HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021-11-16 Planning Board Minutes Town of'North Andover
PLANNING BOARD
E'itaan Goldherg, Chairman Jahn Simons
eter 13oyrttan �'Peter %/%% ' Kell Cormier
��•
• "� Alissa Koenig
Tuesday, November 16, 2021 (0 7o.m., 120.R Maim Street,NA Senior Center,North Andover, MA
01845
1
2 Present: I.?. Goldberg, J. Simons,A. Koenig, R Boynton, K. Cormier-Rewrote
3 Absent:
4 Staff Present: J. Enright
5
6 E. Goldberg, Chairman': The Planning Board niecting for Tuesday,November 16, 2021. was called to order at 7
7 p.m. (Read Governor's Order into the record. This meeting is considered a hybrid meeting; both rewrote and in-
8 person. Votes will be,recorded as roll call this evening.)
9
10 Pursuant to Chapter 20 of the Acts oaf 2021, this meeting will be conducted in person anal via remote means, in
11 accordance with applicable law. This meeting of'the North Andover Planning Board ivill be conducted both in-
12 person at the meeting location listed above and via remote participation. Specific in farinaation and the general
1.3 guidelines for remoteparticipation by members of'thepublic and/orpaarties with a right and/or requirement to
14 attend this nteetittg taut be found oat the 7'o)vrt's raebsite, at rvtvw.ttorthattdoverrita.gov. For this meeting,
15 members of'the public rvho wish to watch the meeting live may do so oat their televisions by tuning to Corncast
16 Channel 8 or Veri"zon Channel 26 or online at rvtvw.nortltattdoverearrt.org. Ira person attendance of members of
17 the public and Board members will be permitted, and every effort will be made to ensure that the public cart
18 adequately access the proceedings in real tune, via technological means. In the event that rve are unable to do
19 so, despite best efforts, we will post oil the Torvn of North Andover rvebsite an audio or video recording,
20 transcript, or other comprehensive record of proceedhigs as soon aspossible after the meeting.If the public
21 would like to participate in public hearings, but not attend the meeting in person please email your
22 question/comment prior to or during the meeting The question/comment will
23 be read during the proceedings and responded to accordingly.
24
25 J. Enright:Attendance:K Cor-irtier preseittlr•errtote, A. Koenig-present, J. Simons present, P. Boynton present, F.
26 Goldberg present.
27
28 STAFF REPORT
29
30 NEW PUBLIC HEARINGS
31 33 A rledore Lane Sean &Lauren Delaney: Application for a Watershed Special Permit under Article 4 part
32 5 Section 195-4.19(B) and Article 10 Section 195-10.7 of the Zoning Bylaw to authorize an additional 12' x 24'
33 garage bay, add second floor addition over garage and breezeway, and expand paved driveway to access new
34 garage bay. The property is located in the Residential 3 (R-3)zoning district.
35 J Enri 1.t: Work proposed is within the 325' Non-:Discharge Buffer Zone to a wetland area located approximately
36 130' from the lot, at I 1 Appledore L,n. Stormwater management includes a systern of two subsurface drywells
37 designed to capture drainage from the proposed additional impervious surface. First stormwater peer review has
38 been received; a response is pending. Department review comments were received from NAFD,Building and
39 Conservation. This is not within Conservation's jurisdiction therefore it is not before the Commission. Any
40 potential stockpiling activity needs to be identified on the plan.
41 Jack Sullivan, PE, Sullivan Engineering Group: Applicant is proposing a portion of the existing I-story structure
42 will increase to a 2-story structure. A 12 x 24x 24' addition will occur to the back side of the existing garage which
43 will become a garage bay.Driveway is expanding on that side to provide garage bay access.A small, landscaped
1
Town of`Nora{,Andover
PLANNING'BOARD
Eitrrn Goldberg, Chairman • Jalrrr Simons
Peter Boynton �� � '• Kelly Cormier
• Alissa Koenig
Tuesdrry,�November 16, 2021(u7 7 p.m., 120)?Main Street,NA Senior Center, North Anrlover, MA.
01845
44 retaining wall is shown off the lot line due to the grade change in that area. Ilas reviewed the peer review
45 comments and can address all concerns.
46 J. Simons: Requested clarification of the wetland location which is located oil I I Appledore bane. The 2-ear
47 garage today becomes 3-car with living space over the garage above all three bays?
48 Sean Delaney, 33 AAppledore Lane: That is correct,we are creating a family-suite on the second floor over the
49 existing garage.
