Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRIVERS DEVELOPMENT DAN c` LONG ^ T�}W4 CL-i iRK �W FO a v� NORT.! ' "DVER LATHAM AND LATHAM, P.C.SEP 12 1 e-6 PF 189 643 MAIN STREET READING, MASSACHUSETTS 01867 KENNETH C. LATHAM AREA CODE 617 O. BRADLEY LATHAM TELEPHONE: 944-0505 DAVID J. LATHAM TELECOPIER: 944-7079 WILLIAM C. WAGNEO September 8, 1989 Christian C . Huntress, Town Planner Division of Planning and Community Development North Andover Town Hall 120 Main Street North Andover, Massachusetts 01845 Re: Riparian Industrial Park Dear Mr. Huntress: In ;response to your August 29, 1989 letter, I wish to advise as follows: 1 . Hayes Engineering, Inc. submitted an updated traffic study to your predecessor. That study was submitted during November 1988. 2. An application is being submitted to the Department of Health with a septic design. That design could of course not be finalized until the final usage need was established. 3. Your predecessor had suggested that the applicant "withhold filing the MEPA review until the Board has reached consensus on the final size of building, parking and driveway locations. Staff will recommend holding the public hearing open until thejfull MEPA filing is made to the State and input is received regarding that filing by the State DPW. " [November 21 , 1988 letter from Town Planner to John R. Rivers, Trustee] It was consistent with that instruction that the applicant had not previously filed for MEPA review and the related DPW curb cut permit . Both of those filings are now being made. At; the September 7, 1989 meeting of the Planning Board, Paul Davies, the architect for the applicant, presented revised plans addressing the aesthetic and design concerns as previously raised by the Planning Board. It would be our hope that all of the issues as raised have now been ,addressed and that now a favorable recommendation could be given. - r LATHAM AND LATHAM, P.C. Christian C. Huntress, Town Planner September '8, 1989 Page Two If any additional materials are required, would you kindly advise us in advance of September 21, 1989 so that we can attempt to address them for the next meeting of the Planning Board. Sincerely, LATHAM AND LATHAM, P.C. 0. Bradley Latham OBL: jmb cc: Town Clerk John R. Rivers William Bergeron, Hayes Engineering I RECEIVED DANIEL LONG TOWN CLERIC Yaw 6#Mr" 0/ NORTH ANDOVER LATHAM AND LATHAM, P.CSEp ZI 34 P '88 643 MAIN STREET READING, MASSACHUSETTS 01667 KENNETH C. LATHAM AREA CODE 617 O. BRADLEY LATHAM TELEPHONE: 944-0505 DAVID J. LATHAM TELECOPIER: 944-7079 WILLIAM C. WAGNER September 20, 1988 KATHLEEN M. MITCHELL DENNIS P. CRONIN* `ALSO MEMBER OF FLORIDA BAR Town Planner Planning Board Town Hall North Andover, MA 01845 RE: SITE PLAN REVIEW/SPECIAL PERMIT APPLICATION ASSESSOR'S MAP NO. 106D, LOT 63 Dear Members: Pursuant to Section 8.3 of the North Andover Zoning By-Laws, enclosed please find an application package containing the following materials: 1. Application for Site Plan - Special Permit; 2 . Site Plan (10 copies) ; 3 . Listing of all parties in interest; 4 . Check number 149 in the amount of $150. 00 for filing fee; and 5. Architectural rendering with proposed building elevation (10 copies) . A temporary waiver of the Traffic Impact Study, Stormwater Drainage Calculations and concurrent filing of the Notice of Intent with the North Andover Conservation Commission is hereby requested. The applicant shall file each of these items with the appropriate department within the next few days. Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation. Very truly yours, THAM & LATHAM, P.C. Dennis P. Cronin, E quire DPC:kem ` RECEIVED DIVISION OF PLANNING AND DANIEL LONG COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TOWNCLERK NORTH ANDOVER TOWN OF NORTH MASSACHUSETTS SEP SEP �� ( 34 FM '88 PLANNING BOARD APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW - SPECIAL PERMIT Under Section 8.3 of the Town of North Andover Zoning Bylaw. 1 . ) Applicant/Petitioners: Riparian Realty Trust Address: c/o Rivers Development Corp. - 24 Gould Street, Reading,.MA 01867 Phone: 617-944- 3 2. ) Ownership : Riparian Realty Trust Address: c/o Rivers Development Corp. - 24 Gould Street, Rea ing, MA 01867 Phone: 617-944-4443 3. ) Location of the project : Salem Turnpike, North Andover, MA Address: Salem Turnpike, Nort An over, MA Assessors Map #: 106-TD Parcel 63 Deed Recorded in: Essex North Registry of Deeds Registry of Deeds Book 2108 Page 244 or Land Court Certificate No . Book Page 1) Bld-2 35,600 4. ) Size of the Building 2) Bld-3 596204 square feet Height 40' Max. Stories Two Feet Occupancy or Use See Addendum Attached Hereto Type of Construction Decorative Block 5 . ) Size of Existing Building vacant land _ Height ___ Stories _ Feet Occupancy or Use Type of Construction 6. ) Classification of the Project (See Section 8.33 of the Zoning Bylaw ) Major _XXX Intermediate Minor INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED MAJOR INTERMEDIATE MINOR TYPE OF INFORMATION REQUIRED X X X X 1 . North Arrow/Location Map X --37 X X 2. Survey of the Lot/Parcel X X X X 3. Name/Description of Project X - it X X 4. Easements/Legal Conditions X X X X 5. Topography X X X X 6. Zoning Information X X X X 7. Stormwater Drainage Plan X X X X B. Building(s) Location X - X X X 9. Location of Parking/Walkways X X X X 10. Location of Wetlands X -�— X X 11 . Location of Walls/Signs X -�- X X 12 . Location of Roadways/Drives X �- 0 0 13. Outdoor Storage/Display Area X X X Q ,a �,._. 14 . Landscaping Plan X X - 0 15. Refuse Areas X 7 — K 0 16. Lighting Facilities X 'X— 0 0 17. Drainage Basin Study X X 0 0 18 . Traffic Impact Study X X 19. Commonwealth Review X RequiredInformation 0 Information may be requested by the Planning Board 7. ) Please supply ten ( 10) copies of the above information to the Town Planner with this application. 8. ) Advertising Fee: 545.00 An do ar (it' Filing Fee: Orth 9. ) Petitioners Signature: 1 . Rivers, Tr t e of Riparian Realty Trust Every application f action by the Hoard shall be made on a Norm approved by the Board . These forms shall be furnished by the Town Clerk upon request . Any communication purporting to be an application shall be treated as mere notice of intention to seek relief until such time as it is made on the official application form. All information called for by the form shall be furnished by the applicant in the manner therein prescribed in accordance with the requirements of Section 8.3. Every application shall be submitted with a list of "Parties in Interest" which shall include the petitioner , abutters, owners of land directly opposite on any public or private street or way and abutters to the the abutters within three hundred (300) feet of the property line all as they appear on the most recent applicable tax list , notwithstanding that the land of any such owner is located in another city or town, the Planning Board of the Town and the Planning Board of every abutting city or town. LIST OF PARTIES IN INTEREST NAME ADDRESS ADD ADDITIONAL SHEETS, IF NECESSARY ANY