Minutes of Meeting – June 2, 2009
The Hudson Planning Board met at the Town Hall, 78 Main Street, Hudson, Massachusetts.
At 7:30 p.m., Dirk Underwood called the meeting to order.
Present: Dirk Underwood, Tom Collins, Charles Freeman, Rodney Frias, Jennifer Burke, Planning Director, and Teresa Vickery, Clerk.
Planner’s Report
ANR – White Pond Road
The Board was presented with an ANR for White Pond Road from the DPW. This relates to town meeting warrant articles for appropriations and the acquisition of a 16.93 acre parcel of land off White Pond Road for open space and recreation. Ms. Burke noted that the ANR is for the dividing up of this land for the Town to purchase. This would grant protection to the well head and add a good amount of open space.
Tom Collins, seconded by Dirk Underwood, moved to accept the plan entitled “Plan of Land in Hudson, MA” as drawn by Thomas Land Surveyors & Engineering Consultants, Inc. of Hudson, MA and dated April 15, 2009 and Authorize the Agent to sign.
Vote: 3-0-0, Unanimous
13 Kane Industrial Drive – Site Plan Review
Present was: Christopher P. Yates, Atty. at Law
Dirk Underwood convened the public hearing.
Atty. Yates states that this site plan was previously approved in 2004; however the applicant had let the site plan expire. Therefore, the applicant it before the Board to request a new approval for 13 Kane Industrial Drive. This site plan was originally submitted simultaneously with the plans for 2 Kane Industrial Drive.
Atty. Yates explained that the applicant is proposing an 8,000 sq. ft. office, industrial and manufacturing building. On a side note, the Atty. Yates noted that the plans do not reflect the correct amount of square footage and he would provide the Board with a set of plans reflecting the correction. The building will have town water; however a private septic system will be installed. Ms. Burke informed Atty. Yates that a new septic approval will be needed from the Board of Health.
Atty. Yates said that a variance will be needed from the Zoning Board due to the fact that the lot is undersized. He also said that the applicant has already been before the Internal Traffic Committee and the only issue was that they requested that the roof drain be referenced on the plans.
Ms. Burke notified the Board that back in 2004 the Board had not yet instituted its set of general standard conditions and it may want to include this in the motion.
Tom Collins, seconded by Charles Freeman, made a motion to close the public hearing for 13 Kane Industrial Drive.
Vote: 3-0-0, Unanimous
Tom Collins, seconded by Charles Freeman, made a motion to approve the site plan entitled “Site Plan for 13 Kane Industrial Drive, Hudson, MA” as drawn by Consolidated Design Group, Inc. of Stow, MA dated February 6, 2002 and last revised June 8, 2009, with the following conditions:
A list of 24-hour emergency contact information must be provided to the Planning Director and the DPW prior to any work being done on site.
Hours of construction will be Monday through Saturday 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. No work or operation of machinery may happen before 7:00 a.m., in accordance with the town’s noise by-law or after 5:00 p.m. Per the Massachusetts General Laws, work on Sundays and holidays need to be permitted on a case by case basis by the Chief of Police.
Prior to the commencement of authorized site activity, the Planning Board Office shall be given 48 hours written notice. If the activity at the Project Site ceases for longer than 30 days, 48 hour written notice shall be given to the Planning Board Office prior to restarting work.
A copy of the conditions and all final approved Plans shall be kept at the Project Site.
Members or agents of the Planning Board shall have the right to enter the Project Site and to gather all information, measurements, photographs or other materials needed to ensure compliance with this approval. Members or agents of the Planning Board entering onto the Project Site for these purposes shall comply with all safety rules, Regulations and directives of the Applicant and the Applicant’s contractors.
The Planning Board’s erosion control plan as attached shall be adhered to and govern. All erosion control shall be in place and approved by the Planning Director before construction begins. Weekly erosion control reports shall be submitted to the DPW and the Planning Department no later than noontime on Fridays.
A final occupancy permit shall not be issued until an as-built plan indicating lot grading and drainage system BMP’s has been confirmed to be consistent with the approved plans to the Planning Director’s reasonable satisfaction.
If, during construction, a discrepancy is found between the approved plans and the existing regulations, the DPW and the Planning Director will be notified immediately. The DPW will make the final decision on how to proceed or if they are unable to make any decision, the matter will be referred back to the Planning Board for review.
And Authorize the Agent to sign.
