HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021-04-06 Planning Board Minutes Town of North Andover
PLANNING BOARD
f
u
Il=Nordt Andover, MA 01845
Trresrlay,April 6,_2021(r� ttr p. ., 120 Manr Street Town Hrr„
1
2 Present: E. Goldberg, 3, Simons, P. Boynton, A. Preston, K. Bargnesi K. Cormier, Assoc.
3 Absent:
4 Staff Present: J. Enright
5
6 E. Goldberg, Chairman: The Planning Board meeting for Tuesday,April 6, 2021 was called to order at 7 p.m.
7
8 E. Goldberg: (Read the Governor's Order into the record). Votes will be recorded cis roll call this everting. This
9 meeting ivas held remotely via conference call.
10 J. Enright 1t(in person/present): Roll Call: K. Cormier(remote participant), P. Boynton (remote participant),A.
I 1 Preston(remote participant), K. Bargnesi (remote participant)J. Simons (in-person/present), E. Goldberg(in-
12 person/present).
13
14 Pursuant to Governor Baker's March 12,2020 Order Suspending Certain Provisions of the Open Meeting Laiv, G.L. e.
15 30A,§18, and the Governor's March 15,2020 Order imposing strict limitation on the number of people that may gather in
16 one place,this meeting of the North Andover Planning Board will be conducted via remote participation to the greatest
17 extent possible.Specific information and the general guidelines for remote participation by ineinbers of the public andlor
18 parties Wilt a right rind/or requirement to attend this ineeting can be found on the Toivn's}vebsite,at
19 ivlyiv.noi'tlitmdover'iiiti.goi: For this meeting,inember's of the public ii�ho ivish to )vatch the meeting may do so on their
20 televisions by tuning to Conicast Channel8 or Verizon Channe126 or online at►viviv.rrortliairdovei•carri.org. No in Pierson
21 attendance of ineinbers of the public wilt be permitted, but every effort will be made to ensure thin fire public cart
22 adequately access the proceedings in real dine, via technological means. In the event that ive are unable to do so,despite
23 best efforts, rve will post on the Town of North Andoi,er ivebsite an audio or video recording, transcript,or other
24 comprehensive record ofproceedings as soon as possible after the meeting.If the public would like to participate in public
25 hearings please email your question1couuuent prior to or during the ineeting to ierrr'i,-hGi itoi'tllatrdover/ii(t.gor: The
26 (luestion/coinnrent will be read during the proceedings and responded to accordingly.
27
28 STAFF REPORT
29
30 CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS
31 3 Great Pond Road,Elaine Finbury: Application for a Site Plan Review Special Permit under Article 8,Part 3
32 and Article 10 § 195-10.7 of the North Andover Zoning Bylaw. The Applicant proposes the creative reuse and
33 conversion of the Grange Hall in the Old Center to three residential units, construction of retaining walls,
34 stormwater management,and creation of associated parking spaces. No exterior alterations are proposed. The
35 parcel is located within the Residential 3 zoning district.
36 [Confintied to the April 27, 2021 Planning Board ineeling]
37
38 [E. Goldberg read Gov. Baker's Order into the record]
39 0 Beecl►svoocl Drive,The
„ ubblebine Company:Application for a Site Plan Review Special Permit and Parking
e,St, ___•
40 Reduction Special Permit under Article 8 Supplementary Regulations, Part] Off-Street Parking and Loading,Part
41 3 Site Plan Review, and Article 16 Corridor Development District of the North Andover Zoning Bylaw. The
42 Applicant proposes construction of a self-storage facility. The proposed use will include a 3-story 90,000 SF
43 building(30,000 SF footprint)with associated parking, landscaping, utilities and stormwater management. The
44 project is located within the Corridor Development District 3 (CDD3)Zoning District.
