HomeMy WebLinkAboutCorrespondence - 250 BRIDLE PATH 3/9/1983 Any appeal s'lo'► be filed
MUM fflfl Within (20) days after the
date of filing of this Notice
DA ; 'I(O W N O F N O R T H A N D O V E R in the Office of the Town
T i. MASSACHUSETTS Clerk.
tf0 I L,nvER
MAR J I 04 O$3 of, O
,SSAGHUSEt
March 9 , 1983
Mr . Daniel Long , Town Clerk
Town Office Building
North Andover , Mass . 01845
Re : Hefco Realty Trust Premises Affected :
23 Arlington Street Lot 20A Bridle Path
Lowell , Mass . Special Permit - Watershed
Dear Mr . Long
The North Andover Planning Board held a public hearing on Monday
evening , January 3 , 1983 in the Town Office Meeting Room upon the
application of Hefco Realty Trust . The hearing was advertised in
the North Andover Citizen on December 16 and 23 , 1982 and all
abutters were notified by certified mail . The following members
were present and voting : Michael P . Roberts , Vice Chairman ;
Walter R . McDounough , Clerk ; John J . Burke ; and Erich W . Nitzsche .
The hearing was continued until Wednesday evening , February 9 , 1983
with the following members present and voting : Paul A . Hedstrom ,
Chairman ; Michael P . Roberts , Vice Chairman ; Walter R . McDonough ,
Clerk ; John J . Burke ; and Erich W . Nitzsche .
The petitioner seeks a Special Permit under Section 4 . 133 of the
North Andover Zoning By Law so as to permit the construction of a
single family dwelling and associated structures ,, including a
subsurface disposal system located within 100 feet of a wetland
tributary to Lake Cochichewick on the premises located on the
South side of Bridle Path and known as Lot 20A , Bridle Path .
The site affected is located in the R-2 zoning district with an
area of 1 . 46 acres + and frontage of 150 feet . The proposed
dwelling will be of wood frame , with the following dimensions :
65 ' front ; 28 ' in depth ; 2 stories ; 28 ' in height .
The Board rendered their decision on Tuesday evening , March 8 , 19-83
with the following members present and voting : Paul A . Hedstrom ,
Chairman ; Michael P . Roberts , Vice Chairman ; Walter R . McDonough ,
Clerk ; John J . Burke ; and Erich W . Nitzsche .
Hefco Realty Trust � �
P;OF;
Special Permit - Watershed
Lot 20A - Bridle Path MAR 9 1104 X83
March 9 , 1983
Page 3
In denying the Special Permit , the Planning Board finds , pursuant
to Section 10 . 31 of the Zoning By Law , that !
a ) The specific site , Lot 20A Bridle Path , is not an appropriate
location for such a use .
b ) The use as developed will have an adverse affect on the
neighborhood .
c ) The use is not in harmony with the general purpose and intent
of the Town ' s Zoning By Law .
Sincerely ,
PLANNING BOARD
Paul A . Hedstrom ,
Chairman
PAH/jw
cc Applicant
Building Inspector
Board of Health
Highway Surveyor
Board of Public Works
Conservation Commission
DEQE
Parties In Interest
Project Engineer
Pr E E
Hefco Realty Trust
Special Permi t - Watershed T� h,
Lot 20A - Bridle Path NOR rk At'�LVER
March 9 , 1983
Page 2 MAR g 1104 AM X83
Upon a motion made by Mr . Roberts and seconded by Mr . Nitzsche ,
the Board voted to deny the petition and plan entitled "Sub-
surface Disposal System Design for Lot 20A Bridle Path , North
Andover , Mass . by Frank C . Gelinas and Associates , Engineers
and Architects , dated October 4 , 1981 and revised October 19 ,
1982 for the following reasons :
1 . The topography as depicted on the plan is inaccurate as to
the location of the wetland , the contours and septic system
test pits .
a ) Water surface of the abutting wetland is at an elevation
of 155 , the corner of the proposed dwelling .
b ) If properly located toward the front of the lot , the
test pits would indicate ground elevations two ( 2 ) to
four ( 4 ) feet higher than the plan specifies , which
places the bottom of the deep pit at an elevation of
155 . 0 . The septic system would , therefore , be raised
and this requires fill on Lot 20B .
c ) No easement or written agreement allowing work on Lot
20B has been forwarded to the Planning Board .
