PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
April 11, 2005
The Planning Board for the City of Marlborough met on Monday, April 11, 2005 in Memorial Hall, 3rd floor, City Hall, Marlborough, MA 01752. Members present: Chairperson Barbara L. Fenby, Clerk Colleen M. Hughes, Edward F. Coveney, Robert Hanson and Clyde L. Johnson. Also present: City Engineer James Arsenault.
MINUTES
On a motion by Mr. Hanson, seconded by Mr. Coveney, it was duly voted:
To accept and file the minutes of the meeting of March 28, 2005.
CHAIR’S BUSINESS
Update on Bond issue for Hagar Meadow
Mrs. Wilderman advised the Board that she had spoken with Chief Leonard and he is in agreement that, whenever possible, it is best to direct traffic to a signalized intersection. However, there is no mention of the connector roadway in the special permit for the Hagar Meadow condominiums. She will continue to work on the Fafard Special Permit to try to locate the source of the bond money.
Underground Wiring Presentation
Attorney Arthur Bergeron gave the Board an abbreviated presentation regarding undergrounding the overhead wires on the main routes through the city; Route 20 and Route 85.
In a series of photographs, the Board could see each section of Route 20 from Northborough to Sudbury as it now exists, the same section with the wires removed and again with the unnecessary poles removed. The pictures demonstrated a dramatic difference in what a lot of the existing neighborhoods would look like. Mrs. Fenby pointed out that with the wires and poles gone the signs are obviously too large. Attorney Bergeron explained that other communities have found that the signs can be reduced, the lighting can be reduced and the perception to drivers is changed in such a way that traffic speed is reduced as well.
Shoestring Hill Lot Release
Mrs. Wilderman explained to the Board that there was one lot left at this subdivision and that its release had been part of the final agreement between the limited partnership that had taken over the subdivision, the City of Marlborough and Mr. Cerquira. All of the conditions of the agreement had been fulfilled but the lot release was never forwarded to the Planning Board. Attorney Dennis Sullivan has forwarded the release with the proper documentation that the issue has been resolved property.
On a motion by Ms. Hughes, seconded by Mr. Coveney, it was duly voted:
To accept and authorize the Chair to sign the release of covenant for Lot 1 at Shoestring Hill.
APPROVAL NOT REQUIRED PLAN
247 Bigelow Street
A review of the plan shows the following:
· That Bigelow Street is a public way in the City of Marlborough
· That the plan showed shows on a plan of land, “Plan of Land in Marlborough, MA”; owned by Arthur W. Doane, Trustee of the Arthur W. Doane Revocable Living Trust. Name of Engineer: Inland Survey, Inc. DBA Zanca Land Surveying, 16 Gleasondale Road, Suite 1-2, Stow, Massachusetts, 01775, and is comprised of Lot 1 and Lot 2 in an A1 residential zone.
· That Lot 1 has the existing house and will be left with 48,745 square feet of area with 150.24 feet of frontage
· That Lot 2 has 41,702 square feet of area with 256.46 feet of frontage
· That both lots meet the frontage requirements of the underlying zone and are therefore eligible for an approval not required plan under the subdivision rules and regulations
· That an approval of this plan indicates no determination of compliance with zoning regulations has been made or intended.
On a motion by Ms. Hughes, seconded by Mr. Coveney, it was duly voted:
To accept and endorse a plan of land believed to be approval not required of Marilyn J. Doane, 1102SE Menores Avenue, Port St. Lucie, Florida, 34952. Engineer: Susan Sullivan, Inland Survey, Inc. dba Zanca Land Surveying, 16 Gleasondale Road, Suite 1-2, Stow, MA 01775. Deed of property recorded in Middlesex South Registry of Deeds, book 37714, page 617. Location and description of property: 247 Bigelow Street, residential A-1.
236 Bigelow Street (re-signature of previously approved plan)
Mrs. Wilderman explained that the plan needs to be re-signed as it was not filed at the Registry of Deeds within six months.
Parameter Road
On a motion by Ms. Hughes, seconded by Mr. Coveney, it was duly voted:
To accept and refer the plan to the City Engineer for his review and recommendation for the next meeting on Monday, April 25, 2005.
541 Pleasant Street
On a motion by Mr. Coveney, seconded by Ms. Hughes, it was duly voted:
To accept and refer the plan to the City Engineer for his review and recommendation for the next meeting on Monday, April 25, 2005.
SUBDIVISION PROGRESS REPORTS
Update from the City Engineer
The GIS was not accessible for the report so the Board could not receive the map but just the update. Now that the weather is breaking more of the subdivisions will be moving on completion.
Shaughnessy Estates
Mrs. Wilderman advised that there is a letter forthcoming from Mr. Franchi’s attorney advising that they will be doing the video of the lines as requested.
Eager Court
On a motion by Mr. Hanson, seconded by Mr. Johnson, it was duly voted:
To accept and endorse the bond for this subdivision and to authorize the Chair to sign the lot release.
