1973-04-11 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

r Campanelli, Inc. (hearing continued) -2 4/11/73 In addition to those already mentioned Alfred P. Tropeano and Wilbur C. Nylander, owners of the property in question, were in attendance. Mr. Wilcox and Mr. Colbert reiterated their need to proceed with build- ing immediately. They stated that they hoped all obstacles such as Planning Board, Conservation Commission, Town Engineering Department and Board of Health approvals had been satisfied so no impediment would prevent the Board of Appeals from approving and issuing the requested finding and determination. A letter dated April 10 was received from the Planning Board stating that it has reviewed and approved revised plans submitted on April 2 and that the Engineering Department has informed it that it now approves. The letter further stated that it approves three waivers of sections of the Rules and Regulations governing the subdivision of land in Lexington, Mass. as follows: Section 6.56 requires a maximum length of 650 ft. for a dead end street; 665.21 shall be permitted. Section 7.3.5 requires sidewalks; in this case none will be required. Section 6.8 sets maximum hydrant spacing of 500 ft.; in this case one may be installed at the end of the cul-de-sac with a plug at the end of the line. It also recommended the standard recommendations of the Conservation Commission, namely: (1) Oil and grease traps and catch basins should be provided in all parking areas to reduce pollutants entering the swamp. (2) Salt shall not be used to melt snow and ice in the wintertime. (3) Approved methods of erosion control should be used in all disturbed areas. (4) All provisions of the Hatch Act shall be observed. A letter dated April 2 was received. This is a copy of a letter from the Director of Public Health to the Planning Board which Board mentions it in its letter of April 10th and seems to approve its recommendations re. sanitary sewage disposal, public water supplies, flood control and air pollu- tion. A letter of April 2 was received. This is a copy of a letter from the Engineering Department to the Planning Board and indicates the approval of the Engineering Department of the revised plan. Nobody spoke in favor of the petition. A letter was received from Frank Sandy expressing opposition. He wrote, "This land is in a wet swampy area with substantial surface water on the ground at the present time. Full dev- elopment of this marginal land, as proposed, would be a substantial detriment to the Town. Residents of the Town who live along Kiln and Simonds Brooks already experience flooding caused by excessive building and faster runoff which these brooks cannot handle adequately. Except for the required front and side yards, the zoning by-law does not put a limit on the total fraction of,the lot that can be used for driveways, parking and buildings. It leaves this completely to the discretioncf your Board in making its finding and determination. I believe the Board should exercise its authority to control the amount of coverage in wet areas such as these. I would suggest that a proposal that covers a much smaller part of lot 9 could be acceptable. Alter- natively, if a building of this size is needed, Tyco should be required to obtain all or a substantial part of the adjacent lot 10 and retain it to absorb the water runoff from their development. A conservation easement or