Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1978-10-23October 23, 1978 - Monday Regular Meeting The PLANNING BOARD held a regular monthly meeting on Monddy evening, Oct. 23, 778 at 7:30 P.M. in the Town Office Meeting Room. The following members were present and voting: William N. S~lem~ne, Chairman; John J. Monteiro, Vice-Chairmau; Joy~e A. DiTore, Clerk; William Chepulis and Michael P. Roberts. DEFINITIVE PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. CARLETON FAP~S~- Victor Hate~ applicant; F. Gelinas representing Desu~ Corp. Consisting of 57 10ts on easterly side of Summer St. Same subdivision as submitted earlier in the year and subsequently disapproved. During some preliminary cour~ pro- ceedings it was suggested that we come back in with another submittal. 5500 f~. of new roadway. Difference from this subdivision and the previous one= a portion of the run-off enters the pond in 3 different locations and several areas where existing drainage comes imto the pond. Drainage calculations are summarized on the plan; if present ~am is working as designed it pro~uces an outflow of 2 f~./sec. Mr. Chepulis sugges, ted that all the data on the drainage be submitted in writing. Mr. Gelinas requested that this policy be clarified. The pond is undergoing an aging process and they do not wish to accelerate that process, he continued. Regarding Mr. Cyr's memo to lower Carleton Lane this would be an undo hardship on the applicant because cf ledge, some fear of having to go on private property and as a result they are not proposing to alter it. Re having the developer do work throughout Raleigh Tavern to rectify poor construction, client feels that these are two separaZe issues. have eliminated the problem of easements referred to by Nr. Oyr by bringing the pipe egressing from the catch basins. ~urther, feeder roads in the area are out of our control. Regarding Board of Health recommendation of a modular' treatment pSant_for = that is not practical and not in the best interests of the Town br client and e;ste did not address the issue. Test pit and soil data was submitted and certified that it is suitable for subsurface disposal systems for residential use. 7 or 8 hydrants throughout the site; they will tie in with the 8" water line with the presently exist- ing 6" going to Farnum St. removed and replaced with an 8". Letters from Highway Surveyor dated Oct. 23, ~978 and Con. Com. of same date were read and on file. Same for Fire Dept. letter dated Oct. 20, 1978. Discussion took place regarding the present Raleigh Tavern and this subdivision during which time Mr. Gelinas stated that this is a separate issue and town specs, have been up-graded since the time of the old subdivision to safeguard against such road conditions. OPPOSITION: R. Noonan, Carleton Lane presented the Board with an Environmental Impac$ statement by th~ abutters. Voiced concern about drainage, the pond, septic systems, Irc nal~ion.sj environmental impact. Jack S~iglin, Raleigh Tavern Lane, Duane Tibbetts, R-~leight Tavern Lame, Patricia Scarborough, Raleigh~ T~vern Lane all voiced similar concerns. Vermnica Nandry, Summer St. questioned where all the water is going to go because of her property's proximity to this parcel. Claudia Wyllie, R. T. L., stated facts about water elevations that occured last December. Dennis Dionne, R. T. L. suggested that the subdivision control subcommittee look at the shoulders on the road and strenu- ously objected to any type of equipment on the road other than town vehicles. Mr. Monteiro made a motion to continue the hearing until Nov. 6, 1978. Mr. Roberts seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Mr ' 2. CARLE~N FARt, S . ~eltnas represented Desun Corp. ~e ~u~ivision t~t was approved Feb. ~8 ~d rescinded on A~. 