Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-10-03Planning Board Meeting October 3, 2000 APPROVED 11/14/2000 Members Present: Alison Lescarbeau John Simons Richard Rowen Richard Nardella Alberto Angles Others Present: Heidi Griffin, Town Planner Jacki Byerley, Planning Assistant The Planning Board meeting was called to order at 7:12 p.m. Discussions: Woodland Estates-Bond Release Mr. Rowen motioned to APPROVE the partial release of $23,900.00 from Woodland Estates Phase I leaving a balance of $4200.00, 2nd by Mr. Simons. Voted 5-0 in favor of. Mr. Rowen motioned to APPROVE the partial release of $49,800.00 fxom Woodland Estates Phase II leaving a balance orS10,000.00, 2~ by Mr. Simons. Voted 5- 0 in favor of. Mr. Rowen motioned to APPROVE the partial release of $23,100.00 fxom Woodland Estates Phase III leaving a balance of $6400.00, 2~a by Mr. Simons. Voted 5- 0 in favor of. 201 South Bradford-Bond Release Mr. Rowen motioned to APPROVE the full release of $2000.00 from 201 South Bradford Street, 2~ by Mr. Simons. Voted 5-0 in favor of. Thistle Road-ANR Plan Ben Osgood developer of Abbott Village had come before the Planning Board with an ANR Plan. The ANR Plan was changing lot lines and creating new lots on a roadway that hasn't been bonded. Mr. Simons questioned whether Ms. Griffin had spoken with Town Counsel on whether the Planning Board could approve the ANR plans? Ms. Griffin had spoken with Town Counsel and stated that the plans can be approved for a non-bonded roadway, provided that a covenant is provided to the Town. Mr. Osgood had Howard Spiecher prepare a covenant that the lots cannot be released until the roadway was bonded. The Planning Board then instructed Ms. Griffin to approve the ANR plan. Mr. Simons motioned to ACCEPT the covenant and ENDORSE the Form A Plan for Thistle Road, 2~ by Mr. Rowen. Voted 5-0 in favor of. 262 South Bradford Street Mr. Tom Zahoruiko represented the owner of 262 South Bradford Street and requested · th_at the site-opening bond for the common driveway special pemfit be waived since the driveway is already existing. Mr. Zahomiko also requested that the Planning Board sign offon the Form J lot releases and hold onto the Form until a later date. The Planing Board signed the Form M, Form I and agreed to sign the Form J to be recorded at a later date once the bond was posted with the Planning Department. Also the Planning Board agreed to waive the $1000.00 site-opening bond for the common driveway special permit. Campbell Forest-Form A Mr. Ken Ahem presented three ANR plans to the Planning Board. Campbell Forest bad originally been approved as subdivision and Mr. Ahem from Mesiti Development wanted to changed and add lots to the approved subdivision. Mr. Ahem went on to state that with the date of the approval, that they would be elig~le under the zoning freeze. Mr. Ahem stated that this zoning freeze would exempt them from having to apply for an access other than frontage special permit from the Planning Board in order to access the lots as all lots are completely covered by wetlands and would have to be accessed either by easements or strips of land that are not in the frontage. Mr. Simons info~med Mr. Ahem that by creating new lots it would have to go by today's standards. Mr. Simons went on to say that the lots are not conforming by today's Zoning Bylaw. The Planning Board deemed that the three ANR plans for Campbell Forest are not to be endorsed and instructed the Town Planner to draft a denial and file it with the Town Clerk. Foxwood A letter from Mark Johnson lawyer to the developers to Foxwood subdivision was read into the record (attached). Mr. Rowen doesn't want to pull the bond because it would put the pressure on the Town to complete the work. Ms. Griffin informed the Planning Board that the developer had akeady been informed that the bond was going to be pulled at this meeting. Mr. Nardella stated that the DPW had changed their minds too many times and given the developer too many lists to complete. Mr. Nardella questioned Ms. Griffin on how much was required to complete the development. Ms. Griffin informed the Planning Board that according to DPW it would range from $150,000.00 to $200,000.00 and that the Planning Board records show $53,000.00. Mr. Devlin a resident at Foxwood told the Planning Board that the developer had received a list from VHB and the developer had not completed that list. Ms. Lescarbean stated that the developer had received the original VHB list and that list had been revised too many times from DPW and the meeting the Planning Board had had with the residents. Mr. Nardella went on to say that the residents hadn't given the Town an easement and the Town could not maintain the area without the easements. Mr. Devlin informed the Planning Board that the reSidents weren't willing to loss about 60% of their property. Mr. Paul McDonough a resident of Foxwood wanted to know what the developer had done since receiving the