Vote: 3-0-0, Unanimous
Saratoga Drive – Site Plan Review
Present were: Christopher King, BCI Communications
Doug Brown, BCI, Communications
Mr. Brown explained that the applicant is seeking a modification to the previously approved site plan. The proposal is to move the location of the tower to meet setback requirements. The applicant went before the ZBA with the approved site plan; however they mandated that the tower be moved. Ms. Burke saw this as a major modification to the approved plan.
The waivers are still intact and nothing else on the plan has been changed, only the location of the tower. Mr. Collins asked how far the tower was moved. Andy Massa, 15 Michigan Drive stated that the tower has been moved 33 feet in the easterly direction. Mr. Massa then asked if the applicant could tell him if it is only the tower that is being moved or is the compound moving as well. Mr. Brown stated that per the request of the DPW the equipment compound has been moved a few feet to the southeast.
Mr. Massa asked that the Board require the applicant to drive a stake into the ground at the exact location where the tower will be erected. He also stated that he wants the applicant to supply the Board with an absolute measurement of the property lines, citing that he does not have any confidence that the tower will erected in the correct location. Mr. Brown said that a stake will be driven into the location as is always done before construction of the tower begins. This is done to ensure that the foundation is structurally sound.
Mark Calvanese, 8 Champlain Drive asked that the site be professionally surveyed. Mr. Brown noted that the Town provided the applicant with a plot plan and they are simply working off the existing conditions. He went on to say that the property lines had to have been certified at some point. This is a very large parcel and it is an unusual shape, making it difficult to survey. Ms. Burke went on to say that the applicant submitted a compiled survey and she does not feel that the Board can require the applicant to perform another survey.
Judy Sabourin, 14 Michigan Drive would like the applicant to confirm that with this new site plan that no mature trees are being cut down. Ms. Burke stated that the new location is better for the trees than the prior location and that the tree conditions of the first site plan will be maintained. Ms. Sabourin stated her concern that by moving the tower different trees would be impacted. Mr. Brown stated that this is correct; however the number of impacted trees is less.
Rodney Frias joined the meeting.
Mr. Frias noted that if the applicant is moving the equipment around the same fenced in area as the previous plan that it is unlikely it would impact the surround vegetation any differently than before.
Paul Young, 11 Michigan Drive noted that it was stated that the compound was to be moved slightly. Through the Board’s discussions it was decided that the compound is to remain at the original location, therefore eliminating the abutter concerns regarding the vegetation.
Mr. Massa asked what the consequences would be if the applicant does not erect the tower in the approved location. Ms. Burke said that the tower would need to be taken down and it would not be in the applicant’s best interest to do this.
Mr. Calvanese asked what the dimensions of the equipment compound are. Ms. Burke stated that the compound is 40’ X 40”.
Tom Collins, seconded by Charles Freeman, made a motion to close the public hearing for Saratoga Drive.
Vote: 3-0-1, Rodney Frias abstaining
Tom Collins, seconded by Charles Freeman, made a motion to approve the plan entitled “Saratoga Water Tank” as drawn by AEG Advanced Engineering Group, P.C. of Attleboro, MA and dated March 12, 2009 last revised May 4, 2009 with the location of the equipment compound to be returned to its original location, pending the staking of the tower location within a week and all original conditions remain in effect.
Vote: 3-0-1, Rodney Frias abstaining
Charles Freeman recused himself.
Bond Reduction – River’s Edge Estates
The Board is in receipt of a bond release request for River’s Edge Estates. Ms. Burke informed the Board that it has been a year since the road was accepted at Town Meeting. However, the plans have not yet been recorded therefore $500 of bond cannot be released until the recording.
The DPW does not have any issues. Mr. Underwood asked if all the sidewalk money has been transferred. Ms. Burke said that it has.
Tom Collins, seconded by Dirk Underwood, made a motion to release all but $500 of the bond for River’s Edge Estates.
Vote: 3-0-0, Unanimous
Charles Freeman returned to the Board.
Minutes
Charles Freeman, seconded by Tom Collins, made a motion to approve the minutes of May 19, 2009, as written.
Vote: 3-0-0, Unanimous
Highland Commons – Site Plan Modification
Tom Collins left the meeting.
Present were: Peter Tamm, Goulston & Storrs P.C.
Alan Wells, SEA Consultants
Bill Hoffman, DeLuca-Hoffman Associates, Inc.
Jed Hayes, Sullivan Hayes, Co.
Jack Thorton, Sullivan Hayes, Co.