50 J. Enrig 1t: A family suite will require permitting through the ZBA.
51 E. Goldbert: We will wait for the responses to the peer review and anticipate a draft decision will be ready for the
52 next meeting.
53 [Continited to the December 7,2021 Plcrnning Booi-c1 ineeling]
54
55 212 Brentwood Circle, John & Michelle Tuirnello: Application for a Watershed Special permit under
56 Article 4 fart 5 Section 195-4.19(B) and Article 10 Section 195-10.7 of the Zoning Bylaw to authorize installation
57 of an in-ground pool, patio, shed,and fencing within the Non-Discharge Zone of the Watershed Protection
58 District. The property is located in the Residential 1 (R-1)zoning district.
59 J. Enright: This is a 'I-acre site. The development is located frilly within the 325'Non-Discharge Buffer Zone from
60 the wetland area located at the adjacent 96 Brentwood Circle. Proposed stor water management includes 2 ft.
61 deep river rock drainage trenches surrounding the proposed impervious site improvements.A total of 1,352 SF of
62 additional impervious area is proposed on the site. An O&M plan has been provided and the proposal includes a
63 cartridge style filter system. One abetter has reached out with proposed drainage concerns. The application
64 suggests to drainage points to the southeast. This should be confirmed.
65 Jack Sullivan, PE, Sullivan.Engineering, Group: Project is within a level,grassed backyard. River rock occurs off
66 the back side of the patio, 4' wide x 2' deep.Drainage coming off the patio would go into this area and recharge
67 into the grouted. The drip line of the shed's roof will have the same low maintenance river rock drainage; will
68 provide ail O&M plan for drainage. 17he pool's cartridge system involves no back washing creating an
69 environmentally sensitive pool. Wetlands are offsite. Provided an O&M plan for the shutdown of tile pool. Pool.
70 discharge call be drained into the river rock off the back edge of the patio or discharged on the lawn away from
71 any abutting properties and allowed to infiltrate back into the ground. Reviewed peer review comments and can
72 address all concerns. There will be no tree removal, branches may be limbed around the shed.
73 J._Sullivan: Agreed to show the proposed pool drainage location graphically on the plan and label it for the record.
74 It starts away from his property and won't have an impact.
75 E. Goldberg: We will wait for the responses to the peer review and anticipate a draft decision will be ready for the
76 next meeting.
77 [Continued to the December 7,2021 Planning Bocrrcl meeting]
78
79 DISCUSSION ITEMS
80 45 C,`otuit Street,Ben Osgood: Discussion regarding access to the frontage of an undeveloped lot(Master
81 Redevelopment Plan for the property.
82 J. Enright: Application for a Notice of Intent to construct a single-family home with a wetland crossing is currently
83 before the Conservation Commission. This is an undeveloped lot that does not currently have constructed access to
84 the frontage. Requested Ben Osgood,project engineer, attend meeting to discuss the issue with the Board. Joe
85 Lynch, Conservation Board member, sent an email dated 10/22/21 stating that he slid Registry research and
86 discovered that this portion of Cotuit St. and Leyden St. are not public ways. A portion of Cotuit St.was accepted
2
Town of North Andover
I'LANNING,BOARD
F,iNn Goldberg, Chairman John Simons
Peter 13vynton �� �%/ '• Kellj? Co nrief-
• Alissa Koenig
I nesday,November 16, 2'021 (d, 7 pan., 1201t Main Street, NA Senior Center,North Andover, AM
01845
87 as a Public Way in 1951 at Town Meeting, however,only for the first. 160 ft. ftonl Andover St. In his opinion,that
88 makes the frontage at 45 Cotuit St a private way. J. Borgesi submitted a letter supporting tile proposed 12 ft.wide
89 driveway as identified oil the plan set for access to the existing lot. All maintenance of this access way including
90 but not limited to pavement;aluminum box culvert, and wing walls will be the responsibility of the homeowner.
91 However, regarding lot frontage, J. 'Borgesi has communicated to the Conservation Commission that it does not
92 fall under the DPW's jurisdiction and advised that input fronn the Planning and/or Zoning Boards should be
93 requested regarding the issue. Showed locus and plan;proposed house sits to the rear of the undeveloped lot and
94 driveway snakes across a wetland crossing to Cotuit. To get to Cotuit, it would have to cross a small portion of
95 Leyden. Both Leyden and Cotuit Streets are shown on the registry plan;these portions are not accepted nor
96 constructed.
