Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988-04-21The Planning Board hei~J oubiic hearinos for the Town Meeting Warrant Articles on Amr!l 6~i, 1988, in shs ~o~Jn Hail, Selectmen's Meeting Room. The meeting was calied to oroer ~y Vice-Chairman, George Perna~ at 7:50 p.m. Also mresenz were Joh~ S~mons~ Clerk; Erich Ni~zsche, Michael L. eary. Chairman~ Paul Hedstnom ~as absent. John Simons read the legal notices to open the public hearings on the above articles. Joinn gave a brief discussion on the formation of the Senior Housing Omtions Commi~tee~ citi-~g those on the committee. Members are John Simons~ Geor(~e Per'no. Paul Tmriot, Gayton Osgood, Barbara Fheberge, John Burke, Sheldon Gilbert, Walter Jacobs, ex-officio~ Karen Nelson and Bill Dolan. The committe was trying to address the needs of housing for the e~der!y. John Connery was the consul tart. Continuing Care Retirem=nt Cen~,~r An intergrated housing and nursing care facility. of CCRC follows: A brief description Low density ~ ia~ge lots Minimum ~b ~ ~ ~c~ - maximum units ~50 Density reouirements: R-~ - ] unit per acre - now allowing 4/units !00 ft. ~etback perimeter line. Maximum height 3 stories - 35 ft. Significant ooen space - 50~ Minimum park3ng requirements Public s~fety requirements On public sewer. Incentives: Affordable units 10%; or Developer would contribute $2 per sq.ft, for affordable to be put into a trust fund. 15% increase if 75% of space was for open Three stage precess: C · Prior to Town Meeting the applicant has to apoear before the Planning Board to review t~e proposal Then to Town Meeting and Town Meeting would review to ~ee if it is appropriate for the Tow~. Back: to the Planning Board with a special permit fo? the devetooment. ~a~,l Tariet sooke stat~n~ that Elder Affairs was interested in the oui~ come at Town Meeting. George Perna asked for open comments from the floor. At thmt time there were no comments. John Simons continued with the second article ~]de.pendent Elderly_ Housing. Tn~s articte is an attemp~ to address housing needs, (situation) whereas elder residents (life long residents) in single family dwellings no longer wish ~o li~e in a ~ingle family environment. George Perna ad,led t!~at there we~e no pursing home facilities with this concept. Paul ]ariot stated that ib w~-~ basicaily' a ciu~ter ~ype condominimum for seniors~ trad~n~ off open sp~ce for increased Oensity. Article #~9 ~onqreqate Housinq John Connery, of Connery Associate~ ~as present. He and the members of' the Senior Housing Options Committee have been w~rking together to present the alternatives For elderly citizens of North Andover. John Simons spoke giving some background on the Congregate Housing concept: not an institutional setting seniors could live together and share in lower cost~ (certain shared facilities) R-4 Zoning District. in such a way it would accomodiate existing structures, but no~ over whelming the existing ~eighborhood F.A.R.(f!oor a~ea ratio) determining factor on allowable use ~- ? units per acre Approval mechanism~ Special Permit ~hrough the Planning Board John Connery spoke citing that it would be ? congregate units, not dwellings, (smaller in size). Such units could be private or State assistance. Example of homes that could be used for such housing are larger, older homes. ]hose who are over 55 would be eligible. Paul Tariot stated that it would be similar to a dorm situation for the elderly, sharing facilities. He also commentecl on why only in the R--A Zoning District, c~ting that it was a trial. Mr Connery further commented citing that the committee did not know the demand for such faciiit':~es. John Simons spoke citing that tn~s ~-~as being established in conjunction with CCRC article Section 13.6';a), {De~!sity Bonuses, Affordable Housing), to establish a pl~ce to pu{ the $~ per sq.ft, in and the perimeter in ~hich the money is disl~cibuted. Henry Fink questioned the sewe? service in CCRC. John Simons read from the proposed bylaw citing publiJ sewer. MOTION: By John Simons to close ti~e public hearing and take the matter under advisement SECOND: Erich Nitzsche VOTE: Unanimous of those present MOTION: By Erich Nitzsche to recommend favorable action on Articles 27,28,~9,B0 and 3!. SECOND: Michael Leafy VOTE~ Unanimous of those present~ John Connery commerqded the committee for the job they had done establishing the articles. Article ~32 ~_~ewood Farm ~ CCRC John Simons read the legal notice to open the public hearing. Cliff Elias~ representing Sam Rogers, spoke to the Board citing the following: located off Stevens Street possessing 62 acres 30 acres 3~ acres in b~ilding to be in the R-~ District not R-I (which is in the watershed). Albe~t Culten. 