QUESTIONS SHOULD BE DIRECTED TO THE PLANNING OFFICE AT 685-4775 ADDENDUM TO APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW Occupancy or Use: Commercial condominium for business and professional uses as allowed by zoning. LIST OF ABUTTERS Assessors Book & Map No. Lot No. Page Owner 106 D 39 & 32 Prob. Rita Houghton 273 691 142 Berry Street North Andover 01845 106 D 38 1046 Robert R. & Joan B. Houghton 91 44 Ash Street North Andover 01845 106 D - 1144 John N. & Therese M. Hagerty 491 1874 Turnpike Street North Andover 01845 106 D - 902 Jean Paul R. Proulx 119 1812 Turnalk Street rth Andover 5 106 D - 1547 David White 335 1 Talbot Ave. And 106 D - Prob. John C. Farnum 236985 426 Farnum Street North Andover 01845 106 D 55 1635 Brian J. Cardello 131 32 May Street North Andover 01845 106 'D 53 & 54 1454 Susan Berman 118 Tom Casey, Robert Casey Berry Street North Andover 01845 106 'D Partial 63 1524 Berry St. Trust 103 Frank Fiore 16 Berry Street North Andover 01845 j � 106 D - 2018 Elm Sq. Builders 256 Realty Trust 1 Elm Square -N@4*k Andover -0404-=0 106 D 63 & 44 2108 Riparian Realty Trust I 244 - 24 Gould Street Reading, MA 01867 1177/ 586/siv Assessors Book & Map No. Lot No. Page Owner 106 D - 2008 Anna Mscisz 182 18 Willow Street North Andover 01845 106 D - 1998 North Andover 333 Realty Trust 1253 Salem Street North Andover 01845 106 D 52 Prob. Nathalie Ross 335346 20 Beaver Street Salem, MA 01970 106'D 49 - Raymond J. Barnes 193 Berry Street North Andover 01845 106 D - 1848 Nancy Houghton 181 142 Berry Street North Andover 01845 1 I 1 i i 1177/ 586/siv i a --- . - M111H BOABO RECEIVED TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER DANIF1 Lf1iG MASSACHUSETTS TOWN01FIRK NOR TX" A:aL_jLIVER MOXTq SEP 12 1116 AN '86 A ♦ ^ E ,SSACMUSt4 NOTICE OF DECISION Date. . September, 9,,, ,1986, , , , , , , Date of Hearing .June ,16;, 1986, Petition of . . . . . .&a.Vex'S. AAve19PAq]] t. CRrg.. . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Premises affected . . . . . .liQt. 1. .: .Dvrry. .Stxeet„ . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Referring to the above petition for a special permit from the requirements of the ..North.AnslQYer. 2.nning. .liYlaW .- .Seei.4i�. �eQt9?�. .$ . Para;,3, , so as to permit . . . . .the. &QnStxuCtjDA .Qt. containing 29 , 800 sq. ft. to be used as office space, industrial . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . warehouse storage. After a public hearing given on the above date, the Planning Board voted M to . . .deuy. . . . . . . . .the . . . .. . $ate ,earl Review,Special, Permit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . based upon the following conditions: Signed Erich W. Nitzsche, Chairman . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . Michael P. Roberts, Vice—Chairman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . John L. Simons, Clerk . . ..Raul. A_ .Hedstrom. . . .. . . . . . .. John J, .13prA@. . . . .. . ... . . . . . .plannifig Board PhaMBIBG BO�BO �����tr� TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER NODAINIrR NI L u) 120 Main Street t,' ty6R North Andover, MA. 01845 SEP � " 685-4775 It 26 NORTI, QQ h p �aau��a September 8, 1986 Mr . Daniel Long , Town Clerk Town Office £wilding 120 Main Street Norti7 Andover, MA 01845 Re: Rivers Development Corp. Let 1 - Berry Street - Site Plan Review Dear Mr . Long : The Ncrtb Andover Planning Board held a Public Hearing on Monday evening , June 16 , 1986 at 8:00 P .M. in the Town Office Meeting Room upon the application of Rivers Development Corp. , 24 Gould Street, Reading, MA. The hearing was advertised in the North Andover Citizen on May 22 and 29 , 1986 . The following members were present at the June 16, 1986 meeting: Erich W. Nitzsche, Chairman; Michael P . Roberts , Vice-Chairman; John L. Simons, Clerk; and John J . Burke. The petitioner seeks a Special Permit under Section 8 Paragraph 3; Site Plan Review of the North Andover Zoning Bylaw . The purpose of the Site Plan is to review Rivers Development proposal to construct an office/industrial building containing 29,800 square feet to be used as office space and industrial/warehouse storage. 1rhe premises affected is located on Lot 1 , Berry Street on the South side of said street . The site is located in an Industrial-1 Zoning District possessing 2.76 acres and 406 .7 feet of frontage. At the "tearing, John Simons read the legal notice and opened the Public Hearing for Rivers Development Corp. Letters from the Board of Lealth, Highway Surveyor and Fire Department were read into the record. Brad Latham-attorney for the applicant, John R. Fivers-trustee of Riparian Trust and the owner, Bob Brustin, Vanasse Hangeri-project engineer and Chris Carlee, Dineen Associates-architect were the interested parties . highlights of their presentation were: - The parcel contains 2.76 acres; the proposed one-story building will contain 29,800 sq. ft , and will be constructed with concrete and masonry. - The site presently resembles a meadow; there is a wetland on the property; stone wall and hedge on property will be kept and maintained. - Building use: mixed - office (20%) and light industrial. Possibly 4 separate tenants. There will be a wide c-iveway and access from Berry St. only. - Setbacks : front-52, side-51 and back-51 . - There will be a loading dock to the rear of the building and 43 parking spaces available. John Sirncns stated his concern that there was no buffer zone on the plans abutting the residential property. Bob Breslin responded that it would be unfavorable to turn the building in another direction Because of its close proximity to the wetlands - currently at 1.5 feet . A Notice of Intent has been filed with the Conservation Commission. Bch Breslin stated that he would respond to all the concerns stated in the department letters . No traffic impact study has been done, a sketci: will be developed of the fire lane and traffic. Chairman iNTitzsche stated several concerns of the Planning Board: 1 ) Setbacks from Berry St . (private way) must be 100 ft from ResiGential property (buffer zone) . 2') Conservation Commission filing because of 10-15 feet of wetlands . Insufficient detail shown for wetlands and compensatory wetlands . The applicant has not satisfied the NACC per their denial dated July 16, 1986, DEQE #242-356 . 3 ) Truck docks very close to the abutters property. 4) Fire ianes needed along truck dock that are not shown on plans . 5) A concern about two-way traffic on narrow Berry St . When trucks are added it will be difficult at best and inadequate for industrial access. 