97 Ben Osgood,Jr.,PI;,Rai7gei l:oggineering Gi-o_glp: This property was created in 1985 on a horm A plan. Cotuit St.
98 existed in 1985 as it(foes now; there's been no reduction in the roadway. Your subdivision regulation 255-2.5
99 regarding roadway improvements states, "adequate access from a public way with a street systern within a
100 subdivision does not connect with or have in the opinion of tile Board, adequate access from a town county or state
101 way the Board may require as a condition of approval a plan that such adequate access be provided by the
102 Applicant and/or that the Applicant make physical improvements to and within such a way of access from the
103 boundary the subdivision to the way."You need to have access onto a constructed way. The town engineer deems
104 the 12 ft. driveway provides adequate access to the property. This is the way the roadway existed when the plan
105 was submitted to the Planning Board, it was signed off on and hasn't been changed since July 5, 1984.
106 I,3. Osgood: It was approved as an ANR without access to the frontage. (#9588)
107 E. Goldberg: How could it be an.ANR without frontage?
108 B.Osgood: When they were developing this piece of land, there was concern if Leyden St.were constructed and
109 connected to Cotuit,and Cotuit was constructed to Waverly Rd.that this would become a shortcut.At the time,
110 there was open land(this piece was left undeveloped) in the area.You would traverse grassed land with brush.
III E. Goldberg: Conservation suggests building up the roadway to subdivision standards. Another possible solution is
112 building a driveway by doing a subdivision just for the roadway using waivers for unnecessary item. Something is
113 needed otherwise there remains no access to the property.
.114 J. Simons: What is the hart of Cotuit that is the public way and what is the ownership of the piece between the
115 paved part of Cotuit at Kingston St.?If something wasn't constructed doesn't the ownership revert to the people
116 oil either side?
117 B. Osgood: Cotuit St. is a private way, open to the public. 'File piece between Cotuit and Kingston St. is Leyden
118 St. which was"somewhat"constructed. Wetlands have expanded and you cannot get through there; it remains an
119 undeveloped roadway, but everybody has rights over it because they're part of the subdivision. Residents may own
120 to the centerline, so this lot may come out to the centerline and the lots across the St. may come out to the
121 centerline.
122 E. Goldberg: Could you build this driveway without getting easements from them?Does the driveway traverse
123 I.,eyden St.?
124 B. Osgood: The driveway goes over the way that's in front of this property, everybody has a right to improve that
125 way.As a private way,the town is not responsible to maintain Cotuit St. What does a subdivision application do
126 for us when there is already a Form A plan?We are building access to the paved area in front of our lot.
127 E. Goldberg: What do the neighbors want?If in agreement, there should be a way to make that happen.
3
Town n of North Andover
PLANNING BOARD
Eitan GoNbet°g, Chait-marr • Joltri Simms
Peter l3ayrtto�t ii�i/�����,�1 �„•• Ifelly Coi-mien
• Alissa Koenig
Titesrla n November 16 2021 a7 7 .m. 120R Mrrin Street NA Senior Center North Andover MA
01845
128 B. Osg gad: The neighbors have no say, we have a right to use the way, it's in our deed as part of the subdivision.
1.29 Roadways for this property were laid out in 1924 encompassing the condominiums, Brewster St.to Dartmouth St.;
130 it was a large area that was developed.
1.31 E. Goldberg: Is this a Subdivision or a Form A, or both?
132 B. Osgood: It was laid out in 1924 as a plan; a"subdivision"did not exist. It was re-clad as an ANR plan in 1984.
133 (Handed ANR Plan, Pat-eel 8 to Board)The zoning and roadway have not changed since then.It was done as an
134 ANR because the roads were all there. Homes in this section were built in 1984. Lots created in 1924 didn't meet
135 1984 zoning; they did a Dorm.A to make conforming lots which remains unchanged. 'file proposed house would
136 meet all setbacks and zoning.
137 E. Goldberg: If this were an ANR today,we couldn't approve this without frontage or adequate access, but we are
1.38 saying it's all existing lot.
139 J Simons: I would be concerned about access over someone else's land. If You call get the rights to access over the
140 piece of land that's Leyden, it exits onto a street. Otherwise, I think it's fine.
141 B. Osood: I don't have the deed with me, but I think they do have access. When a property is conveyed it's
142 always conveyed with access over the roadways within subdivision. We can verify that.
