Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1974-08-05Monday - AuguSt 5, 1974 Regular Meeting The PLANNINa BOARD held its regular meeting on Monday evening, A~st 5, 1974, at 7:30 P.M. in the Fire ~ation. The following members were present and voting: William Chepulis, Chairman; ~ritz 0stherr, Vice Chairman; William N. Salemme, Clerk; Paul R. Lamprey and John J. Monteiro. There were approximately' 20 people present for the meeting. Mr. Monteiro made a motion to accept the minutes of the July 1, 1974 and July 11, 1974 meetings. Mr. Lamprey seconded the motion and the vote w~s 'unauimous. PLANS NOT ~IN~ APPROFAL: Francis B. If/ttredge - Plan of land on Stevens ~tPeet. Mr. 0stherr made a motion that the Planning Board endorse as Not Requiring Approval under SuBdivision Con- trol Law the Plan of Land in North Andover, Mass. owned by Mr. Eittredge.. Mr. Monteiro seconded the motion and the vote ~as unanimous. 2. ~eorge F~rr - Plan of Lots 55, 56, 57 & 58 in Salem Forest. A discussion about an~ieasement shown on the plan took place~ however~ inasmuch as Mr. Farr was not present the Board decided to continue the discussion at a later time. T~is m~tter would be taken up at the August 13, ~974 ~pecial Meeting. 3. Victor I~tem- Plan of land owned by Appledore Asso. Atty. Victor Harem represented the applicant and stated that they wish to COnvey 2 lots (A & B) with sufficient frontage on Sutton Hill Road, Mr. Ostherr made a motion to endorse as Not Requir- ing Approval under Subdivision Control Law the plan of land by Appledore Associates. Member Monteiro seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous: Victor I~tem - Plan of land in North Andover o~ned by Robert J. BUrke. Mr. '~tem explained that although Mr. Burke owns the land a~ present a Mr. Davis is going to pumchase it from Mr. Burke. A discussion took place as to locus and street front- age. Mr. Monteirc made a motion that these plans ]~e sut~nitted ~to the ~ubdiv[sion Control Subcommittee which will in turn make a recommendation within 10 days and Mr. Lamprey seconded. A discussion followed in Which the ]~OARD noted that this would require calling a special meeting. Mr. Foster stated that there was a question of legal frontage with townhouse lots. A unanimous ~ote was then taken. The BOARD voted-unanimously to condu~t a Special Meeting on August 12, 1974 at 7 'P.M. in the Town Office ~Meeting room. Mrs; David Burns - Plan of land in North Andover and Boxford. Mr. & Mrs. Burns were present and spoke relative to the application. Mrs. Burns noted that a copy of the plan was approved in ~972 and the new plan is practically the same, except 2 of the lots are extended. They are very close to the North Andover-Boxford line. A discussion took place regarding the 'culvert. The Highway ~n-veyor woul~ like to see a drainage easement to the town and the culvert protected. Mr. O~yr agreed to go out and determine where the easement should be located. The ]~iARD first decided to approve the plans , but not sign them until Mr. Oyr and Mrs. ]~urns m~ke an agreement as to the easement. However, Mr. Burns then suggested that the BOARD sign the plan~ at this meeting, write up an agreement and sign it later. This would be a public agreement between the To~n and Mr. & Mrs. ~urns. Mr. Ostherr ma~e a motion to endorse the plan of land in North Andover and Boxford as No~ Re, r- ing Approval under SuBdivision Control Law and Mr. Mont&~ro seconded. The vote was unanimous o August 5, 1~4 - Cont. Revisions to ~ubdivision Rules and Regulations - The clerk read the legaI notice. See. III, N-3: Intent is in reference to roadways, utilities and other things, under the purview of sul~livisien control to aocomodate the most 'size or dense use under current zoning law. Ben Osgood and ~ohn Willis voiced opposition. Mr. 0sgood thinks the rules should be based on what the developer has to do; categOrize each type of building. ~ ~elinas says it sounds like the BOARD wants site plan approval. More discussion followed. Mr. Willis raised the question of legality of the legal notice published in the local newspaper. The BOARD felt that the notice was adequate. The opposition stated 'that ~this would create a ~esire on the par~-of the landowner to build to maTimum density. ~ Gelinas stated that a) it is not necessary b) ~it i.~ arbitrary'and c) we already have checks and balances to stop things from happening. Mr. Willis says we are imposing greater standards 'than the developer needs and it is ~ greater block in the way of developments it is another attempt at the control of growth. Ctmrles Foster, Building Znspector, stated that there is no way in which he can control drainage i~ streets and Utilities under the present zoning, and felt that perhaps we will have more trouble with the industrial areas with this parti- cular section. He would dislike seeing the PLANNING BOA.~ get pointed at as being arbitrary. William Cyr, Highway Surveyor, would like to use Andrew .Circle as a goo. d example of what we a~e talking about. 