Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1972-12-13Wednesday - December 13, 1972 Special Meeting - 2 Hearings Amendments to Z~ning By-Laws The PLANNING BOARD held a special meeting on Wednesday evening, Dec. 13, 1972 at 7:30 P.M. at the North Andover High School auditorium with the following members present and voting: Charles ~. Trembly, Jr., Esq. ~ Donald N. Keirstead, Vice Chairman; William Chepulis and John J. Monteiro. Mr. Fritz 0stherr was unable to attend. There were 60 people present for the hearings on amendments to the Zoning By-Laws. HEARING: Amendment to Zoning By-Law Chairman Trombly read the legal notice on petition of Vincent P. Helfrich and others to amend the North Andovar Zoning By-Lawby striking therefrom Paragraph (1~) of Section ~.122, Residence ~ District and inserting in place thereof a new Paragraph (]3+) Section A.122 to read as shown on the legal notice. Also, to strike Paragraph (15) of Section ~.122, Residence ~ District which presently reads: "(15) Towr~bouees." The Board first considered the conversion amendment to the Zoning By-Law. Paul Lamprey, Phillips Ct., spoke in favor of the amendments and said that con- versions and townhouses are presently allowed in the most densely populated parts of town. Apartments were voted out a few years ago and now conversions are allowing apartments again. He feels conversions should come under town meeting action and not give the Board of Appeals the power to pass on them. The towns- people should be given the right to v~te. There are more buildings in town that could be converted th~ same as the Stevens Mill if the conversion section was left in the Zoning By-Law. Mr. Monteiro said he was in favor of this article. The Pla~ Board should acknowledge the fact that the people have a right to be heard; townspeople should have the opportunity to be heard. Mr. Xeirstead stated he was a sponsor of the article that took out apartments and he wanted to point out that at that time they felt it was a bad apartment law and they wanted to put a moratorium on apartments. This new By-law has not created new apartment district. Other mill buildings in town could not be converted, the only ones that could be would be school buildings. The Planning Board felt that the Stevens Mill was an appropriate place for cc~version rather than see it deteriorate. ~He does not plan to oppose the article. Mrs. Canty asked why this area was zoned for apartments and industrial use taken out. Mr. Trombly~ Mr. Monteiro and Mr. Keirstead all explained that since it was located in a residential area, the Board thought that residential use would be better. They explained that public meetings and hearings had been held prior to town meeting and that the matter had been publicized in the newspaper. Stevens Mill could become a derelict building if left as it is. After more discussion, the Board said they were pleased that the section was not stricken completely but that an alternate was submitted. December 13, 1972 - cont. HEARING: To strike Townhouses. Mr. Chepulis read the legal notice on Article 2 to strike Townhouses from the Zoning By-Law. Paul Lamprey spoke on this article also. He said townhouses are basically apart- ments; alot of the arguments are the same on this article. He feels something should be done before the situation gets out of hand. Mr. Monteiro said he was concerned that the young people in town can't find a place to live. There should be some place in town for this type of building. Other types of homes are very expensive. He would like to consider them and not put them out entirely. Mr. Keirstead explained that single family homes in town are costing $5§,000 and up. We have to create some type of housing for people of more modest incomes. These townhouses would pro~ably, sell for under $35,000. Even apartments are being sold in condominium form. Two developments presented to this Board are on the basis of owner-occupied. Townhouses have to built where there is sewerage. If sewerage is extended to the outer areas of town, then there could be a higher density. Mr. Keirstead submitted a report from the School Department as to the number of children in the various apartment developments, for the Board's records. He also submitted, for the records, cost comparisons of several new subdivisions with apartments. He said there is no great difference between apartments and private homes. Private homes need more municipal se~ices. A large number of people present were concerned with the Archdiocese townhouse development on the cemetery land on WaverlyRoad. A spectator questioned the cooperative ownership proposal of the Archdiocese. Mr. Keirstead explained that under that proposal, they will enter into contract with each occupant, they will own a share and the complex will be under cooperative ownership. He added this By-law was not draftedwith the thought that this type of development would take place. He explained that the Archdiocese could come in under Chapter 77~ and the town would have no control over it at all. He explained the Chapter 77~ housing law to the people. Mr. Monteiro said the Building Inspector has made a comment that the Archdiocese do not complywith the town's zoning laws. He agrees with the B~ilding Inspector's remarks and would vote against the proposal as it ia now. He feels the townspeople should have some considerationon this before it does go before the Board of Appeals if it is under Chapter 77~. Townhouses should be only 1 and 2 bedrooms; he doesn't think there should be 3 & ~ bedrooms allowed. The people were concerned as to who the townhouses would be rented to. Mr. Keir- stead explained that the Planning Board has no jurisdiction over this - the law does not permit the Board to guarantee anything. He said he prefers not to see subsidized housing of any form but this kind of development is coming whether we like it or not. Village Green apartments is subsidized with 25%of the tenants being low income. Comments were made that taxes have never been paid on the cemetery land -will they have to pay now?. December 1~, 1972 - cont. Mr. Keirstead said most subsidized housing is not taxed. He is not in favor of it, but we can't stop it. If this proposal goes through properly, tax~s will be paid and they will be owner occupied. The people also pointed out that thereis a traffic problem in the area. Mrs. Thomas Ceplikas spoke'and said she was in ~ympathywith the people and she cares about the town but feels we have a responsibility to people and others in places such as Lawrence. She asked if there was legislation requiring co.~f,~a~i- ties to have iow income housing. It was stated that Chapter 774 was passed in 1969 and is presently being tested in the courts. Mr. Monteiro explained that the Planning Board, Merrimack Valley Planning Commission, amd Dept. of Community Affairs have made housing studies. As yet, they have not done so for the town. There is nothing on the books in the legislature at present. Mrs. Ceplikas said townhouses is a way of getting lower cost housing; this could be what we want. The townspeople should have something to say but a special town meeting can be stacked with a certain group for a purpose. A Waverly Road resident asked if the Archdiocese is going to help pay~for the sewer going by their property. A woman spectator said she was against any type of townhouses going in North Andover. The Board took the petitions under advisement and announced that they will meet on Monday evening, December 18, 1972 at 7:15 P.M. at the high school, Just prior to special town meeting, to vote their recommendations when member Ostherr will also be present. The Board discussed an amendment to be included in the conversion section which would make it more restrictive. Mr. Keirstead made a motion to include the amend- ment as discussed; Mr. Chepulis seconded the motion and the vote was ~nanimous. The meeting adjourned at 10:00 P.M. ~Charles Trembly, Jr.) .es (Anna 'D'or~ahue) ' ' Chairman Secretary