45 J. Enri Irt: Revised plans were submitted addressing all outstanding stormwater and department review comments.
46 Applicant is before Conservation for an NOI;hearing opened March 10, 2021; they have not closed yet wanting a
1
I
Town of North Andover
PLANNING BOARD
Tuesday,April 6, 202164 7P.nt., 120 Mrri►r Street Town Hall,North Andover, MA_01845
47 sense of the Planning Board's status with the project. Outstanding issues related to stormwater management have
48 been conditioned in the draft decision. Applicant submitted images of other storage facilities and provided a letter
49 requesting a waiver of the required fiscal impact and community impact analysis and a request for modification to
50 the design standards to allow for a 20 ft. drive aisle for 2-way traffic v. the 25 ft. required. Applicant submitted a
51 request to withdraw the Parking Reduction SP application. The Building Commissioner has confirmed 26 spaces
52 are provided; 23 are required. Suggests withdrawal be approved without prejudice. Showed images of local self-
53 storage facilities and proposed building elevations.
54 J. Simons: Inquired about visibility of roof mechanicals.
55 R. Duval, TFMoran: There are a half dozen units on the roof; 2-3 tons ea. 3 ft. square by 3 ft, high set in from the
56 edge so they will not be visible frown any vantage point.
57 J.Enright: Building footprint is 30K sq.ft. and the building is 40 ft. tall (3-stories).
58 MOTION: J. Simons made a motion to close the public bearing for 0 Beechwood Drive,North Andover, MA. P.
59 Boynton seconded. Roll Call vote: J. Simons voted yes. E. Goldberg voted yes. A. Preston voted yes. P. Boynton
60 yes. K. Bargnesi voted yes. The vote was 5-0, unanimous in favor.
61 MOTION: J. Simons made a motion to accept the request for the withdrawal without prejudice of the Parking
62 Reduction Special Permit application for 0 Beechwood Drive,North Andover,MA. K. Bargncsi seconded. Roll
63 Call vote: K. Bargnesi voted yes. P. Boynton yes. A. Preston voted yes.J. Simons voted yes. E. Goldberg voted
64 yes. The vote was 5-0, unanimous in favor.
65 MOTION: J. Simons made a motion to approve the Special Permit, as amended, for 0 Beechwood Drive,North
66 Andover, MA. P. Boynton seconded. Roll Call vote: A. Preston voted yes. P. Boynton yes. K. Bargncsi voted yes.
67 J. Simons voted yes. E. Goldberg voted yes. The vote was 5-0, unanimous in favor.
68
69 [L. Goldbet•g read Gov. Baker's Order into the record]
70 Annual Town Meeting Zoning Bylaw Amendment ArticleslPlannine Board Report:
71 Table 2: Summary of Dimensional Re uirem .ardor
entsCo• Corridor Development District 2 CDD2 : Amend tat
72 area minimum, street frontage, and to make them consistent with the text in Article 16, Corridor
73 Development District, 195-16.13 of the Zoning Bylaw.
74 • Business 4 District: add Personal Service Establishments to Permitted Uses
75 • Downtown Overlay District, Historic Mill Ares: Subdistrict A: add Personal Service Establishments to
76 Permitted Uses
77 • Water Protection District: Make Boundaries and Zones text consistent dimensions in Table 1 and Table 2,
78 amend cross-references and other minor edits.
79 • Sign Byla : Amend the zoning bylaw to regulate the placement of signs on private property in a content
80 neutral manner.
81 E. Goldberg: Confirmed no public comment has been received on any of these Articles. The Board had no
82 additional comments.
83 J. Enright:Noted Annual Town Meeting has been rescheduled from May 18, 2021 to June 15, 2021.
84 MOTION: J. Simons made a motion to recommend favorable action on the five Articles noted above. A. Preston
85 seconded. Roll Call vote: A. Preston voted yes. P. Boynton yes. K. Bargnesi voted yes. J. Simons voted yes. E.
86 Goldberg voted yes. The vote was 5-0, unanimous in favor.
87
88 Planning Board Report
89 Annual Town Meeting Wan-ant Articles 3 and 4: Authorization to Accept and Grant Easements.
2
i
Town of North Andover
PLANNING BOARD
Tires rry.April 6, .20.21 (&, 7 p.m., 120 Maur Street Towlr„Hall.Noilh Amlover, MA 01845,•,•,.,,,•_,.
