Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1977-06-20June 20~ 1977 - MONDAY Regular Meeting The PLANNING BOARD held a regular monthly meeting on Monday evening, June 20, 1977 at 7:30 P.M. in the To~*n Office Meeting Room. The following members were present ~nd voting: Paul R. Lamprey, Chairman; William N. Salemme, Vice-Chairman; William Chepulis; Michael P. Roberts, Clerk; and John J. Monteiro. 15 visitors were present primarily for the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING: INGALLS CROSSING (George Chongris) - the Clerk read the legal notice. Frank C. Gelinas represented the petitioner, Mr. Chongris. 39 lot subdivision with 4 frontage lots which are all one acre except for lot 11 which is 34 acres; location is on easterly side of Salem St., across from Campbell Rd.; two intermittent streams - one on northwest side of lot A which crosses Salem St. where there is a culvert adja- cent to it and, the second is on the north side of lots ~, 4, & 5 with auother culvert at Ingalls Crossing and then meanders into Mosquito Brook; the locus is gentle except at intersection of Ingalls Crossing and Launching Rd., they will lower the hill 15 ft. to be in keeping with the min~ grade; in addition to having N. E. Power as an abutter, ~u 80 ft. easement is present on the site; there is a l~" water main at site and a h~- rant at lot line of A & B; they will put in an!$" main all the way back to Salem St. and a 6~ main on Launching Rd.; there is a pond on lot l~ and, also~ a retention area; they are not proposing a subdivision at this time of lot Mr. Chepulis asked that the easement for drainage through road A be extended to the lot line of lot 2. James Dunn talked about the brook on his property which runs into this site. Chepulis didn't think we should have a street named "Ingalls Crossing" where there is Rd". Gelinas left it up t~ the BOARD. already an Paul Roy, 18~5 Salem St. had q~estions about w~ere Campbell Rd. comes in to Salem St. and was shown on the plan locus. ~ Representative of N. E. Power Co.: stated that they do not allow any construction at all on their land. Gelinas told him that he had talked to the right of way department, Messers Cnllen and Hughes, and they feel there iis no problem as long as it is crossed at right angles. Gelinas will send them a recSrded copy after P. B. approval. Also, the owner has to enter into an agreement on this with N. E. Power. Lot D is an unbuild- able lot by virtue of being botmded by N. E. Power and Salem St. Lot E is going to have to come under the Conservation Commission.~ Mr. Roberts queried whether or not a culvert and road will dramatically effect the stream - Gelinas answered that it would not. And, in addition to deeding lot D to the ?own they could also make it a drainage easement to the Town. . The Chairman read the letters from the followin~g departments: of Health, and Police. Highway St, rveyor, Mr. Chepulis questioned when the pero tests were done which was in Dec. '76. Mr. Gelinas said that it wasn't frozen and that according to Art. 11~ Title 5, they ~re enforcing the collecting of that kind of data between the months of Dec. through M~y. The theory is that the high water table reaches its peek in those months. It is accepted engineer- ing practice as long as it is done before the frost. Mr. Lamprey noted that they are all right off the roadway so they will have to be taken again into the lots. Mr. Chepulis asked who on the Board of Health observed these field tests -Mr. Gelinas stated that he believed it was Joe Cushing ~zo ~orks for the firm retained by Bd. of H. 1 June 20, 1977 - cont. Motion by Chepulis to take the matter under advisement, second by Roberts and unani- moms vote. PLANS NOT REQUIRING APPROVAL: 1 - L. KMIEC - Johnson St.: Lot 1 shown; approximately 6 lots from ~here Mill Rd. crosses Johnson St. Mr. Kmiec said there were no springs, brooks or streams on the locus. Owner of land is Charles Thornton, Mill Rd. Chepulis made motion to endorse as not recruiting approval under subdivision control law plan dated J~me 1977. Monteiro seconded and the vote was ~manimous. 