Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-06-18 Planning Board Minutes (6)Present: J. Simons, M. Colantoni, D. Kellogg, L. Rudnicki. L. McSherry, R. Rowen Absent: Staff Present: J. Tymon, J. Enright Meeting began at 7:00pm. BOND RELEASE 125 Flagship Drive: Request for the release of a $10,000 performance G bond. J. Tymon: The bond is for a cell tower monopole. The installation required some stormwater management and the project went before the Conservation Commission. A site visit has been completed and an as-built has been received. A $10,000 Surety Bond has been posted for the removal of the equipment/tower. MOTION A motion was made by M. Colantoni to approve the release of all cash bond funds for 125 Flagship Drive. The motion was seconded by D. Kellogg. The vote was 5-0 in favor. R. Rowen did not vote. POSTPONEMENTS CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING, 1077 Osgood Street: Application for a Watershed Special Permit and Site Plan Review Special Permit. Applicant proposes to construct a 3,672 sq. ft. single story retail bank, parking lot, and stormwater structures within the Non-Discharge Zone and Non-Disturbance Zone of the Watershed Protection District. NEW PUBLIC HEARING, Adjacent to 1665 Great Pond Road: Application for a Watershed Special Permit. Applicant seeks to construct a single family home with associated clearing, grading, utilities, and stormwater maintenance features within the Non-Discharge and Non-Disturbance Zone of Lake Cochichewick and the 100 foot buffer zone of an adjacent bordering vegetated wetland resource within the Watershed Protection Overlay District in the Residential 1 (R-1) Zoning District. PUBLIC HEARINGS CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING, 0 Great Pond Road (Map 35 Lot 38): Application for a Watershed Special Permit. Applicant seeks to construct a single family dwelling with appurtenances on a presently undeveloped, buildable lot. J. Tymon: A revised Site Plan and a Landscape Plan have been received. There is some landscaping within the 100’ Conservation Commission. This is still before the Conservation Commission and a condition requiring their final approval could be put into the Decision. L. Eggleston does not have any additional issues. Phil Christiansen, Christiansen & Sergi, Inc.: Reviewed the latest changes to the Site Plan and provided an overview of the Landscape Plan. The sewer and water lines now follow the driveway in order to minimize the cutting. Additional stone has been added along the driveway at the Board’s recommendation. J. Tymon: In working with the applicant and L. Eggleston we were able to accomplish maintaining as much of a ‘no cut zone’ within the 100’ Conservation Zone as possible. ABUTTERS: John Desmond, 1775 Great Pond Road: Expressed strong opposition to building the proposed home on the lower portion of the lot. Stated he would like the 100’ Conservation Zone strictly maintained with absolutely no disturbance. Believes it is difficult to construct on the top of the hill, but that it is possible. J. Simons: There are substantial differences in the topographical features of this lot and 1775 Great Pond Road. The Town’s outside consultant has reviewed and scrutinized the proposal and is satisfied it will not create a problem. Requested some science to back up the opinion that this is going to create a problem. J. Desmond: Stated the middle section of his lot is substantially steeper than any part of the 0 Great Pond Road lot. This lot was unbuildable until the sewer was brought in so this is not a hardship. Whenever there is a wet spring the entire front of the lot looks like a swamp. The water has been well over two feet deep over most of the front of the lot. The rules are to protect the water supply. If the lot cannot be built on easily it should be regarded as unbuildable. Otherwise you are going to end up polluting the Lake. Specifically, nitrogen or any other type of fertilizers near the Lake creates an algae and an excess of it creates an algae bloom. That is exactly how this Lake is going to die as the Town’s water supply. P. Christiansen: This project went before the Board of Appeals and received a variance. The middle of the lot is far steeper than his property. The front of the lot is relatively level and that is where you will have the minimum disturbance to the land. Fertilizer types can be restricted through a deed restriction. The limit of clearing will also be noted on the deed and additional clearing will be prohibited. Reviewed the stormwater management plan proposed for the project. If there was a lot of ponding at the lower end of the lot the vegetation would show that. It is all upland soil in this area. There is no way four feet of water can pond on that lot. J. Desmond: During the May storm that washed out the bridge there was four feet of water. This is a wooded area with substantial water in the spring. There are large trees and scattered growth. It is not a dry soil. Strongly objected to building this close to the water supply. J. Simons: This biggest problem the Board has ever had has been building on a steep slope or territory. The sheer number of feet away from the Lake does not measure safety. In addition, this has been through a very elaborate process with the Town’s engineer to ensure that there is not a problem. R. Rowen: Stated that given the existing vegetation at the lower end of the lot he does not believe two feet of water sits there for extended periods of time. MOTION A motion was made by R. Rowen to close the public hearing for 0 Great Pond Road. The motion was seconded by D. Kellogg. The vote was unanimous. MOTION A motion was made by R. Rowen to approve the Watershed Special Permit for 0 Great Pond Road as amended this evening. The motion was seconded by D. Kellogg. The vote was unanimous. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING, 100 Dale Street: Application for a Watershed Special Permit. The project consists of two (2) building lots. Structures on Lot 2 are to be demolished. A single family home with associated clearing, grading, utilities and stormwater maintenance features is proposed for Lot 1 and Lot 2. J. Tymon: A separate wetlands map was presented to the Conservation Commission. They have approved the wetland delineation. Jennifer Hughes, Conservation Administrator, requested additional flags and she visited the site today and approved those flags. The 200’ Zone A was added to the plans at L. Eggleston’s request. The proposed house location has been moved back on the lot. The proposed driveway has been moved to the other side of the house to address the concern that was expressed at the last meeting. L. Eggleston recommended confirmatory test pits should be done and that can be made as a condition of the approval. L. Eggleston also recommended the maintenance plan that is on the Plan also be made available to the homeowner in document form. Phil Christiansen, Christiansen & Sergi, Inc.: L. Eggleston also wanted the water and sewer lines to follow the path of the driveways. They are currently proposed to be a straight line to the houses. Straight lines are preferable in either line ever requires maintenance. They are proposed to be run in a straight line in the cleared area where the front lawns will be. Provided a review of the wetland locations and distances on the plans and the stromwater management plan. J. Tymon: L. Eggleston has not received a copy of the revised paper plan yet. She will need to do a final review. R. Rowen: Expressed he did not believe the Board of Appeals should have granted a variance, but they did and it was not appealed. The changes made since the last meeting are a step in the right direction to address the major issues that were raised at the last meeting. ABUTTERS: Dinelle Bere, 40 Berrington Place: Provided and aerial photograph of the site which included the location of her home. Stated she appreciated the house being moved back in the lot; however, it is still closer to her home than to proposed new home on Lot 1. Requested the house be moved further. The house is placed at the convenience of the builder and for his profitability. R. Rowen: We are still dealing with the fact that there are two lots, but if it were one lot still he would have every right to put his home there. D. Bere: Referenced an email she sent to the Board stating the Planning Board’s philosophy. J. Simons: We have to follow the law. This is before us for a very specific permit, a Watershed Special Permit. This is a permit for a very specific purpose. Some broader issues have been brought in to reflect feedback but the intent of this is not to deal with every possible contingency of having a house next to you. This has to do with a Watershed Special Permit and the Board cannot go broader than that. There is no jurisdiction that is legally broader than that. The Board do not have jurisdiction of where the home is placed on the property other than the context of the Watershed Special Permit. J. Simons: We will continue this over until the next meeting and will likely close and vote at that meeting. DISCUSSION 316 Great Pond Road: Watershed Special Permit waiver request. J. Tymon: There are several dead trees and/or limbs on the property that the homeowner would like to remove. He would also like to do some re-grading in the backyard. The trees are within 100’ of a wetland and therefor this is re-vegetation and grading within the Non-Disturb Zone. Bill Karras, Homeowner 316 Great Pond Road: J. Tymon and H. Gaffney have visited the site. Showed pictures of four dead trees. The stumps will not be removed. Conservation has confirmed that they are dead. J. Tymon: The Conservation Commission is going to review this project. This is a request for a waiver of a Watershed Special Permit. J. Tymon: Cutting the trees can probably be waived; however, substantial re-grading would require a more detailed plan that can be reviewed. MOTION A motion was made by R. Rowen to waive the Watershed Special Permit for the purpose of the tree cutting only. The motion was seconded by L. Rudnicki. The vote was unanimous. MEETING MINUTES: Approval of May 7 and May 20, 2013 meeting minutes. MOTION A motion was made by L. Rudnicki to approve the May 7, 2013 meeting minutes as amended. The motion was seconded by L. McSherry. The vote was unanimous. MOTION A motion was made by L. Rudnicki to approve the May 20, 2013 meeting minutes as amended. The motion was seconded by D. Kellogg. The vote was unanimous. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: A motion was made by M. Colantoni to adjourn the meeting. The motion was seconded by R. Rowen. The vote was unanimous. The meeting adjourned at 8:15 pm. MEETING MATERIALS: Agenda, 0 Great Pond Road: Draft Decision, Site Plan of Land Great Pond Road dated May 30, 2013, Special Permit Plan dated May 30, 2013, Watershed Special Permit Site Plan Details dated May 30, 2013, 100 Dale Street: Site Development Plan for Watershed Special Permit dated June 3, 2013,Wetland Location and Soil Types Watershed Special Permit dated June 3, 2013, Stormwater Review Letter from Eggleston Environmental dated May 7, 2013, aerial view of existing home and Bere home, email from Dinelle Bere dated June 2, 2013 sent to the Planning Board, 1665 Great Pond Road: email dated 5/30/ 2013 requesting a continuance, 316 Great Pond Road: Letter from Bill Karras to Judith Tymon dated June 4, 2013, pictures of tress on the property identified as tree #1 through tree #6, 16 pictures of the property, 5/7/2013 and 5/20/2013 draft meeting minutes.