DRAFT
Minutes of the May 10, 2004 Meeting of the Greenfield Planning Board
The meeting opened at 7:00 p.m. with members Cernota, Kavenagh, Marshall, O’Connell, Rainier and Seigars in attendance as well as alternates Carrara and Pennoyer. The minutes of April 26 were read and approved with the following correction: under Mail #2, Brady was changed to Bradley.
The board went over the mail. We received the following items:
· A copy of the 4/29 minutes of the selectmen’s meeting.
· A thank you letter from Mr. Therrien of Crotched Mountain for our meeting with them on 4/26.
· A copy of Dario Carrara’s appointment as an alternate to the Planning Board.
· A letter from Mrs. Andrews Macalaster concerning growth in Greenfield.
· A bill for $87.50 for advertising the Edwin Colburn subdivision hearing on 5/24.
· A list of town officials and their hours.
Mike asked us to check the corrected base map from Southwest. The have taken off the private roads and the brown dotted lines. All corrections have been. Mike will ask Braden to print one copy of the Master Plan.
Mike asked us to look over the sheet of items to review for subdivision review/update. Bob suggested that wetland setbacks be added to the list. We will discuss these after the Mitchell-Mason subdivision deliberations. He also mentioned tat he had reviewed the Excavation Regulations a while back. This could also be added to the list. If we wish to amend the subdivision regulations, we can do so by holding a public hearing and then voting at our meeting.
Mike mentioned that Marilyn may not make the meetings for a while. However, we can use her as a research resource. He passed out copies of her research into driveway regulations. Mike also reminded us that we need to rewrite the Rules of Procedure and volunteered to work on these. He asked us to consider whether we want to meet three times a month for a while in order to get everything done in a timely fashion.
Kevin O’Connell has agreed to be our corresponding secretary.
At 7:45 p.m. we reopened our deliberations on the Mitchell-Mason proposed subdivision. Mr. Mitchell and Mr. Mason were present along with Atty. Silas Little. Sheldon will continue to take Marilyn’s place. Mike went over items he had received concerning the subdivision. There was a letter from Gene Mitchell asking for all planning board files since January. Deb sent them and has a receipt for the cost of copying them. We have received letters from John Teague concerning the violation of the 600 foot maximum requirement for roads as well as needing new language in the easement to indemnify the town from any claims. We also need language put in that the 4 lot driveway shall not become a town road.
Sheldon made a motion to approve the subdivision submitted by Mitchell-Mason Properties LLC and shown on drawings P-1 and P-2 by Meridian Land Surveyors dated 4/22/04 with the following conditions:
1. Lots 9-3-5 and 9-3-6 be merged and labeled Lot 9-3-5.
2. Lots 9-3-7 and 9-3-8 be merged and labeled Lot 9-3-6.
3. A final plat be submitted with the above changes no later than ___________________.
4. The common drive be built with crushed stone in place of bank run gravel as shown on drawings dated 4/22/04.
The purpose of the above mergers is to eliminate the common drive which is shown larger than 600 feet as stated in Section 7 of the subdivision control laws of Greenfield.
Atty Silas Little objected to having Sheldon participate because of his bumper sticker which Atty. Little feels is biased against the plan. The board felt that Sheldon did not need to step down. The motion was then seconded, and the board voted 4 to 2 to accept the motion. The board then began discussion on the motion. George was concerned about an easement to a back lot. He also said that Eric Tuarog from Southwest had suggested that lots 7 & 8 be
made more conforming. Atty Little noted that he was all right with John Teague’s language in his letters. We agreed that the changes made so far are small enough so that we don’t have to hold another public hearing. However, Sheldon’s motion is a substantial change so that we would have to rehear the subdivision if the motion passed. Mr. Kelley from Meridian said that his remarks at the last meeting on dead end streets were not in the minutes and he presented an explanation tonight. Bob read from minutes of 3/8 about merging two lots but because of the railroad the two lots cannot be merged. It was then moved to accept the proposed motion. The vote was 1 in favor and the rest of the members voted no.
Steve then moved that we approve the proposed subdivision as submitted on applicants drawings dated 4/22/04 including P-1 and P-2 with the following conditions:
1. 8 inches of compacted crushed gravel is to be used instead of bank run gravel.
2. The easement is to be amended per letter from John Teague dated 5/10/04 as follows:
The Town of Greenfield does not, and shall not, have any obligation to maintain the Common Driveway shown on said plan.
By accepting a deed a lot in this subdivision, each grantee, heir, or assign acknowledges that the Common Driveway serving four of the lots is not and shall not become a Town road.
The Declarant and its successors and assigns do hereby agree to indemnify and hold harmless the Town of Greenfield, its agents, officers, and employees from any claims, losses, judgments, settlements, or costs received from or paid to any party arising out of the inability of Town fire, police, rescue, or other emergency vehicles to access or reach said four lots or any of them in a timely fashion which results in any injuries or claims for damages, consequential or otherwise.
The motion was then seconded. The board began discussion. Bob wants a waiver on the length of the driveway. They could have a waiver since the State only allows three cuts. It was mentioned that there are other dead end roads in town but these are Class V roads. No other common driveways are as long or have as many lots on them.
The motion was then amended by adding “ A waiver of the 600 foot road requirement of Section 7 B.4 of the subdivision regulations dealing with dead end streets is approved for the following reasons: 1. The unique nature of this parcel.
2. The State limitation of three driveway cuts.
3. The expanded nature of the construction of this road to account for public safety issues makes this the best
solution in this case.
The amendment of the motion was a tied vote. The chairman voted yes to break the tie.
The board then voted on the amended motion which was denied by a vote of 4 no and 2 yes.
The board asked if they have alternative plans that we might look at. Mr. Kelley passed out two different plans. After looking at these, many of the board members preferred the original. Sheldon then moved to reconsider the motion that we had just denied. The motion was seconded by Bob and passed by a unanimous vote. Mr. Mitchell told the board that this subdivision will be done right.
We then looked at the items to review for subdivision review/update. We decided to work on them in this order
First - #s 3,4,12 & 13 (driveways)
Second - #s 7 & 8 (dimensioning & frontage_
Third - #s 5 & 6 (Class VI roads)
The meeting was adjourned at 10:30 p.m.
Jean Cernota, Secretary
| 
