Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-05-03 Planning Board Minutes Town of North Andover PLANNING BOARD John Simons, Chairman David Kellogg Lynne Rurinicki w ���� Lora McSheray Peter Boynton Regina Kean (Associate) Tuesday May 3, 2016(� 7 p.m. 566 Main Street-School A(Iministration Building,North Andover,MA 01845 1 Present: J. Simons, L. Rudnicki, L. McSherry,D. Kellogg, P. Boynton,R.Kean 2 Absent: 3 Staff Present: B. Wolstromer, R. Oldham 4 5 J. Simons, Chairman: The Planning Board meeting for Tuesday, May 3, 2016 was called to order at 7 p.m. 6 7 PUBLIC HEARINGS 8 CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING,Annual Town Meeting Zoning Article: Warrant Article 16. 9 10 Article 16: Citizen's Petition-Petition to the Town of North Andover-Amend Zoning Bylaw—Miscellaneous. 11 To see if the Town will vote to amend the Town of North Andover Zoning Bylaw,by amending the following 12 Sections as follow, 13 14 or to take any other action relative thereto. 15 16 Amend Zoning Bylaw, Section 4.127(Business 2 Zoning District), Subsection 15, by inserting the term"....by the 17 Planning Board." So that subsection 15 shall read as follows: 18 19 "15. Multi-family dwelling and town houses(with Special Permit by the Planning Board.) 20 21 Amend Section 7.4 (Building Heights), by inserting after subparagraph 5, a new sub-paragraph 6. So that Section 22 7.4 shall now read as follows: 23 24 7.4. Building Heights 25 Maximum heights of buildings and structures shall be as set forth in Table 2. The foregoing limitations of 26 height in feet in the designated zoning districts shall not apply to: 27 1. Farm buildings on farms of not less than ten(10)acres. 28 2.Nor shall they apply to chimneys,ventilators, skylights,tanks,bulkheads, penthouses, 29 processing towers, and other accessory structural features usually erected at a height greater than 30 the main roofs of any buildings. 31 3.Nor to domes,bell towers, or spires of churches or other buildings, provided all features are in 32 no way used for living purposes. 33 4.And further provided that no such structural feature of any non-manufacturing building shall 34 exceed a height of sixty five(65)feet from the ground. 35 5.Nor of a manufacturing building a height of eighty five (85)feet from the ground, or 36 pharmaceutical manufacturing silo having a height one hundred-fifteen(11.5)feet from the ground, 37 or 38 6, a parcels or parcels collectively comprising at least five(5)acres of land located within a 39 Business 2 (B-2)Zoning District eligible for a waiver of the maximum height,for residential 40 multifamily dwellings and town houses, described under Table 2; provided that such height waiver 41 shall not permit a structure to exceed more than four stories and 55 feet in height,and further 42 provided that such waiver is granted by the Planning Board,as Special Permit Granting Authority, 43 after the Planning Board has made a determination based upon consideration of the special permit 44 criteria described under Section 10.31 of the Zoning Bylaw. 1 Totivn of Not-Ili Andover PLANNING BOARD John Simons, Chairman ��11�%��, David Kellogg Lynne Rudt7ichi o �i�� '��'° Lora McSherry Peter Boynton Regina Kean (Associate) Tuesday May 3, 2016 @ 7 p.m. 566 Main Street-School Administration Building,North Andover,MA 01845 45 Petition of John Smolak,et al 46 47 Planning Board Recommendation: Favorable Action as Amended D. Kellogg recommended Favorable 48 Action on Warrant Article 16, as amended. L. McSherry seconded the motion. The vote was 5-0, unanimous in 49 favor. 50 Vote Required: Two Thirds (2/3) Vote 51 52 R. Oldham, Staff Planner: The petitioner has made additional amendments to the proposed warrant article to avoid 53 confusion over the height waiver criteria.They are proposing to eliminate that criteria and default to the Special 54 Permit criteria described under 10.31 in the zoning bylaw. 55 John Smolak,Petitioner&Andrew Chapin,Princeton Properties: Presented amendments to the proposed warrant 56 article.After our last meeting,at the request of the Board,we surveyed ten local municipalities; all ten 57 municipalities allow multifamily development by Special Permit through the Planning Board. They rest this 58 authority on the Planning Boards based on the amount of additional staff and resources typically available during 59 design review.Additionally,we replaced the proposed height waiver criteria with criteria which currently exist 60 under Section 10.31 of the zoning bylaw. We further limited the height waiver criteria allowed by Special Permit 61 to address parcels that are larger than 5 or more acres fit size located in the B2 District.This waiver will only 62 affect residential components. 