2004-07-28-PB-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Minutes for the Meeting of July 28, 2004 Intervening portion of Hazel Road: Mr. Harden indicated that a portion of Hazel Road between the end of the improved roadway and the beginning of the development is problematic. The existing conditions include some portions with 16% grade. This seems steep to him in winter conditions and he wondered how much development makes sense given this condition. Mr. Garber said that the specific waivers requested were lacking from the applications. Mr. Dryden said that this was an interior drive, not a subdivision so waivers were not needed. There was further discussion on this matter, including who would be responsible for the upkeep of the road. Some board members wondered if the homeowners association for the new development could plow the entire street in order to insure that it would be kept clear. Neighbors had indicated that there have been times when the Town failed to plow on weekends. They also indicated that the major source of traffic was people who drive down Hazel thinking they can get through. Signage would help in those cases. Mr. Douglas Rae, a local realtor, stated his belief that this development would be a benefit to the town, as it improves a difficult site and one of the units will be given to the town for affordable housing. Mr. McMahon spoke for Mrs. Sharkey, saying that she believes this is a good plan. She relies on the sale of the land to Mr. Lopez to fund her retirement. Direction to the Applicant: The Board requested fewer and /or smaller units. Mr. Galaitsis indicated that a cluster subdivision does not entitle the applicant to the maximum impact factors. Members wanted to see that Mr. Hayes' concerns about runoff from the roofs were addressed as well as sing the results from more test pits. They were concerned about the effects of any blasting on the wooded slope relative to drainage especially where the infiltration is released. Mr. Dryden asked just how many units would be acceptable. The Board responded that it depends on the total number of square feet of the buildings, but that at least one building should be eliminated, and the size of the others should not increase. Members said that the developer was pushing the capacity of the site. They felt an overall ten percent reduction was needed. (Ms. McCall- Taylor pointed out that the applicant decided to file a definitive plan even after the Board disapproved the sketch and preliminary plans, at which stages it is less expensive to adjust to Board comments.) The Board indicated that it in order to keep the impervious surfaces to a minimum it would favor a pavement width of 20 feet for the interior drive. At 10:50 p.m., seeing that there was still much to be decided, Mr. Harrington asked for an extension of the time in which the Board must act so that the hearing could be continued. The time to act on the subdivision was extended until October 26, 2004 by vote of the Planning Board members present. All parties agreed to continue the hearing to Tuesday, September 21. The Board also agreed to review informally the plan in progress at its meeting on Wednesday, September 1. Mr. Harden adjourned the hearing at 11:05 p.m. STAFF REPORTS Mr. Garber reported the following: Middlesex County Hospital Land Regarding the sale of a six -acre parcel which is part of the former Middlesex County Hospital property, the state's Department of Capital Asset Management will accept placing a covenant limiting the buyer to the base zoning of the parcel, which is RO, Single - Family Dwelling. Marrett/Sprin /g Bridge Intersection The Marrett Road /Spring Street/Bridge Street ad hoc committee will be sending to the Selectmen a draft scope of services for an RFP to study the intersection and how best to