90 AnnuaI Town Meeting Warrant Article 9: Transfer care and custody of land surrounding the Stevens Estate to
91 Conservation Commission,
92 E. Goldberg: Confirmed that no public or Board comment leas been received on these three articles.
93 J. Enrimbt: Provided a brief explanation of Article 9. Protects the land and transfers care and custody to
94 Conservation.
95 P. Boynton: Clarified acreage given to Conservation is 137 acres; 16 acres remains with the Stevens Estate.
96 Annual Town Meeting Warrant Article 15: Report of the Community Preservation Committee-Appropriation from
97 Community Preservation Fund.
98 J. Simons: Briefly summarized Article 15 and upcoming projects funded by the CPC. Highlighted projects
99 include: Affordable Housing Trust-enables the committee to secure property as it becomes available; Bradstreet
100 School Memorial,Housing Analyst-allowing an expert in housing to manage the Town's 40B numbers,advise on
101 numbers, over a 2-year period; Gateway Improvements/l-Iistoric Causeway Trail as a component to recreation and
102 open space,this allows for management of invasive species, trash and erosion at the two main trails entering Weir
103 Hill and the parking lot adjacent to the beach; stone arch &causeway at Weir Hill is an historic element built
104 during the Mill era (P. Boynton recused h nrselffrom voting on this as Ile particil3ated in submitting the CPC
105 application);Additional Funds to Housing Authority-next steps to Master Plan, Final Phase upgrades at the
106 Playgrounds-Thomson&Kindergarten schools; Ridgewood Cemetery-next phase to their Master Plan and
107 establishment of a second burial ground similar to the first.
108 MOTION: P. Boynton made a motion to recommend favorable action on Articles 3,4 &9. J. Simons seconded.
109 Roll Call vote: K. Bargnesi voted yes. P. Boynton yes.A. Preston voted yes. J. Simons voted yes. E. Goldberg
110 voted yes. The vote was 5-0, unanimous in favor.
111 MOTION: J. Simons made a motion to recommend favorable action on Article 15. K. Bargnesi seconded. Roll
112 Call vote: A. Preston voted yes. K. Bargnesi voted yes.J. Simons voted yes. E. Goldberg voted yes. The vote was
113 4-0, unanimous in favor. (P. llo)nntorr recused).
114
115 DISCUSSION ITEMS
116 Town Counsel,Suzanne Egan: Overview of House Choice Legislation.
117 S. Egan,Town Counsel: Suggested the Board review this information and postpone a discussion to a later date.
118 Act provides opportunities for affordable housing in MA as an amendment to the Zoning Act Chapter 40A; easier,
119 more expedited method to amend zoning bylaws to provide for multi-family housing. Act provides reduction in
120 the quantum of vote necessary for Special Permits and uses as required as a matter of right. This law is in effect
121 now and affects all municipalities other than Boston.
122 [Conntirrrted to the April 27, 2021 Planning Board meeting]
123
124 Citizen Petition: Multi-Housing Moratorium Warrant Article
125 [Applicant not present]
126 (E. Goldhen g recrcl proposed article into the record)
127 S. Egan, Town Counsel: This is similar to the zoning moratorium passed by the town of Saugus. AG now has to
128 review all zoning bylaws of any town;they issued a 2019 opinion approving the bylaw. It is an interim zoning
129 measure. It served a particular purpose; deemed constitutional.
130 E. Goldberg: Was that challenged in court?
131 S.Ega is Not to my knowledge.
132 E. Goldbeer: I struggle to see how this would be legal; it wants a comprehensive study, however there is no
133 funding mechanism. We have completed such studies already; we have addressed these issues in comprehensive
3
Town of North Andover
PLANNING BOARD
I
i
y, (fir P. , t Town M11, Nof tli Andover,MA OI845_
rresr rr April r 7 frr. 120 Mrarrr Stt„ee,•,._ _
134 ways as part of the Special Permit process, Master Plan, Housing Production Study. It cannot be a pause to see if
135 we have addressed everything; it appears as an arbitrary"taking". Three units or more, makes no sense.