63 P.Boynton: Was the application at West Mill specific to one site and one site only? 64 J. Simons:It was specific to the District and the District was limited to one site,This would be limited to the sites 65 listed on the document presented. 66 J.Smolak: This proposal is designed to streamline the process. Under current zoning,the process is duplicative.If 67 the 'ZBA grants a Special Permit the applicant would then go to the Planning Board for Site Plan Review for both 68 the commercial and residential components of the project,The ZBA with limited jurisdiction would only review 69 the residential portion of the project in isolation from the commercial,making it challenging from a planning 70 standpoint 71 L.Rudnicki:"Four stories"is vague; it needs to be defined as a height; 72 Board:Discussed variable height limitations in reference to the property. Suggested the amendment include 73 language stating,"not more than four stories and 55 feet in height". 74 A. Chapin: The addition of"four stories and no higher than 5511.height"is within tolerance and comfortable. 75 L,Rudnicki: And the addition of the word"residential"should be included so as not to be confused with the 76 commercial component, 77 Kathleen Colwell,253 Hickory Hill Road, Neighbor/Abutter: (Former North Andover planner,current Methuen 78 Assistant Director of Community and Economic Development)I strongly believe the Planning Board is the better 79 Board to evaluate this type of project;they are used to looking at these types of projects with commercial and 80 residential components,addressing projects in a comprehensive approach.The ZBA has a smaller staff that 81 typically deals with setbacks and smaller variance issues,I also agree that designating an actual height restriction 82 in the language is a good idea. 83 R. Kean:I've heard concerns that our schools are currently overcrowded and adding a large residential component 84 will only add to this situation. 85 J. Simons: We have been assured by the applicant that typically one to two bedroom luxury units produce a small 86 number of school children in our schools.If three to four bedrooms are considered,that would become part of the 87 planning review process. 8$ 2 Torvn of North Anrlover PLANNING BOARD John Simons, Chairman Davitl Kellogg Lynne Rudnicki Lora McSherry Peter Boynton Regina Kean (Associate) Tuesday May 3,2016* 7 p.rn. 566 Main Street-School Administration Building,North Andover,MA 01845 89 NEW PUBLIC HEARING: Verizon, Christopher Swiniarski, Cloud Radio Access Network Antennae on 24 90 Utility Poles Town Wide: Application for Wireless Facilities Special Permit. Proposal for attachment of disguised 91 Cloud Radio Access Network(CRAN) antennae, a single 24.2"tall cylindrical canister weighing approximately 92 22 pounds, mounted to existing utility poles. 93 R. Oldham: Verizon is seeking a Wireless Facilities Special Permit to install Cloud Radio Access Network(C- 94 RAN)technology on 24 utility poles owned by National Grid located throughout the Town.The Applicant 95 approached the:Board in December of 2015 requesting a waiver from the Wireless Facilities Special Permit. At the 96 December 1,2015 meeting the Board questioned whether this would be a licensing issue with the Board of 97 Selectmen or a Special Permit with the Planning Board. On January 25, 2016 the Board of Selectmen agreed with 98 Verizon that it should be permitted as a Wireless Facilities Special Permit. The Board contracted a wireless review 99 consultant,David Maxson with Isotrope,to review the proposal. The Applicant has not had a chance to respond to 100 the review. In his review,the consultant raised a few concerns that should be addressed before opening the 101 discussion. In terms of his questions about dimensional requirements,typically any zoning variance needed goes 102 through the ZBA. In terms of whether or not those zoning requirements apply to the existing utility pole, we would 103 need additional information from the