Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987-12-0328O The Planning Board held a regular meeting on Thursday evening, December 3, 1987 in the Town Office, Selectmen's Meeting Room. The meeting was called to order at approximately 8:15 p.m. by George Perna, Vice-Chairman. Also present were John Simons, Clerk and John Burke. Paul Hedstrom arrived at 8:25 p.m. DISCUSSION Common Driveways Scott Stocking spoke to the Board stating the current problem with common driveway regulations is that there are no standards for them and there should be to address the concerns of the Fire Department, Police Department, and the Conservation Commission. Standards should also include lengths for the common driveways. George Perna wrote some recommendations for common driveways and felt that the Planning Board should review them. Scott Stocking, Town Planner, stated that common drivew~y~ attem~.~ to 4o tw~ings: 1. address resource concerns, ~avo~d~i~e~d%.~ . ~..~ ~.~'~ 2. that due to lot configuration and site features, topography and sight distance when a driveway connects/meets roadway. Scott Stocking does not agree that the Planning Board should review them for the following reasons: 1. Conservation type of concerns 2. hardship due to configuration of lot - variance from Zonign Board of Appeals. John Simons stated that it was an engineering issue and that previous common driveway issues have benefited with the involvement of an engineer and that it would have been a disaster if they were not involved. Also that ClUster Developemnts should alleviate common driveways as an alternative form of development. John BUrke stated that if the common driveway provision was not in the Bylaw you would not have a problem and applicants would have to go about it differently. He also felt that if the Board went along with common driveways than a criteria should be set up and they should not vary from the criteria. John Burke also stated that basically what has happened was that an applicant would go before the Conservation Commission and were told that they cannot cross the wetlands at specific points and the applicant would come back to the Planning Board. Buddy Cyr stated that he would not allow common driveways. John Burke said that if the provision is not in the Bylaw then the original design will be in thanking that they cannot get a common driveway and if it is a case of hardship then the applicant can go before the Board of Appeals and ask for a variance. Tom Neve, of Thomas Neve Associates, spoke to the Board and stated that he is infavof of common driveways and that he uses them as a design tool. Reasons for using them are: 1. Crossing~wetland areas 2. frontage exception lots (50' frontage going back to 2-3 acre parcels) and utilizing what would be dead space. Tom Neve also stated that he has been working in other communities which have standards for common driveways. These standards include the following requirements: 1. Design Standards 2. slope requirements 3. grade requirements 4. radius requirements 281 Paul Hedstrom and Scott Stocking are to work together on the common driveway issues. PUBLIC HEARINGS Jerad II - Special Permit - 3 Common Driveways John Simons read the legal noticeto open the public hearing. Letters from the Conservation Commission, Police Department, Fire Department and the Board of Health were received and read. Tom Neve, Thomas E. Neve Associates, represented the applicant, Robert Janusz, presented the Board with the plans. Changes were made on the plans to comply with the decision and because of the geometry of the land the common driveways are being proposed. Lot 18-19 off Candlestick Road, the purpose of which is so that the large wetland area will not be corssed. The Planning Board requested the construction of an upland detention pond in order to mitigate run-off. Access to Lot 18 and 19 severly limited. Culvert to be put under the driveway. John Simons questioned the size of the lots. Tom Neve stated that each of the lots are over an acre in size. Buddy cyr expressed concerns about emergency situations and the possibility of such vheicles hot being able to reach an area. Tom Neve stated that there were no provisions in the Bylaws for maintenance agreements on common driveways and that someco~unities do have such agreements which are submitted when a Special Permit is submitted or facsimile of an agreement that would be attached to the deed of the property and become part of the SPecial Permit with provisions for maintenance and upkeep, MOTION: By John Burke to take the matter under advisement and close the public hearing. SECOND: George Perna VOTE: Unanimous of those present. Chestnut Street - Special Permit - 4 Common Driveways John Simons read the legal notice to open the public hearings. Letters from the Conservation Commission, Fire Department, Police Department and the Board of Health were read. Thomas Neve presented the Board with the plans. Some backgound on the parcel is as follows: 1. Form A lots with 2,000 foot frontage 2. 40 acres of land 3. Zoned in a Residential-3 Zoning District Tom Neve stated tha in a R-3 Zoning District a cluster development was not allowed. Changes in the Bylaw since 1985 regarding contiguous building area, upland and a zoning freeze on property as to use. The common driveways will be 15 feet wide with a6 foot wide islamd with post and rail fence between. Four common driveways accessing 11 dwellings. Paul Hedstrom stated that the standards of the Special PErmit have be met as well as the safety issues being addressed. Tom Neve stated that the driveways have been placed 125 feet to 200 feet apart, all are straight and with grades of 5%. normal curvature. A water looped system around the property, hydrants, sprinklers in each home, a sewer system from Route 114. Paul Hedstrom stated that due to the freege on the property that the Board has to live up to the Bylaw obligation but factorally the Board can control, minimize and reduce the number of dwelling units accessed of common driveways. George Perna asked why the applicant has not submitted a subdivision plan originally. Tom Neve stated that he had a choice. Tom stated that he would like to set up a ~, workshop to make modification. 