2/3 of the water that comes out of this area runs directly onto Andover St. It is a big problem. He feels there is insufficient drainage in most subdivisions in this town and anything that will help the town .he is in favor of doing. Sec. III, E-4:. ~here it ~tates "must- we should put "shall". Dan~r is easements. being los~, says '~hmmk Gelinas. Sec. 1~, F-S: Mr. I~ter suggests that an addilion to the 3rd line be as follows: "along with a registered land surveyor's plan of the easement." We have an engineer on the BPW, but .we do not have a land surveyor for the %c~n. Mr. Willie a~ded further to this same line - "and recorded in the .appropriate Registry of Deeds at the expense of the grantor." Sec. V, B-6: Use "Minor and Secondary S~reets" in the 1st line. Mr. 0egood feels 't~is is too much hot top for a road and it is also very expensive. Mr. Cyr thrums we need this amount along with a .sufficient base and drainage.~ Sec. ~ H-3: Typo (d), 'change to "least". 0harles Foster suggests heading ~o state, "Concrete" and under (a) "footings shall be..."; (c) Zeds shall be..." Also, under "STONE BEADWALL" (a) shall be..." and-(c) and (d) the same. In the first sentence un,er H-3 - "Ail headwalls shall be of the type and size...and shall Be constructed as follows:" Mr. ~herr made a motion to 1) take under advisement the result of this hearing and 2) advertise the remaining items that are being considered for revision to Subdvvision Rules and Regulations at the earliest opportunity. Mr. Lamprey amended the motion by adding a definite hea~ing da~e of September 30, 1974. Mr. 0etherr seconded the mstion and the vc~e was unanimous. Augu'st 5, 1~74 - oont~. Properties - Preliminary Subdivision Plans: Mr. John Turtle and Frank ~elinas represented the petitioner. It was noted that the' clOCk wontt start running until Form B has been submitted and stamped by the Town Clerk. Mr. ~elinas ~tated that the lOCus of the plan of la~d is where Gray St. meets Boston St.,at Stiles St. There ~as no locus map with'the plans. Also, the scale is improper. ~he road ends in a cul de sac and exceeds the regulation for a cul de sac which is a 550 Ft. requirement. Mr. ~elinas said he had spoken with an abutter who would not want Stiles St. opened up. Mr. ghepulis asked wh~ they chose this type of cul de sac. According to Mr. Gelinas, it meets with their allowance to get a lot there and, also, for an easy flow to keep going through in the future. The contours go about a 20 f~. variance in grade and the problem is not m~ximum but minimum ,grade. The ~epti~ system will be designed by a private engineer. The soil content is average for North Andover. The drainage ditch goes under Stiles St. Mr. Gelinas asked for two waivers.. 1) length of cul de sac 2) 's~ale of !.'= 40' William Cyr, Highway 3urveyor, reported that he does not like off-set cul de sacs or undersized in area. Action will be taken when Form B is submitted. DISCUSSI(~I: Consultan~ Engineering Firm for Trafalgar Estates: Mr. Lamprey n~de ~ motion to pursue the matter of hiring Metcalf & Eddy for consultant purposes. Mr. M~nteiro seconded the motion and a discussion followed. Mr. Lamprey .s~ated that, after reviewing the resum&s received, Metcalf & Eddy have covered the subject most thoroughly and ~re capable of doing the job. Mr. Monteiro stated that he has done business with this firm in the past and they have 'been fair and reputable. Mr. Ohepulis noted the responsibility of the planning ~o~rd which is not included in the fee suggested. A vo~e was taken a~d all members voted in the affirmative. Mr. Monteiro a~de a motion that Mr. Ohepulis con~act Mr. ~odden about approaching the Advisory Board for the money and Mr. Ostherr seconded: The vote was unanimous. Appointments to Earth Removal Study Committee.' Charles William Patricia Roscoe DiFruscio ~i~ cent Tur~no '~'~lbert Rea Paul R. Lamprey Mrs. Alise 0handler Mr. Ostherr made a motion that the Board accept the above named people to be members of the Earth Removal Study Committee. Mr. Monteiro secouded the motion and the vote w~s unanimous, Augus% 5, 1974 - cont. ROADS: Nr. Ostherr brought up the ~ubject of Scenic Roads and suggested the BOARD appoint members to a subcommittee which will establish criteria £cr these ro~ds and study .regulation and enfo?cement of the Scenic Roads Law. Suggested committee as follows: John J. Non%eiro Willia~ ~ Leo L~fond Mrs. Albert Nanzi Mrs. Joan ~iorino BOARD (~APPEALS w~.ARINGS: Nereford Corporation: The BOARD received notice of a hearing to be held ~n August 12, 1974. Mr. Lamprey made a motion to make no recommendation, Mr. Salemme seconded and the VOte was unanimous. ROLL OF THE PLANNING BOARD ON T~E MUPC: The BOARD held a short discussion after which Mr. Ostherr recommended, by ~y of a motion, that an executive session be held on Monday evening, September 9, 1974 mt 7 P.M. Mr. Lamprey seconded the motion and the vote was una~imons. PJ~INDER: ~TION FOR TOWN ~EPORT: The secretary submitted the facts ~o the Chai~ and he will write the report. FLOOD PLAIN ZONING: The Chairman is studying the matter and will report back to the BOARD. NIS~W.L~WE(~S MAT~2~S: A letter from Mrs. Patricia Trembly, Chairwoman of the Conservation Commission, regmrding obtaining Mrs. Blaoks~ock for their secretary also. The BO~P~D has no objection and lef~ the decision up to Mrs. Blacks$ock. The BOARD decided to have a sign-out sheet for any m~ter~al borx~wed from the PLANNING BOARD office. The meeting adjourned mt midnight. (Wiliiam 0hePUli~) ~ secretax~