Building Commissioner. The Building Commissioner has unfortunately been 104 away on vacation the last few weeks. Additionally,the consultant wondered if the Planning Board has the ability 105 to enforce zoning regulations in the public right of way. Staff has been working on the assumption that the North 106 Andover Zoning Bylaw gives the Planning Board the authority to regulate wireless facilities and those apply to 107 those in the public right of way. We reviewed how other communities have permitted C-RAN technology and 108 found that,Andover used a Wireless Communications Permit through their ZBA and also shared the same view of 109 regulating these facilities in the public way, Amesbury used an Electrical Permit and Brockton issued a Building 110 Permit. This is new technology and there are different ways to go about permitting. (Showed map of all proposed 111 North Andover locations) 112 C. Swiniarski: Provided a brief explanation of the C-RAN technology. 113 J. Simons: Is there any noise generation from the canisters?How often are they maintained? 114 C. Swiniarski: There is no noise generation and they don't require regularly scheduled maintenance because we 115 can monitor their activity remotely. 116 P. Boynton: Are there any hazardous liquids inside the container? 117 C. Swiniarski:No, it is only made to look like a transformer to blend in with the existing equipment on the utility 118 pole. There is an antenna inside. 11.9 J. Simons: You have to comply with all the FCC standards? 120 C. Swiniarski: Yes, anything that emits an electromagnetic field has to comply with FCC standards. 121 P. Boynton: Prior to this,Verizon proposed 5 or 6 pilot locations-why the increase to 24 locations? 122 C. Swiniarski: National Grid has given us space for 24 locations. The more equipment we are able to install the 123 better we can meet the demands for service. 124 R. Kean: Why these particular locations?These are planned for nice residential districts. 125 C. Swiniarski: We monitor the demand closely; we can see areas of less than optimum coverage. We then locate 126 ideal poles. The range is small and very focused. 127 L. Rudnicki: The transformer, guy wires and the electric junction box will be at eye level; five feet. 128 P. Bo,, no: The junction boxes are what dimension? 129 C. Swiniarski: They are approximately 311 x 12"w x 6"d. flush mounted to the pole. 130 L. Rudnicki: With conduits on both sides you are enlarging the pole by approximately 25%. Seeing a lot of 131 signage on the equipment is not desirable. 3 Town of'North Andover PLANNING BOARD John Simons, Chairman „ David Kellogg Lynne Ru(Inicki ' Lora McSherry Peter Boynton Regina Kean (Associate) Tuesday May 3, 2016 @ 7p.m, 566 Main Street-School Administration Building,North Andover,MA 01845 132 P.Boynton:Regarding emissions, according to our consultant analysis, a third of these (7)are located below the 133 height of the FCC waiver. What are your thoughts? 134 C. Swiniarski: The FCC regulations don't require testing above ten meters.The emissions are so minimal you can 135 barely test it. I can supply the Board with a certified engineer's statement that these are FCC compliant. 136 L. Rudnicki:Requested identification of submitted locations having guy wires. I'd like to see the signage as well. 137 C. Swiniarski: I will provide the Board with the Federal requirements for informational signage. 138 D.Kellogg: As a courtesy, would you notify the immediate property owners prior to installation? 139 C. Swiniarski: We can do that.That's not unreasonable. 140 [Continued to next meeting May, 17, 2016] 141 142 DISCUSSIONS: 143 Adjacent to 1665 Great Pond Road,Tom Zahoruiko: Request for Watershed Special Permit Extension. 144 R. Oldham: We recently permitted 1665 Great Pond Road. This parcel is adjacent to that property. On July 3,2013 145 the Planning Board approved a Decision for a Watershed Special Permit to construct a single family dwelling unit 146 and driveway, demolition of an existing shed, insulation of utilities, stormwater management facilities and 147 associated grading on an undeveloped parcel within 100 ft. of the wetland and within 250 ft. of the non- 148 disturbance and non-discharge zones of the watershed district.The permit was set to expire in July of 2015. On 1.49 May 22, 2015 the Applicant requested a Watershed Special Permit extension due to the slow economy. The Board 150 granted the extension for one year. The permit will now expire on July 2,2016. Per the zoning bylaw, if the 151 applicant can show good cause why substantial use or construction has not commenced within the two year period, 152 the special permit granting authority at its discretion may extend the special permit for an additional one year 153 period. 