2 . Location of the water surface in proximity to the leaching
facility indicates such water to be closer than 100 feet ,
thus requiring a variance from the Board of Health .
3. As evidenced in the field in February , which is not spring
high water elevation , the Planning Board is of the following
opinion :
a ) The proposed dwelling and related improvements will not
afford the headwaters of Lake Cochichewick , North Andover ' s
water supply , the proper safeguards from pollution of
surface and ground water supply intended by the Wetland
Zoning By Law ;
b ) The proposed driveway and garage is in such close proximity
( zero feet ) to surface water that it subjects the water-
shed to oil spill contamination and petroleum pollution .
4 . Said plans of the dwelling indicate basement slab elevation
of 155 . 5 , which is only 0 . 5 feet above existing water surface
in the wetland . Drainage and flood calculations have not been
submitted and the Board is of the consensus that the dwelling
does not provide proper protection from a one hundred year
storm or any major storm .
BRIDLE PATH - LOT 20A
SPECIAL PERMIT
Vote to disapprove the special permit application by Hefco
Realty Trust under the Town of North Andover Zoning By-Laws ,
�b �' Gherj as shown on a submitted plan entitled
"Subsurface Disposal System Design for Lot 20A, Bridle Path
prepared for Hefco Realty Trust dated October 4, 1981 and revised
October 19 , 1982 for the following reasons ;
1 .;/ The topography as depicted on the plans is incorrect as to the
-location of th wetland, the contours and the test pits fo`r ' the
septic system.T Water surface of abutting swamp exists at the
proposed house corner at elevation 155 . 1 The test pits , if
properly located towards the front of the lot, would t indicate j
ground elevations 2 to 4 feet higher than specified on the plan,
which places the bottom of the deep pit, at best , at elevation
155 .0 thereby requiring the septic system to be raised and
requiring fill to be placed on the abutting lot 20B. The Planning
Board has not received an Easement or agreement from the abutter
allowing such work.
2. " Water surface of the swampybeing situated at the proposed dwelling
would also indicate that such water is also closer than 100 feet
to the proposed leaching facility. This would require a variance
from the Board of Health which has not been submitted to the
Planning Board.
3 . Bearing in mind that i=�E- existing water surface evidenced on
the ground in February is not Spring Water elevation, which may
be higher, the Planning Board is of the opinion, that this proposed
dwelling and related improvements have not afforded the headwaters
of Lake Cochichewick, North Andover' s Water Supply, the proper
protection from pollution of surface and ground water supply that
the zoning by-laws intended. The proposed driveway and garage being
in such close proximity (zero feet) of surface water subjects the
watershed to contamination from oil spills and
p � petroleum pollution.
4. The plans of the s+_
P proposed dwelling indicate a basement � elevation
of 155. 5 which is only 0. 5 feet (one-half of a foot) above existing
water surface in the swamp . The Planning Board is of the opinion
that the proposed dwelling has not been afforded proper protection
from a one hundred year storm or any major storm. Drainage and
flood calculations have not been submitted.
-5. A previous Order of Conditions for Bridle Path from the North
Andover Conservation Commission has specified that contour 156
was a restriction line . These plans are contradictory.
® '
H, Michael Smolak, Jr.
315 South Bradford Street
North Andover, Massachusetts 01845
(617) 688-8058
Veb:r°uary 99 1983,
The North Ivndover Planning Board
lv,,ain Street
North Andover, Mass. 0184
Dear sirs:
17ue -to prior co mnit°tmen-t I find myself unable to attend
your meeting this evening concerning lot 20A, Bridle Path. Just
because I art not ; here doesn' t meant that I don' t have some very
definite views of the situation that I •thilik you should listen.
:iu`ly family has lived at ou home on South Bradford and 'Dale
Streets for almost 60 years and I think over time we have demonstrated
a very definite concern for the area of 'town we live ing as
demonstrated 'by our participation in the State of Massachusetts'
.a.gricu:.l.tural 1'reservation 11es-triatiOn :grogram whereby 2/3rds of
our property can never be developed. Let me further state that I aaati
also aware of change and that development, is necessary in a °towri such
as ours. But let me mare a, distinction between good development and
bad.
