Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988-03-10The North Andover Planning Board held a meeting on Thursday evening, March 10, 1988 in the Town Hall Selectmen's Meeting Room. The meeting was called to order by Vice-Chairman, George Perna, at ?:50 p.m. Also present were John L. Simons, Clerk; John J. Burke and Erich W. Nitzsche. Paul Hedstrom, Chairman, was absent. Public Hearin~ Warrant Article - Parkinq Standards John Simons read the legal notice to open the public hearing. Scott Stocking, Town Planner stated that the Board had requested to up the parking standards for office, warehousing and wholesaling uses. John Burke cited basically what was being proposed was 3 plus parking per 1,000 square feet of office, I parking space per 1~000 square feet for warehousing and wholesaling. Scott Stocking said that most Towns have 1 to 300. John Burke stated that the type of office in some cases should be more, such as medical. He also stated that there is not enough parking in commercial building areas and developers should not get the maximum use unless the necessary parking spaces are addressed. Erich Nitzsche spoke about existing structures and the use changes and that during site plan review the maxium amount of parking spaces should be provided, not paved, but land set aside, for the potential use for parking. Scott Stocking stated a per employee standard of 300 square~ feet is used by industry. Different types of office~ ha~e~%~e~t dem~hds ~o you~ ~. could specify what type (i.e. medical'6ffi~es ~i~'h"~Uld 'need more spaces) . John Burke stated our bylaw is in line as far as density on a square foot basis than most Towns around, but our parking standards are lower. John Simons stated that he did not want to see strip malls due to zoning. Erich Nitzsche would like to see 1 space per ~00 square feet. John Burke favored 4 per 1,000 square feet. Erich Nitzsche favored 5 per 100 square feet if medical office. Scott Stocking stated that due to the number of changes called for from the draft, the changes must be readvertised. The Board agreed. The following amounts were requested by the Board: Offices 5 per 1, 000 square feet Retail 8 per 1,00 GFA 6 per 1,000 B-1 & B-~ Restaurants 1.5 per 8 seats Funeral Same Standards - 1 space per 4 persons Boarding Rooms 1 parking space per room Hospital/Nursing Home 1 per 2 beds Warehousing 1 per 1,000 square feet Wholesaling/Distributing i per 500 square feet Manufacturing 1.5 spaces per 2 employees Under Section 8.1 (Off-Street Parking) opening paragraph stating the Planning Board can waiver the number of parking spaces to be constructed. Erich Nitzsche wanted to change the size of the parking spaces from 9x18 to lox20 particually in shopping centers. Scott Stocking cited that a percentage would have to be set aside for compact cars, retail especially. The concensus of the Board on the percentage for compact cars to be AO%, but not in shoping centers. Off-Street Parking Warrant Article to be readvertised. MOTION: By John Simons to close the public hearing and take the matter under advistment and also readvertise. SECOND: Erich Nitzsche VOTE: Unanimous of those present Warrant Article - Bed & Breakfast John Simons read the legal notice to open the public hearing. John Burke asked if there was any request for this type of use. Scott Stocking cited one in Town and some inquires and there is nothing in the current bylaw regulations. John Burke said to eliminate them. George Perna wanted to know if the Board first of all wanted Bed & Breakfast and if so in some specific zoning districts. Erich Nitzsche stated that basically North Andover was not a tourist town. Jack Linden~ Conservation Commission, stated that Bed & Breakfast tend to be in older houses and that older people were supplimenting their income. After a brief discussion, George Perna asked the Board for their concensus. John Burke thought that it would open Pandora's Box. When the need comes up then address it. Erich Nitzsche felt the same. John Simons also felt as did John and Erich. George Perna wanted them, it adds quality to the Town. MOTION: By John Burke to withdraw the article from the warrant. SECOND: John Simons VOTE: Unanimous of those present. Warrant Article - Site Plan Review John Simons read the legal notice to open the public hearing Stocking, Town Planner, cited the proposed changes: 1. 3. Scott requiring more detail and information different size projects handled differently provides the Board with guidance for review and flexibility as far as amendments to the plan without going through additional hearings which we do not have nOW. George Perna asked if the Board could review the changes one for one. Scott stated that it had completely changed. He also went over briefly major issues citing size of projects, minor, intermediate and major and information required/requested: registered architect, registered engineer, and registered landscape architects. Scott Stocking cited two tables that run parallel. Table ! is basically an outline of information required. Table 2 indicating the specific requirements for minor, intermediate and major projects. John Simons felt that it was asking for to much information. Erich Nitzsche wanted the mitigation of run-off to zero in the 2, 10 and 100 year storm event identified and add language into the bylaw. SCott Stocking stated that the more information required would cause less confussion in the long run. John Burke wanted the following text be included "Anything specifically not mentioned is specifically prohibited under this Bylaw". Erich Nitzsche wanted an acceptable scale on all plans for locus map. Scale to be that of subdivision scale· John Simons questioned the language under the "finding section" Scott Stocking stated that part was from the ordinance from Charleston, South Carolina and part from M.G.L. Chapter 40A, Section 9. John Simons would like to chairman to review. MOTION: By John Simons to close the public hearing and take the matter under advisement. SECOND: Erich Nitzsche VOTE: Unanimous of those present. Discussions Watershed Bylaw Stephen Madaus, Environmental Coordinator, supplied the Board with two forms for the Watershed Bylaw: Variance - Zoning Board of Appeals Special Permit from the Planning Board John Simons stated that for a more stringent standard then it should be by variance. He also stated that it should not be determined by the personalities invloved on a given Board. John Burke stated that for a variance, they would have to show hardship. Jack Linden, Conservation Commission, felt it should be a conservation issue and the Planning Board should be the granting authority. John Simons said you cannot set your law up based on the individuals on the current Board because three years form now it all could change. Scott Stocking stated that he, on a regular basis, goes over the agenda's and files and makes comments to the Board of Appeals and that they have been very receptive. John Simons stated that the existing bylaws and state statues are very stringent regarding variances. John read a portion of the Bylaws and State Statue. He also stated that it is a political issue and as long as the organization is structured, the rest will fall into place and take care of itself. Stephen Madaus asked for a concensus of the Board. John Simons and John Burke both felt that it should be a variance through the Board of Appeals. Erich Nitzsche felt the same. George Perna wanted to review it more.