154 J. Simons: Stated that the bylaw does not reflect the opportunity for a secondary extension,therefore an extension 155 cannot be granted. 156 157 1.636 Osgood Street, Ruff`n Tumble Plate: Request for Site Plan Review waiver. 158 R. Oldham: This Applicant is seeking a.Site Plan Review waiver for space at Osgood Landing(Building 48-rear). 159 The Applicant seeks space for a dog training center,playcare, dog park and concierge service. The dog training 160 center will be in partnership with the MSPCA. There will be supervised outdoor and indoor play groups and a dog 161 taxi service providing transport for dogs to and from the facility and to local groomers and vets. The Building 162 Commissioner has determined"kennel"as an allowed use in the I2 District. Per the use,the Parking Table requires 163 3 parking spaces based on the approximate square footage. The Building Commissioner is requesting professional 164 plans before making his official determination. Site concerns include: the existing barbed wire fence,lighting, 165 landscape buffering, and existing stormwater structures-water drain/catch basin and a swale in the outdoor play 166 area. 167 Applicant, Mike Helman: Presented the conceptual ideas and schematic plans for a membership dog park and 168 playcare service/dog care. 169 Board:The Board requested more concise information for the next meeting regarding site improvements, i.e. 170 parking analysis, signage,plans, lighting, fencing, etc. and will issue a set of Conditions which will be the 171 equivalent of a Decision as an informal Site Plan Review at the May 17, 2016 meeting. 172 [Continued to next meeting May, 17, 2016] 173 174 70 Main Street: Requesting a determination for an Insubstantial Change to the Site Plan Review Special Permit 175 issued on January 6,2015 re-align the driveway entrance on Main Street. 4 Town of North Andover PLANNING BOARD John Simons, Chairman David Kellogg i//% o Lynne Rudnicki � � , ��" Lora McSherry Peter Boynton Regina Kean (Associate) Tuesday May 3,2016 G 7 p.m. 566 Main Street-School Administration Building,North Andover,MA 01845 176 Mark Yanowitz Bradstreet LLC: Presented new driveway configuration for 70 Main Street showing a shared 177 access easement configuration with the neighbor, combining two curb cuts into one. 178 Board: The Board agreed that the final configuration was an improvement to the original proposal. L. Rudnicki 179 noted that the North Andover Fire Department should review the configuration for public safety. 180 MOTION: P. Boynton made a motion to approve the Insubstantial Change to Site Plan Review for 70 Main 181 Street,North Andover,MA. L. Rudnicki seconded the motion. The vote was 5-0,unanimous in favor. 182 183 Annual Town Meeting Warrant Article 28: Report of the Community Preservation Committee-Appropriation from 184 CPC Fund. 185 Article 28: Report of the Community Preservation Committee — Appropriation from Community 186 Preservation Committee Fund. To receive the report of the Community Preservation Committee and to see if 187 the Town will vote to raise, borrow, transfer and/or appropriate from the Community Preservation Fund, in 188 accordance with the provisions of Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 44B, a sum of money to be spent under 189 the direction of the Community Preservation Committee, 190 or to take any other action relative thereto. 191 192 List of Approved Projects—Community Preservation Fund 193 Description Amount Category 194 45 MU Street Preservation $ 1,200,000 Open Space 195 Affordable Housing Trust $ 100,000 Affordable Housing 196 Bingham Way Senior/Disabled Housing $ 480,213 Affordable Housing 197 Leonard Farm Conservation Restriction $ 325,000 Open Space 198 Library Roof Repair $ 400,000 Historical Preservation 199 Parson Barnard Barn Structural Renovation $ 148,000 Historical Preservation 200 Playground Renovation-Kittredge School $ 100,000 Recreation 201 Ridgewood Cemetery Landscape $ 550,000 Historical Preservation 202 Administrative Costs $ 30,000 Administrative and 203 Operating expenses 204 Total for Requested Projects $3,333,213 205 Community Preservation Committee 206 Planning Board Recommendation: Favorable Action 207 MOTION L. Rudnicki recommended Favorable Action on Article 28.P.Boynton seconded the motion.The vote 208 was 5-0, unanimous in favor. 