7, 1978. ~is is a br~d new su~ initial ~d reviewed since the pre~ous appro~l. ~erm dated A~. 18, 1977 fr~ ~ghway ~eyor & B~ conce~ t~s ~i~sion ~d not the pre~ous one. ~ing the process of appro~l it was approved ~th a condition t~ a ~0' "no touch" ~ffer s~rip exist ~ the westerly side of the su~i~sion ~d client does not feel he c~ li~ ~h this, i$ is a tremend~ infri~men~ ~ his rights ~d ~t the prope~y will lose ~keti~ value and ~exibility ~d hoped for Bo~ reconsideration on ~s point. Also, a ~fer is ve~ ~ to ~e in te~s of c~ce. ~. Ro~s re~ letters ~ ~ghw~ ~eyor, Con. Oom. Fire ~pt.--~ed ~2. 2~, ~978. Le~te~ ~e on file. Mr. aelinas stated that theme is a very small wetland partially on Lot 5. Discussion re road widenin~ easements. C_~ said it was agreed_._and the~ reneged; said it was discussed and a misunderstanding occurred. ~r, Osgoc~'~ated'~n~ they will give the Town $7,000 to do the work of repairing the. street plus all the rest of the letters cited from Demun to the Bl~ d~ted Nov. 30 1977. There ars 3 hydrants shown on the plan; "pert tests at site of leeching fields to be made prior to road construction" is unacceptable to the applicant. Mr. Roberts re- q~ested tt~t ~b~ a~velQ~er put in writing wl~y he will not ~o along with someof the conditions a~. imposed on the ~. Veronica Mandr~, ~ummer ~t. objected to any further flow of water onto her land. Very swampy parcel, she told the Bo~rd. ~. Roberts asked if they would care. to refile - no, let it stand as it is . Mr. Roberts then made a motion to deny the proposed subdivision based on the fact that prior to this resut~nittal on parcel of land had approved a subdivision with conditions which the ]~oard felt were necessary to this parcel. On this resubmittal numerous of these conditions h~ve been removed and this would be detrimental to the tract of land. No second, motion withdrawn. Mr. Chepulis made a motion to accept the proposed subdivision with the ~ listed items identical to the previously approved subdivision. Mr. Monteiro seconded. Motion and second then withdrawn. Mrs. DiTore then made a motion to take the matter under advisement. Mr. Monteiro seconded and the vote was unanimous. ...... _./ , ailda Blackst ock October 23, 1~78 - Monday Regular Meeting The PI~kNNIN~ BOARD held a regular monthly meeting on Monday evening, Oct. 23, 1978 at 7.'30 P.M. in the Town Office Meeting Room. The following members were present and votingz Milliam N. Sale,she, ~hairman; John J. Mon%eiro, Vice-Chairman; Jo~e A. DiTore, Clerk; William Chepulis and Michael P. Roberts. DEFINITIVE PUBLIC ~]~ARINGS: 1. CARLETON FARMS EAST - Victor Haten~ applicant; F. aelinas representing Desun Corp. Consisting of 57 lots on easterly side of Summer St. Same subdivision as submitted earlier in the year and suhsequen%ly disapproved. During some preliminary court pro- oeedings it was suggested that we come back in with another submittal. 5500 ft. of new roadway. Difference from this subdivision, and the previous one= a portion of the run-off enters the Pond in 3 different locations and several areas where existing drainage comes into the pond. Drainage calculations are summarized o~ the plan; if present dam is working as designed it produces an outflow of 2 ft./sec. Mr. Chepulis suggested that all the data on the drainage be submitted in ~iting. Mr. aelinae, requested that this policy be clarified. The pond is undergoing an a~,ing process and they do not wish to accelerate that process, he continued. Regarding Mr. Cyr's memo to lower Carleton ~ane this ~ottld be an undo hardship on the applicant because of ledge, some fear of having to go on private proper~y and as a result they are not proposing to aAter it. Re having the developer do work