2 - DAVID YOIR~G - Foster St.: Young told the BOARD that there was a foundation on the lot which was started 20 years ago and since then the law has been changed. Charlie Foster told him that it looks okay. He }vas enlarged the size of the lot to make room for the septic system, perc test has been okayed and has building permit. Motion by Monteiro to endorse as not requiring approval under subdivision control law plan dated June 1977. Satemme seconded and the vote was unauimos. 3 - GEORGE FARR - Granville Lane: Frank Gelinas representing stated that lot 7A was a part of the subdivision and is now altered. They shortened the easterly lot line and fanned it back. h~rpose: the original subdivision showed a future road easement coming off Granville Lane and this lot was all inclusive of that easement. Mr. Farr wants the roadway relocated via removal of majority of the easement. Paul O'Neill, 31 Regina Rd., L~n, stated %hat he has a P & S Agreement on Lot 7 and included in this agreement is that the e×isting road easement could be re-defined however maintaining a minimum of one acre buildable lot. The original lot contained 1.73 acres. He stated that he wanted to make sure he had a building lot so that he could obtain a building permit. Gelinas said that this will give ~,~. Farr greater flexibility when and if he ever comes in for a subdivision. ~,~. Chepulis asked what happens to the drain that was within the roadway easement - Gelinas: the easement rights go back to the definitive plan and when the road is designed it will be taken into consideration. Motion then made by Salemme that the plan of land dated June 18, 1977 owned by George Parr, which is part of Granville Lane and known as Lot 7 changed to Lot 7A be endorsed as not requiring approval under subdivision control law. Second by Monteiro and unanimous vote. SCOTT PROPERTIES: REQI~ST FOR BOND AMOUNT ON PADDOCK ESTATES - letter from Highway Surveyor dated June 20, ~977 recommended ~55,000. Upon motion by Monteiro to se$ the bond amount at S60,000. with a September 1, 1978 completion date, as agreed to by Scott Follansbee, and second by Roberts the vote was unanimous. WILLOW RIDGE: REQUEST FOR BOND RELEASE - letter from Highway Surveyor dated June 20th recommended release of $11,000. for gravel and binder. Motion by Monteiro and second by Roberts to release the amount of $11,000. leaving a balance of $15,000. Unanimous vote. PRELIMINARY DECISIONS: CAS~IOM HALL - See over HALL P]~.I~INAHY PLaN DEClSI(~ - June 20, 1977: Letters from the Highway S~rveyor (~y ~th) and Fire Chief were read and on file. ~r. Chepulis mentioned that the site had been ~alked; it was noticed that the old drain age ditches from fteeching f~elds which apparently malfunctioned in the past were still visible. He stated ~wo concerns - l) the presentation no~ to put in a road is not leas ible because the driveway is insufficient with a development of this size and, 2) Shif~ ing the proposed road from where the present driveway goes would present a hazardous condition on Great Pond Rd. due to very limited visibility. Also, the drainage system is ~uestionable as pointed out by Mr. C~r's letter. On the profile Road ~ ends up in a 59 grade and, ye.t, it coeds do~n from the grounds proper appearing by scale to be more steep than 6%. Ail in all, the fact that this proposed subdivision is so close to Lake Cochichewick with its attached drainage and seepage problems it would seem to go against the health, safety, welfare, etc. of the citizens of the ?o~. It would be detrimental to our drinking water supply. Mr. Chepulis made a motion that the proposal not be approved at this time subject to the above stated reasons. ~r. Monteiro seconds Mr. Monteiro repeated Mr. Chepu!is' reason regarding the health, safety and welfare of the c~amunity and ~dded pollutants to the Lake and the fact that this would open develc ment in the watershed and that the nature and character of the development of land would have an adverse effect on the water quality of the Lake. Mr. Lamprey added that it does not comply with our Rules and RegulatiOns in some respects. ~he motion was amended by Mr. Roberts to include~the above reasons, also and seconded by Mr. Chepulis.~ The vote on the motion and the amendment was unanimous.