Andover Planning Board held a regular meeting on Thursday evening, September 13, 1990, in the Town Hall, Selectmen' s Meeting Room. The Meeting was called to order by the Chairman, George Perna, at 7 : 15 p.m. The following members were present: John Draper, Robert Ercolini and Joseph Mahoney. Also present at the meeting was Karen H. P. Nelson, Director of Planning and Community Development. A motion was made by Robert Ercolini to go into Executive Session to discuss Lot B Great Pond Road. The motion was seconded by Joseph Mahoney and on a roll call vote: John Draper - Yes Robert Ercolini - Yes Joseph Mahoney - Yes George Perna - Yes the Planning Board went into Executive Session to discuss Lot B Great, Pond Road. Upon completion of the Executive Session the Planning Board will open the meeting to the public. + Executive Session Lot B Great Pond Road - McGarry John McGarry and Dave Zaloga were present in the Executive Session, as well as Bill Hmurciak, D.P.W. Joseph Mahoney stated that Christian Huntress, Town Planner, was to check with the Division of Public Works on options on tying into the sewer. Bill Hmurciak was asked by the Board what could be done in the area as to tying into the system. Bill Hmurciak stated that there was a pump stating near the Scully Property. A gravity sewer in the area will extend to Rolling Ridge. Lot B would discharge into manhole at the Rolling Ridge driveway, and then be pumped towards the Water Treatment Plant A forced main would be a temporary situation, a pump station to pump from one location instead of several. A dry sewer was requested by the Board members. As soon as a sewer becomes available the applicant will tie in to a force main to an appropriate location on Great Pond Road. The Board wanted assurance that the applicant would tie into the sewer. A copy of a draft agreement was given to the Board. The agreement has to be re-written so that it makes sense for this particular lot. Conditions for tying into the sewer will be needed from the Division of Public Works. Restriction will be placed in the deed to guarantee sewer hook-up. A brief discussion took place on the location of the property and the distance from any wetlands . George Perna recapped things that needed to be donee 1. Re-write agreement so that it makes sense, in the context that the applicant will put the dry sewer plus the forced main in up to the appropriate location on Great Pond Road now; 2 . D.P.W. will be contacted for appropriate conditions for sewer tie in; 3. A restriction in the deed for tying into sewer when it becomes available ( language to be reviewed by Town Counsel) ; 4. Take assessment at that time and review with Town Counsel. A motion was made by Joseph Mahoney to come out of Executive Session. The motion was seconded by Robert Ercolini and voted unanimously by those present. r CONMOML On August 7 , 1990, the North Andover Planning Board went into Executive Session to discuss Chestnut Street - Common Driveways. A motion was made by John Simons to go into Executive Session to discuss the Chestnut Street - Common Driveway. The motion was seconded by John Draper and on a roll call vote: John Draper - yea John Simons - Yea Joseph Mahoney - Yea George Perna - Yea the Planning Board went into Executive Session at approximately 8:05 p.m. . At the close of Executive Session the Board will reconvene the public meeting. Christian Huntress, Town Planner, read from the remand. Joseph Mahoney expressed concerns with the draft Chris had presented to the Board. Although it is not referenced, the text is from the Rules and Regulations Governing the Subdivision of Land. The width of the roadway was discussed. John Simons went over the choices that the Board has: 1 . Approve a single way over the wetlands 2. Approve with three or four ways over the wetlands. John added a third: 3. Vary the plan by moving the location of the houses. George Perna asked what size pavement should be used if all houses will be using one road. Bill Hmurciak responded with a twenty foot roadway with two foot shoulder or a twenty two foot paved is adequate. George Perna stated that the bottom line is that twenty two feet is reasonable. John Simons said that basically the Board is approving eleven lots on one common driveway. John Draper asked what width would be recommended if there were four entrances. Bill Hmurciak, D.P.W. said that a common driveway should be 16 feet. A lengthy discussion took place on the width of the roadway. A motion was made by Joseph Mahoney to have an 18 foot pavement. i There was no second. A motion was made by John Simons to strike out Condition 17 and 18 of the draft decision. The motion was seconded by Joseph Mahoney and voted unanimously by those present. A motion was made by John Draper to approve the draft as amended and send to Town Counsel for review. The motion was seconded by Joseph Mahoney and voted unanimously by those present. A motion was made by John Simons to -come out of Executive Session. The motion was seconded by John Draper and on a roll call vote: John Simons - Yea Joseph Mahoney - Yea John Draper - Yea George Perna - Yea the Planning Board came out of Executive Session. coNreoMIAIL On November 29 , 1990 the North Andover Planning Board went into Executive Session. A motion was made by John Draper to go into Executive Session. The motion was seconded by John Simons and on a roll call vote: John Draper - Yes John Simons - Yes Joseph Mahoney - Yes Rick Nardella - Yes George Perna - Yes the Planning Board went into Executive Session at approximately 8 : 45 p. m. to discuss Brookview - Farnum Property. Upon completion of the executive session the Board will reconvene the regular meeting. Brookview - Farnum Property John Simons read a letter from Town Counsel, Joel Bard. Also read was a letter from Attorney Marden. The Board was brought up to date on the litigation on the Farnum Property. The zoning was changes but the particular definition for Village Commercial was not redefined due to items that were bumped of the Town Meeting agenda. The Board will try again to address the Village Commercial area at the next Town Meeting. Christian Huntress will contact Tom Neve regarding the subdivision. A motion was made by Joseph Mahoney to come out of Executive Session. The motion was seconded by John Simons and on a poll voted: John Simons - Yes John Draper - Yes Joseph Mahnoey - Yes Richard Nardella - Yes George Perna - Yes the Planning Board came out of Executive Session at approximately 8: 50 p. m I