605 Osgood S~ere~, w~nted to know if this was considered the first step under the CCRC, th~z is Site Plan Approval or does Mr Elias, if this bylaw is passed, does he have to come back before the Planning Board and get Site Plan Approval and then go back to the Town Meeting. John Simons deferred the question to the Director of Planning and Community Develepme~t, Karen Nelson. Karen Nelson stated that the question had been brought up before and that Town Counsel, the State and John Connery, the consultant had conferred, the district was being established, rezoning the land at the same time. The Board will have to make their recommendation~ subaect to the CCRC being adeptea. Cliff Elias handeO ()ut packets to ti~e ~oard members on the Edgewood Farm CCRC. Enclosed in ~ne packet follows. Representatives of Edqewood Life Care Clifford E. Elias, Attorney 112 Chestnut Street North Andover, MA 01845 Marsha K. Elias, Attorney Sweeney & Sargent 32 Chestnut Street A~dover,'MA 01810 Samuel S. Rogers, Owner of Parcel One Johnson Street North Andover, MA 01845 Paul C. Luthringer, Edgewood Life Care Life Care Services Corporation Des Moines, Iowa Nelson Hammer, Architect Earl R. Flansburgh & Associates Boston, MA -2- II. III. SITE 6. 7. 8. Off Osgood and Stevens Streets. 62 acres. R-1 (watershed) portion: 30 acres. R-2 portion: 32 acres. ~.' Even without proposed new'article prohibiting development in watershed, Edgewood never intendedto develop there. Proposal has always been to build in.R-2, exclusively. In any event, proposed bylaw prohibits building in watershed. Leaves 32 acres in R-2 available for project. siting of buildings important. There are some wetlands in R-2 portion. site for building chosen for following reasons: a. Outside watershed. b. Least impact on entire site c. High point of site. d. Very little destruction of site in terms of trees, growth, etc. e. Aesthetically sound. CONDITIONS FOR DEVELOPMENT 1. Ail facilities should be accessible under "one roof." No more than 3 stories. Parking readily accessible, with some underground. ACCESS 1. Choose access road with least impact. Only one road· Private road. Road to be built to town specifications, if required. -3- IV. SAFETY V® Police - 24-hour security personnel.. Fire - good access road -' road around watershed side, if required - fully sprinkled building. UTILITIES 1. Town water: will tap in without cost to Town. Town sewer: developer will make town sewer accessible without cost to Town. VI. WETLANDS AND CONSERVATION No building in watershed. No building in wetlands.' Wetlands issues will be addressed to satisfaction of statute, rules and regulations. Only 7-8 acres out of 62 will be developed. Remainder will be open space. Conservation easement will be granted. VII. TRAFFIC As with any project, Edgewood will have some effect on traffic. The traffic analysis report concludes with the following: "The study has indicated that the street system would be able to accommodate existing plus project-generated traffic volumes with negligible impact." VIII. CONTINUING CARE RETIREMENT CENTER General Concept Edgewood will be a totally integrated continuing care retirement center consisting of a 45-bed Health Center, approximately 250 living units and extensive common facilities specifically designed for the elderly who need a viable alternative to living alone at home or in a traditional nursing home. Its unique combination of nursing care, supportive services and housing provides a lifestyle characterized by freedom, dignity, indepen- dence and security that addresses both immediate -4- Be requirements and potential needs. Residents can enjoy an active life in good health, comfort, peace and contentment. Unique Financing Residents pay a one-time entrance fee, often ~the proceeds from the sale of their house, and receive a contract which guarantees them residence and health care at a monthly rate'for the rest of their' lives. Upon moving o~ death, ninety percent'.(90%) of their entrance fee is returned to them or..their estate. If residents move from their living units to the nursing home, there will be no per diem charge for nursing home care. Management Edgewood Life Care, Inc. is a private, taxpaying proprietary corporation, independent and non- denominational. The management firm for Edgewood has a 25-year history and more than'50 successful life care communities, nationwide. A local Board of Overseers drawn from area residents will assist and monitor the development of the community. Health Care As a continuing care retirement center, Edgewood will have its own on-site Health Center, licensed and staffed to provide the highest level of care available outside of a hospital. The Health Center will offer unlimited emergency, recuperative and long-term care. It will have a 24-hour skilled nursing home and a physician on call at all times. All residents at Edgewood will be in constant communi- cation with the Health Center through an emergency call system. Residents will have available day-to-day assistance with personal requirements. Private under- ground parking will be available, along with scheduled private transportation for shopping, professional appointments, worship services and trips, as well as recreational excursions. A gracious community dining room will provide sit-down service for breakfast, lunch and dinner seven days a week under the supervision of professional chefs and dieticians. -5- IX. FACILITY Up to 250 living units. 