43 E. Goldberg: Wouldn't the ANR trump the 1924 plan if Leyden is now on this ANR plan?Do you think it heeds a
144 subdivision?
145 B. Osgood: Correct, but as the owner conveys properties, the owner owns the road, the right to pass and re-pass
146 over the roadways shown oil the plan. I don't think a subdivision is necessary, it's an ANR plan that accesses onto
147 a constructed roadway with a driveway. We have frontage on this curved portion ofthe roadway. I'm not sure
148 where Cotuit and Leyden end.
149 I?. Goldberg: Your choices are to file a subdivision or go forward and if someone disputes it,they can take
150 remedy.You would continue with Conservation and it's your client's risk. More research would be helpful
151 regarding ownership, specifically crossing the paper street, how the ANR came to exist, Current rights to cross and
152 re-pass, etc.
153 B. Osgood: We need to resolve this with Planning. If we need to present file deed to demonstrate we have access,1
154 will get an attorney to give case law. We will review the original deeds for rights to pass and re-pass. We will get a
155 legal opinion for Town Counsel review.
156 lConthmecl to the December- 7, 2021 Plcinning Booml meeting]
157
158 Royal Crest Estates 1 & 2$ Royal Crest Drive Triiiit
y Fixiancial., Jim Keefe: Proposed Master
159 Redevelopment.Plan for the property.
1.60 * Discuss potential for a Design Working Group
161 * Traffic Study update
162 * Draft mixed-use overlay district bylaw
1.63 • Program Summary
164 Board: Discussed effectiveness of having a potential Design Working Group to address aesthetic concerns for this
165 proposal. Board agreed this exercise was too detailed, premature and unnecessary at this time; bigger issues of
1.66 scale and density need to be addressed prior.
167 J.Enright: The proponents submitted a letter in response to the previous peel-review comments. J.Dirk has
168 provided a memorandum and is here to address that and lie has provided answers to questions the Board posed at
169 the last meeting.The proponents have submitted an answer as to how this project would affect the"average"town.
170 resident and provided detailed, related numbers.
4
Town of North Andover
PLANNING BOARD
Eilttn Goldberg, Chairman • •�' ,John Sintotts
PeterBoyntoir eft%���%%�'� �. Kelly C'ot-tstier
j Alisso Koenig
Tuesday,November 16, 2021(47 7 p.m., 120R Mttitt Street,NA Senior Center,North Andover, MA
01845
171 Jeffrey Dirk, P.F NAI: Provided a detailed 'traffic Study update. Three outstanding items including a summary
172 with respect to the pedestrian bridge. We reviewed Trinity's responses and within that memorandum was an
173 update relating to downsizing elements of the project. They had new trip generation calculations and associated
174 analyses. Tire first item reviewed were suggestions we had to enhancing the elements of the transportation
175 improvement program. MassDOT is undertaking a significant investment in the Rt. 114 improvements. Traffic
176 from this project will use some of the available capacity being created by the improvements. We reviewed ways
177 and opportunities the developer might construct additional improvements. The first suggestion is the"adaptive
178 traffic controlssystem technologies"which measures input and output at each intersection; it understands capacity
179 at intersections and measures the volume of traffic arriving and how much traffic it processes by adjusting the
180 signal tinting to serve the demand. This newer technology continually adjusts to fluctuating traffic flow in real
181 time;without intervention the system adjusts to the demand. This system will be installed between the Andover
182 bypass extending to Peter St. and Haverhill St. intersection.
183 J. Simons: I-low long has this system been used and where has it been implemented?How measurable is the
184 improvement it provides?
185 J. Dirk: It has been used for 5-10 years;relatively new in this area but used elsewhere in the country to relieve
186 congestion. It's effective where you have limited ability to widen the roadway and have fluctuating traffic. Will
187 follow up oar locations it is being installed in MA. Installing some in Newburyport. The second item we suggested
188 was the installation of a right turn lane at the applicant's private/primary driveway opposite Walsh Way to add
189 capacity to that intersection. We suggested the ability to lengthen the turn lanes at a couple intersections Rt. 125
190 Andover St. and Waverly Rd. approaches to Rt. H 4 to facilitate queueing. 'I'lrere's limited ability to create
191 additional capacity on the corridor. Trip reduction then becomes the focus which can be achieved through an
192 aggressive transportation demand managernent program. This means the site needs to be served by public
193 transportation to relieve density; alternative modes of transportation need to be considered with MVRTA
194 interested in serving this site. To supplement that, a private shuttle service could be run by the applicant as part of
195 their development or perhaps in conjunction with the college, or local businesses. If we cannot build capacity to
196 reduce the traffic volumes having all effective transportation demand management program is assurance, i.e.