original list t~om VHB? Mr. McDonough also questioned how many sessions the Planning Board had had with the developer and hadn't gotten any results from the meetings. Ms. Lescarbeau informed the residents that the developer had received a punchlist that had continued to grow and the developer had a hard time keeping up with the list. Ms. Lescarbeau went on to say that it would not be in the best interest of the Town to pull the bond money as there is not enough money remaining to complete the work. Ms. Lescarbean informed the Planning Board and the residents that she would set up a meeting between just herself and Mark Johnson to see what could he resolved. Continued Public Hearings Boston Ski Hill-Proposed Site Plan Mr. Ken Grandstaffpresented a letter request'rog to withdraw the site plan special permit application without prejudice from the Planning Board. Mr. Nardella motioned to APPROVE the withdrawal without prejudice and waive any new application fees for Boston Ski Hill, 2~ by Mr. Angles. Voted 5-0 in favor Of. Ms. C_rriffin stated that the application fees waived would not include the project review fees which would be need to be paid in order for the Town's consulting engineer to review any new proposals. Public Hearings 673 Great pond Road-Watershed Special Permit Robert Gill engineer for the applicant presented the plans to add a 300 square foot enclosed room onto the existing dwelling. Mr. Gill went on to say that he had received a memo from VI-IB and has responded to the original concerns. Ms. Griffin informed the Planning Board that she had received a memo from VHB showing that the revised plans had satisfied all the original concerns. Mr. Nardelia motioned to CLOSE the Public Hearing for 673 Great Pond Road Watershed Special Pern-dt, 2nd by Mr. Simons. Voted 5-0 in favor of. Mr. Nardella motioned to APPROVE the Watershed Special Pennit for 673 Great Pond, 2~ by Mr. Simons. Voted 5-0 in favor of. Hawk Ridge-Definitive Subdivision, PRD, and Watershed Special Permit Chris Huntress representative for the developer, Tom Zahomiko, presented an overview of the proposed subdivision. Mr. Huntress stated that the property is 27 acres located on Bradford and Barker Street and that the proposed subdivision consisted of 7 single-family homes. Twenty (20) acres of land would be preserved. The smallest lot would be 21,000 square feet. The developer would be minimizing cuts and grading to lessen any impact to Bradford Street. Mr. Huntress had received comments from VI-IB and wanted to comment on the three major points of the memo. First being the design of the cul de sac, second being the grade of the roadway and third the grade of Bradford Street. Ms. Lescarbeau stated that the design of the roadway was not considered to be a cul de sac. The roadway was teardrop shaped and would be considered a road that comes back on itself. Mr. Huntress commented that the 20-foot roadway should be sufficient for 7 homes. Mr. Nardella stated that 20 feet was not appropriate and would be too small with snowfall. Mr. Nardella stated he would prefer to roadway be a minimum width of 22 feet, as recommended by VHB. Mr. Huntress stated that the roadway was a 10% grade and could conform to 6% by cutting into the top of the hill. Mr. Nardella stated that the plans should show sidewalks to enable the children to walk to the bus stop. Mr. Nardella pointed out that the police department specifically requested sidewalks. Mr. Huntress informed the Planning Board that a sidewalk would increase the amount of impervious area. Mr. Nardella stated he felt that the extension of impervious area would increase public safety. Mr. Rob Bmmial the architect for the development explained to the Planning Board that the homes would be walk-ups. The homes would be ranging from 3200 SF up to 5200 SF. The homes are showing some unique architecture, each would be using the same materials and massing but with difference of design. The walk out is to the outside edge and the garage to the backside of the property. Ms. Griffin wanted to know the site distance fi:om the left coming onto Bradford Street? Mr. Huntress informed her that it is more than 200 feet. Ms. Lescarbeau wanted to know how much land would need to removed for the lots. Mr. Huntress stated that a finger shape of trees would need to be removed but with so much being open meadow it would not be a lot ofremoval. Ms. Lescarbeau suggested that the Planning Board set up a site visit. A date was set for October 14, 2000 at 8:00 a.m. Mr. Nardella motioned to CONTINUE the Public Hearing for Hawk Ridge, 2"a by Mr. Angles. Voted 5-0 in favor of. Endicott P!