6) Location of septic disposal system in proximity to Berry St. No percolation data or location provided. Test pit 4A is not in field area. 7 ) L'rainage calculations are insufficient : - 1,c discharge curve 10 outlet. Invert elevation on outlet control structures and spillways are not shown. - Outlet velocity is not shown as described. Nancy Houghton, a resident of Berry St . , stated her concerns about the project . They have an artisian well which she felt might become polluted. Landscaping along her property should be provided. Access to the site, e.g. , heavy trucks, will be via the Riding academy road which will affect her property. Bob Brestlin will look at all the issues and report back to the Planning Board. MOTION: By Michael P . Roberts to take the matter under advisement arra close the public hearing. SECOND: Jelin J . Burke. VOTE: Unanimous. Upon a motion made by John L. Simons and seconded by Paul A. Hedstrom, the Board unanimously voted to DENY the petition for Site Plan Review Approval under the Special Permit process for Rivers Development Corp. , plans dated: 6 May 12, 1986 by R.E . Dineen Architects & Planners, 160 No. viasirington St. , Boston, MA o May 9 , 1986 by Vanasse/Hangen Consulting Engineers & Planners, 60 Birmingham Parkway, Boston, MA Sheets 1 through 10. In denying this Site Plan, the Planning Board finds pursuant to Section 10. 51 - Conditions for Approval of Special Permits of the Zoning Bylaw . The Planning Board S .P .G.A. shall not approve any application for Special Permit unless it finds that in its judgement all the following conditions are met: - The use as developed will not adversely affect the neighborhood: The proposal as designed will affect the neighborhood in regards to traffic generation and safety on Berry St . and Berry/Rte. 114 intersection. No roadway improvements have been presented, nor has a traffic study been submitted to measure the impacts of this development on the surrounding neighborhood. Insufficient setbacks under zoning exist on the Plan. No provision to accommodate the required setbacks have been submitted. - There will be no nuisance or serious hazard to vehicles or pedestrians: It is the opinion of the Planning Board and Highway Surveyor that the safety of pedestrian and vehicles travelling on Berry Street are subject to a substantial increase of heav y traffic associated with this development . No corrective measures designed to alleviate the traffic problem have been addressed by the applicant . - Adequate and appropriate facilities will be provided for the proper operation of the proposed use: The roadways leading to the project site are inadequate to properly service the operation. It is the opinion of the Planning Board that the drainage is insufficient, as well as the wetland compensatory storage and replacement areas . The location of the septic system will prohibit the use and future access to Berry Street and has not received Board of Health approval . Based crr site visits, the hearing process and review and comments from other town boards and departments, the aforementioned project, as presented, is NOT in harmony with the general purpose and intent of this bylaw, per Section 1 , PURPOSES . Sincerely, PLANNING BOA/RD Erich W. Nitzsche Chairman HvaN :nr s cc: Highway Surveyor Boaru of Public Works Tree Department Fire Chief Police Chief Conservation Commission building Inspector Board of Health Assessor Engineer Applicant File ;3Akl£L IQ OVOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER NTOWN CLrgX MASSACHuSETTS flRt`�i Af�I �VER PLANNING BOARD MAY 16 11AN '06 APPLICATION POR SPECIAL PERMIT NOTICE: This application must be typewritten Applicant Rivers Develo ment Corp. Address 24 Could Street, Reading, MA 01867 1• Appl-ication is hereby made (a) For a Special Permit u}ider Section 8.3 Paragraph 1 of the Zoning By—Law. 2. (a) Premises affected are land X and buildin b's numbered Berry Street. (b) Premises affected are property with front Hast West side of age on the North South X No• 1 Berr rr ____,_Streetr and known as Street.. (c) Premises affected are in Zoning District I-1 have an area of 2. 76 , and the premises affected and frontage of4Q�'feet. 3. Ownership: (a) Name and address "of OMer (if joint ownership, give all names) Ri aran Realty Trust 24 Gould Street, Reading, MA Date of purchase January, 1986 Previous Owner ' Berry Street Trust (b) If'•.applioant is not owner, check his interest in the premises: ...0--prospect I've purchaser —.-._.asses _ 9ther (explain) 4• Size of Proposed building:--318§55 (Max) front; 112 (Max) Height: 1 stories i feet deep (Not Rectangular) ._2n fest. (a) Approximate date of erection (b) Occupancy or use (of each floor) Office Industrial (°) Type of construction concrete B ock'w Brick Face 5• Size of lakisting Building: N/A Height: stories feet front; feet deep feet. (a) ApproXimate date of erection (b) occupancy or.use (of each floor) (c) Type df construction 6. Has there been a previous application for a on these premises? No Special Permit from the Planning Board If so, when ?• Description of purpose for which Special Permit is sought on this Petition:-- Per z n 'n r ulaon 8.3.1 of the North Andover Zoning By Law, tiro `— building in an Industrial District requiring more than. iu parking spaces will be required to obtain a S ecial Permit. f os . recorded in the Registry of Deeds in Book 2108 6N Land Court .1ficate No. Book Pam .ie principal points upon which I .base my application are as follows: (must be stated in detail) This application is made for site plan review and governmental approval from the Planning Board. The applicant intends to construct an office/industrial building in accordance with accompanyinglans. P I agree to pay for advertising in newspaper and postage fee for mailing legal notices t "Pies in re t". ' Petitioner's si Mature Every application for action by the Board shall be made on a form approved by the Board.. These forms shall be furnished by the. Clerk upon request. Any. commnnication purporting to be an application shall be treated as mere notice of intention to--seek relief.until such time as it is made on the official application form. All information caned for by the form shall be furnished by the applicant in the manner. therein prescribed. Every application shall be submitted with a list of "Parties in Interest" which shall include the petitioner, abutters, owners of land directly opposite on any public o= private street or way and abutters to the abutters within three hundred (300) feet of the property line all as they appear. on the most recent applicable tax list, notwith— standing that the land of any such owner is located in another city or town, the Plan— ning Board of the town and the planning board of every abutting city or town. LIST OF PARTIES IN INTMEST NAME ADDRESS /P n r ADD ADDITICNAL .. ill P6A8MfNG 80A80 = TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER Thi#a �s� R MASSACHUSETTS � L 25 ; NORTq Any appeal shall be filed ; within(20)days after the date of filing of this Notice aCMUs��g In the Office of the Town CIS& NOTICE OF DECISION December 4, 19.89 Date. . . Date of Hearing II t Riparian i Petition of P Realty Trust, c/o .Rivers Development.Corp. . Premises affected .Berry,Street Assessors's rad 106D. Parcel. 44. �.Parcel,63 , Referring to the above petition for a special permit from the requirements North Andover zoning Bylaws - Section 8.3, Site Plan Review of the . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . so as to permit ,the construgti ops oA A ,KLAPP. Story.building.of.commercial condominium on Parcel 44 and the construction of a..35,600 sq.ft.two story building and �a 59,200q.ft. two stormsi}13} bapg, €PT. FQA a Oiai.CVadOminiwmS.on.Earce1.63 Parcel 44 on Berry_:Street,. Parcel 63 on the Salem Turnpike, Rte 114. After a public hearing given on the above date, the Planning Board voted Conditionally Site Plan ep e t© Approve. . . . . . . . .the . . . . yp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . based upon the following conditions: i cc: '! Director of Public Works Board of Public Works Signed,,,, Highway; Surveyor BuildingInspector George PernaS Jr:. Chairman! . Board off P Health • . • . • . • • • Conservation Commission John Simons, Clerk Assessors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Police Chief Erich Ni.tasche Fire Chief . . . . . . . . . .. . . Applicant John Draper . . . . . Engineer File interested Parties . . . . . . . .>Sianning" Board �ewnrH, OFFICES OF. dr' � Town of 120 Main Street BUILDING ;e ! NORTH ANDOVER North Andover CONSERVATION ;`b ;;: Massachusetts o 1845 HEALTH "°s`t DIVISION OF (508)682-6483 PLANNING PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT KAREN H.P. NELSON, DIRECTOR December 4, 1989 Mr. Daniel Long, Town Clerk Town Hall 120 Main Street North Andover, MA 01845 Ree Lot 1 & Lot 2 Berry Street, Site Plan Review Dear Mr. Longe The North Andover Planning Board held a public hearing on November 17, 1988 in the Town Hall, Selectmen' s Meeting Room, upon the application of Riparian Realty Trust, c/o Rivers Development Corp. , 24 Gould Street, Reading, MA. The hearing was duly advertised in the North Andover Citizen on October 27, 1988 and November 3, 1988 and all interested parties were notified. The petitioner seeks Site Plan approval for the construction on of a 17 , 600 sq. ft. , two story building of commercial condominium on Parcel 44 and the construction of a 35,600 sq. ft. two story building and a 59, 200 sq. ft. two story building for commercial condominiums on Parcel 63, both found on the Assessors Map #106D, on Berry Street and the Salem Turnpike respectively. The following members were present, George Perna, Vice Chairman; Erich Nitzsche and Michael Leary. Paul Hedstrom arrived at 8:08. John Simons, Clerk was absent. Erich Nitzsche read the legal notice to open the public hearing. Dennis Cronin was present representing the applicant. Mr. Cronin stated that there were two lots. one of the projects proposed is a major site plan and the other is an intermediate project. He stated that he has met with the Technical Review Committee. William Bergeron, Hayes Engineering, spoke to the Board. He stated that the buildings would be two stories. There are two independent proposal on 14. 7 acres. Conservation Commission has had a hearing on this project. Page 2: George Perna asked what the use was of the buildings. Hr. Bergeron stated that they would be used for office and manufacturing. He said that there was substantial amount of wetlands on the property, that there were two separate watersheds. Drainage calculations were submitted for the 2, 10, and 100 year event. There will be on-site septic systems. Erich Nitzsche questioned the septic systems and the lots. Paul Hedstrom questioned the zoning. William Bergeron stated that they would be connecting to the sewer when available. George Perna asked what guarantee was there for the sewer connection. Paul Hedstrom said a covenant. Mr. Bergeron said that they needed Fire Department approval for the location of the hydrants and alarm system. The proposed has been reduced by 26,200 sq. ft. to 96,200 sq. ft. There will be 53 for retail (or fast food) , 453 for office use, and 503 for industrial use. Scott Stocking, Town Planner asked that the maximum ( 103) be used for retail/restaurant. The issue was stressed because of parking using the largest scenario. Scott Stocking read from the Bylaw. Dennis Cronin asked if there was a condition that could be made relative to the issue. The Town Planner has asked the Building Inspector to clarify the matter. William Bergeron spoke on a traffic study that was done. He said that MEPA, State D.P.W. have copies. George Perna spoke on curb-cut on Route 114. Mr. Bergeron stated that deceleration and accelerations lanes would be combined with those of the Elm Square Project. He also stated that there would be limited tree cutting. Erich Nitzsche questioned the landscaping on Berry Street. Hr. Bergeron said that Arborvitae would be used. Scott Stocking questioned the timetable on the MEPA filing. The response from Mr. Bergeron was next week. Scott stated that it is a policy of the Board not to close the public hearing until a report comes in on the MEPA filing. Erich Nitzsche said that the proposed project is abutting the wetlands with no buffer. Scott Stocking asked Bill Hmurciak if he had concerns. Bill Hmurciak, D.P.W. stated he had concerns with Berry Street being only 18' wide. George Perna stated that he would like to see Berry Street up-graded. Erich nitzsche said he felt that the project was squeezing the site. Nancy Haughton, Berry Street abutter, wanted to know the hours for the manufacturing. She cited loud noise already from the Elm Square site. Page 3: Paul Hedstrom read from the Bylaw citing no nescience to an area. A motion was made by George Perna to continue the public hearing until December 15, 1988. The motion was seconded by Erich Nitzsche and voted unanimous by those present. On December 15, 19880, the Planning Board held a regular meeting. The following members were present: Paul Hedstrom, Chairman; George Perna, Vice Chairman; John Simons, Clerk and Michael Leary. Erich Nitzsche was absent. John Simons read a letter from the Building Inspector. A letter was also received from the Conservation Commission regarding Lot 1 Berry Street and Lot 2 Salem Turnpike, dated December 14, 1988 and is available for anyone to read, addressing eight issues related to the project. Scott Stocking, Town Planner summarized the letter from the Conservation. Scott Stocking stated that the Conservation Commission was ready to issue a decision, a denial based on the plan before the Board. The applicant asked that the Conservation Commission hold off until there is more input from the Planning Board on it. If the plan is marketably changed then Conservation will issue its decision to deny, if there is substantial changes, the Conservation Commission will asked them to withdraw the application and submit another Notice of Intent. John Simons stated that he could not understand if the plan was going to change why didn't the applicant withdraw this site plan. Scott Stocking said the issue is how significant the plans are going to change. Scott Stocking went over some of the issues that are still outstanding with the Planning Board: 1 . Parking standards 2. Driveway connection between the two buildings 3. Improvements to Berry Street 4. Improvements of intersection of Route 114 5. Drainage 6 . Setback between Industrial and Residential