A" s sorrle of you may know with the death of my grandfather Martin
there have been a variety of demands on lily ti'lle. One of .,the things
that I have been intending to do something about is the flow of
effluent from the development in question. Let me assure you that
our :fields are well fertilized and that they do not require any
additional ra.utrients from upstream. I have been wa-thhing the change
over the coubse of tixrze in the quality of water and I , without the
benefit of cho of:orraa test tel1 .r ou n the ���tle mars- .er of
a farmer. Ufa t j3elieve me , I don' t vr�
hold m personally responsible, but rather -the d.esigliers of the
systelas. I life my neighbors. . . .
dhen my time is more free.:; I intend -to do whatever is necessary
in order to correct the situation.
My purpose is this I am not trying to ruffle feathers, but
I also don' t intend to sit by and have the waters of a stream that
I used to drink from become more polluted by the addition Q,,
another septic system. It is clear that this lot is under water
and undeniable that effluents don' t leach when there is no place to
leach, we will be most directly affected by this and the town second-
arily when it ends up coming out their taps®
I hope you will do the only logical and crrect thing and that is
to deny their application.
Respectfully,
H. Michael Smolak Jr.
ROBERT ERCOLINI
195 Bridle Path
N. Andover, MA 01845
January 25, 1983
RE: Proposed development of a single family
residential home on Lot 20
To All of the Distributees Herein Noted: Bridle Path, No. Andover
Pursuant to the public hearing held on January 3, 1983 at the bi-monthly meeting of
the North Andover Planning Board and, as requested, after various meetings and
conversations with the concerned neighbors and abutters, I have set forth below a
series of comments and/or questions that should be answered in writing by each of
the relevant distributees herein noted prior to any further action by the Planning
Board or other relevant distributees on this matter.
Further, it is respectively requested that the written copies of the distributee
responses be noted in the public record of the Planning Board minutes and that a
copy of each of the responses be forwarded to me for the distribution to the
concerned residents for any further comments that they may have prior to a final
decision by the Planning Board or other distributees which would allow for the
development of this lot until all matters including those herein noted have been
thoroughly and properly resolved by the applicable distributees herein noted.
QUESTIONS - (All questions are directed to each of the relevant distributees) :
Has the Planning Board, and/or Board of Health, and/or Conservation Commission, and/or
the Building Inspector, and/or the Department of Environmental Ouality, and the related
board and executive members thereof:
1. Thoroughly reviewed, in compliance with their fidicuiary responsibilities, each
of their applicable files in terms of the history of this lot and subdivision,
the previous development activities of this sudivision, applicable engineering
records, the old and current topographical survey of the subdivision and
specifically the records of previously conducted perculation tests by other
engineers on this lot and other related matters which should become part of
the public record on this matter?
2. Thoroughly considered the related consequences that the installation of the
proposed septic system within a very short distance of a drainage system of
the Town's water supply may have on on the health and welfare of the residents
of the Town? Moreover, have the proper authorities thoroughly considered the
results of all previous perculation tests on this lot, the reason why the
lot was never previously developed and most importantly the REFUSAL OF THE
ENGINEER WHOSE FIRM PERFORMED THE PERCULATION TESTS TO ALLOW INDEPENDENT TESTS
TO BE CONDUCTED ON THE LOT WHEN REQUESTED BY RESIDENTS OF TFE TOWN, NEIGHBORS
TO THE LOT, PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS AND HOPEFULLY WHEN REOUESTED BY THE PROPER
DISTRIBUTEES HEREIN NOTED. It should be noted that we believe that the previous
developer has indicated in previous court depositions that this lot did not
pass perculation tests or water level requirements.
Page Two it
The installation of the proposed septic system will requir a variance because
of its proximity to the Town's water supply and that its operation, if not 100%
properly leached, will directly flow into a tributory of the Town's water supply
as well as onto a neighbors driveway and into other neighbors property because
of the drain system of the sudivision.
In addition to the proximity of the leaching system to the Town drainage
system as noted above, any observation of the Lot will clearly disclose that
the topography of the Lot will clearly result in draining into the Conservation
Commission so called 155 line which is considered a tributory of the Town's water
supply.
