The Planning Board for the City of Marlborough met on Monday, May 9, 2011 in Memorial Hall, 3rd floor, City Hall, Marlborough, MA 01752. Members present: Barbara Fenby, Colleen Hughes, Clerk, Philip Hodge, Edward Coveney, Clyde Johnson and Sean Fay. Also present: City Engineer Thomas Cullen.
MINUTES
April 25, 2011
On a motion by Mr. Fay, seconded by Mr. Coveney, it was duly voted:
To table the meeting minutes.
CHAIRS BUSINESS
APPROVAL NOT REQUIRED PLAN
PUBLIC HEARING
Walker Estates
Open Space Special Permits
The Planning Board of the City of Marlborough held a public hearing on Monday, May 9, 2011, at 7:15p.m. in Memorial Hall, 3rd Floor, City Hall, 140 Main Street, Marlborough on the Open Space Special Permit Known as “Walker Estates”, located off of Framingham Road, Marlborough, MA. Members present: Chairperson Barbara L. Fenby, Clerk Colleen Hughes, Philip Hodge, Clyde Johnson, Sean Fay and Edward Coveney. Also present: City Engineer Thomas Cullen.
Ms. Hughes read the advertisement into record.
Notice is hereby given that the Planning Board of the City of Marlborough will hold a public hearing on Monday, May 9, 2011 at 7:15 P.M., at Memorial Hall, City Hall, 140 Main Street, Marlborough, MA on the following Open Space Development Plan known as “Walker Estates” in which the proposal is herewith published in compliance with the requirements of the M.G.L. 41, §81T and is hereby set forth as follows:
NAME OF SUBDIVIDER: Melanson Development Group, Inc.
P.O. Box 564
Woburn, MA 01801
NAME OF ENGINEER: Bruce Saluk & Associates
576 Boston Post Road East
Marlborough, MA 01752
LOCATION OF PROPERTY: Property located at 93 Framingham Road
Map 93, Parcels 87, 93, 93A, 94 and portion of City Owned Property
A plan of the proposed subdivision is on file in the City Clerk's Office, the Planning Board Office, and the City Engineer's Office and may be seen prior to the public hearing.
Mr. Saluk presented the plan to the Planning Board. He stated that the Walker Estate consists of 3 parcels with a combined area over 5 acres. This land abuts the Walker Brook and the existing Walker Estate remains on the property. Mr. Saluk briefly described the Open Space concept plan with 8 lots all having frontage along Framingham Road and the rear of the properties abutting the existing sewer easement. He also showed the conventional plan with 8 lots that would be allowed under the subdivision rules and regulations. He also then explained that the developer is also before the City Council for a Comprehensive Special Permit to renovate the existing residence into 7 units.
Mr. Bergeron explained that the City Council has not advanced the Comprehensive Special Permit to the Urban Affairs until all taxes due are paid. He explained that Celeste Walker, current owner of the property, needs more time to pay those taxes. He will be asking the City Council and the Planning Board for an extension for consideration.
In Favor:
No one spoke in favor.
In Opposition:
William Brewin
126 Woodridge Road
Mr. Brewin submitted several concerns including the parking for the Walker Estate, the projection sale of the homes and he also submitted documents in opposition to the special permit. He stated in his documents that the neighborhood would lose wide open environment. He also submitted to the Board a request for conditions to the Special Permit which includes that all lots proposed in the “93 Framingham Road Open Space Development” be restricted to single family dwellings as defined in the City of Marlborough Zoning Ordinance.
Marian Hopkins
151 Framingham Road
Ms. Hopkins asked that date of the submittal. Ms. Fenby stated that this is the first time the Planning Board is reviewing the plans. She is also concerned about the walking trails and the safety of their homes and if the people walking the trail would know if they were on the open space land or private property. Another concern of hers was the trash from various neighboring business’s that accumulate on Framingham Road.
Thelma Balsa
125 Framingham Road
Ms. Balsa was asking why Ms. Walker was not foreclosed on by the City as of today. Councilor Ferro stated that Ms. Walker was current on her taxes as of a few years ago and until recently she has lapsed in payment.