197 connections to commuter rail stations, express bus into Boston. The town should review that framework for any
1.98 potential barriers to residents related to subsidizing this service to reduce Out-of-pocket costs to make it negligible.
199 Having robust artd safe accommodations for pedestrian and bicycle connections is important. The applicant needs
200 to flush this out in more detail. The community creeds to see what their commitments are for that trip reduction
201 strategy; services need to be frequent, convenient, affordable and marketed. You could expect to achieve a 1.0%
202 reduction in traffic volumes.
203 P. Boynton: We have received a solid analysis;the real solution is to reduce the traffic. This proposal's size,
204 scope and density translates to additional traffic. We now understand it needs to be reduced. When we say this
205 doesn't support North Andover, we aren't saying that we don't support additional housing. We have a strong track
206 record of supporting additional housing. Feedback we are getting is that it is too big, has too much scope,too
207 much density and too much traffic.
208 E. Goldberg: I would like to review numbers. I agree I don't think saying reduced traffic is going to be some sort
209 of panacea, but private transportation has a chance to make a difference. It may not make a tremendous difference,
210 but it has to be available, affordable and effective. It Wright be Helpful to estimate how many people living here
21.1 would be commuting to Boston, or how many do it now. I would like to know what the data reveals with regard to
212 the current plan and if a project is proposed and permitted,what mitigation can be done after the fact?
5
Town of North.Andover
PLANNING BOARD
Eitan GoNberg, Clzainnan • 'r. ,John .Simons
Peter Boynton Kelly Conniei-
• Alissa Koenig
Tues(NV,November 16 2021 d) 7 pxt., 1201?Maur Street NA.Senior Center NoNll Andover MA
01845
213 J,..Dirk;We are starting with a project that will generate over 9,000 vehicle trips per day net over what's there
214 today; that is a significant increase.
215 P. Bo n�ton: That figure represents a tripling.
216 J. Dirk: Based on the 10.20.2021 letter: the existing site has 588 residential units and generates an estimated 4488
217 vehicle trips; it's going from roughly 4500 to 9400 additional trips which translates to 13,500 approx. The traffic
218 data is accurate. Your peak numbers, given the mix of uses,will be somewhere between 7& 10% of that daily
219 number.
220 K. Cormier: Have you seen any change with the peak hour driving patterns nxid to post Covid? Should we be
221 looking at new data v.year old traffic numbers?
222 J. Dirk: It's shifted back;volumes have not resumed to pre-Covid levels; peaks are resuming. The volumes on the
223 Rt 1.14 Corridor are not back to where they were pre-Covid. The data being used would represent greater numbers.
224 There is 2021 data available for the Rt. 114 Corridor. We can take that and look back at the historic data at the
225 same location. historic data pre-Covid was just over 30K vehicles per day;2021 traffic volumes are just below
226 that at 29K.
227 I . Goldberg: Requested.J. Dirk review what the numbers with this current proposal mean and how it affects the
228 average North Andover citizen.
229 J. Dirk: Reviewed new peak hour numbers. (631-vehicles weekday morning hours; 737-evening, 897-Saturday;
230 total volume.Net increase over what's out there today with the 588 residential units ranges from 512 vehicles ill
231 the morning peak hour to a net increase of 717 during Saturday midday peak hours which results in impacts at the
232 intersections. Tile pronounced impact you would see would be the length of the queues which are already long.
233 'file rnix of uses within the site is important; switching to strictly residential is not a good idea as it translates to
234 more traffic. Applicant needs to look at capacity created and compare it against how much capacity they are using
235 as a measure of volume to capacity.They call demonstrate the volume to capacity ratios at intersections which.
236 may be helpful to understand impacts created and how much capacity the project is using.
237 J. Simons: What, incremental capacity does MassDOT provide? What if this was built and 5 years from now a
238 1500 unit apartment building gets built where the movie theater is oil the corridor in Lawrence?
239 J. Dirk: We have suggested enhancements that have been deemed not feasible. MassDOT is installing the adaptive
240 system and this proposed project is not adding capacity to the roadway. They're using the available capacity
241 created by MassDOT's project.No additional lanes are being added,they're adding driveways which may
242 improve efficiency;the one item not continued in their analysis is the volume to capacity ratio at each of the
243 intersections.