3. Thoroughly determined the reason why the previous developer, who the Town has
already had numerous problems with on another sudivision which was near the
Town's pond, did not even attempt to develop this Lot at great economic cost to
this developer?
While I believe that the above issues constitutes the main thrust of our concerns
the following questions or comments are also relevant and should be addressed by
the approximate distributees herein noted.
4. Determined whether the Engineer who represented the petitioner will move the
proposed driveway to accomodate the ten foot easement that an abutter and
neighbor has on the proposed lot. Specifically, I and my neighbors are concerned
about the Engineer's response to this neighbor, with the easement, that even if
the driveway was built on the easement by the petitioner, the neighbor with the
easement would not have to repair the driveway after he asserted his easement on
the property. Obviously, the neighbors could be locked into needless litigation
over this issue for many years to come which the Engineer, by his comment does
not consider relevant to his client's petition but we as concerned neighbors do
and believe that this issue should be resolved now.
5. Obviously, because of the requirement in placing the septic system on the only
high part of the lot that allegedly supported one perculation test and water
level test in the summer and the fact that much of the lot is so low that it
will be flooded much of the year, many residents are concerned as to only
available location of. the residence in terms of its proximity to its neighbor's
property and the street itself, in terms of setback requirements and other
building code issues of the Town. Accordingly, we request that the Planning
Board in having the lot staked, request that the building inspector determine
that the building code will be thoroughly compiled on this proposed development
and that any proposed problems be resolved now including the issue raised in
point 7 below.
6. It is our understanding from the engineer who represented the petitioners that
the topography map submitted to the Planning Board and other distributees herein
noted is not only outdated but in all probability inaccurate because of the
subsequent development of Bridle Path (the lots, roads , [abutting this lot] ).
Accordingly, we respectfully request that an accurate current topography map
be requested from the petitioners and be resubmitted to each relevant distributees
so that each of the distributees will have accurate information available to
them in making their decision.
7. Because of the proposed location of the residence to low areas and its expected
problems with water penetration into the basement, unless a proper drain system
is installed in the construction of the residence, we believe that the proper
distributees must examine the requirements of this drain system with the revised
topography map. In addition to determining the adequacy of the drainage requirements
of the house, each relevant distributee should also determine the drain systems
probable effect on the proximity of the subdivision's drainage system, the proposed
septic system and the other low areas on the lot which are tributories of the
Page Three
Since we understand that some of the distributees may have already acted on this
matter without the benefit of all relevant information on this matter, we expect
that each applicable distributee will respond either by rescinding its original
approval pending resolution of all relevant matters discussed herein and such other
matters as may come before them in their further review of this matter. However, if
any of the distributees herein noted do not rescind their approval, we would expect
a response to each of the relevant issues discussed herein and any other reason that
they may have for granting their approval. In addition, I would appreciate receiving
from each of the distributees who do not rescind their original approval, a copy of
the correct procedures to be used for filing an appeal whether administrative or legal,
that is available to residents of the Town who take exception to their decisions.
In closing, I look forward to receiving responses from each of the distributees as soon
as possible so that these comments can either be thoroughly reviewed at the February
7, 1983 Planning Board hearing or such other public hearings that the other distributees
may require. In the event that these replies are not received by a date adequate for
the concerned residents to respond the appropriate request of extension of the Planning
Board public hearing on this matter is hereby respectfully requested until all of
the relevant distributees respond with copies to be provided to the Planning Board.
Respectfully ubmitted,
Z ert b Ercolini
CC: Residents of Bridle Path, No. Andover, Massachusetts
F. Cappezzari, Esquire
Roche, Carens & DeGiacomo
One Post Office Square
Boston, Massachusetts
DISTRIBUTION SHEET
Planning Board and each of the Members individually
Paul Hedstrom, Chairman
Michael Roberts , Vice Chairman
Walter McDonough, Clerk
John Burke
Eric Nitzsche
Board of Health and each of the Members individually:
Julius Kaye, Chairman
George Caron, Member of Board of Health
Edward Scanlon, Member of Board of Health
Mary Joyce, Clerk
Conservation Commission
Building Inspector, North Andover
George Foster
Department of Environment Quality Engineering
Thomas Clougherty, Senior Senator Engineer
Information copy only
Board of Selectmen
PEQ
�,,,
Town of North Andover NORTH
Oft
OFFICE OF O
o?