136 S. Ewan: The courts have found these to be constitutional unless there is a very specific"showing",there is no
137 "taking"because most landowners will still have use of their property; it's an interim measure. A moratorium will
138 not apply to any Special Permit issued before the first notice of public hearing of the proposed amendment.
139 Property owners that have their Special Permits may very well be protected under Chapter 40A Section 6.
140 E. Goldberg: It seems odd to have a zoning rule about building permits. Would 40B trump a building moratorium?
141 S. Egan: Yes, 40B trumps everything.
142 J. Simons: If this is approved, we will have the identical discussion we had regarding the Master Plan. That
143 discussion was the first time I heard sentiment for wanting"only"single-family housing in town; an alternate
144 group argued for multi-family housing. I think we need to at least let people vent and talk this out. In the late
145 eighties, we considered capping the building of single-family homes.
146 E. Goldberg: If this is a referendum on the Royal Crest Proposal which goes before Town Meeting anyway;this
147 seems reactionary and over-broad to suit whatever purpose it serves. If this were in place, what are we going to do
148 that we have not already done and what is the real need for such a"significant"proposal as this?
149 J. Enright: This zoning amendment will be noticed on April 12"'and 21". I expect the petitioner will attend the
150 public hearing opening on April 27, 2021.
151 J. Simons: We have kept multi-family housing locations in logical areas, i.e. closer to major highways.
152 K. Bar rg zesi: When we receive fiscal impact studies from these multi-family applicants, are they taking into
153 account those projects that have been approved; built and permitted when looking at municipal services, public
154 schools and public safety or is that data based on what exists now? People seem most coricerned about the sum of
155 the impact. Perhaps a moratorium is not the answer.
156 J. Enright: It is the aggregate of all the recent developments. I provided the data of"permitted not constructed"and
157 "permitted and constructed"numbers to the peer reviewer for the Royal Crest proposal.
158 E. Goldber : AvalonBay incorporated other units being planned to come on board or about to come on board. We
159 can ask our peer reviewer.
160 K. Cormier: How does this intersect with the Housing Choice Act 2021 and is this even possible?It does not seem
161 like we have a choice.
162 E. Goldberr7: The intents are somewhat different. Housing Choice Act is an"idea"to make it easier for affordable
163 housing-specifically, multi-farnily. There is a shortage of housing in the Comrnonwealth. Towns are hesitant to
164 take on multi-family housing because it carries burdens associated with it. The state is trying to make it easier; this
165 appears to have the opposite intent. This puts off building permits; approved projects could line up and wait hvo
166 years; it is a conversation worth having.
167 P. Bo, ro: Agreed with the sentiment that there is reason to discuss this at greater length to give people a chance
168 to voice their concerns. I do not know how many options there are; this is the method to do this the right way. I see
169 the sense behind it.
170 A. Preston: I question what larger scale multi-family projects can be built in this town right now without zoning
171 approvals through town meeting-either by right or Site Plan Review?This seems unnecessary, but 1 `d like to hear
172 more.
173 E. Goldberg: Encouraged all opinions to be brought forth for the discussion during the public hearings.
174
175 Ro al Crest Estates 1 &28 Royal Crest Drive Trini Financial Jim Keefe: Proposed Master
176 Redevelopment Plan for the property.
177 Update to building heights and number of floors
4
Town of North Andover
PLANNING BOARD
I
I
Arrdove►•, MA 0})j p ' , rr p._ wirtlr 1845
_crest rr r•r 7 oar. 120 Mama St►•eet Tot Hall,No
178 • Update from zoning working group
179 • Analysis for the pedestrian bridge option Rt. 114
180 • Responses to general questions/comments
181 R Goldberg: We will hear from the applicant about building heights& number of floors,the zoning working
182 group and similar to the last anecting,we will address responses general questions and comments. We have forty
183 pages to cover along with responses from Trinity. Whatever we do not get through tonight will he addressed at the
184 next meeting on April 27,2021.