282 MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: By John Burke to take the matter under advisement and continue the public hearing. George Perna Unanimous of those present. Water Treatment Plant - Site Plan Review & Special Permit John Simons read the legal notice to open the public hearing. Scott Stocking, Town Planner, spoke to the Board stating that the previous application for the plant had lasped. MOTION: NO SECOND. MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: By John Burke to approve the plans as submitted. By John Simons to continue the public hearing until December 17, 1987. George Perna Unanimous of those present. Contact East - Site Plan Review John Simons read the legal notice to open the public hearing. A letter was received from the applicant to de deferred until the first meeting in January. MOTION: By John Simons to accept letter and deferral until January 7, 1988. SECOND: George Perna VOTE: Unanimous of those present. Lon$ Pasture - Definitive Subdivision (cont'd) John Simons read a letter received from the Board of Health. Also received and read was a letter from the applicants attorney, John McGary regarding an easement. Paul Hedstrom summerized the four issues that need to be addressed. They are as follows: 1. location of test holes 2. existance of easement 3. catch basins on Forest Street 4. Cluster development Paul St. Hillaire spoke to the Board stating that because of not enough elevation, the catch basins could not connect and tie into Mass. Electric. George Perna questioned the mitigation of run-off to Forest Street. On-site retention is possible. Scott Stocking stated that a cluster development was possible. Town Counsel to go over deed and easement/ if it exists and advise the Board. An agreement is needed in writing and put in the file. Paul Pliniski, abutter, went over the concerns of the abutters. The biggest issue is drainage. Carl Schoene, abutter, also spoke regarding the large filling and the fact that iw would change the character of the land. MOTION: By John Burke and accept an SECOND: George Perna VOTE: Unanimous of those present. Graywood Estates (cont'd) MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: to continue the public hearing until extension from the applciant. December 17, 1987 By John BUrke to allow the applican to withdraw without prejudice John Simons Unanimous of those present. 283 Jeffrey Place - Definitive Subdivision (cont'd) John Burke left the meeting. Chris Nelson spoke to the Board and showed them changes from the original presentation. George Perna cited concerns that the Board has, which are: 1. adjacent wetlands 2. 100 year flood plain 3. retention or detention basins Chris Nelson stated that the wetlands shown on the plans are just on the property and not the adjacent land and that the wetlands had been flagged. Notice of Intent will be filed with the Conservation Commission. Retention or detention basins will be placed. The cul-de-sac is 850 feet long, 875 feet to the center of the cul-de-sac Applicant is requesting a waiver for the length of the road. A 50 foot easement at the end of the cul-de-sac for right-of-way will be deeded to the Town. Tom Callahan also spoke to the Board regarding the easements. Each owner has placed 25 feet in escrow with his lawyer until such time of completion and the total 50 feet will be deeded to the Town. Conservation approval on the 100 year flood plain is needed. A letter from the Board of Health is needed regarding the septic systems. Mr. Cahill, abutter, owns a house adjacent to the rpoposed subdivision, spoke to the Board regarding set-backs for the frontage and sides of his property. He has gone before the Board of Appeals for a varaince. At this time, Mr. Cahill does not have a problem, only when the proposed road is built can he go before the Board of Appeals for a variance. MOTION: By George Perna to close the public hearing and take the matter under advisement. John Simons Unanimous of those present. Paul Hedstrom voted. Extension needed from applicant. SECOND: VOTE: NOTE: DISCUSSIONS MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: DECISIONS Watershed Protection Act Stephen Madaus, Environmental Coordinator, spoke to the Board and asked for feedback from the Planning Board. By George Perna to have Chairman, Paul Hedstrom review and comment by December 17, 1987. John Simons Unanimous of those present. 1070 Os$ood Street - Site Plan Review The Board will review for a decision on December 17, 1987. LaColla - Special Permit - PDD Preliminary MOTION: By John Burke to approve the preliminary plan subject to the conditions cited by the planner. SECOND: George Perna VOTE: Unanimous of those present DeRosa Trucking - Site Plan Review MOTION: By John B~rke to approve subject to nine conditions plus boiler plate SECOND: VOTE: NOTE: conditions drawn up by Planner. John Simons Unanimous of those present Decision is part of minutes. 284 1060 Os~ood Street - Re-ZOnin~ Report to Town MeetinF. MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: By George Perna to report unfavorable recommendation, John Simons Those infavor of an unfavorable recommendation, George Perna, John Simons, and Paul Hedstrom. John Burke voted Nay. Seven Oaks - Definitive Subdivision The Board will review the draft decision and render a decision on December 17, 1987. Stevens Memorial Library - Site Plan Review MOTION: By John Burke to approve subject to the conditions drafted by the Planner. SECOND: George Perna VOTE: Unanimous of those present NOTE: Decision is part of minutes. BONDS & CONVENANTS Oakwood Estates Issue not clear. No motion. MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: Wintergreen MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: Frances Estates Bond not posted by applicant in the amount of $85,000, lots 1,2,3 and 8 not released. Teoma Estates By John Burke to release $10,000 John Simons Unanimous of those present. Estates By John Burke to release $60,000 John Simons Unanimous of those present. By John Burke to adjourn John Simons Unanimous of those present. Meeting adjourned at 11:27 p.m. Paul A. Hedstrom, Chairman Eaton, Secretary