244 E. C.ioldberg: Say this project doesn't move forward, nothing is built or changes, MassDOT goes ahead,what is the
245 capacity"with the build"? 1s there a way to calculate, assuming another project goes forward in the same spot, or
246 down the street, something with half the amount of traffic? What would that do to the capacity? Looking at the
247 data there are unknowns.
248 J. Dirk: You can run pure volume numbers at"x"percent utilization capacity which can translate into some level
249 of development.Numbers can translate into a certain number of residential units and commercial space.
250 E. Goldber : You could specify a certain volume,70%overall development, then you would know what kind of
251 development:would support that.
252 P. Boynt-orr: When you talk about consuming roadway volume capacity it strikes me how analogous this is to-how
253 much water we have in the lake available for drinking water?Each new development consumes capacity. How
254 quickly will this project add volume and at the sarne time MassDOT is doing a multi-year project,how quickly
255 does the MassDOT project add capacity? We could have a year or two where we are upside down.
6
Town of'North Andover
PLANNING.BOARD
titan Goldberg, Cliai-maii John Simons
Peter Boynton io �i%�, �'« Kelly Coiwmiei-
• Alissa Koenig
Tties(lap,November 16 2021 i� 7 .m. 120R Main Street NA Senior Center Nor-ih Amlover MA
01845
256 J. Dirk: This capacity typically translates into letter grades.
257 E. Goldberg: Is this something that can be done over time? Project build-outs take time; is there something that
258 can be done to mitigate during a rough year or two?
259 K. Cormier: The other piece is to define the average North Andover commute. Is it adding to or taking off minutes
260 from their commute?What does it mean to people waiting in their cars trying to get frorn point A to point B?
261 E. Goldberg: Jean earl we get timetables from.MassDOT, a mock schedule,what gets built first and when are the
262 adaptive signals installed?It would be helpful; more than we have now.
263 J. Dirk: The applicants build a traffic model that simulates traffic going through intersections.It runs several then
264 report results averaging those simulations the result is an output of travel times by selecting the section of tile
265 corridor you want. It can be weighed against the no-build condition and then look at what it is with the MassDOT
266 project and this project.You look at capacity utilization and you have a travel time model.
267 E. Goldberg: Can we look at this more broadly; if person commuting lives on Sutton St., Johnson St., or Hillside
268 1Zd.? Is there a way to say they will or won't be affected?Measure where they are going Grow? Or proxy
269 measurements for?
270 P. Boynton: We need the movement along the corridor bordering this proposal but what about orthogonal
271 movement to the corridor?
272 J. Simons: There's another factor where people are taking back roads to divert traffic(say to get to 1-95)and then
273 the Old Center becomes backed up?How do you capture those secondary effects?
274 J. Dirk: Starting with the crossing concept. "there are changes in delay which tell you how much longer it would be
275 to cross Rt. 114. That information is available. It would be helpful to identify specific points in the town where
276 you would like that analysis performed.
277 K. Cormier.: What is the average North Andover commute like?We need that majority substance data. We need to
278 look at the larger picture. If we don't have the data how can we get it?
279 E. Goldberg: We need to look at(1)what can we easily study with the data we have?and(2)what is a way to get
280 more information?Let's start by marking and studying some intersections,crossing or parallel. Kelly and Peter
281 would you be willing to work on this and present to the Board?I drink we should do this because we have a better
282 sense of which intersections would be impacted;we can all come back with a list.Jean,can you talk with people
283 in the field?
284 K._Cormier: A traffic expert should address this. There must be a consulting agent someone could bring in; Wayz
285 sells their data. 'there are larger corridor traffic studies being done.
286 E. Goldberg: Jeff could you come Grp with some suggestions give them to Jean for the next meeting?If it's taking
287 traffic counts we could entertain an intern to gather cumulative data. Census data might help too.
288 J. Dirk: The pedestrian bridge has been reviewed by the applicants. The at grade crosswalk functions safely today.
289 No significant increase is expected in pedestrian traffic,however they have suggested they would revisit that as
290 part of their traffic monitoring program.
291 P. Boynton: Should the Board require a bond by the applicant sufficient for that project? Otherwise,there's
292 nothing behind it.
293 J. Dirk: A robust traffic monitoring program needs to be a part of this project. The key is defining within the
294 monitoring program the metrics that are required to measure the goals they are supposed to achieve. If they fail to
295 achieve those goals or metrics there is a series of items they must do associated with the project.