185 Update Building Heights &Number of Floors:
186 J. Enra ht: Additional resident
� comments were received Tate today(drsplqyecl onscreen) as well as Trinity's
187 response to the general, public comments which is the document being referenced this evening.Number of
188 comments were related to building heights. Ali excel spreadsheet that details the conceptual plan by block, number
189 of floors,height and use of each building.
190 J. Keefe, Trinity financial: We were encouraged to review density and hope to have suggestions and proposals in
191 the next week to ten days.
192 Zoning Working Group:
193 S. The zoning working group has been meeting once a week on the proposed zoning bylaw and working
194 with the proponents to review consistency against the existing zoning bylaw. What is proposed in the zoning
195 bylaw, is an as-of-right permit for the plan which means that the Planning Board,as they typically do, will not be
196 reviewing the project for a Special Permit, taking away that discretionary review. Town Meeting essentially
197 approves the portions of this plan as-of-right. Density is an issue; we are looking for response from the proponent
198 to decrease that to show a project that reflects more of the character of North Andover regarding setbacks, open
199 space,characteristics outlined in the zoning bylaw. We are continuing to work on this, reviewing mechanics and
200 substance of the bylaw.
201 E. Goldberg: This will be different than Amazon. Trinity is not returning for Special Permits; Town Meeting
202 approves the project, in addition to the zoning.
203 S. Egan: That happened with the MINCO and Princeton Properties projects. There were zoning amendments put
204 forth which may have involved height or density issues. This zoning bylaw is an overlay district that has a specific
205 plan approved as-of-right; there is no Special Permit process; there is no determination process via the Planning
206 Board to determine appropriate use. This process provides certainty to the developer,through the Town Meeting
207 process.
208 J. Enright: The working group has discussed certain components of what would trigger a Special Permit and
209 whether this could be a hybrid approach; i.e., a restaurant greater than 15K sq. ft., a retail building of similar size,
210 however per the request of the proponents,the vast majority of uses would be as-of-right, by plan approval, unless
211 a different approval process and a different appeal process is considered.
212 J. Simons: There is a big difference between a use allowed by Special Permit and a Special Permit Site Plan
213 Review. With a Special Permit the Planning Board has a fair amount of discretion for good reasons can deem a use
214 is inappropriate whereas a Site Plan Review is basically an approval subject to conditions. I am reluctant to give
215 up Site Plan Review for most uses on this property. You can make the argument for the townhomes, but I do not
216 want to give tip the level of scrutiny once something is approved by Site Plan Review for the rest of the property. I
217 view a Special Permit as a use that is not allowed by right but is allowed by Special Permit to be fundamentally
218 different than Site Plan Review Special Permit. The standards and requirements are dramatically different. Town
219 Meeting cannot be the end of this; there should be a rigorous process in public where people can discuss this.
220 J. Enright: The working group has considered carrying all the information requirements in the Site Plan Review
221 bylaw into"Plan Review",carrying the design guidelines in and most of the information seen in Site PIan Review,
5
i
0
I
i
Town of North Andover
PLANNING BOARD
Vies` 'at,April 620.21 rr 7p.tfr., 1201V1aiir Sheet ToiUsr Hall,Not„11i„Arrrlover� MA OI845
222 it is not just by Special Permit. This contemplates an application back to the Planning board for Plan Review;they
223 cannot go straight to the Building Permit.
224 E. Goldberg: It seems like a compromise,you can build it as-of-right if town approves it, but they still return to the
225 Board for the Special Permit process; we need to shape it. It seems appropriate if once approved, we can still
226 review certain components. It is important to know what things can and cannot change. Things such as building
227 heights, density, parking, traffic flow, buffer zones, will be fully vetted at Town Meeting.
228 S. Ems: 'This is simply a different procedural posture. If something is different than what is approved at Town
229 Meeting,they would be required to return to Town Mceting to get major items changed.
230 Pedestrian Bridge Analysis:
231 M. Lozano:We heard desire for the Board to look at the option of a pedestrian bridge. VHB did a comprehensive
232 study and memo. We encourage Board's peer reviewer to review this memo and we will take this to MassDOT for
233 their comment and input.