Zones. Bylaw calls for 100' between Residential and Industrial Zone. 7. Wetland impacts 8. Technical issues related to septic design 9. Easement documents for septic systems - two different lots. 10. Landscaping screening details. Scott Stocking stated that those are the major issues. Dennis Cronin, representing the applicant, was present as well as William Bergeron, Hayes Engineering, and Mr. Rivers from the Riparian Realty Trust. Mr. Cronin spoke to the Board on the technical review process and that the applicant had four meetings with the Conservation Commission and with the Planning Board. .Page 4 s Mr. Cronin said he felt quite confident that a design could be adapted that would satisfy the concerns of the Conservation Commission and he said he is looking for direction on the issues of the Planning Board brought up by Scott Stocking, Town Planner. He said on the parking issues and letter from the Building Inspector that it is a statement of what the principal is and the application in the particular case, you have to develop a design which incorporates the projected use and that is what is incorporated in the plan is what the potential uses are and any conditional approval should incorporate those projected uses on the parking layout and must comply with that. Mr. Cronin said that is what is meant in that section of the Bylaw was where there were no uses specified. Mr. Cronin also spoke on the VR and Industrial requirements in that the applicant has complied with the dimensional requirements of the VR District as it abuts the Residential Zone. He has presented a letter to Scott Stocking which indicates under this type of situation where you have a grandfathered right of use that a reasonable regulation is what he applied, applicant is asking that the Board apply Industrial dimensional requirements on the other side of the project where it abuts Industrial use. Mr. Bergeron, Hayes Engineering, spoke to the Board on some of the issues Scott Stocking, Town Planner, brought up. Mr. Bergeron stated that he was somewhat surprised when at the last Technical Review Committee Meeting when the issues of improving Berry Street was brought up, bringing Berry Street up to Town standards. Mr. Bergeron stated that Scott said that he would be going to visit the site. Mr. Bergeron said that there was a stone wall along Berry Street also a substantial amount of large trees along that area and subsequently would have to be removed which was not their desire. An easement or right-of-way was also requested along the dirt section of Berry Street for the future so the Town would not have to do any land taking. Mr. Bergeron stated that it would pose a problem because it was the primary area for septic system disposal. Mr. Bergeron provided a letter from D.E.Q.E. saying it was alright for building 2 and 3 to discharge sewage to another lot as along as there is a long term easement or lease between the lots. Mr. Bergeron said that someone D.E.Q.E. had spoken to Erich Nitzsche and that his concerns should be rested. Mr. Bergeron stated that he has been working with the different departments trying to satisfy their concerns. John Simons asked what the total upland area was. Mr. Bergeron replied that 14 acres were upland. Conservation says there are 9. 75 acres of upland and 5. 5 acres of wetland, of that John asked how much was covered for parking. Mr. Bergeron said that 51% was for parking. John Simons raised issues on the parking lot and wetlands. Scott clarified some of the issues as raised by the Conservation Commission on those issuese 1 . Boundary dispute 2. Resource area used for detention for stormwater run-off. Page 5: 3. Performance standards of protecting the wetlands. 4. Driveway to Lot 2 eliminated. 5. Extensive work in buffer zone. 6. Suggesting imposing a 25' no construction zone around the bordering vet. wetlands. 7 . Problem with replication plan. Scott said those were main issues with the Conservation Commission. John Simons stated that based on those issues that would be substantial changes in the plans before the Board. The applicant is working on those issues. John wanted to see the architectural plans, something that would show the height of the building and the screening of the surrounding property. George Perna and Mr. Bergeron went over some of the issues the Planning Board had: 1 . Parking area show where it could be if business changed - not to construct it, show it on the plans. 2 . Zoning issues - do they go with the current zoning (VR) setbacks, applicant next to VR District what's there is non-conforming and was put there before the VR went into effect. 3. ENP (Environmental Notification Form) to be done for the State curb-cut. Board asking applicant to file, applicant would like to hold-off because of Berry Street and the wetland crossing. This was on Scott's recommendation. A lengthy discussion took place on the connecting of the two parcels and the wetlands. George Perna said there should be some restrictions of commercial traffic in the Residential Zone. Bill Hmurciak would like to have more figures on the drainage. Scott Stocking spoke on the width of Berry Street and the fact that the impact on Route 114 and Berry Street would be greater. Dennis Cronin wanted feedback on the connecting of the two parcels. A motion was made by Michael Leary to continue the public hearing until the first meeting in February and accept an extension until February 16th. The motion was seconded by George Perna and voted unanimous by those present. on February 2, 1989 the Planning Board held a regular meeting. The following members were present: Paul Hedstrom, Chairman; George Perna, Vice Chairman; John Simons, Clerk; Erich Nitzsche and Michael Leary. John Simons read letters from Scott Stocking, Town Planner, the Fire Department and the Building Inspector. -page 6 : William Bergeron, engineer, went over the concerns of the Fire Department. Hr. Bergeron stated that they have been before the Conservation Commission. He also stated that the revised plans show the building is 100' from the Elm Square Development as requested by the Planning Board. The applicant is asking for a waiver from the 50' buffer, for access to three buildings. There is a parking garage shown on the plans to address the parking issues. Ninety percent of the parking spaces are for the office space requirements and 10% for retail use. A total of 300 spaces required for the project. The parking garage could accommodate 165 parking spaces. Mr. Bergeron showed the Board floor plans (3 scenarios) , each containing 20'x60' modules. Mr. Bergeron went over the list of issues from Scott Stocking, Town Planner. Easement document supplied for septic systems. Landscaping added near the detention area. John Simons wanted the wetlands delineated on the plans. Mr. Bergeron showed John where they were. John also asked what percentage of upland would not be disturbed. Mr. Bergeron said basically a third. Scott Stocking, Town Planner, asked about the type of rip-rap. Mr. Bergeron said stone. Erich Nitzsche asked if the