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND SERVICES � p
30 School Street to
North Andover,Massachusetts 01845 �qSSACfHUS���y
WILLIATM J. SCOTT
Director
June 9, 1998
Ms. Joyce Bradshaw
Town Clerk
120 Main Street
North Andover, MA 01845
Re: Watershed Special Permit-Lot 20A Bridle Path
Dear Ms. Bradshaw,
The North Andover Planning Board held a public hearing on Tuesday evening March 17, 1998 at
7:30 p.m. in the Department of Public Works, upon the application of Henry Kucharzyk, P.O.
Box 1701, Lowell, MA 01853 requesting a special permit under Section 4.133 watershed special
permit of the North Andover Zoning Bylaw. The legal notice was properly advertised in the
North Andover Citizen on February 25 & March 4, 1998 and all parties of interest were duly
notified. The following members were present: Richard Rowen, Chairman, Alison Lescarbeau,
Vice Chairman, John Simons, Clerk, Joseph V. Mahoney, Richard Nardella and Alberto Angles,
Associate Member.
The petitioner was requesting a special permit to allow to construct a single family residential
dwelling within the 100 linear feet horizontally from the edge of the tributary to Lake
Cochichewick.
The premises affected is land numbered Lot 20A Bridle Path and shown on Assessor's Map 104
as Lot 82 in the Residential - 1 (R-1) Zoning District and the Watershed Protection District.
Atty. Mike McCarron and Phil Christiansen were present to represent Lot 20A Bridle Path. Mr.
McCarron stated that they are grandfathered under the 1979 Zoning Bylaw. Mr. McCarron
stated that this lot was part of the Bridle Path subdivision. There were lot line changes that took
place in 1978. As of August 1, 1979 Lot 20A was in separate ownership but, was not part of the
subdivision. In June of 1978 the first Watershed Protection Bylaw came into affect. Mr.
McCarron stated that this was not part of this lot because it had a zoning freeze. Mr. McCarron
went over property ownership of the lots with Mr. Simons. Mr. McCarron stated that the only
thing that comes close is a swamp and they have gone to ConCom and applied for an RDA for the
wetland lines and they have been approved. The proposed home, driveway and lawn are within
100' of a wetland and are within 23 5' of a tributary to the lake. The driveway is 25' away from a
wetland and the house is 50' from a wetland. Mr. Rowen states that not even with a variance
could you build this. Mr. McCarron stated he knows. Mr. Nardella had concerns with the runoff
on the property. Mr. Christiansen stated that we can address that for the next meeting. Ms.
BOARD OF APPEALS 688-9541 BUILDING 688-9545 CONSERVATION 688-9530 HEALTH 688-9540 PLANNING 688-9535
Colwell stated that there is no final grading on the plan, no limit of clearing, no control of storm
water shown or proposed, no certification from an engineer that there will be no effect on the
lake, need to show the tributary on the plan, no erosion control shown and the 25' no cut and 50'
no build zones not shown properly on the plan. Mr. Simons asked why they never built on the
property. Mr. McCarron stated that it is a hard lot to fit a septic system on and now they can tie
into sewer. Mr. Simons stated that you had many choices on how the lots were laid out and when
you build on them. Mr. McCarron stated that it was a buildable lot when it was created. Mr.
Simons stated that we never granted a Watershed Special Permit that close to the wetlands
before.
Linda Weeks of 148 Bridle Path stated that we're not even on sewer and the Town has said that
we won't be for 1-2 years. The Board stated that it would be part of their decision. Ms.
Lescarbeau believes that the driveway could be relocated. Ms. Colwell received a letter from
Town Council stating that the applicants were in fact grandfathered under the old zoning.
Continued until April 21, 1998.
The North Andover Planning Board held a regular meeting on April 21, 1998. The following
members were present: Richard Rowen, Chairman, Alison Lescarbeau, Vice Chairman, Joseph V.
Mahoney & Alberto Angles, Associate Member. Kathleen Bradley Colwell, Town Planner was
also present.