Dick Anderson
193 Dartmouth Street
Mr. Anderson asked why the property is not being kept up, he stated the grass was overgrown and the property was in true despair. Ms. Fenby stated that was a code enforcement issue.
Mark Tucker
70 Dartmouth
Mr. Tucker asked what the sizes of the lots are smaller then what the zoning would allow. (Property is A2 which under the Open Space would allow 12, 000 sq ft), Lot 1 is 16, 020 sq ft, Lot 2 is 12,330 sq ft, Lot 3 is 20,190 sq ft, Lot 4 is 13,230 sq ft, Lot 5 is 33,030 sq ft, Lot 6 is 22,620 sq ft, Lot 7 is 37,530 sq ft and Lot 8 is 12, 980 sq ft.
Marjorie Vallee
47 Framingham Road
Ms. Vallee stated asked where the pathway to the open space would be, Mr. Saluk pointed it out for her on the map. She is concerned on who will be in charge of the upkeep once the developer has completed the project. Ms. Fenby stated that Conservation is generally paid a fee for the upkeep. She also is concerned about the parking for the Open Space and the security in her neighborhood. She stated she sees no need for more open space.
Grant LaPlante
29 Farm Road
Mr. LaPlante stated that he agreed with Mr. Brewin. The neighborhood has a scenic quality that he would hate to lose. He also stated that he does not agree that the historic home should be turned into 7 units and this would only exhaust the City’s services even more.
Chris Heinz
108 Framingham Road
Mr. Heinz asked what the impact would be of the home values in the neighborhood. Mr. Melanson stated through a study a few years ago, that there would be a slight increase to the surrounding homes.
John Esposito
2 Woodridge Road
Mr. Esposito stated he just sees the Open Space as a bargaining chip. He believes this is not a great use of the “ugly open space” concept.
George Cumming
58 Dartmouth
Mr. Cumming stated that the parking spaces for the units would be an eye sore to the scenic road. Mr. Melanson stated they can shield the parking spaces by mounding the front and adding landscape.
Michael Spitanik
152 Framingham Road
Mr. Spitanik asked about the houses themselves, how many bedrooms will be in each home? Mr. Melanson stated that they would be three bedrooms.
Clement Santos
1 Beverly Drive
Mr. Santos stated several years ago the residents expressed their opinions, and most of the opinions were opposed to any development to the Walker Estate. He asked why they seem to keep coming back and also stated that this would kill all property investments.
SUBDIVISION PROGRESS REPORTS
City Engineer Update
Mr. Cullen provided a new subdivision status report to the Board. He stated the following:
· Indian Hill Subdivision: Several meetings with Conservation Commissioner, the Building Commissioner and the City Solicitor regarding the access to Callahan State Park and is reviewing the resubmitted acceptance plans.
· Shaughnessy Estates II: He has spoken to the bond holder’s Engineer and Contractor, and is expecting a new subdivision completion schedule.
· The Residences of Oak Crest: He has spoken to the developer regarding his completion schedule and building out as needed, Mr. Cullen stated to finish the subdivision.
· Mauro Farms: he would like to see an update completion schedule; work was progressing but has since stopped.
Black Horse Farms
Extension Request
Mr. Donald Seaberg, on behalf of the developer, is asking for a two year extension for this subdivision. He also provided a new completion schedule. Mr. Seaberg also stated that the erosion controls have been inspected and repaired, the streets have been cleaned and catch basins have been inspected.
On a motion by Ms. Hughes, seconded by Mr. Coveney it was duly voted:
To accept and file the correspondence.
Ms. Fenby questioned the completion schedule with its resume date of work to start in April of 2012. Mr. Seaberg stated that he pushed back the time frame for resuming the construction because lack of home sales in the subdivision. He stated he can revise the schedule.
Mr. Fay questioned whether the Board was required to grant a two year extension. Mrs. Lizotte stated that the current extension will expire on May 15, 2011.
On a motion by Mr. Fay, seconded by Mr. Johnson, it was duly voted:
To extend the subdivision until June 15, 2011 and have the developer submit a new completion schedule.
