Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995-01-03Planning Board Meeting Minutes January 3t 1995 Senior Center The meeting was called to order at 7:12. p.m. Members Prese~ Richard Nardella, Chairman, Joseph Mahoney, Vice Chairman, Richard Rowen, Clerk, and Alison Lescarbeau. John Simons arrived at 7:30 p.m. Also present was Kathleen Bradley Colwell, Town Planner. warrant artioles Mr. Nardella stated that Ms. Colwell assigned a warrant article to each of the Planning Board members. Mr. Rowen questioned what buildable area is for CBA - should non- buildable portions of the lot such as required sets backs be excluded from CBA calculation? Lowering % CBA would be part of this. "Rat tail" area would not be included in the calculation for area and should also not be included in the CBA calculation. Mr. Nardella: looking at eliminating "rat tails" totally. Mr. Rowen: "Rat tails" should not contribute to lot area CBA, and frontage. Richard Nardella: Question about allowing rat tails. Joseph Mahoney: Neutral on rat tail issue until the project on Osgood Street. Alison Lescarbeau: No benefit to a developer to create rat tails therefore they would not create them. Richard Nardella: Wants to eliminate rat tails totally. Richard Rowen: Wants to eliminate setbacks from the CBA calculation. Joseph Mahoney: A parcel may end up being easier to develop if the CBA requirement is reduced. Richard Rowen: Developers will center the home on the lot because the buildable area will be in the center of the lot. Density is fixed by the 2 acre requirement. Richard Nardella: May not want to constrain someone to this extent, wants to allow flexibility. Richard Rowen: Calculation of CBA should only count the buildable area. Should not call it "CBA" then, call it "upland area". Need specific definition of "contiguous upland area". Bon~s/Lot Releases Jim Grifoni, developer, requesting the release of the lots on Willow Street, would post $45,000 for the six lots on Willow Street, start work now and then start the internal road. John Simons: Lots are on a road but they are not Form A lots because the developer could not create 5,000 sq. ft. lots through the Form A process. The lots are part of the entire subdivision. Alison Lescarbeau: do not want to start a new precedent. Richard Rowen: If planning board has enough security to make sure that the subdivision is completed, then would entertain release of the lots. Planning Board reviewed the plan. Richard Nardella: All the covenants do is prevent the lots from being constructed on. Joseph Mahoney: Agrees with the majority, does not want to release lots "piece meal". Richard Nardella: Does not want to start a precedent. John Simons: Does not have adequate security to get the road built. Mr. Grifoni stated that he cannot do anymore work on the site this season. Consensus of Planning Board that lots cannot be released until the entire bond is posted. Po~ & pl~ Mike Rosati, Marchionda Associates Presented Fo:m A plan to create 2 lots on winter Street Looked at putting a road up the hill to create 4 lots, would eliminate 2 of the lots. but cost John Simons: Question about whether there is practical access to the site. Mr. Rosati Presented a revised plan showing a lot line change to allow for a smaller wetland crossing. Richard Nardella: What would applicant do if pork chop lots were not allowed? Mr. Rosati stated that he would suggest a small road and cul de sac to create frontage for two lots. Public Hearings Lot 3AA and 4& winter Street - Special Pe~nit - Common Driveway & Mr. Rowen read the legal notice to open public hearing for access other than over legal frontage and for a common driveway Ms. Colwell questioned the ability of the applicant to create a Form A lot because of the lack of practical access. Mr. Simons agreed with Ms. Colwell on interpretation of Form A. Suggested that the Board look at cul-de-sac plan. May want to review the site as a small subdivision. Ms. Colwell stated that she would rather treat it as a common driveway with revised lot lines. Richard Rowen: could not support Form A plan before the Planning Board currently, but could support it with a revised lot line and treat it as a common driveway. Richard Nardella: wants to limit common drive for two homes only. Richard Rowen: with revised lot line may be able to get a permit to cross the wetland. Joseph Mahoney: wants to have a site visit, no access to lot 4A, need to look at it as a subdivision. Richard Nardella: Recommends that Planning Board wait until TRC has reviewed the project. Mr. Rosati has designed driveway with retaining walls and 81/2% and 12% grades/ Susan Parker 464 Foster Street, concern about drainage and the disrupting of the road. Kathleen Bradley Colwell: Ask TRC to review drainage calculations on this site. Mr. Rosati has the drainage calculations for this site -- water goes under Winter Street behind the homes and down to Mosquito Brook. Motion to continue made by John Simons, seconded by Richard Rowen. Mr. Rosati agree to withdraw Form A plan. PB~ DeveloPment - The Crossroads - Site Plan Review Atty. Peter Shaheen continued the discussion of the proposed project. Kathleen Bradley Colwell stated that at the last meeting the Planning Board discussed traffic. The traffic study is being reviewed by Merrimack Valley Planning Commission--suggest that