Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-06-02 Planning Board Minutes Planning Board Meeting DPW Conference Room June 2, 1998 Members Present: Richard S. Rowen, Chairman , Joseph V. Mahoney and Alberto Angles, Associate Member were present. Richard Nardella arrived at 8:05 p.m. and John Simons, Clerk arrived at 7:15 p.m, Kathleen Bradley Colwell, Town Planner was also present. Alison Lescarbeau, Vice Chairman was absent. Minutes: On a motion by Mr. Mahoney, seconded by Mi. Angles, the Board voted unanimously to approve the minutes for May 19, 1998 as amended. Discussion: Merrimack College - Campus Plan Workshop & Art Center Doug Hartnett from Sasaki Associates, was present to represent Merrimack College. Mr. Hartnett stated that they have updated their master plan and reevaluated their goals. Mr. Hartnett stated that the proposal for the first project is freshman housing which is already in the process. The second is a cultural arts building and third is the expansion of the student housing and academic buildings. Mr. Hartnett stated that they are trying to eliminate and reduce the parking to make more green space. On campus freshman and sophomore will be prohibited from having cars on the property. Mr. Hartnett stated that they are planning to add an athletic complex and do an expansion on Gildea Hall. Mr. Mahoney asked if the access to Rt. 114 is going to be eliminated. Mr. Hartnett stated that it wasn't. Mr. Mahoney asked where the Andover, North Andover town line is. Mr. Hartnett showed the Board the town line on the plan. Mr. Mahoney asked how this plan is different from the plan in 1990. Mi. Hartnett stated that it is different from the housing and the location of the parking lots. Mr. Rowen asked if the street trees shown on the plan along Rt. 114 were existing. Mr. Hartnett stated that there was a row of maple trees. Mr. Angles asked if this is what the college plans to see in 20 years. Mr. Hartnett stated yes, Laurel Heights - preliminary subdivision Steve Stapinski of Merrimack Engineering was present to represent Laurel Heights. Mr. Stapinski stated that John McGarry and Dave Zaloga are the developers. The applicants filed a subdivision plan and a PRD plan to see which one the Board would prefer. Mr. Stapinski stated that the property is known as the Media One site on Johnson Street behind the Holly Ridge subdivision and Toll Brothers subdivision. Mr. Stapinski stated that the site consists of 17 acres. Mr. Stapinski stated that they are proposing to extend the road from Ridge Way approximately 1300'. Mr. Stapinski stated that they would service 14 single-family homes on I-acre lots. Mr. Stapinski stated that they would be servicing the homes with town sewer and water and providing sprinkler systems. Mr. Mahoney asked where the sewer goes. Mr. Stapinski stated that it goes into the East Side interceptor. Mr. Stapinski stated that the homes would be similar to the homes in Holly Ridge. Mr. Stapinski stated that the roadway will be in compliance with the Town's Rules and Regulations and will need no waivers. Mr. Stapinski stated that they cannot come up from Johnson Street because it is to steep. Mr. Stapinski stated that staff wanted to see a P.R.D plan to see how much open space could be preserved. Mr. Stapinski stated that they could possibly put parking spaces at the entrance from Johnson Street so people could access the open space. Mr. Stapinski stated that a fire truck could also access through that road. Mr. Stapinski stated that there are no wetlands on the site. Mr. Stapinski stated that they would like to get the Boards direction to see what plan they like and then they can go further with the project. Mr. Rowen stated to Mr. Stapinski that they are going to have a lot of problems on this plan and we have grave concerns whether or not this is buildable. Mr. Mahoney stated that he used to walk Clay Pit Hill and he would like to go on a site walk Ms. Colwell stated that at this point she is not convinced that the PRD plan is best. She stated that one benefit of the PRD is that it will match the other neighborhoods. Ms. Colwell asked the applicants to get a roadway plan together Mr. Stapinski stated that the Fire Department did take a truck up the back entrance from Johnson Street and it did make it up. Mr. Rowen stated that he would like the applicants to put in a road in on the back entrance of Johnson Street, Mr. Simons asked what the existing slope of the property is. Mr. Stapinski stated that it is a 20% slope. Mr. Simons stated that for them to build this they would have to take out the hill and the topography would be changed. Mr. Stapinski stated that the hill is no steeper than the lots on Johnson Street. Mr. Simons stated that in all his years on the Board he has not seen a tougher property. Mr. Rowen stated that they couldn't put huge houses up there. Ms. Colwell stated that they need to do a road from Johnson Street and we need a lot more information. Mr. Rowen stated that you have a lot of work to do and he does not think they will get 14 lots. Mr. Rowen stated that they should show a road from Johnson Street and scale the houses properly as you see them from Johnson Street, Mr. Stapinski asked if the Board wanted to walk this before the Board talks about this