bridge design had been submitted. Mr Bergeron said, no, he had just received the okay from the Conservation Commission. George Perna asked about lighting. John Simons asked about the design of the buildings. Mr. Bergeron showed the Board, asked about what they will be made of, Mr. Bergeron said concrete (textured) . George Perna asked about the signs. Mr. Bergeron showed the Board the type of signs. George Perna and Erich Nitzsche elaborated on lighting and size of the signs. John Simons stated that a registered landscape architect stamp was needed. John also commented on the need for common driveway applications or Form A Plan. Erich Nitzsche would prefer Form A lots. Mr. Cronin stated that the land was grandfathered in 1985. George Perna asked if the parking garage was permitted in the area. Mr. Bergeron said, yes. He also asked about the septic systems. Mr. Bergeron stated that all have been submitted to the Board of Health. Paul Hedstrom questioned whether parking garage was allowed. Erich Nitzsche questioned the letter from the Board of Health. Mr. Bergeron aid that since the letter, he has met with the Board of Health to address the issues. An extension is needed from the applicant to extend the public hearing. •Page 7 : A motion was made by Michael Leary to accept an extension until April 30, 1989 with readvertising the hearing. The motion was seconded by Erich Nitzsche and voted unanimous by those present. The Planning Board held a regular meeting on March 2, 1989. The following members were presents George Perna, Vice Chairman; John Simons, Clerk; Erich Nitzsche and Michael Leary. Paul Hedstrom arrived at 10:00 p.m. John Simons read a letter from Dennis Cronin asking for an extension on the public hearing. Erich Nitzsche stated that if an extension on the public hearing was granted, the Board would be asking for an extension on the decision. A motion was made by John Simons to continue the public hearing to April 2, 1989. The motion was seconded by Michael Leary and voted unanimous by those present. On April 6, 1989 the Planning Board held a regular meeting. The following members were present: Paul Hedstrom, Chairman;George Perna, Vice Chairman, John Simons, Clerk and Erich Nitzsche. Michael Leary was absent. John Simons read a letter from the applicant requesting an extension. A motion was made by John Simons to continue the public hearing until May 27, 1989. The motion was seconded by George Perna and voted unanimous by those present. On April 27 , 1989 the Planning Board held a regular meeting. The following members were presents George Perna, Vice Chairman; John Simons, Clerk; Erich Nitzsche and Michael Leary. Paul Hedstrom arrived at 10: 25 p.m. John Simons read a letter from the applicant requesting an extension on the public hearing. A motion was made by John Simons to accept an extension, but the request is to be put on the standard form for extension. The motion was seconded by Michael Leary and voted unanimous by those present. On May 18, 1989 the Planning Board held a regular meeting. The following members were present: George Perna, Vice Chairman; John Simons, Clerk and Erich Nitzsche. Paul Hedstrom, Chairman arrived at 9:00 p.m. John Simons read a letter from the applicant requesting an extension on the public hearing. A motion was made by George Perna to vote a denial subject to the applicant coming in with a suitable extension, the facts of the Boards denial are in the file. The motion was seconded by John Simons and voted unanimous by those present. On June 8, 1989, the Planning Board held a regular meeting. The following members were present: George Perna, Vice Chairman; John Simons, Clerk; Erich Nitzsche and Michael Leary. Paul Hedstrom, Chairman arrived at 8& 35 p.m. Page 8: Dennis Cronin, attorney, gave the Board background on the application before the Board. He stated that since the first public hearing in October, the project has been scaled down from 125,000 sq. ft. to 95,000 sq. ft. A new notice of intent has been filed with the Conservation Commission. George Perna wanted the issues identified before the Board went any further with this application. Dennis Cronin said that the issues were the design of the project and a letter from the Building Inspector relative to the interpretation of the parking and whether an accessory parking garage was necessary to accommodate the proposed. Dennis Cronin stated that Mr. Hicetta had not seen the plans at that time and has since reviewed them and the parking meets the requirements for what is proposed. John Simons questioned how many separate lots there were. Mr. Cronin stated that there were two separate lots. Peter Ogren, Hayes Engineering, went over changes as a result of the Conservation Commission. Mitigation of Drainage Report was given to the Board to review. Chris Huntress stated that he had spoken to Richard Doucette, Conservation Administrator, on the fifty (50) foot buffer area and Richard stated that the Conservation Commission was strongly opposed, that a portion of the project was being built within the 50 foot buffer area. Peter Ogren stated that at the Conservation meeting on June 7, 1989, was the first time any reference was made to a 50 foot buffer zone. John Simons questioned the percentage of upland that would not be disturbed. Paul Hedstrom stated that the report says 48% including wetlands. John Simons wanted to see a landscaping plan. Mr. Ogren was waiting for site plan approval before submitting. John Simons said it was part of the requirements of a submittal. A lengthy discussion took place on what the issues were and information that is needed in the site plan review process. These issues were in a letter, dated February 7 , 1989 from the Planning Office . Some of the issues were: 1. Landscaping 2. Form A Plan 3. Building elevations along Berry Street 4. Rip-rap design 5. Sign Design in 6 . Three story parking garage is accessory building 7 . Order of Conditions from Conservation 8. Dumpsters/screening 9. Drainage calculations submitted to. D.P.W. before closing the public hearing. Page 9s 10. Details of retaining walls 11. Redesigning parking area to Horth of Building #2 12. What material will be used to stabilize the retention area. Some of the concerns were: 1. Lighting 2. Parking 3. Residential area abutting 4. Too intense of a project The Board wanted to know the outcome of the Conservation meeting. Dennis Cronin stated that the abutters may not have been notified properly and that the applicant is going before the Conservation Commission on June 21, 1989. Perc tests have been done on the project. A motion was made by George Perna to continue the public hearing to the first meeting in August and accept and extension for three months. The motion was seconded by Michael Leary and voted unanimous by those present. On August 24, 1989 the Planning Board held a regular meeting. The following members were presents George Perna, Chairman; John Simons, Clerk; Erich Nitzsche and Jack Graham. 