234 J. Keotteritz,VHB: Provided bridge option analysis; memo includes two graphics. A bridge is not recommended.
235 Encouraging people to use the bridge where there are no grade changes is the issue. Detour to the bridge lengthens
236 desirable pedestrian travel approach prioritizing vehicles.
237 J. Enrip it: MassDOT will be prepared to attend our next meeting; I will forward this memo to them if they wish to
238 comment. I suggest you wait to send this to our peer reviewer until their comments are received.
239 J. Simons: Questioned whether physical grade makes the bridge easier to build.
240 J. Keotteritz: It is a tradeoff between earthwork and structural cost. The design includes a designated signal and
241 widened crossing.
242 A. Preston: A signaled intersection makes a lot of sense. People will use the pedestrian signal v. a pedestrian
243 bridge; it might not have a lot of utility. Willing to hear more about it.
244 Responses to General Comments and Questions:
245 E. Goldber : Intent is to read comments in same manner as last meeting. Read initial statement provided.by
246 Trinity; Elkus Manfredi is architect of record, included highlights of plan. (Fiscal impact study to be al'ailable the
247 end of April or beginning of Ma})
248 P. Boynton: I do not understand the reference to a"traditional New England village". It is a stretch to say this is
249 the model of that. I completely understand the model. I love the idea, but what we are seeing in terms of density
250 conflicts with the notion of a traditional New England village. The piece left out here is the density. This is more
251 like the Boston Common,Central Park, urban areas. The term "New England Town village"conveys mixed use,
252 quaint and low density. If this is being sold with reassuring terminology like"New England village"we must
253 question the proposal does not accurately reflect how it is being sold; we need to address the density. This"town
254 green" is similar to the South Common in Lawrence as a place to gather with adjacent five story buildings.
255 J. Keefe: The"town green" is the organizing principal of a lot of New England towns;the church. library, housing,
256 retailers, a place where the community can come together for different events and passive recreation. The model
257 has worked for over 200 years; we are recreating this here.
258 E. Goldber : It is more the sense of having one place where people meet with everything centered in one location
259 with housing, stores branching out from a central location; density does not come to my mind.
260 J. Simons: I agree that calling it a"New England town green" is a stretch bordering on disingenuous.No New
261 England green anywhere in New England has the scale of this proposal. This is a tiny"pocket park"amongst tall
262 buildings. The reference does not work for me.
263 E. Goldberg: `Read abutter/resident comments into the record]LAM. Collar,N. Hodor, J. Watters, L. Jackobek
264 (1 &2),J. Arleque, M.Neagle, C. Tibaudo, M. &K. Tortora, and T. & R. Fortune(1 &2). Responses related to
265 the following topics: Schools,traffic, density, (items relaled to fiscal impact shaded in document will be dealt}villa
6
Town of North Andover
PLANNING BOARD
Tuesday,Apt'il 6, 202.1 R 7p.fn„ 1._20 Main Sheet Town Hall,NoN11 Andover, MA 01843
266 at following meeting) net difference in residential units-total proposed is 1641; currently it is 588 (d fference is
267 1053 units) number of bedrooms goes from 1284 to 2927 (diet'ence is 1640 bedrooms), total occupants is
268 currently 1926; goes to 5264 (difference is 3338 proposed additional occupants projected-includes dorrrrs),
269 pedestrian footbridge, make-up of retail location,hotel operation (Merrimack College only has involvement with
270 the cloi-milory component at the site; hotel independently owned and operated byAimco and Trinit}), lighting plan
271 & light pollution (lighting plan to folloug, Master Plan references, retail relative to tax base, housing choices,
272 school population increase, affordable housing (shortage exists in North Andover-, latest projects do not Dave 40B
273 components, as total of units increases affordable percentage diminishes),density, scale& building heights,
274 landscaping,transparency (Project is not a public hearing, therefore not prthlicly noticed), outreach, parking, noise
275 and potential for late night events, safety& security, construction schedule and duration,drainage plan, walking
276 path concerns,Annual Town Meeting will now be held June 15"'. This project will not be on the Julie IS"'Town
277 Meeting warrant. Special Town Meeting is being considered this fall. (Fiscal r-elated questions/comments will be
278 addressed in f tture)
279 J. Enright: Will reach out to the school department for school enrollment numbers for large developments.
280 Reviewed the location and height of proposed buildings. Current zoning bylaw requires a 100' setback to Rt. 114.
281 Merrimack College has been asked to attend the May 4,2021 meeting. Parking ratios have not been discussed with
282 the Board yet. We are seeking information on the Floor Area Ratios associated with the phasing plan.