Continued until May 19, 1998
The North Andover Planning Board held a regular meeting on May 19, 1998. The following
members were present: Richard Rowen, Chairman, Alison Lescarbeau, Vice Chairman, John
Simons, Clerk, Joseph Mahoney & Richard Nardella. Kathleen Bradley Colwell, Town Planner
was also present.
Attorney Michael McCarron went over the prior information for this filing. Phil Christiansen of
Christiansen& Sergi, went over the revised plans. Mr. Christiansen stated that a force main
would be installed to tie into the Town's sewer system. Mr. Christiansen stated that the force
main will be placed at Bridle Path and Timber Lane and connect into the existing sewer manhole
at the intersection of Timber Lane and Brentwood Circle. Mr. Rowen asked if this would be the
only house on Bridle Path on sewer. Mr. Christiansen stated yes. Mr. Rowen asked which way
the driveway flow. Mr. Christiansen stated downward toward the wetland.
Ms. Colwell stated that she is concerned with the drainage on the site. Mr. Nardella stated that he
would like to see an oil trap on the site, Mr. Christiansen stated that they can add oil traps to the
plan. Mr. Simons asked if they have a letter stating that there will not be an effect on the water
quality. Mr. Christiansen went over his theory on water quality. Mr. Nardella asked if there were
roof drains. Mr. Christiansen stated that there were. Ms. Colwell asked why they have railroad
ties. Mr. Christiansen stated that they are part of the state storm water management requirements
however they would not use old railroad ties but would use wooden boards. Mr. Christiansen
went over the location of the railroad ties. Mr. Christiansen stated that they would put in the oil
sump, and a berm to protect street runoff from going down the driveway for the next meeting.
Continued until June 2, 1998.
The North Andover Planning Board held a regular meeting on June 2, 1998. The following
members were present: Richard Rowen, Chairman, John Simons, Clerk, Joseph Mahoney,
Richard Nardella and Alberto Angles, Associate Member. Kathleen Bradley Colwell, Town
Planner was also present.
Ms. Colwell stated that Ms. Lescarbeau could not make it tonight but, wanted the Board to know
that she is not in favor of this special permit. Mr. Simons asked how many feet are they away
from wetlands are they. Ms. Colwell stated that they are 50' away. Ms. Colwell went over the
definition of a tributary and the special permit definition from the 1979 bylaw. Mr. Rowen stated
that it is clearly a good spot for a house and there is no affect to the neighborhoods property and
they have added oil traps and berms to the plans. Mr. Rowen stated that he feels they have put in
the appropriate requirements for the 1979 bylaw. Mr. Simons stated that he feels the same as Ms.
Lescarbeau and does not feel that Mr. Christiansen has addressed the water quality issues. Mr.
Simons stated that they never talked about fertilizers. Mr. Simons stated that he feels that the
Board can deny this under the 1979 bylaw. Ms. Colwell stated that they did not go before the
Zoning Board of Appeals to relocate the house. Mr. Rowen stated that it is a left over lot
because they could not fit the septic system but now they can get sewer on the property. Mr.
Simons stated that he does not feel that the applicant went beyond what he should have.
Dave Zaloga stated that they did have an approved septic system and the original developer owed
Henry money and the only way Henry could get paid was to get this lot. Mr. Zaloga stated that
there was no intent to force anything down the Boards throat. Mr. Zaloga stated that it was a
buildable lot and Henry was told to wait until sewer came down. Ms. Colwell stated that as of
1987 this lot was not acceptable because there was no septic systems allowed in the watershed.
Mr. Mahoney stated that he does not feel that it will have a big impact on the lake. Mr. Angles
stated that he did not feel comfortable voting on this because he was not at the last meeting to
hear what was talked about.
On a motion by Mr. Mahoney, seconded by Mr. Angles the Board voted unanimously to close the
Public Hearing.
On a motion by W. Mahoney, seconded by Mr. Nardella, the Board voted 3-1-1 for the special
permit for Lot 20A Bridle Path as presented. The motion to approve Lot 20A Bridle Path failed.
Attached are the conditions.
Sincerely,
Richard S. Rowen, Chairman
North Andover Planning Board