296 E. Goldberg: [Dead letter dated 11.1.21 into record from I). Schaalman into the record] Believes impacts at the
297 crosswalk will become a busy destination for over 1,000 students plus visitors to businesses, shops,stores and
7
Town of'North Andover
PLANNING BOARD
Eitarr Goldberg, Chairnrarr r. Jolrn Simons
/i '.
Peter�73oyrrtorr Kelly Coi-mief-
„
Alissa Koenig
Trtesdah,November-16, 2021 (&, 7P,nr., 120J Main Street,NA Senior•Center, North Andover,MA
01845
298 restaurants which in 2020 exceeded 5400 students. Questions whether the revised traffic study models the
299 possibility of significantly increased use of the at-grade pedestrian crossing.
300 M. Kealey,VFIB: The pedestrian crossing is called every single cycle. Every time someone pushes the button they
301 are allowed to cross accommodating existing and future demands. Out-analysis assumes that every time tine light
302 changes there's going to be someone pressing the button. The adaptive system will adjust to pedestrian demand.
303 J. Simons: The volume of people will increase. It seems inevitable there will be more pushing of the button
304 resulting in more traffic stops ultimately slowing traffic down. Wouldn't they get a higher space in the queue
305 snider the adaptive response signals?There would have to be more stoppages.
306 J.Dirk: It is more focused on vehicular movements through the intersection; the pedestrian phase comes up in the
307 cycle. It comes up and run-,for a fixed time and that is the case fir I or 100 pedestrians. The bigger issue is
308 whether your sidewalks can accommodate the crowds. MassDOT has crossings on both sides(east&west) of
309 Royal. Crest Drive where today there is one single crossing today at the Hawk signal addressing some of the
310 capacity issues.
311 E. Goldber : You could increase sidewalks or make the crosswalk bigger as mitigation measures.
312 M. I-ealey_: In addressing the question about the average resident we conducted a high-level summary of overall
31.3 intersection delays for the whole corridor during peak hours. That revealed overall intersection delays were less
314 under future build conditions than under existing conditions. We are happy to look at the volume to capacity ratio
315 that VAI suggested.
316 K. Cormier: You noted the typical NA resident,what is that?
317 M. I{caley: We just studied the intersections in our-study area. Regarding other future scenarios, our study
318 includes a background traffic growth rate as well as some specific projects that are planned in town.
319 J. Simons: This brings us back full circle. If you believe all these numbers that means the state project adds so
320 much incremental capacity that it absorbs all the incremental traffic from Royal Crest and makes it better. I'm not
321 sure we call conclude that with what we know today.
322 E. Goldberg: We received the draft of the Mixed-Use Overlay Toning that was put together by the Toning
323 Working Group. We are not going through that this evening but will be discussed at a later date.Program
324 Summary is carried over. We received comments, [Read 11.3.21 resident letter into the record from Michael
325 Consoli,regarding the Planning Board initiating zoning changes at last meeting. Agreed with J. Simons and P.
326 Boynton position on the matter.] [Read '11.13.21 abutter letter into the record from. Don Sclnaalman regarding
327 warrant article sponsorship, supports of Board completingfull project review]
328 K..._Cormier. Even though Planning sponsors an Article, can we still vote unfavorably? As of now,my vote would
329 be unfavorable. Is that possible?
330 E. Goldberg: Yes, I have used the word sponsored in tine past. I would say we"initiated" it, so now it is moving
331 forward. We will review draft zoning when we feel that is ready we will send that to the Select Board, who
332 reviews it and sends it back to Planning,then we have public hearings and then we make a recommendation. Our 3
333 options are favorable, unfavorable or recommend at town meeting.Nothing about us initiating it requires any vote.
334
335 Public Comment
336 M. ConsolL 35 Meadowood Rd.: Lives off the corridor, MassDOT project is mind-numbing;this project adds
337 another level. There is no way to give an accurate depiction of what it's going to be like. Planning Board really
338 needs to take a step back, speak with Mass DOT more about what they plan to do. The applicant has talked with
339 them"somewhat". Drives Rt. 114 10-15 times per day, all hours of the day. Students cross whenever they want,
340 which won't change. A bridge might help but doesn't believe that will happen. Thousands of students will be
8
Town of'North Andover
PLANNING BOARD
Eitan Goldberg, Chaii-man ','�, John .Simons
Kell 7 Cormier
• Alissa Koenig
Trtesday, November 16, 2021_((i,) 7 p.m., 120R Main Street,NA Serrior Center,NoNli Andover,AM
01845
341 walking back and forth across Rt. 114 to parties and games without adhering to the crosswalks, excluding the
342 addition of bicycles, pedestrian walkways, etc. Highly concerned abutter that two major pr<Ijects will greatly
343 impact the area and changing traffic to the Old Center. Doesn't believe any traffic study will accurately predict
344 what will happen.