47-bed nursing home. Density: R-1 30 acres x 2 = R-2 32 acres x 4 = 60 128 188' Open space bonus 15% x 188 28 216 Affordable housing bonus of.$2/sq, ft. would allow maximum of: 250 SUHMARY 1. Protect the watershedl There will be no building in the watershed forever. 2. Only 7 to 8 acres out of 62.would be utilized. Remaining 87% will be preserved forever. 3. Major real estate taxes to Town of $300,000 to $400,000 annually. 4. Town sewer at no expense to Town. 5. Town water tap at no expense to Town. 6. Private road, plowing and garbage pickup. 7. Avoid 40-50 house lot development which would produce only $120,000 to $150,000 in taxes. This kind of development would increase school system budget. 8. Affordable housing bonus to Town of at least. $650,000 (if maximum number of units is constructed). Provide a highly desirable need to the elderly. Dignified, caring environment. optimal use of sensitive area. 10. 11. -6- FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON CONTINUING CARE RETIREMENT CENTERS AND ON THE EDGEWOOD PROPOSAL, PLEASE CALL OR WRITE: 1. CLIFFORD E. ELIAS 112 Chestnut Street North Andover, MA 01845 Tel: 686-1092 office of the Faculty Suffolk University Law School Boston, MA 02114 Tel: 573-8170 70 East Street Methuen, MA 01844 Tel: 687-0151, ext. 2304 2. SAMUEL S. ROGERS 1 Johnson Street North Andover, MA 01845 Tel: 688-7211 Michael Leafy questioned the ambulance service. Mr Elias stated that would be private. Paul Tariot, Conservation Commission spoke citing his concerns relative to the wetlands being 'flagged. In 1986 there was a dispute with DEQE as to where the wetlands were. Mr Tariot also cited that there were three more paths than on the plans being shown. Mr Elias stated that the plans that are submitted show everything. John Simons stated that he was concerned with respect to the public hearings before the Board presently, establishing the CCRC District and making recommendation to Town Meeting on Site Plan Review and the fact that the delineation of the wetlands has not been done. This is the applicant's engineering resoonsibility. Albert Culler of Osgood Stree~ spoke again saying that he had concerns with regards to the wetlands. Erich Nitzsche stated that the Evironmental Notification Report that was filed was out dated and a new report will have to be submitted to the Planning Board. Paul Luthringer, project development manager for Edgewood Life Care, stated that the wetlands were flagged and that the Board has final approval with conditions, no impact on the wetland, no building in the watershed. John Simons wanted to know in what general area was the retention/detention area proposed citing that it looked like it w~s in the wetland areas. Erich stated that at this time, with 8 acres proposed for the building and 22 acres of wetlands it was not an issue to be discussed because it was possible to have two or three retention/detention areas and should be brought up with the Definitive Plan. John Simons wanted to see scale models of the oroposed to see exactly what the impact would be on the site. Jo~n also questioned the access to the site, is it free and clear without easements with public access to the lake. Cliff Elias stated that it was private property. Paul Tariot, being also a member of the Senior Housing Options Committee, spoke about consume? orotection and the possibility of a developer going bankrupted, not specifically Life Care Inc., but in general and that there was great concern exoressed at the committee meetings. Paul wanted to know how Life Care Inc. could assure people who invest will be ~rotected on their investments. Cliff Elias spoke stating that the corporation has never gone "belly up." Albert Cutten, spoke again and went on record as being in opposition to the project. Being a lawyer~ he wanted Town Counsel's opinion on having a public hearing on something that has not b~en established. Karen Nelson, Director~ PCD s~oke stating that Town Counsel had been asked for an opinion on this matter. What is before the Board at the present time is a recommendation to Town Meeting, not for a Special Permit