throughout Raleigh Tavern to rectify poor construction, client feels that these are two separate issues. We have eliminated the problem of easements referred to by Mr. Cyr by bringing the pipe egressing from the catch basins. ~urther, feeder roads in the ~ are out of our control. Re~rding Boa~ of Health recommendation of a modular treatment p~ant for waste = that is not practical and not in the best interes$s of the Town or client and he did not address the issue. Test pit and soil data was submitted and certified that it is suitable for subsurface disposal systems for residential use. 7 or 8 hydrants through~ut the site; they will tie in with the 8" water line with the presently exist- ing 6" going to Farnum St. removed and replaced with an 8". Letters from Highway Surveyor dated Oct. 23, 1978 and Con. Com. of same date were read and on file. San~e for ]~ire Dept. letter dated Oct. 20, 1978. Discussion took place regarding the present Raleigh Tavern and this subdivision during which time Mr. Qelinas stated that this is a separate issue and town specs, have t~en up-graded since the time of the old subdivision to eafe~,,a~d against such road conditions. OPPOSITXON: R. Noonan, Carleton Lane presented the Board with an Environmental Impact statement by the abutters. Voiced concern about draina~, the pond, septic systems, road conditions, environmental ~mpact. Jack Stiglin, Raleigh Tavern Lane, Duane Tibbetts, l~aleight ~avern Lane, Patricia Scarborough, Raleigh~ T~vern Lane all voiced similar concerns. Vsrnnica Mandr~, ~ummer St. questioned where all the water is ~ing to go because of her property's proximity to this parcel. Claudia ~yllie, R. T. L., stated facts about water elevations that occured last December. Dennis Dioane, R. ~. L. suggested that the subdivision control subcommittee look at the shoulders on the road and strenu- ously objected to aa~:~ of equipment on the road ether than town vehicles. Mr. Monteiro made a motion to continue the hearing until Nov. 6, 1978. Nr. Roberts seconded and the vote was unanimous. 2o OARI~N FA~S WE~T: ~ro Oel~nas represented ~ Co~. ~e ~divtsi~ mi%%~1 ~d re~e~ed sinoe the p~s appro~l. ~2%ers ~%ed A~. ~8, ~ ~eyor · ~ o~oe~ ~s ~si~ ~d no~ the pre~s one. ~n~ the pr~ess off appro~l ~% ~ appr~ ~h a o~dition ~ ~ 40~ ~no t~h" will lose ~kett~ value ~d flexibility ~ hoped for Bo~ ~o~sider~%i~ on 2his po~t. ~so, a ~ffer is ~ ~ ~o ~ ~ Se~s off c~ce. ~. Ro~a ~ letters ~ ~gh~ ~yor, C~. C~. Fire ~p2. ~ed ~. 2~, ~78. Eet~ers ~e ~ file. ~. Gel~ stated t~t She~ is a ve~ ~11 welled ~ially ~ Bot ~. Dis~ssi~ ~ ro~ ~den~ easem~ts. C~ said i~ w~ ~ed ~d they rene~d; s~d it ~ ~so~sed ~d a mi~derst~d~ ~c~re~. ~. Osgo~ s~ated t~ Shey ~11 ~ve She T~ $7,~O $o do the wo~ of ~p~ri~ the sSreet plus all the ~st of She letters cited ffr~ De~ ~o the B~ ~ted ~. 30, ~77. ~e~ ~e 3 ~ts sh~ ~ the pl~; ~pe~ Ses~s aS siSe of leechi~ fields to ~e prior to ~ o~st~c~ion" is ~ptable ~o ~he applicon. ~. Ro~s ~ested t~t the de. loper ~t in ~iti~ w~ he will n~ go alo~ ~h s~e of the c~2i~s ~ i~oaed on 2Be p~or ~ppro~l. Ve~i~a ~, ~r ~. objected ~o ~y ~her flo~ of ~er onto her l~d. Ve~ ~y p~cel, she told the B~. ~. Ro~s ~sked if they w~d c~ to ~file - no, les it s~d as i~ is . ~. Ro~s ~hen ~e a motion to de~ the proposed ~si~ ~ed ~ ~he $~ prior 2o this ~su~it~ ~ p~el of l~d ~d approv~ a su~i~si~ ~th o~diti~s which the Bo~ fel$ were necess~ ~o this paroel. ~ ~s n~r~ of these conditions ~ been ~moved ~d t~s w~ld be de~riment~ ~o ~he ~r~ of l~d. No second, motion ~. Chepulis ~e a mo$ion 2o ~oept the propesed su~i~sion ~th ~he ~ li~ed identical to the p~sly ~pr~d su~i~sion. ~. M~teiro seceded. Mo~ion ~d se~d ~hen ~th~a~. ~s. DiTore then m~e ~ moti~ to t~e ~he ~tSer ~der ~s~n$. ~. M~eiro seo~d~ ~d the vo~e ~ ~im~s.