Forest Trail
There was a considerable further discussion regarding this request. A number of issues have come to light as a result of Conservation Officer Priscilla Ryder’s visits to the site and her recommendation.
It is clear that the “No disturb” zone has been disturbed. An aerial photograph of the site taken in 2000 shows clearly that the area was entirely wooded and site visits clearly show that that is no longer the case.
On a motion by Ms. Hughes, seconded by Mr. Coveney, it was duly voted:
To direct the developer to provide, for the next meeting on Monday, April 25, 2005, a proposed planting plan for the reforestation of the “no disturb” buffer zone that was removed during construction to be reviewed and approved by the Planning Board, Conservation Officer and Tree Warden. Also, as the lot marker stakes appear to be missing it is difficult for the homeowner to accurately place either his pool or fence. The developer should make sure the markers are placed until such time as the granite bounds are installed.
On a motion by Mr. Coveney, seconded by Ms. Hughes, it was duly voted, with Ms. Fenby and Mr. Johnson in opposition:
To allow the homeowner to build his fence within the perimeter buffer zone but not within or adjacent to the “no disturb zone”. The homeowner is advised that the developer will be notified to submit a planting plan for the “no disturb” zone and to re-stake the area so that the fence contractors can insure that they well outside the zone.
Sterling Woods
Mrs. Wilderman advised that the Board had not yet received a reply from the City Solicitor on this matter. It will be held over until the next meeting.
Forest Grove
The Board received a letter from an abutter to the Forest Grove Subdivision asking for assistance. Mrs. McIntyre had an agreement with the developer to have a parcel of land abutting her property deeded to her. The developer has provided a draft deed of the parcel to the Mrs. McIntyre’s attorney last July but there is some contention regarding the use of the land.
The deed as submitted by the developer includes a perimeter buffer and a substantial no disturb buffer which would render the property fairly unusable to Mrs. McIntyre. A review of the plan by the Building Commissioner and the Board members indicates that the parcel as outlined on the original plan was never intended to be part of the subdivision, therefore the restriction of a perimeter buffer or no disturb buffer should not be included in that parcel.
On a motion by Ms. Hughes, seconded by Mr. Coveney, it was duly voted:
To advise the developer that Parcel “C” was not considered part of the Subdivision and therefore the restrictions of the perimeter buffer and the no disturb buffer were not to be included in the parcel “C” to be conveyed to McIntyre.
Fahey Street
On a motion by Mr. Coveney, seconded by Mr. Hanson, it was duly voted:
To refer the request for a reduced maintenance period to the City Engineer for his review and recommendation at the next meeting on Monday, April 25, 2005.
PENDING SUBDIVISION PLANS: Updates and Discussions
Old Orchard Heights
This subdivision has been extended until the next meeting on April 25, 2005.
Davis Estates
No appeals have been filed in the City Clerk’s office for this plan. The Board was authorized to sign.
Crowley Drive
On a motion by Mr. Coveney, seconded by Mr. Hanson, it was duly voted:
To accept and file the response to the complaint filed in Land Court for this project.
White Oak Estates
On a motion by Mr. Coveney, seconded by Ms. Hughes, it was duly voted:
To accept and file the correspondence from Richard C. Carter regarding the subdivision plan.
Mrs. Wilderman suggested that the Board may wish to consider a suggestion that former City Engineer Clancy had concerning subdivision proposals with waiver requests. In order to make an informed decision regarding whether or not the waivers are in the city’s best interest, it would be important to view how the plan would look if all of the rules and regulations were met.
On a motion by Mr. Johnson, seconded by Mr. Coveney, it was duly voted:
To request that future subdivision plans being submitted with waiver requests include a plan that shows the development as it would appear meeting all of the rules and regulations.
SIGNS
Review of Entrance sign Variance
On a motion by Ms. Hughes, seconded by Mr. Johnson, it was duly voted:
To amend the previously approved variance that allowed the “Entrance to Marlborough” signs with the ability to hang temporary signs to include the following additional language:
Municipal, non-profit, fraternal, civic, religious entities, shall be allowed to apply to hang signs on the Welcome to Marlborough signs a total of twice a calendar year. Signs can be placed a week before the event and shall be removed the day after the event. Signs for informational purposes will also be allowed for a week at a time only.
Before the end of the evening, Ms. Hughes brought the Board up to date on the project with Channel 8. After considerable discussion it was decided that rather than just have a ”talking head”, the public might get a better feel for what the Planning Board does if they follow a specific project through. That way they could tape the public hearing, field work, engineering work, conservation, etc. which would make for more interesting television.
Mrs. Wilderman will contact the owners of the project to get their permission before we contact M8 with our suggestion and then notify the members.
COMMUNICATIONS/CORRESPONDENCE
On a motion by Ms. Hughes, seconded by Mr. Hanson, it was duly voted:
To accept and file all items listed under communications and/or correspondence.
On a motion by Mr. Johnson, seconded by Ms. Hughes, it was duly voted:
To adjourn at 9:30 p.m.
A TRUE COPY
ATTEST: ______________________________
Colleen M. Hughes, Clerk
| 