Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1976-05-03~Y 3, ~976 - Monday Re'gular Meeting The Pk42~-NING ~OARD held a regular monthly meeting on Monday evening, Nay 3, 1976 at 7:30 P.M. in the Town Office Meeting Room. The following members were present and voting: FTitz Ostherr~ Chairman; William Chepulis, Vice-Chairman; John J. Monteiro, Clerk; Paul R. Lamprey and William N. Salemme. There were 10 visitors. The minutes for March 1 and t5, 1976 were approved as submitted by motion of Mr. Monteiro and 2nd by Mr. Salemme. The vote was unanimous. PLANS NOT REQUIRING APPRfr~AL: 1. J & V REALTYTRUST - Rea St.: Combining Lot 3 with Lot 3A. A motion was made by Mr. Chepulis to endorse the plan of land of J & V Realty Tr~st, dated April 1976 as not reqfuiring approval under subdivision control law and seconded by Mr. Lamprey. The vote was unanimous. 2. FRANCES D. WAUGH - Camden St.: Plan stamped by FLYEwho is registered in Nass. A motion was made by Mr. Chepulis to endorse the plan as not requiring approval under subdivision control law in North Andover, Ma. owned by Frances D. Waugh, dated Naroh, 1976. Mr. Lamprey seconded and the vote was unanimous. 3. GREENWOOD ASSOCIATES - Sutton Hill Rd.: Victor Harem, Esq. appeared before the BOARD. They wish to combine Lot 62A with Lot 62. Lot 62A is not a buildable lot. Mr. Chepulis made a motion to endorse as not re~iring approval under subdivision control law a plan of land located in North Andover, Ma., owned by Greenwood Assoc., dated July, ~975 and revised Feb. 3, 1976. Mr. Lamprey seconded and the vote was lln~nimouse DECISION~ON PRELIMINARY PLANS: 1. GREENWOOD WEST - Chestnut St.: Letter from the Highway Surveyor dated May 3, 19?6was read and the last paragraph of the letter from the Board of Public Works regarding lift station was also read. The letters are on file in the office. Mr. Ostherr stated that the Subdivision Control Committee had walked the site some weeks ago and that one alternative to the lift station would be to allow the natural valley to remain and the lift station to be located about 300 ft. in from Chestnut Two other alternatives are that the hollow could be filled in with a gravity sewer out to Chestnut St. or pursue the obtaining of an easement for sewer out to Hillside Rd. Ben 0sgood was asked if it was their intent to pursue the lift station- yes, it appeared to be although they would like to obtain an easement. Mr. Monteiro said he had no objection to the lift station if it would do the job, but as yet there are no set standards on this type of thing. One has already cost the Town $IO0 or more and didn't feel that we should have to bear this cost. Mr. Osgood said that the one on the Appledore site will average $25-$40 rather than $100~ and that there must be something wrong with the one on Johnson Circle. Mr. Cyr, Highway Surveyor, stated that he would like to know what they are going to do because he plans to do corrective work on Chestnut St. within the next year to make it a year-round road. Ben Osgood mentioned the conference they had had last December, %hat the developer was wil$ing to do his share by supplying $6,000 worth of pipe and that now it was up to the Town Departments. May ~, 1976 - cont. Char~es Foster, Building Inspector, commented that he was sad %o hear everyone talking about "my road", "my water", etc. and felt it was time we started cooperating to settle these matters. Mr. Busby, Sr. sta~ed tb~.t he has been locking at these pipes for 6 m0n~hs and they are stacked in a location which was a nice triangle which could be loamed and seeded. Mr. Cyr said that we each have our own thing to do although we do try to pull together. He had offered his back hoe during the winter months and felt that this was in the spirit of cooperation. Phil Busby, Jr. spoke for the BPW stating that the water main on Chestnut St. is sufficient to handle the houses there now but they will not let the developer tie in because the new houses will not be serviced by any water. His opinion Was that it is probably the developer's responsibility to see that the water line is put in before he gets the.plan approved. Mr, Lamprey inquired why Mr. Cyr recruited the Cape Cod berm - it is more durable. It was noted that the plan was filed on Marsh 15 and had to be acted on by May 15. Mr.'Cyr then mentioned drainage problems in subdivisions and getting more leverage or control in this area. The Chairman told him that the PLANNING BG~.RD doesn't see these things on a day to day basis ~uch as the Highway Dept. does and, although- nothing can be done on an individual lot to'lot circumstance something could probably be 'included in our Rules & Regs. A motion was made by Mr. Lamprey to grant condilional approval incorporating letters from Town Depts. and unless the new water line is in the PLANNING BOARD will not grant approval of the definitive plan; also, the lift station and plans for individual lot drainage will be closely scrutinized. Mr. Salemme seconded and the vote was unanimous. 