anymore. Janice Lamm, 75 5 Johnson Street, stated that they already have several problems with their foundations cracking and other problems with their homes. Ms. Colwell stated that we need an extension until the July 7, 1998 meeting. Gayton Osgood stated that most problems that we have with septic systems are in that area and we don't need anymore problems, they don't call it Clay Pit Hill for nothing. An abutter had concerns with the water pressure on their property. Resident of 68 Ridge Way stated that they are against this extension and would like to know when they can speak on this about their concerns. Mr. Rowen stated that the appropriate time would be when they come back with a definitive plan and we hold a public hearing. Nancy Prendergast, stated that they have had multiple problems with Toll Brothers. Don Peters of 14 Skyview, stated that Toll Brothers stated that a lot of the land was conservation land. Continued until July 7, 1998. Endorsement of Plans: Osgood Street - Form-A The Board authorized Ms. Colwell to endorse the plans. Summit Street -Form -A The Board authorized Ms. Colwell to endorse the plans. Osgood Street&Academ Road - Form-A Ben Osgood Jr. was present to represent Gayton Osgood. Ben Osgood Jr. stated that Gayton is selling his home and would like to donate a parcel of his land before it is sold to the historical society. The Board authorized Ms. Colwell to endorse the plans. 2 �` Boston Ski Hill - definitive subdivision Ms. Colwell recommends the Board endorse the plans. The Board endorsed the plans. Berrinaton Estates - definitive subdivision The Board did not endorse the subdivision plans because an appeal was filed and Town Council recommended that the Board not endorse the plans. Bonds: Windkist Farms - definitive subdivision Ms. Colwell received a letter from Tim Willett, Staff Engineer, stating that he recommends a release of$ 19,550 and retains $95,300 for Windkist Estates. On a motion by Mr. Simons, seconded by Mr. Angles, the Board voted unanimously to release $19,550 and retain $95,300 for Windkist Estates. Foxwood - definitive subdivision/PRD Tom Hurley was present to speak about Foxwoods bond releases. Mr. Hurley stated that he couldn't understand why the Board releases nothing for Foxwood and Windkist just got $19,550. Ms. Colwell stated that we got a punchlist from DPW and I got one for Planning for the things that need to be completed. Ms. Colwell stated that for Planning's punch list there are still issues with streetlights, access to the open space and the no cut areas. Ms. Colwell stated that DPW recommended that we don't release anything. Mr. Nardella stated that we're holding $130,000 and DPW is only putting numbers to $60,000. Mr. Nardella stated that the Town is going to face lawsuits. Mr. Rowen stated that we believe that we should hold bond money for what is not complete. Mr. Hurley stated that Mr. Rand told him that all three phases were lumped together. Ms. Colwell stated that she needs to work with DPW and they told me not to release any money. Ms. Colwell went over the spreadsheet from DPW for what they are holding money for Foxwood Phase I& II. Mr. Hurley stated that DPW had a check for $26,000 for sewer mitigation for over a year and then they gave it back to us and now they are looking for that money back. Mr. Rowen stated that we are going to ask what is remaining on your punch list and what's not. Ms. Colwell stated that as soon as she receives a recommendation from DPW she would put it on the agenda. Mr. Nardella stated that we make the developer pay the money up front and now we can't give the money back when they want it, Mr. Rowen stated that he wants to protect the Town and help the developer. Mr. Rowen asked Ms. Colwell to ask DPW to get an itemized list together for Foxwood. Ms. Colwell stated that as soon as we get something from DPW we would put them on the next agenda. 525 Turnpike Street - site Man review Ms. Colwell stated that the walkway is complete and recommends a total bond release. On a motion by Mr. Mahoney, seconded by Mr. Angles, the Board voted unanimously to release the remainder balance plus interest for 525 Turnpike Street. Continued: Lot 1 Dale Street - repetitive petition 1 �J 3 Mr. Rowen stated that Ms. Colwell went back to our Town Council to find out if the Board could endorse the plans. Mr. Rowen stated that our Town Council felt that the Board should not endorse the plans. Mr. Rowen suggested that we poll the members to see how they feel on endorsing the E plans. Ms. Colwell stated that normally the plans would not come to the Board but at the last meeting we found out that an incomplete appeal was filed. Ms. Colwell stated that until it goes to court we wouldn't know if it is a complete filing. Ms. Colwell stated that we should not make that determination until the courts make their decision. Mr. Angles stated that we got Town Council's opinion and we should go by it. Mr. Mahoney stated that we have to abide by Town Council. Mr. Simons stated that we should go with Town Council. Mr. Nardella stated that we should go by Town Council. Kerry McCollister, asked what a repetitive petition is. Mr. Rowen stated that it is to see if the project is sufficiently different to give the applicant permission to go back before the