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. Hodification of that plan relative to retaining walls, per Conservation 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 buildings will look lime, would prefer seeing jogs in the footprint, not all flat. Hr. Osborne spoke to the Board on landscaping the property. Plans of the landscaping were presented to the Board for review. Hr. 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. There are 186,000 sq. ft. of wetlands for a total of 309,000 sq. ft. of undisturbed land. Total paved area, 145,676 sq. ft. ; footprint, 49,600 sq. ft. ; sidewalks 7, 120 sq. ft. for 31 . 5% being disturbed. -!Page 10: 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 71 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. A motion as made by Erich Nitzsche to continue the public hearing to September 7, 1989, accept the extension to September 26, 1989 and direct the Planner to draft a decision. The motion was seconded by John Simons and voted unanimous by those present. The Planning Board held a regular meeting on September 7, 1989. The following members were presents George Perna, Chairman; John Simons, Clerk and Erich Nitzsche. Jack Graham was absent. 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. A motion was made by John Simons to continue the public hearing to September 21, 1989 Planning Board Hearing. The motion was seconded by Erich Nitzsche and voted unanimous by those present. Page 11: The Planning Board held a regular meeting on September 21, 1989. The following members were present: George Perna, Chairman; John Simons, Clerk and Erich Nitzsche. Paul Hedstrom arrived at 8: 15 p.m. Jack Graham was absent. 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 mechanical 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. A motion wa made by Paul Hedstrom to accept the extension. The motion was seconded by John Simons and voted unanimous by those present. On September 28, 1989 the Planning Board held a regular meeting. The following members were present: George Perna, Chairman; John Simons, Clerk; Erich Nitzsche and Jack Graham. John Simons read two letters from the applicant requesting an extension in which the Board must act until October 26, 1989. A motion was made by John Simons to accept the extension until October 26, 1989. The motion was seconded by Erich Nitzsche and voted unanimous by those present. The Planning Board held a regular meeting on October 19, 1989. The following members were present: George Perna, Chairman; John Simons, Clerk; Jack Graham and John Draper. Erich Nitzsche arrived at 8: 15 p.m. A letter was received from the applicant requesting an extension to November 10, 1989. A motion was made by John Simons to accept an extension to November 10, 1989. The motion was seconded by Erich Nitzsche and voted unanimous by those present. The Board wants an additional extension beyond November 10, 1989. On November 2 1989 the Planning Board held a regular meeting. The following members were present: George Perna, Chairman; John Simons Clerk; Erich Nitzsche, Jack Graham and John Draper. The following issues were discussed: 1 . traffic 2 . intensity of use 3. proximity with the parking near the wetlands. Bill Bergeron spoke to the Board on down scaling the project. The footprint will be the same, but will be used industrially. The parking requirements will be less, thus reducing the traffic. Page 12: George Perna expressed concerns about possible other types of uses for the buildings, like putting up partitions and making more office space. Bill Bergeron said that the issuance of the building permit from the Building Inspector will ensure that what the Planning Board approved will be constructed. George Perna wants a restriction put on the deed. Christian Huntress, Planner, told the Board of a possible septic system problem. The system could handle one ( 1) shift. Mr. Bergeron told the Board that once a sewer is installed along Route 114, this project will be hooked up to the system. A lengthy discussion took place on the parking as Mr. Bergeron explained it to the Board. Erich Nitzsche spoke on the landscaping. He cited that it was mostly retaining walls. Bill Bergeron told the Board that the Conservation Commission asked for retaining walls. A brief discussion took place on the amount of wetlands on the property. A motion was made by John Simons accept an extension to December 5, 1989 and continue the public hearing to November 30, 1989. The motion was seconded by Jack Graham and voted unanimous by those present. On November 30, 1989 the Planning Board held a regular meeting. The following members were present George Perna, Chairman; John Simons, Clerk; Erich Nitzsche and John Draper. Jack Graham was absent. John Simons read a letter from the Board of Health. Also read was a letter from the Department of Public Works. Christian Huntress, Planner, stated that the Board had a dead line of December 5, 1989. He presented the Board with a draft decision. The draft decision does not include the concerns from the D. P. W. The Board added to the draft decision a condition to tie into the sewer when available. George Perna asked that the words Special Permits be replaced by Site Plan Review. A discussion took place on the letter from the Board of Health as it relates to Condition #2(b) reducing the size of the footprint. Also discussed was adding to that portion of the condition after (b) section (c) regarding the physical conditions found on the site. John Simons asked if there was a condition that relates to all necessary permits being obtained, for example common driveways. Christian Huntress stated that Condition #23 addresses the issue. A further discussion took place on Condition #2(b) . The applicant did not agree with the recommendations from the Board of Health. t , Page 13: A motion was made by Erich Hitasche to approve the conditional site plan approval for Riparian Office Park as drafted and amended during discussions. The motion was seconded by John Simons and voted unanimous by those present including the Chairman, George Perna. A list of those conditions is attached. Sincerely, Planning Board Georg Perna, Jr. , Chairman /je attachment CC. Director of Public Works Board of Public Works Highway Surveyor Building Inspector Board of Health Conservation Commission Assessors Police Chief Fire Chief Applicant Engineer File RIPARIAN OFFICE PARK. Conditional Site Plan Review Approval. FINDINGS OF FACT The Planning Board makes the following findings regarding this Site Plan Review application as required by sections 8.3 and 10.31 of the Zoning Bylaws: 1. The proposed use and site design for this lot are appropriate, due to it's location in Town. (With the addition of conditions listed herein. ) 2. Adequate vehicular and pedestrian access into the surrounding site has been provided. (With the addition of conditions listed herein. ) 3 . The landscaping plan as shown meets the requirements of section 8.4 of the Zoning Bylaws. 4. The site drainage system is designed in accordance with the Town Bylaw requirements. 