283 M. Lozano: Trinity is prepared to accept any fencing requests along the property line. We are preparing to speak to
284 the construction phasing plan and duration soon.
285 E. Goldberg: Due to the amount of information to be covered, suggests moving the April 27, 2021 meeting to 6:30
286 p.m. J. Enright to reach out the NACAM TV to see if they cart meet that request.
287
288 MEETING MINUTES:
289 MOTION: March 16, 2021 Planting.Board minutes to be voted on at the April 27,2021 Planning Board meeting.
290
291 ADJOURNMENT
292 MOTION: J. Simons made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Motion was seconded by P. Boynton, Meeting
293 adjourned @ 9:30 p.m. Roll Call vote: A. Preston voted yes. P. Boynton yes. J. Simons voted yes. E. Goldberg
294 voted yes. The vote was 4-0, unanimous in favor.
295
296 MEETING MATERIALS:Planning Board Meeting Agenda April 6,2021,DRAFT Planning Board Meeting Minutes
297 March 16,2021,Staff Report:210406 Staff Report;3 Great fond Road,Elaine Finbury:210406 Con't to April 27;
298 0 Beechwood Drive,The Stubblebine Co: Department Review: 210325 NAFD—Final Comment,210326 Building
299 Inspector--Parking Comment(2),210326 Building Inspector Parking Comment,210329 Health—Final Comment,210329
300 NAPD—Final Comment;Draft Decision:20210406 0 Beechwood Drive-DRAFT;Elevations: 210216 REV NORWOOD
301 SELF STORAGE- Schematics; Images Storage Facilities: Example Storage Facilities;Plans:210326 31968-00 Site Rcv02;
302 Resp to Dept. Review:210318 Resp to Dept Comment_Muni01_rev0,Swept Path 31968-00 Site Plans-TURNING;
303 Stormwater Review:210225 P'Peer Review Beechwood Dr,210311 Stormwater_Response—Eng01 rev0,210323
304 31968.00_Stormwater Report Rev01_clean; Waiver Request:210322_waiverlett Aisle Width; Withdrawal Request—
305 Parking Reduction SP:210326 WITHDRAWAL FORM;Annual Town Meeting Zoning Bylaw Amendment Warrant
306 Articles: 210406 Planning Board Report;Town Counsel Suzanne Egan: Housing Choice Act of 2021;Planning Board
307 Report: 210406 Planning Board Report,SE T0877_Site Plan 03-24-2021;Citizen Petition: 21M8 Review Calendar—
308 Citizen Petition Article,Citizen Petition Housing Moratorium; Royal Crest Estates(1&28 Royal Crest Drive),Trinity
309 Financial: Building Heights Stories.210316 Proposed Bldg Height--Floors 3.16.21,210316 RCE BLDG HTS 21_0305r1;
310 Pedestrian Bridge Analysis: 210406 14283.00—Route 114 Pedestrian Bridge Analysis,210406 14283.00_Figure IA—Route
7
Town of North Andover
PLANNING BOARD
s
Tuesday,Apri16, 2021 rr, 7 p.m.f 120 Maim Sit-eel Town Ha 1,North Andover, MA 01845
311 114 Pedestrian Bridge Markup [2021-04-05],210406 14283.00_Pigure 1B—Route 114 Pedestrian Bridge Markup [2021-04-
312 05]; Resident Comments_Questions: 210406 Trinity Response Summary General Public Comments,210406 Summary
313 General Public Comments,210406 Resident Comment—Lauro,210401 Resident Comment—Schaalman,210401 Resident
314 Comment—Rudnicki; Program Summmy 1.28.21.
8