209 210 211 212 Vote Required: Two-thirds (2/3)Vote 213 214 215 EXPLANATION: The Community Preservation Act (CPA) addresses community issues such as 216 acquisition and preservation of open space, creation and support of affordable housing, acquisition and 217 preservation of historic buildings and landscapes, and creation and support of recreational opportunities. 218 The CPA, adopted at a Special Town Meeting in January 2001, and by the voters at the Town Election in 219 March 2001, levies a 3% surcharge on property taxes with two exemptions: $100,000 of the value of every 5 Town of'North Andover PLANNING BOARD John Simons, Chairman ��� �1����� • David Kellogg Lynne Rudnicki % °'" Lora McSherry Peter Boynton Regina Dean (Associate) Tuesday May 3, 2016 @ 7p.m. 566 Main Street-School Administration Building,North Andover,MA 01845 220 residential property is exempted, and a complete exemption on property owned and occupied by people 221 who qualify for low-income housing or low-or moderate-income senior housing. 222 223 The Community Preservation Committee (CPC) annually recommends how funds should be spent or set 224 aside for future spending among the allowable categories of a) open space; b) historic preservation, c) 225 affordable housing; and d) land for recreational use,with a minimum of 10% required in each of the first 226 three categories. In addition, a maximum of 5% may be spent on administrative expenses by the 227 CPC. Town Meeting may either approve or reduce the recommended expenditures, but cannot add to 228 them. North Andover received matching funds equal to $485,256 or 32.95% in FY16 from the 229 Commonwealth, 230 231 Watershed Informational Mailer: The next mailer will focus on the lakeshore property owners and abutters of 232 tributaries. 233 Water Quality Research: Bruce Thibodeau, Director of Public Works,will present items of interest to the Board at 234 an upcoming meeting. 235 Planning Board Rules &Regulations: (not addressed) 236 237 MINUTES APPROVAL 238 MOTION: P. Boynton motioned to approve the April 19, 2016 minutes. D. Kellogg seconded the motion. The 239 vote was 5-0, unanimous in favor, 240 241 EXECUTIVE SESSION: (9:00 p.m.)L. Rudnicki made a motion to go into Executive Session to discuss legal 242 matters and not return to Open Session. 243 Roll Call Vote: Peter Boynton motioned to go into Executive Session. Lora McSherry motioned to go into 244 Executive Session. David Kellogg motioned to go into Executive Session. John Simons motioned to go into 245 Executive Session.Lynne Rudnicki motioned to go into Executive Session. The vote was 5-0, unanimous in favor. 246 247 MEETING MATERIALS: Planning Board Meeting Agenda May 3, 2016;. DRAFT Planning Board Minutes April 248 19, 2016; Warrant Article 16-Citizens Petition: Article 16 Revised Draft2_160425,B2 Parcels, Citizens Petition 249 Revised_160412, Citizens Petition_160321,Locus,Neighborhood Meeting Summary, Parcels Zoned B-2_160412, 250 Powerpoint Presentation_Huntress_150405,Rezoning to B2, Smolak Letter to PB 160426, SPR Permit 1210 251 Osgood Street_001114;Verizon.C-RAN: Location Site Plans,Application_160318, Building Permit 252 Request_1.511.16,Isotrope Consultant Review_160422,Map of N. Andover Utility Poles, Meeting 253 Minutes_151201, Selectmen Comments_160125;Adjacent to 1665 Great Pond Road: 10.3 Special Permit Bylaw, 254 Decision_WSP Extension_160619,Decision Recorded_WSP_130702, Locus, Request for Extension 255 Plans_TKZ_160420,Request for Extension_TKZ_160420; 1636 Osgood-Building 48-Ruff n'Tumble: Exhibit 256 A+B+C, G. Brown_Bylaw Reference, G. Brown_Use and Parking Comments,Locus Map, Outside Dog Park 257 Detail,Parking Plan Exhibit B Detail, Waiver Request; 70 Main Street: Bradstreet Neighbor Reciprocal Driveway 258 Easement 2016, Decision—Approved Plans,Decision_Bradstreet School Redevelopment 1.50106,Easement Sketch 259 10-5-15,Locus, March 3 Meeting Minutes Final, Special Permit Waiver Request; 1.60503 Planning Board Report. 6