Mike DePriest, Benderson Development
Randy Hart, Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc.
Mr. Frias began the meeting by noting two letters from DeLuca-Hoffman, both dated June 1, 2009, one was regarding issues of site drainage and the other was more information regarding storm drainage systems on the site. A letter was also received from Goulston & Storrs dated June 1, 2009 which showed the impact to the traffic by replacing the hotel with retail space.
Mr. Wells referred to some of his comments regarding the design. One he considered to be a designer preference. Three of the manholes on the site had an 8 foot or greater drop, which he feels would over time cause the slow deterioration of the manholes. He suggested that by channelizing the water internally so as not to have the water drop and erode the manhole it may add to the longevity of the manholes.
He also noted that originally the plans called for 2 foot sumps, they have been changed to 3 foot sumps. Mr. Wells stated that because the applicant refers to the sumps as deep sumps they should be 4 feet deep. However, because the applicant is not taking credit for TSS removal it is not required by law.
Mr. Hoffman provided more detail on the rain garden. SEA was concerned that the rain garden could potentially flow into Route 62. Mr. Hoffman suggested that the concern could be addressed by adding rip rap to stabilize the berm. Mr. Wells found this solution to be acceptable.
Mr. Frias had some concern regarding the access to the BJ’s store. Ms. Burke stated that this was brought up at the Internal Traffic meeting and the Committee was not concerned at all.
During that meeting Chief Blood stated that he did not want fire alarm boxes installed on the buildings.
Mr. Frias expressed his concern regarding the potential for traffic re-routing through Central Street to avoid the traffic along Route 62. He also noted that the road is in very bad condition. Mr. Hart, traffic engineer for the applicant addressed Mr. Frias’ concerns. He stated that the roadways are being redesigned to accommodate a new and higher volume of traffic. The applicant is not anticipating much re-routing. He informed the Board that during peak evening hours it would take a vehicle 2 minutes 45 seconds to drive the Route 62 corridor as opposed to re-routing through Central Street would take 4 minutes 35 seconds. Mr. Frias then asked if any monies had been allotted to repair Central Street. Ms. Burke said no.
Mr. Freeman asked who sets the timing on the lights. Mr. Hart said that along Route 62 it would be MassHighway; however the site driveways would be under local jurisdiction.
Charles Freeman, seconded by Dirk Underwood, made a motion to close the public hearing for Highland Commons.
Vote: 3-0-0, Unanimous
Atty. Tamm noted that the waiver for the K value would be maintained with an approval. The rest of the relief will be sought from the Zoning Board.
Dirk Underwood, seconded by Charles Freeman, made a motion to approve the modified site plan for Highland Commons with the following proposed set of conditions to be approved at the Board’s meeting of June16, 2009:
A pre-construction conference shall be held prior to the resumption of major construction activities, to include, at a minimum, the developer, the Town Planner, the DPW and the Towns’ peer review consultant (SEA Consultants).
In the event activities on the Site have been suspended for thirty days or more, the Developer shall provide the Planning Department written notice at least 48 hours prior to commencement of authorized Site activity.
A copy of this Decision and all final approved Plans shall be kept on file at the Project site.
The Developer may request changes to the approved site plans, which shall be submitted in writing to the Town Planner and the Towns’ consultant. The Planner and consultant shall review each such change to determine whether the change constitutes a minor change or whether it amounts to a major, substantive change, requiring the consideration of the full Planning Board. If, in their reasonable determination, the change is minor in nature, the Town Planner and consultant may authorize the implementation of a minor change without full Planning Board review. It shall be the responsibility of the Developer to maintain records of any such changes and include them in the record drawings for the project. For the purposes of this Decision, a proposed modification
may be deemed minor in nature if (i) all buildings depicted on the modified plans continue to be located within the “permissible building area” shown on Sheet 2.0 of the Site Plans, (ii) all paved surfaces depicted on the modified plans are within the “permissible impervious surface area” shown on Sheet 2.0 of the Site Plans and (iii) the modified plans are accompanied by a certification from a licensed professional indicating that the modified plans are otherwise consistent with the general design and construction standards and practices contemplated in the approved site plans.
Members or agents of the Planning Board, upon providing prior notice, shall have the right to enter the Project site and to gather all information, measurements, photographs or other materials needed to ensure compliance with this approval. Members or agents of the Planning Board entering onto the Project site for these purposes shall comply with all safety rules, regulations and directives of the Developer and the Developer’s contractors.