345 E. Goldberg: What you are saying makes sense. We have to review the traffic data in the traffic study to get as
346 much information we call even if tyre conclusion is that it's incomplete. It's our best way to make an educated
347 decision,
348 Wayne Gendron, 134 Berkeley Rd.: 37 yr, resident questioned viability of adaptive lights. Doesn't see how the
349 conversation about capacity is going to resolve the issue of the increase that inight come from this development.
350 Nobody is riding the buses. Complained about steady stream of traffic on Rt 114 at 2:40 p.m. (Bertucci's to
351 Sharpners Pond Rd.)Concerned for impact of population density on traffic and water.
352 E. Goldberg: We are doing a study oil that and should be receiving that information soon. Encouraged resident to
353 participate by commenting oil the Weston& Sampson report once published.
354 Andrea O'Donnell 14 Sargent St.: Expressed disappointment with the Board and their vote last week. I
355understand you can snake any decision going forward recommending but the perception is that the Board is now
356 behind this. "There were other options for the applicant to being this before the town.Noted recently opted to take
357 Johnson Street to avoid traffic on Rt 114. Anticipates impacts on Old Center and side roads.
358 Barbara Suhr, 148_Main St.: Two concerns are the water supply and traffic. Witnesses heavy traffic heading into
359 Andover and 1-93 with no opportunities available to expand the roadways, Major concern is water as we only have
360 one water supply and we are over-developing in this town.
361
362 MINUTES: October 26 &November 2, 2021 mecting minutes.
363 MOTION: P. Boynton made a motion to approve the October 26 &November 2 Planning Board meeting
364 minutes. The motion was seconded by J. Simons. Roll Call vote: K. Cormier voted yes A. Koenig voted yes. J.
365 Simons voted yes. E. Goldberg voted yes. P. Boynton voted yes. The vote was 5-0,unanimous in favor.
366
367 ADJOURNMENT
368 MOTION: P. Boynton made a motion to adjourn tine meeting. Tire motion was seconded by A. Koenig, Meeting
369 adjourned @ 9:08 p.m. Roll Call vote: K. Cormier voted yes.A. Koenig voted yes. J. Simons voted yes. E.
370 Goldberg voted yes. P. Boynton voted yes. The vote was 5-0, unanimous in favor.
371
372 MEETING MATERIALS:Planning Board Meeting Agenda November 16,2021;Planning Board Meeting Minutes October
373 26&November 2,2021;Staff Report: 211.1.16 Staff Report; 33 Appledore Lane,Sean &Lauren Delaney: Application: 33
374 appledore_Site Plan,211020 Full Application;Department Review: 211019 Conservation Comments,211019 NAFD
375 Comments,211021 Bldg Comments; Stormwater Review: 211101 1`Peer Review 33 Appledore Lane;45 Cotuit Street:
376 2021-10-1.3_Plan Set,211022 Con Comm email-..J.Lynch,211027 DPW Comment Letter 45 Cotuit Street,Cotuit
377 Acceptance,Locus,Village Green 1968, 1984 ANR Plan;212 Brentwood Circle Iolrn& Michelle Turnello:APpiication:
378 210924 212 Brentwood_Site Plan, Full Watershed Application;I�nartment Review:211018 Review.DPW -Operations,
379 21.1019 NAFD Comments,211029 Conservation Comments;O&M Plan-eng certification: Pool O&M Plan certification,
380 Stormwater Review: 21.1101_SW Design Review_212 Brentwood;Royal Crest Estates 6&28 Royal Crest Drive),Trinity
381 Financial,Jim Keefe:Abutter Comments:211101 Abutter Comment--Schaalman,211103 Resident Comment—Consoli,
382 21113 Abutter Comment-Schaahnan,"Traffic Study Q?date:21.1110 Resp.to traffic question—ave resident impact,211110
383 P1:3 211026 Traffic Related Questions with VAI Responses,211110 Dirk Peer Review resp.to 21.1.020 memo,21102.0`Traffic
384 Resp.Comments Summary Letter-Final;Pmgram SutRr11 :211020 Royal Crest Program Summary.
9