1984-01-BOS-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

t� No one else speaking in favor or in opposition, the Chairman declared the hearing on Ellis Street closed. Emerald The hearing on Emerald Street was opened. Mr. Pol i ti read the report Street of the Planning Board in opposition to the project because of its status as "paper right-of-way" and because developable lots would be opened up at the expense of the Town. The Planning Board also noted a matter of dumping of illegal fill in the "paper right-of-way", which has. not been resolved. Mr. Field showed a slide of Emerald - Street and reported that construc- tion is proposed for a distance of 490' , with a 40' layout and 24' paving. Sidewalk would installed on the southerly side with land takings only for roundings . Seven out of the eight abuttors had s igned the petition. Con- struction costs would total $90,000 with a betterment return of $ In response to the questionnaire sent to abuttors , four were in favor and one opposed. Previous petitions had been submitted in 1973, 1975, 197 1980 and 1982. Mr. Pali ti read a letter from Stanley E. Toye , Precinct 8 Town Meet- ing Member, in support of the project and noted his suggestions for three alternative construction plans . Catherine Molle, 24 Bellflower Street, stated that Emerald Street had been a travelled way, plowed by the Town, until it was made unpassable by action of the Town in conjunction with sewer construction in 1975. She noted that its designation as "paper" has been only for the past two years and claimed that petitions have been submitted more frequently than the five times stated.. Dennis Santucci, 16 Bellflower Street, expressed his opposition and distributed a petition so stating signed by 20 residents. Mr. Santucci claimed that Emerald Street in the "paper" street section which abuts his property, had been a wooded area and strictly unpassable until last summer when a strip was bulldozed in conjunction with the McSweeney lot develop -. ment . The petitioners claim that the construction of Emerald Street would upset a natural setting in their neighborhood and would create in uneces- sary annoyance. He further stated that the proposal is opposed by a major- ity of the neighborhood and would use Town money to open land for additiott al development . Ownership of undevloped land on Emerald Street will be researched by the Town Manager . Benjamin Golini, Precinct 8 Town Meeting Member, noted that since 1955 or 1956, Emerald Street has been passable and noted that Asbury Street is also unpaved. He questioned the need to build a minor street to standards imposed on highly travelled streets: Mr. Kouyoumj ian, 24 Hamblen Street, noted extensive work needed to re- move ledge and questioned Town expenditure for an additional access when accesses now exist. He also claimed the "paper" street had previously been plowed. Mr. Eddison asked if the proposed street accesptance criteria had been applied to this year's list of streets. Mr. Politi said the Board had applied the criteria as guidelines only as a means of gaining input and experience with the new policy before the actual vote to accept it. The Town Manager had also applied the new criteria and, on that basis, has recommended only one street for acceptance - Sunny Knoll Avenue. No one else speaking in favor or in opposition, the Chairman declared the hearing on Emerald Street closed .