Hours of operation for construction shall continue to be Monday through Saturday 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., unless otherwise specifically authorized by the Town. No work or operation of machinery shall occur before 7:00 a.m., in accordance with the town’s noise by-law, or after 5:00 p.m. Per the Massachusetts General Laws, work on Sundays and holidays may be permitted on a case by case basis with the prior approval of the Chief of Police.
This Decision shall be valid for five years, from the date of the Decision.
Prior to and during construction and as otherwise provided herein, the Planning Board reserves the right to review the site and compliance with the conditions of this Decision every six months in consultation with the Developer.
The Developer shall continue to ensure that a Professional Engineer provides a yearly inspection report of the Best Management Practices (BMP’s) of the proposed drainage system to the Town Planner, the Town’s consultant, the DPW and the Conservation Commission demonstrating that adequate maintenance is being provided for this drainage system. The next such yearly inspection report shall be provided on or by November 15, 2009.
The Developer shall continue to be responsible for ensuring compliance with an erosion control plan as submitted and approved. All erosion control measures as specified in the erosion control plan shall be in place and confirmed by the DPW and the Planning Department before the next stage of construction begins. As erosion control measures are implemented, the obligation to provide weekly erosion control reports shall be reinstituted and such reports shall be submitted to the DPW and the Planning Department no later than noontime on Fridays, as such schedule may be modified upon the approval of the Planning Director. The resumption of such submittals shall occur no later than July 15, 2009.
A final occupancy permit shall not be issued until an as-built plan indicating lot grading and drainage system BMP’s has been confirmed to be consistent with the approved plans to the Town Planner’s reasonable satisfaction.
Prior to issuance of any building permit, the Developer shall provide a schedule and plan to the Town Planner, the Town’s consultant and the Conservation Commission for the removal, replacement and/or restoration work associated with existing “Drainage Pipe 2” and “Drainage Pipe 5” as referenced in the “Highland Commons Culvert Inspections and Report” prepared by DeLuca-Hoffman Associates dated February 21, 2008.
All transportation related improvements as required herein shall be implemented prior to the issuance of any final occupancy permit. In the event that work cannot be completed prior to the date of occupancy, the Developer shall file a bond, cash guarantee or other similar form of surety in an amount sufficient to cover the costs of any outstanding required improvements with the Town of Hudson.
The Developer shall implement the following traffic improvements as more specifically described in both the Traffic Impact and Access Study (TIAS) dated August 2005 (Phase I) as updated in February 2009 to support this Project modification (Phase II) prepared by Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc., on file with the Town. Any modifications or additions that may be required by the Massachusetts Highway Department (MHD) during formal design review, shall be deemed minor for purposes of this Decision:
Phase I Improvement Requirements;
NOTE: Specific Phase I improvements initiatives listed below that have been superseded or shall be modified as a result of the modifications to the Project (Phase II) approved by this Decision, have been noted below in italics.
Route 62 /Interstate 495 Ramps / Gates Pond Road (see page 31 August 2005 TIAS for more specific details) - Phase II plan modifies the Phase I initiatives, see below.
Implement traffic signals and geometric improvements
Route 62 /Site Driveways (see page 32 August 2005 TIAS for more specific details) - Phase II plan modifies the Phase I initiatives, see below.
- Implement traffic signal and geometric improvements
- Implement right - in / right - out and left-turn in at secondary western access
Route 62 and Central Street (see page 32 August 2005 TIAS for more specific details)
- Design and construct traffic signal
Downtown Roundabout (see pages 34-37 August 2005 TIAS for more specific details)
$500,000 in aggregate, to fund the following suggested improvements/options:
- Channelized paint scheme safety improvement
- Cobble modification
- Capacity improvement (Concept 1A)
Packard Street / Lincoln Street / Cox Street
Cox Street / Manning Street
- Signage upgrade and trimming with in roadway layout
Implement on-site TDM program
- Rideshare Program
- Bicycle and Pedestrian Measures
- On-site services
Phase II Improvement Requirements
Route 62 /Interstate 495 Ramps / Gates Pond Road (see page 3-39 to
With a waiver of the K value on the internal drives
And Authorize the Agent to sign.
Vote: 3-0-0, Unanimous
Adjournment
Rodney Frias, seconded by Dirk Underwood, moved to adjourn at 9:15 PM.
Vote: 4-0-0, Unanimous
Cc: Town Clerk
Department of Public Works
Jeff Wood, Building Commissioner
| 