conversation be limited to discussion of other issues. Richard Nardella: Does Planning Board want a lantern in the front? Joseph Mahoney: Lantern compliments what is currently at Chestnut Green. John Simons: What are the hours the lights will be on? Atty. Shaheen: May be kept on all night. One of the concerns is that complex not attract "undesirables" at night. Kathleen Bradley Colwell: shine into the street. would be concerned that lanterns may Richard Nardella: do not want lights shining all night into the street. Kathleen Bradley Colwell: It is possible to have security lights at night, not the parking lot lights. At the Osco Drug site the hours of lighting were limited. Richard Nardella: how is building sign illuminated? Atty. Shaheen: Down cast. Phil Busby, Hillside Road, concerned about lighting, what height are the poles? Atty. Shaheen: 18' high pole Kathleen Bradley Colwell: Lighting cannot extend beyond lot boundary. Alice Piesons 125 Hillside Road, concerned about lights. Must be on all night to discourage partying in the back lot. Richard Nardella: Planning Board may not require the construction of the back parking lot. Ms. Piesons concerned that a secluded area is being created. Lynn Accari, Hillside Road: Stated that there may be a 24 hour 4 shift at NE Telephone--no need to light back parking lot. Kathleen Bradley Colwell to talk to Mr. McGarry, Coolidge Construction, about lights. Richard Nardella: What about lighting that is triggered by motion- security lights? Dan Betty 105 Hillside Road wants to match lighting with Chestnut Green. Atty. Shaheen: A planting plan was submitted on sheet A-Z Mr. Busby: commented that a 4'to 5' arborvitae is planned, what about a taller tree? Balance bush with trees spread out along the property line. Landscaping should match the Osco Drug Plan and Chestnut Green. Mix "green" bushes with "colored" bushes Richard Nardella: W~at about planters at the retail centers? Atty. Shaheen haven't thought about it, but will look into it. Richard Nardella: What about trash receptacles on site? Richard Rowen: Discussions about Vanett lot. Atty. Shaheen will keep the pines on Vanett lot. Drainage discussion Mike Rosati stated that project has two drainage basins on the site. One section goes to Merrimack College, the other goes to Jasmine Plaza. Need a detention pond to catch drainage so that drainage can be tied into state drainage system. Richard Rowen: Question about stores being accessed from both sides. Atty. Shaheen stores will not be accessed from the rear. Alison Lescarbeau: How many stores? Atty. Shaheen 5 to 6 stores Richard Nardella: What if a breakfast place is put at the site? Atty. Shaheen May not put a restaurant in the site because it causes problems with traffic and parking. Richard Nardella: Difficulty with change ? over the long term. Need to reserve parking sgaces for emgloyees Ed Becotte 136 Hillside Road any way to 9ut restrictions on the hours of delivery? Richard Nardella: yes, Planning Board will restrict hours of delivery. As part of traffic review, will 9edestrian traffic looked at? Mr. Simons: Need to design entire flow of intersection to provide for pedestrian access. Discussion of pedestrian traffic Discussion of limiting "for sale" signs in the windows--will put this in decision. Discussion of shopping carts--will put this in the decision. Mr. Simons questioned the architectural designs, and whether they are false facades Asked where are the mechanicals? Atty Shaheen Hidden behind the facade Richard Nardella= Working clock? Atty. Shaheen: Yes John Simons: What is the glass to wall ratio? Arty Shaheen: The more glass the better John Simons: What type of windows/moldings Arty Shaheen will provide the info Richard Nardella: Dumgster needs to be entirely contained--put in the decision Atty Shaheen Metal col~ns covered with wood--metal frame building--wooden fence. Mr. Simons question what the S~gn in the front is. Atty. Shaheen, simply a signature sign, store names will be on the building Ms. Piesons= Question about watershed on Hillside against a curb cut on Hillside. Discussion of access to Hillside Road Traffic will be discussed at the next meeting. Will have benefit of outside review of the traffic study. Richard Rowen: Discussion of parking and need for rear parking lot. Richard Rowen, John Simons, motion to continue until January 17th Lost Pond - Definitive Sub~visio- The applicant requested to continue the public hearing until January 17, 1995. Decisions Pinewood Definitive Sub~iv~sion/SDecial Permit PRD Ms. Colwell--used Foxwood decision as a base, added in discussions and conditions from original decision Discussion of subdivision decision Discussion of Street trees Discussion of special permit Site opening bond $15,000 Erosion control $2,000 per lot, $16,000 to be held for the duration of the project Add construction signs and stop signs to decision On a motion by Mr. Mahoney, seconded by Ms. Lescarbeau, the Planning Board voted to approve the subdivision decision pending review of the decision by the chairman. On a motion by Mr. Mahoney, seconded by Mr. Rowen, the Planning Board voted to approve the special permit pending review of the decision by the chairman. On a motion by Mr. Mahoney, seconded by Mr. Rowen, the Planning Board voted to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 10:30 pm.