Approval. Mr. Culler disagreed. Mr. Cul!en expressed concer~s about access~ type of development, height of the building as well as who ~il! be eligible for such a development. He asked the Board to make a,'~ unfavorable recommendation to Town Meeting. Erich Nitzsche spoke stating that at the present time the Board was looking at the site and the bylaw not the access to the site. John Simons stated that he was disappointed that there was not more information submitted with the plans. John cited major concerns with the massing, drainage/wetlands and the access. George Perna requested to set up a site visit. ]-he Board will visit the site on Saturday, April 2B, i~8~ at !0:00 a.m. M(]TION: By Erich Nitzsche to continue the public hearing on the recommendation and continue the discussion on the preliminary review until April ~8, ~9~B and have a site visit walk on Saturday, April ~3, i988 at iO:O0 a.m. SECOND: John Simons VOTE: Unanimous of those present. MOTION: By John Simons to adjourn for I0 minutes. SECOND: Michael Leafy VOLE: Unanimous of those present. The meeting adjourned at 9:55 p.m. At 10:05 the meeting was called back to order by Vice Chairman, George Perna. Scott StocNing, ~own Planner, made ,-~n announcement stating that in the "Citizen" a public ~earing loc Annaloro Rezoning on Route 114 and Hillside Road. It will not be hearO at this meeting~ but on April ~9th, Friday evening at ~=:00 p.m. in ~he Selectmen's Meeting Room. Article #33 S~o_e_cial Permit for Independent Elder_l.y Housinc~ O_s_ctood Street/Mass Avenue_~_~a~!~_e~i_ i]~n!i!~_s~ John Simons read the legal notice ~o open the public hearing. Sam Thomas, t68 Osgood Street spoke to the Planning Board stating that what he proposing is located on p~ope~ ty owned by his father, Brooks Thomas of Rhode !sland, containing !6.A acres (total acres) in a Residenti~l-3 Zon~r,g District. There is or has oeen a plan before the Board for a 83 house subdivision. Sam l~oma~ also stated ~t last years Town Meeting the Historic Districz was established and he stated that preserving the district was what he intends to do. by oroposing an alternative to the ~3 house subdivision. [here will be six ouiidings each with nine units on 14.1 acres. The units will be for people over 50~ whose families have grown, who no longer need the s~ngie family setting but want to remain in North Andover. Mr. Thomas stated that this project did not have nursing home facilities it was f-c~r indepe~der!t John Simons brought up screeni ~g or the project. Mr Th~mas sa. id that the natural screening a~ ound the property would be cleaned up but not cut. John asked if he would consider adding twelve month screening. Mr. Thomas said he ~ad no ~roblem with t~at. John question;ed the lighting of the property. Mr Thomas iaad the following comments on the project: B. 5. 6. i~ghting would be directed down road is private not maintained by the Town sewer, water a~'~d gas fire access buildings will be sprinklered 1 1/.~ (covered) parking spaces per unit George Perna wanted to know how he could guarantee that the pro~ect would be opened to North Andover Residents or f~milies of North Andover Residents only. Mr ~homas state~ that it would probably be in the form of a covenant. Erich Nitzsche wanteo to know if it was a conduminmum type project. Mi-. Thomas sa~d, "no~'~ it would be a life time lease or cooperative basis. John Simons exoressed concerns about the parking situation. Mr Thomas assured John that most of the parking would be covered. That which is not covered would be screened. Mr Thomas also stated that the property would be managed approximately eight (8) hours and that there would be no parking along the roadway. John Simons question the height of the structures and whether it would be the same as a single family house.. Mr Thomas stated that it would be less, havi~)g two fui! floors and a false attic. Paul Tariot, an abutter to an abutter, asked if Mr. Thomas had considered entering from Chickering Road. Mr Thomas sta~ed that it was a State highwa~ and due to the traffic speed ne did not consider it. Karen Nelson, Director of Planning and Community Develooment spoke citing that Joseph DiAngeio, Mas~ D.P.W., h~d looked at the plans and that he perferred that nothing go out to Route lPS. Paul Tariot questioned the possibility of access from Osgood Street. Thomas stated that because of the schools down the street and the children that use Osgood Street it would not be considered. ~r Chris Mantis, attorney representing Julia Warchol, stated that her client had concerns with the entrance to the oroperty. Ms. Warchol lives across from the proposed project. Mr Thomas said that he would be more than happy to move the entrance toward Route 185 but did not think the State would a~ Iow