Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992-09-01The North Andover Planning Board held a regular meeting on Tuesday evening, September 1, 1992 in the Town Building, Selectmen's Meeting Room. The meeting was called to order by the Chairman, George Perna, at 7:34 p.m. The following members were also present: John Draper, Joseph Mahoney and Richard Rowen. John Simons arrived at approximately 7=50 p.m. Richard Nardella was absent. Karen H.P. Nelson, Director of Planning & Community Development was present. Discussions Lot 28 Great Pond Road - Special Permit Watershed District John Draper read a letter from Kaminski Associates regarding Lot 28 Great Pond Road requesting a two year extension on a Special Permit issued September 27, 1990. The Special Permit was for construction of a septic system within 325 feet of the Non-Discharge Zone. A motion was made by Joseph Mahoney to grant a one year extension on the Special Permit for Lot 28 Great Pond Road. The motion was seconded by John Draper and voted unanimously by those present, including the Chairman, George Perna. Nieburger - 476 Great ~ond Road Christian Huntress told the Board that a Special Permit for 476 Great Pond Road will be before the Board on September 15, 1992. This item is on the agenda for discussion only. Christian Huntress showed the Board plans of a Special Permit that was granted previously for regrading within 250 feet of the lake. The applicant will not be building a new house, but are asking to renovate the existing cottage. Grading to be within 20 feet of a direct tributary to the lake. The plans show the existing septic system as a cesspool. Questions were raised on whether the system meets the requirements of Title V. The applicant has proposed a sewer pump station in back of the cottage. The applicant would like to use the existing system until the sewer is available for hook-up. John Draper read a letter from William Hmurciak, D.P.W. This item was tabled under discussion and will be heard on September !5, 1992 at a scheduled public hearing. Bond Release - Sideri Place John Draper read a letter from Eric Sideri requesting partial release of a $5,000 bond being held on the common driveway. Christian Huntress stated that he has spoken to D.P.W. and the items on the punch list supplied by D.P.W. has been addressed. No letter has been received from D.P.W. A motion was made by John Draper to release $3,000 upon the receipt of a letter from D.P.W. The motion was seconded by Joseph Mahoney and voted unanimously by those present. John Simons arrived at approximately 7:50 p.m. Town Planner Statu~ George perna told the Board members that interviews were being set up for 6 candidates for the position of Town Planner. There were approximately 73 applicants. If the right candidate is not found from within the 6 selected, others will be interviewed. Public Nearing~ The Greenery - Special Permit & Site Plan Revie--- Christian Huntress updated the Board on the application before them. He was asked by the Board to meet with the Technical Review Committee. A written response was received on the Fire Department. D.P.W. will be reviewing drainage on Park Street. There was no written response from the Police Department to date, but a response is expected. John Simons read a letter from the Fire Department which is in the file for inspection. George Perna stated ~hat there were other issues that were brought up at the last meeting. One of them was access to and from the property. Karen Nelson, Director of Planning & Community DeVelopment stated that the applicant will pull the access further away from the direct line of the house across the street. The Greenery will look be asked to provide a sidewalk on Osgood Street. Lighting will be addressed. Locations of the existing homes in the area was requested. The D.P.W. will review the aspects of the 100 year stozm event. A memo was read from the safety officer by Karen Nelson. No response was formally received by the Planning Board from the Police Department. Revised plans of the entrance and the parking lot were shown to the Board. Christian Huntress, Town Planner asked the engineer to move the three van parking space located on Park Street to the new parking area in the back. He did not want several areas used for parking, only one designated area. John Simons asked that the parking area be staked so that the Board could get a better idea of its location. He expressed concerns regarding the root systems of the existing trees on the abutting property. Some of the trees were over 150 years old. George Perna asked how the applicant would safeguard those trees when regrading was done on the property. He asked the applicant to show where the sidewalk would be placed. The applicant stated that there was an existing sidewalk from the Police Station to Park Street. George Perna stated that he was not pleased with the present lighting on the site. On the issue of the location of the abutters and screening, John Simons stated that when he walked the site there were portions of the property that were pretty well screened. Calculations were done on the 100 year storm event and the design exceeds the requirements. D.P.W. has the figures and are reviewing the calculations. George Perna stated that the issues discussed were related to site plan review and reminded the Board and those attending the public hearing that the issue of the Special Permit on the change in use had not been addressed. Another issues that can up was additional screening. The applicant will use arborvitaes. A bond will be set up to ensuring that any tree that dies will be replaced. John Simons read from the Zoning Bylaw, 10.31.2 on Special Permits and- the Authority. Section 10.3, 10.31.1 & Special Permit Granting John Simons asked the applicant if this was the final cap on development if the approvals were issued. The applicant stated that there were no future plans. John Simons reworded his question trying to get some sense of what would be going on at the site. He expressed concerns with the possibility of the applicant coming before the Board in a few years wanting to expand the existing building to the parking area and finding a new site for parking. He wanted some sort of deed restriction or a condition. He did not want to see the