2. PADDOCK ESTATES - Boston St.: Highway Surveyor's letter of May ~, 1976 was read by the Chairm~n. Other Town Dept. letters were read at a previous meeting. The~du~ivision Control Subcommittee recom- mended that the two opposing Streets coming out onto Boston ~t. be aligned. A motion was made by Mr. Lamprey that conditional approval be grante~ subject to the letters of the various Town Depts. and the recommendation of the Subdi-~ision Control ~gubcommiitee. M~. ~lemmeseconded and the vote was unanimous. SALEM FORA-~T -Frank Gelinas and George Fart were present. Plans for re-signature were presented to the BOARD and the revision of the Bond Agreement w~s read. A motion was made by Mr. Chepulis to approve, the partial release of the Covenant on Lots 1-12 ~nd 23-30 which shall be replaced by the Mortgage Bond Agreement for the same number of.lots in the amount specified of $100,000 and muthorite the Chairman to execute such agreements. Mr. Monteiro seconded and the vote was unanimous. Frank Gelinas requested the BOARD to re-endorse the plan in order to bring it under the six months requirement of the Registry. Mr. Monteiro made a motion to re-sign the plan and Mr. Cheyulis seconded. The vote was unanimous. BOARD OF ~WJBLIC WOPJfS LE,~ml~ RE SEWAGE Pt~ING ST.~TIONS: Mr. Monteiro made a mo%ion to defer this letter to the next meeting agenda because he had input on %he mat~er. The letter was then read. Mr. Lamprey seconded Mr. Mcuteiro's motion. Michael Schena questioned the acceptance of the lift stations and a discussion followed about ~the State mandates. Will the individual home owner by assessedfor t~e lift station? The vote on the motion was unanimous. May ~, 1976 - cont. CONSERVATION CO~MISSION LETTER RE WINTER HILL CUE DE ~AGS: The letter was read aloud after which Mr. Nonteiro m~de a motion to table the matter until the Nay 17th Agenda at which time all concerned parties shall be present. Member Salemme stated that he attended the Conservation Commission meeting referred to in the letter and did not remember a vote being taken on the subjec%. Hr. Chepulis, also a member of the Con. Com., said that they didn't vote as such but felt it would be a good way to get the various parties together. Hr. Ealemme stated, for the record, that he takes issue with this procedure. Hr. Chepulis seconded the motion and the vote was as follows: Messers Monteir~Ohepulis and Ostherr in favor; Messers Lamprey and Salemme opposed. Hr. Monteiro asked for reconsideration of his motion and Hr. Lamprey seconded. Hr. 0hepulis w~s opposed and the remaining 4 members in favor. The Highway Surveyor, Hr. Cyr, voiced.~his opinion tha~ we have to hold the line, plan within our community in a manner we can afford to maintain. He s2mpathized with the aspect of environment, brooks, etc. but felt that the only way to achieve our goal so that these subdivisions do not become a direct burden in maintenance to the Town Depts. was to follow through with our planning. The developer has to give, he said; too much is being squeezed into the developments. Hr. Salemme commented that he became disturbed~ this particular Con. Com. meeting because the developer didn't seem to want to lean at all and at our (Planning Board) meeting previously the developer stated that he would be willing to cooperate with the Town Depts. Hr. Lamprey added, that the developer probably went to the Con. Com. and convinced them to pressure us into this because we were sticking to our convictions. Hr. Ohepulis did not want to see this BOARD go %hrongh the same thing that it went through with the Board of Appeals. Another motion was made by Hr. Monteiro ~hat the P~A~NNING BOARD go on record adhering to the Highway ~urveyor's recommendation as to the connection of the cul de sacs. The motion did not receive a second. Mr. Monteiro's next motion was to take action at this meeting. Hr. Lamprey seconded and a discussion followed. Mr. Lamprey stated that no one had come back to the BOARD wi~hanalternative, just for us to cba~ge cur decision. He fel~ that it was Planning Board business to do planning for %he developer. Mr. Chepulis interjected that this was not a black and white situation. Mr. Nonteiro then proposed his origi- nal motion to place the item on the N~y 17thAgenda, second byMr. Ohepulis. The vote was, Hr. Nonteiro in favor and the other four members opposed. Mr. Salemme made a motion that the BOARD write a letter to the Con. Com. s~ating that it will be willing to work as a Subcommittee on this