ZBA because they had already gone before the ZBA. Ms. Colwell read the laws regarding repetitive petition. Mr. Rowen stated that the support for granting the repetitive petition decision is based on the fact that.the parcel is now a subdivision, not a single lot. However since this won't be valid until the Board endorses the plans we recommend that the applicant withdraw their application. Ken Grandstaff, stated that he has no problem withdrawing the application but, has a problem with the Board not endorsing the plans. Ms. Colwell stated that she would waive the filing fees if the applicants re-file within 60 days. Walnut Rid e - definitive subdivision Ms. Colwell stated that the applicants have requested a continuance until the June 16, 1998. John Soucy of Merrimack Engineering stated that D.P.W would like to review the vortech units because they seem to be of high maintenance. Mr, Soucy stated that it is an acceptable plan through D.E.P. Storm Water Management. Mr. Soucy stated that that D.P.W. is recommending that we hold for two weeks and extend their time for the decision until July 1, 1998. On a motion by Mr. Mahoney, seconded by Mr. Simons, the Board voted unanimously to grant an extension until July 1, 1998 for the Board to issue a decision. Mr. Soucy stated that under Storm Water Management there are several ways to deal with contaminated water. Mr. Soucy stated that I"we chose sand filters and now we're going with vortech chambers. Mr. Soucy stated that at the last meeting they received an unfavorable letter from Jim Rand due to the lack of policy. Mr. Soucy stated that Mr. Rand felt that the vortech chambers were only used by private policies. Mr. Soucy stated that Mr. Rand needs time to come up with a policy in regards to financial issues. Mr. Nardella asked what they would normally do for drainage. Mr. Soucy stated that we would use retention or detention ponds. Ms. Colwell stated that Mr. Rand would have a recommendation by the next meeting. Continued until June 16, 1998. Lot 20A Bridle Path- watershed special permit Ms. Colwell stated that Ms. Lescarbeau could not make it tonight but, wanted the Board to know i' that she is not in favor of this special permit. Mr. Simons asked how many feet are they away from wetlands are they. Ms. Colwell stated that they are 50' away. Ms. Colwell went over the definition of a tributary and the special permit definition from the 1979 bylaw. Mr, Rowen stated that it is clearly a good spot for a house and there is no affect to the neighborhood property and they have 4 added oil traps and berms to the plans. Mr. Rowen stated that he feels they have put in the appropriate requirements per the 1979 bylaw. Mr. Simons stated that he feels the same as Ms. Lescarbeau and does not feel that Mr. Christiansen has addressed the water quality issues. Mr. Simons stated that they never talked about fertilizers. Mr. Simons stated that he feels that the Board can deny this under the 1979 bylaw. Ms. Colwell stated that they did not go before the Zoning Board of Appeals to relocate the house. Mr. Rowen stated that it is a left over lot because they could not fit the septic system but now they can get sewer on the property. Mr. Simons stated that he does not feel that the applicant went beyond what he should have. Dave Zaloga stated that they did have an approved septic system and the original developer owed Henry money and the only way Henry could get paid was to get this lot. Mr. Zaloga stated that it was a buildable lot and were told to wait until sewer came down. Ms. Colwell stated that as of 1987 this lot was not acceptable because there was no septic systems allowed in the watershed. Mr. Mahoney stated that he does not feel that it will have a big impact on the lake. Mr. Angles stated that he did not feel comfortable voting on this because he was not at the last meeting to hear what was talked about. On a motion by Mr. Mahoney, seconded by Mr. Angles the Board voted unanimously to close the Public Hearing. On a motion by Mr. Mahoney, seconded by Mr. Nardella, the Board voted 3-1-1 for the special permit for Lot 20A Bridle Path as presented. Mr. Angles abstained from voting, as he was not present at the prior meeting. The motion to approve Lot 20A Bridle Path failed. Decisions: Lot 1 Dale Street - repetitive,petition Ms. Colwell recommended to the applicant that they withdraw their application without prejudice due to the fact that the Board could not endorse the subdivision plans because there was an appeal. Ms. Colwell stated that the PIanning Board would waive the filing fees if the applicants re-file within 60 days, Walnut Rid e - definitive subdivision Continued until June 16, 1998. Lot 20A.Bridle Path - watershed special permit On a motion by Mr. Mahoney, seconded by Mr. Nardella, the Board voted 3-1-1. Mr. Angles abstained. The motion to approve Lot 20A Bridle Path failed. Between 187 & 211 South Bradford Street (201 South Bradford Street) - watershed special permit On a motion by Mr. Simons, seconded by Mr. Nardella, the Board voted unanimously to approve 201 South Bradford Street - watershed special permit. Adjournment: On a motion by Mr. Mahoney, seconded by Mr. Nardella, the Board voted unanimously to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m. ��� 5