_a?a-Site Plan Special Permit-1210 Osgood Street Mr. Chris Huntress presented the proposal for the developer, Bill Barrett. The site is off of Route 125-Barker Street. The proposal is for 28,000 SF retail space located on the first floor with another 12,500 retail space. Onthe second floor is 110,000 SF of office space. A 102 unit extended stay hotel. The outbuilding is a proposed pharmacy with a drive through. The building to the front shows parking on the side or rear. Sidewalks are shown to make it pedestrian friendly within the plaza. There is a thirty-foot travel lane. Mr. Angelo Petichelli of Design Partnership Architect showed the proposed design for the plaza. The ground floor plan of retail space shows various sizes, the office space would be located above the retail. There is a two-story archway thai enables cars and pedestrians to pass through instead of traveling the complete way around the building. A canopy is proposed using a copper, which gives a village expression to the plaza. The roofs are interrupted with a fake dots-tier. There would be a sign band along the copper awning. The hotel would have some suites, a large lobby, and a dining area. A tower would be the center point of the retail space. Mr. Huntress came hack to state that the plaza is located within different zones but a variance wasn't necessary because each building in the zones was conforming. Ms. Lescarbeau wanted to know about the wetlands on the site. Mr. Mike Howard stated that a detention pond was going to be in place, and that the site was in the Merrimack. River Watershed District. Mr. Howard explained that the Conservation Commission had approved the delineation. Mr. Nardella questioned why the building proposed near the entrance was sideways and did not face the road frontage. Mr. Pitoccheli explained that it was to give access to the drive through and to keep the curbing. Mr. Simons wanted to know whether the developer needed all the parking spaces shown. Mr. Huntress informed the Planning Board that they will need all spaces shown and possible more depending on what exactly goes in. Mr. Simons complimented the design of the hotel, stating that most hotels are uniform in their look. Mr. Barrett stated that he hoped to keep the look ofthe hotel and was pitching to the market as is but if the space was difficult to sell he may have to change the design to accommodate the buyer. Mr. Nardella wondered whether Mr. Barrett was envisioning the pla?a as being the new downtown. Mr. Huntress commented that the square footage of the retail space wasn't enough to make it a new downtown. Mr. Nardella wanted to know if the possible pharmacy or outbuilding could be a restaurant instead. Mr. Barrett stated that there were no definite business going in yet but the design would hopefully stay the same. Mr. Simons stated that a decision could be made with the idea of a pharmacy going in and be later modified to accommodate something else like a restaurant. Mr. Huntress stated that possibly in the decision, the Planning Board could leave some flexibility to accommodate different types of businesses. Mr. Simons wanted to know the landscaping layout at the fi.om of the property. Mr. Huntress stated that it would be informal groupings with a variety of trees. Ms. Lescarbeau wanted to know the placement of the dumpsters. Mr. Huntress showed th. at each bulldin4 would have its own dumpster. The retail building would be sharing a dumpster, which would be fenced in and screened. Mr. Huntress went on to say that the deliveries would be curbside and possible written that deliveries could be done between scheduled hours. Mr.. Nardella suggested th_at the developer possible designate parking space for trucks. Mr. Rowen wanted to know what style of lights the plaza would have. Mr. Huntress explained they would be an acorn fixture with a 12-foot height to give the effect of gas Mr. Angles questioned the wastewater placement. Mr. Mike Rosati commented that a forced main would travel down Route 125 5-7 feet in the ground over to the pump station located on Sutton Street near the airport entrance. Mr. Rosati went on to say they could not use the pump station across the street at French Farm because they are not allowed to take fi.om one watershed district and bring to another watershed district. Mr. Rowen wanted to know about the drainage. Mr. Howard infom-~ed the Planning Board that there was going to be an underground storage behind the hotel Also there would be an open-air detention pond, and the roof mn off would go to two systems. Mr. George Barker an abutter to the developer liked the idea of the first entrance with the stoplight but he felt the second entrance should also have a light. Ms. Lescarbeau let him know that the second location was only a right turn in and out and would make it a more comrolled entry way. Mr. Nardella questioned the placement of sidewalks at the proposed light. Mr. Huntress informed the Planning Board that the sidewalk fi'om the plaza would reach to the lights to be able to cross the street to French Fami al_so there would be a push button light for pedestrian use. The Planning Board had additional questions regarding the traffic. Mr. Howard stated that he would have the traffic engineer come to the October 17, 2000 meeting to answer any questions.