matter. Hr. Monteiro seconded and the vote was unanimous. HISTORICAL C0~NISSIONPRE~TIONOFHISTORIC SITES NAP TO BOARD: Mrs. A~ Howes, Hrs. MaryEllen 0stherr and Hr. Peter Rossiter appeared before the B_o~RD to make the presentation. The purpose of the map is to enable the Planning Board and Town Engineer (?) to use it in reference to the historic significance indicated on the map in various areas throughout the Town. This map can be overlayed on-the zoning map. The Commission reserved the right to check out an~ corrections tlzmt might be suggested before they are made. Ail sites are registered with theN ass. Historical Commission. A motion was mde by Nr. Lamprey to authorize the Historical Commissioutohave 6 prints made and the PLANNING BOARD will bear the cos~. Mr. Monteiro seconded and the vote was unanimous. REC0~ENDATION ON GILBERT REAEARTHR~OVALPERNIT: The Chairman stated that he assumed that the Board of Appeals is policing its own activities as to the fact that Mr. Rea is in compliance with the By-Law. The Building Inspector told the BOARD that they are May 3, 1976 - cont. planning to follow the new~-Law and that there appear %o be no problems. ~r. Monteiromade a motion that the PLANNING 30ARD suggest %hat the Board of Appeals accept the application for Earth Removal Permit as in accordance with ou~ By-Laws. Mr. Lamprey seconded and the vote was unanimous. Eugene Sztucinski Letter Re Land of Dr. Love: The letter wasreadbythe Chairman as was the Building Inspector'sreport. As a follow-up Charles Foster stated that Enfold Graves, his assistant, had contacted Mrs. Love and inspected thewhole area. Mr. Graves could find no evidence of any of the neighbor's complaints and it seemed to be a continuing hattie between the landowners. Mr. Monteiro agreed that this might possibly be the case, but felt it proper to do something from the P~BOARD side. Mr. Ostherr asked if the BOARD ~anted to reply to Fr. Sz~ucinski, Messers Monteiro and Chepulis agreed. Mrs. ~ Armitage 0orrespondence of March4, 1976 - Re Glen Rd. and Appledore Develop- ment: The letter was read aloud by the Chairman. During a short discussion, Mr. Foster commented that we have a Town By-Law that the driveway permit is req, Aired before it can enter onto a Town street and it must be approved by Mr. Cyr before an occupancy permit can be issued. Upon motion of Mr. Monteiro to inform Mrs. Armitage that the matter has been referred to the ~uildingInspector, Mr. Lamprey seconded and the vo~ewasunanimous. Mass. Federation of Planning 3cards Annual Meeting on May 8th. All members and secretary will be attending. ~P~EAT POND WOODL~gD SITE KEVIE~: Morning of Sat., May l~ at 8:30 A.M. The BOARD I~ANI~OUSLY agreed that the Agenda shall be closed on Friday of previous week unless an important addition made by a BOARD M~NBER. BOARD OF APPEALS LEGAL NOTICES: L & L NORTH ANDOVER TRUST - Mr. Saleratus made a motion to .advise the Appeals Board that we ca--ct find where the petitioner meets the hardship requirement from the information at h~.~d. Mr. Monteiro seconded and the vote was unanimous. :~'E:3. SMESOZI~ISEI - After reviewing the plans and short discussion, a motion was made by Mr. Monteiro that the PLANNIN6~ is in favor pending comments by the Town of Middleton. Mr. Salemme seconded. More discussion regarding setback requirement al~ter which member Chepulis amended the motion by adding that the provision of ~00 f~. setback should be maintained. Mr. Salemme seconded and the vote was unanimous. AUGUSTINE DE PARTS - Ai~ter viewing the information and plans, Fr. Monteiro made a motion to advise the Board of Appeals that since the applicant does not reside on the premises, we see no hardship. Mr. Salemme seconded and the vote was unanimous. JOHN TH~ON -Mr. Monteiro made a motion that it appears for one lot an adequately maintained roadway should suffice for adequate frontage. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lamprey and the vote unanimous. NISCELLANF.~JS MATTERS: TO~N OF BOXFORD - Notice of Pablic Hearing on May ~th to revise zoning map was duly no~edo Request a copy of the zoning map & By-Law if the above is approved. Beacon was received and filed. Ch~les l~os%ers Subject - Reorganization of To~ ~ilding: ; Mr. Fos%er ~fo~e~ %he ~ %~% he h~ he~ ~ ~e of %he Selec%men %ha% %he ~ilding ~speo~or's office ~s going to be moved upstairs ~d ~he Pia~nin~ B~,% Bo~ of Appeals ~s to re.in do. stairs ~d ~e over his p~sem~ office. He fel~ ~ ~hese t~ee depa~nts sh~d be in close p~ximi~y ~o one ~o~her' ~ue ~o ~he nat~ of ~r work. ~e e~lained w~t ~he c~en~ plus seem ~o be for ~he ~il~ng. ~e ~ voiced conce~ abou~ ~he meeting ro~ - presently, w~ d~ % ~ow where it ~11 e~nt~lly be l~ate~. Chairman (~rit z Os~herr) ~ret~ / (~ilda ~lacks~ock)