Cider Mill Estates
City Engineer’s Correspondence
Mr. Collins stated in his report that he has reviewed the status of the subdivision and can recommend the Planning Board reduce the current bond of $462,000.00 to $410,000.00. He also noted that the several items including drainage, pavement, curbing, sidewalks and streetscapes have not been completed.
Mr. Fay asked if the infrastructure progress being made was in keeping with the completion schedule. Mr. Seaberg stated that he will provide to the Board with new information.
On a motion by Mr. Johnson, seconded by Mr. Coveney, it was duly voted:
To accept and file correspondence; have the developer provide an update to the completion schedule.
Elm Farm Valley Estates
Correspondence from Attorney Norris
Mr. Norris and his clients are asking to resolve the ongoing matter of the error of the easement on the original subdivision plan. The original plan shows a Sewer Easement, however the easement includes both water and sewer lines; and the acceptance plan shows it as a Utility Easement as requested by our Engineering Office.
His suggestion is for either the City Engineer, or the City Solicitor, or the Engineer or even himself, sign an affidavit stating that the easement stating utility easement is truly a water and sewer easement and record the plan with the affidavit.
Mr. Rider stated that he believes this may not hold up in the court of law when there becomes an issue with a water breakage on any of the lots with the easement error. He stated that if you could convince a judge of the original intent was for the easement to show both the water and sewer then you would have a valid ruling.
On a motion by Ms. Hughes, seconded by Mr. Coveney it was duly voted:
To table the matter and to discuss after the public hearing.
On a motion by Ms. Hughes, seconded by Mr. Coveney it was duly voted:
To remove the matter off the table.
Mr. Fay stated that a notice should be provided to the abutters. He suggested that he and Mr. Hodge would work on a letter that would expedite the plan. Mr. Rider stated that he could draft up an addendum to show the intent of the water and sewer line easement before the next scheduled meeting.
On a motion by Mr. Fay, seconded by Mr. Hodge, it was duly voted:
To ask the City Solicitor to draft language to show the intent of the easement.
Mr. Fay stepped out of the room due to conflict on interest
Water’s Edge
Correspondence from Attorney Flood
In a letter our City Solicitor, Attorney Flood stated the following has been completed as requested:
· On Gaucher Circle, couch has been removed;
· Replaced missing trail signs;
· Removed the dead tree leaning over Gaucher Circle.
Mr. Flood stated that will be in contact with Mr. Rider regarding the deeds and grants of easements prior to the Planning Board’s acceptance.
Correspondence from Developer
Mr. Ansari stated all work that was requested to be completed by the Planning Board. He has asked to expedite the Planning Board’s acceptance.
On a motion by Ms. Hughes, seconded by Mr. Hodge it was duly voted:
To accept and file all correspondence.
West Ridge Estates
City Engineer’s Correspondence
At the Planning Board’s request, the Assistant City Engineer, Timothy Collins, has reviewed the subdivision and can recommend the current bond at $216,000.00 can be reduced to $127,000.00. He noted that the pavement, roadway and streetscape is not completed.
Mr. Fay asked if the developer was on track with the completion schedule. Mr. Seaberg will provide an update.
On a motion by Ms. Hughes, seconded by Mr. Coveney, it was duly voted:
To accept and file correspondence; have the developer provide more information.
PENDING SUBDIVISION PLANS: Updates and Discussion
PRELIMINARY/ OPEN SPACE SUBDIVISION SUBMITTALS
DEFINITIVE SUBDIVISION SUBMISSIONS
SCENIC ROADS
SIGNS
INFORMAL DISCUSSION
COMMUNICATIONS/CORRESPONDENCE
On a motion by Ms. Hughes, seconded by Mr. Hodge, it was duly voted:
To accept all of the items listed under communications and/or correspondence.
On a motion by Mr. Johnson, seconded by Mr. Coveney, it was duly voted:
To adjourn at 9:05 p.m.
A TRUE COPY
ATTEST: _____________________________
Colleen Hughes, Clerk
| 