same thing happen to this neighborhood as did out on Route 114. Joseph Mahoney stated that he was in agreement with what John Simons articulated. Arthur Detora, 242 Pleasant Street, stated that he was opposed to the plans before the Board. He did not see that this was a benefit to the neighborhood. John Simons read a portion of a response from Town Counsel on the use issue: "It is my opinion that a change in the use of the facility of the nature and extent you have described may be determined by the Building Inspector to be so substantial as to result in the loss of its legal nonconforming status. If this George Perna sta~ed that the Special Permit Granting Authority in this case was the Planning Board and that the Board shall not approve any such application for a Special Permit unless it finds that in its judgement that all of the conditions are met. If the Board finds that it is an appropriate use, they can condition the application appropriately. George Perna stated that he was not pleased with the present lighting on the site. On the issue of the location of the abutters and screening, John Simons stated that when he walked the site there were portions of the property that were pretty well screened. Calculations were done on the 100 year storm event and the design exceeds the requirements. D.P.W. has the figures and are reviewing the calculations. ' George Perna stated that the issues discussed were related to site plan review and reminded the Board and those attending the public hearing that the issue of the Special Permit on the change in use had not been addressed. Another issues that can up was additional screening. The applicant will use arborvitaes. A bond will be set up to ensuring that any tree that dies will be replaced. John Simons read from the Zoning Bylaw, 10.31.2 on Special Permits and the Authority. Section '10.3, Special Permit 10.31.% & Granting George Perna stated that the Special Permit Granting Authority in this case was the Planning Board and that the Board ~ approve any such application for a Special Permit unless it finds that in its judgement that all of the conditions are met. If the Board finds that it is an appropriate use, they can condition the application appropriately. John Simons asked the applicant if this was the final cap on development if the approvals were issued. The applicant stated that there were no future plans. John Simons reworded his question trying to get some sense of what would be going on at the site. He expressed concerns with the possibility of the applicant coming before the Board in a few years wanting to exp~nd the existing building to the parking area and. fipdlng a new sl~e for parking. He wanted some sort of deed restriction or a condition. He did not want to see the same thing happen to this neighborhood as did out on Route 114. Joseph Mahoney stated that he was in agreement with what John Simons articulated. Arthur Detora, 242 Pleasant Street, stated that he was opposed to the plans before the Board. He did not see that this was a benefit to the neighborhood. John Simons read a portion of a response from Town Counsel on the use issue: "It is my opinion that a change in the use of the facility of the nature and extent you have described may be determined by the Building Inspector to be so substantial as to result in the loss of its legal nonconforming status. If this determination is made, it is my opinion that the current New Medico use may not be lawfully operated under the current Town's Zoning Bylaw until a special permit and site plan approval have been granted by the Planning Board for .the facility, as-a new use, pursuant to Sections 4.122, 8.3 and 10.3 of the Bylaw." George Perna stated the Board of Appeals was not going to act on the Building Inspectors decision. The issue before the Board is "is this a proper use in the neighborhood?" The level of care has changed from Level 4 to Level 2. The Bylaw does not address levels of care under Nursing Home/Convalescent Homes. Robert Nicetta, Building Inspector, stated that he has been working on this project with Karen Nelson, Director of Planning & Community Development for the past few years. The previous owners did not respond to requests or calls. The present owners are trying to work with the neighborhood and have met with them to try and resolvethe issues. He further stated that the Building Permit was issued in April, 1972. The facility was already built. The permit was issued the same day the State inspected the facility. George Perna stated that the issue being addressed at the present time is "use". He went on to say that the action of the Building Inspector was appropriate. The action of the Board of Appeals was also appropriate and they are waiting for the Planning Board to make their decision. George Perna went over the options of the Planning Board: 2. 3. 4. Deny the Special Permit and the Site Plan Review. Approve both the Special Permit and Site Plan Review. Approve the Site Plan Review and deny the Special Permit. Approve the Special Permit and deny the Site Plan Review. The Building Inspector's action was due to additional parking in the current Zoning Bylaw. John Simons expressed concerns with granting a special permit which would allow for further expansion of the nursing facility. John Schrier, 267 Osgood Street, expressed concerns with the noise and a safety factor. Shirley Roberts, Park Street, expressed her concerns with the investments made by her and her neighbors, even though smaller than the Greenery's investment, still important to them. Christian Huntress stated that under Special Permit in the Zoning Bylaw, limits can be placed in a decision as to the size of a facility. Letters were supplied to the Board by the neighbors and are part of the file. A motion was made by Joseph Mahoney to close the public hearing on the Special Permit and Site Plan Review and take the matter under advisement. The motion was seconded by John Draper and voted unanimous by those present. Booth street - Prel~m~a_rF Sub~ivisio- Item tabled to next meeting. A motion was made by Joesph Mahoney to adjourn the meeting. The ~otion wae seconded by John Draper and voted unanimous by those present to adjourn the meeting. The meeting adjourned at approximately 10:30 p.m. George D. Perna, Chairman