it. John Simo~'~s questioned the distance of the curb cut on Mass Avenue from Route 1~5. Erich N~tzsche said that it was about 400 feet. Jerry Berube, Chickering Road, asked if these plans were itched in red. Mr Thoams said that he was aware of her concerns as to screening. Attorney Marius stated for the record that there was a real procedural oroblem, on how the Board could vote on something that did not exist. George Perna said that the Board had not voted. Paul Tarlot s~uke s~ying that at ]'own Meeting once the bylaw was passed the Board could meet in the hall far a brief moment, come back to Town Meeting and make i{s recommendation wt~ch would address what the attorney was referencing, MOTION: By Erich Nitzsche to close the public hearing and take the mat~er under advisement. NO SECOND. John Simons wuot~ like a site visit. John Simons asked to amend Erich's motion by keeping the public hearing opened until April ~8~ 1988 and that the Board have a site wai~ on Saturday, April ~Brd~ between 10:00 a.m. and I1:30 ~.m. SECOND: Erich Ni~z~che VOTE: Unanimous of those present. Article #35 Watershed Protection District John Simons read the legal notice to open the public hearing. Stephen Madaus, Environmental Coordinator,stated that this article was for Special Permit. John Simons asked if there was anyone in the audience who was at the meeting for the Watershed Protection District. No one responded. Staphen Madaus continued, c~ting Section ?(c) would be changed to s~ecial permit and prohibited uses ~- animal feed lots and/or storage could not be prohibited due to ~he fact that the Merrimack Valley Planning Commission was working with the farmers and it would be contrary to wha~ the commission was trying to accomplish. MOTION: By John Simons to make a favorable recommendation for the Watersmed P~otection District, special permit bylaw with the amendments noted. SECOND: Erich Nitzsche VOTE: Unanimous o~ those present. Article ~A8 (VR-GB) ~rry Street & Route John simons rea~ the legal notice to open the public hearing. Sharon Myers, attorney representing Mr. Proulx., stated that the property had been rezoned fo~~ Village Residential at the last Town Meeting. Mr Proulx was not aware of the change (~t the time. The parcel is located at the corner of Berry Street- aud Route 114, the present location of the Equstrian Shop. Ms Myers stated Ci~it ~-~ ~he map it shows Mr. Proalx's property as being in the VR Dist~ irt, although there were no metes and bounds presented in the article and ~lo legal description that included his property jus~ the map. The parcel cor~tains 3.I acres and for more than thirty year~ it P~as been zoned General Business. After a iength¥ discussion John Simons wanted feedback from John Connery Associates, consultants on ~he zc)i~ir~g b~'law. MOTION: John Simons to close t~e pub] ic hearing and take the matter under advisement and soticiate input form the consultant and go over the files. SECOND: Mic,haei Leafy VOTE: Unanimous of those present'. Article ~9 138 Pleasant Street Rezonin~ John Simons read the legal notice to open the public hearing. The petitioner was not present. Peter Agey, 130 Pleasant Street, has lived there since 1939, stated that he was opposed to the rezoning. Mc Agey also asked what B-1 District would allow. Scott Stock~ng, Town Planner, gave him a brief summary. Mr. Agey cited the fact that traffic was already a problem. Steve Martin, 114 Pleasant Street could not understand why the owner wanted to rezone. Norman Crescimano, i~ Pleasant Street, expressed concerns about the whole block from 13~ Pleasant Street to Route 125 being businesses. Ms. Sullivan~ 8?-89 Pleasan~ S~reet expressed concerns of the traffic and the fact that there are a lot of small children in the are~. Theresa Sadadski, 1~3 Pleasant Street also expressed the same concerns abutters expressed~ MOTION: By John Simons to close the puOlic ~earing and recommend unfavorable action. SECOND: Erich Nitzsche VOTE: Unanimous of those present. Recommendation to Town Meetinq Article #36 -- Watershed Moratorium MOTION: John Simons to recommend favorable action SECOND: Erich Nitzsche VOTE: Unanimous of those present Article #37 -- Off-Street Parkinq MOTION: By John Simons to recommend favorable action. SECOND: Erich Nitzsche VOTE: Unanimous of those present Scott Stocking spoke to the Board members asking them to vote on extension for Edgewood Life Care Preliminary Plan. MOTION: By John Simons to accept an extension on the preliminary plans for Edgewood Life Care until May ~0~ ~988. SECOND: Michael Lear~ VOTE: Unanimous of those present. MOTION: By John Simons to ad,iourn the meeting. SECOND:Erich Nitzshce VOT '~Unanimous of those p~esent. e_~~t 11:~0 p.m. George Perna, Vice-Chairman ~/Janet Eaton, Secretary