5. The applicant has met the requirements of the Town for Site Plan Review as stated in Section 8.3 of the Zoning Bylaw. (with the addition of conditions listed herein. ) 6. The Applicant has met the procedural requirements of the Town's Special Permit process as found in section 10.3 of the North Andover Zoning Bylaw. The Planning Board finds under Section 8.35 of the Zoning Bylaw that the proposed site plan generally complies with the Town Bylaw requirements but requires minor conditions in order to be completely in compliance with Town Bylaws. Finally, the Planning Board finds that this proposal complies with the Town of North Andover Bylaw requirements so long as the following conditions are complied with. Therefore, in order to fully comply with the approval necessary to construct the facility as specified in the Special Permit before us, the Planning Board hereby grants a Special Permit to the applicant provided the following conditions are met: SPECIAL CONDITIONS: 1. The final plans shall include the following in one packet: a. Site Plan b. Building Elevations C. Detail sheets d. Profile sheets (with appropriate revisions as noted below) e. Landscape plan f. Plan showing phasing of construction activities and erosion control methods. All plans shall be on 24" x 36" sheets 2 . The overall footprint of all structures found on this site shall not exceed 36,000 square feet, and the total gross floor area of all buildings found on this site shall not exceed 70,000 square feet. The Planning Board places this condition on this site for the following reasons: a. The negative impact this site will have on traffic safety along the route 114 corridor. b. Recommendation from the North Andover Board of Health that the proposed septic system will not adequately support the proposed structures. C. The physical conditions found on this site, with regard to topography and wetlands, call for such limitations as found within this decision. 3. In no instance shall additional pavement, construction or building additions be allowed at any time in the future after the final site plan has been approved except as allowed through Site Plan Review. 4 . All revisions which are herein required shall be placed upon the final plans prior to endorsement and filing with the North Essex Registry of Deeds. 5. All Planning Board Order of Conditions are to be placed upon the recorded Definitive Plan, ( Cover Sheet ) prior to endorsement and filing with the Registry of Deeds. 6. All uses and operations located on this site shall be limited to one, eight hour shift per day. Violation of this condition shall enable the Building Inspector to retract any Occupancy Permit which has been issued for that structure. This condition shall also be incorporated in the deed for each individual unit, and all deeds shall be submitted to the Planning Department to be included in the file. 7 . In no instance shall the use percentage for any structure exceed that which is found on the record plans. Violation of this condition shall enable the Building Inspector to retract any Occupancy Permit which has been issued for that structure. This condition shall also be incorporated in the deed for each individual unit, and all deeds shall be submitted to the Planning Department to be included in the file. 8. The applicant shall receive State DPW approval for the curb-cut prior to receiving a permit to build for any structure located on this site 9 Throughout all lands, tree cutting shall be kept to a minimum in order to minimize erosion and preserve the natural features of the site. Accordingly, the developer in conjunction with a registered arborist, shall submit a tree cutting and reforestation plan consistent with the provisions of Section 5.8 of the North Andover Zoning Bylaws ( The plan is for areas of substantial cutting and filling ) to be reviewed by the Planning Staff prior to the applicant receiving a Building Permit. This Plan shall explicitly include specific trees to be retained. Also, the developer shall inform the Town Planner when significant tree cutting is to occur in order that the Planner may determine the need to be to be present. 10 The contractor shall contact Dig Safe at least 72 hours prior to commencing any excavation. 11. Gas, Telephone, Cable and Electric utilities shall be installed as specified by the respective utility companies. 12. All catch basins shall be protected and maintained with hay bales to prevent siltation into the drain lines during road construction. 13 . No open burning shall be done except as is permitted during burning season under the Fire Department regulations. 14 . No underground fuel storage shall be installed except as may be allowed by Town Regulations. 15. All buildings shall have commercial fire sprinklers installed prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy, per order NAFD. 16. Prior to a Certificate of Occupancy being issued for any structures, this site shall have received all necessary permits and approvals from the North Andover Board of Health. 17. Bonds, in an amount to be determined by the Planning Board, shall be posted to ensure construction and/or completion of site screening and other pertinent public amenities. These bonds shall be in the form of a Tri-Party Agreement. 18. Prior to a Certificate of Occupancy being issued for any structures, the site shall be reviewed by the Planning Board. Any additional screening as may be reasonably required by the Planning Board shall be added at the owners expense. 19. Prior to endorsement of the plans, all off site utilities shall be submitted to, and approved by the North Andover DPW and Planning Board. 20. Prior to the Building Permit being issued for the first structure and again prior to occupancy of the first structure, the applicant shall receive a written determination from the Conservation Commission that all work under their jurisdiction is being satisfactorily performed and maintained. 21. Any Plants, Trees or Shrubs that have been incorporated into the Landscape Plan approved in this decision, that die within one year from time of planting shall be replaced by the owner. 22. A final set of plans shall be drawn with regard to the conditions contained herein. The Plans shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Board prior to endorsement and filing with the North Essex Registry of Deeds. 23 . Prior to the issuance of a permit to build the applicant shall submit an Approval Not Required (ANR) plan to the Planning Board for review and approval. The plan shall show existing lots 1 & 2 combined into one lot entitled "lot 1-All . 24. The provisions of this conditional approval shall apply to and be binding upon the applicant, it's employees and all successors and assigns in interest or control. 25. The applicant shall connect into the Town's sewer system as soon as it becomes available to this site. cc: Director of Public Works Board of Public Works Highway Surveyor Building Inspector Board of Health Assessors Conservation Commission Police Chief Fire Chief Applicant Engineer File it Oversized Maps on file with the Town