October 3, 2011
7:00 PM
The Planning Board for the City of Marlborough met on Monday, October 3, 2011 in Memorial Hall, 3rd Floor, City Hall 140 Main Street, Marlborough, MA 01752. Members present: Barbara Fenby, Philip Hodge, Colleen Hughes, Sean Fay and Edward Coveney. Also present: Assistant City Engineer Timothy Collins.
MINUTES
September 12, 2011
On a motion by Ms. Hughes, seconded by Mr. Hodge it was duly voted:
To table the meeting minutes.
CHAIRS BUSINESS
Mass Development, JRI Framingham Road
Mass Development Finance Agency gave a preliminary approval for a revenue bond to JRI and is asking the City if there is any proposed project conflicts with any existing local or regional plan.
On a motion by Ms. Hughes, seconded by Mr. Coveney, it was duly voted:
To forward the correspondence to the City Council and the Marlborough Economic and Development Corporation.
Citizen Planner Training Collaborative
Each member was given a copy of the training meetings held by the CPTC.
APPROVAL NOT REQUIRED PLAN
PUBLIC HEARING
Affordable Housing Units, 7:30
The Planning Board of the City of Marlborough held a public hearing on Monday, October 3, 2011, at 7:40 p.m. in Memorial Hall, 3rd Floor, City Hall, 140 Main Street, Marlborough on the proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Marlborough Section 650-26(A) (1)(a). Members present: Chairperson Barbara L. Fenby, Clerk Colleen Hughes, Philip Hodge, Edward Coveney and Sean Fay. Also present: Assistant City Engineer Timothy Collins.
The Chair introduced all of the members of the board including the City Engineer and the Planning Board Secretary. She advised the audience that everyone should direct questions to her and she will direct the questions to the proponent or others.
Ms. Hughes read the public hearing notice into record.
(a) Affordable Housing and Affordable Housing Units. The term “affordable housing” shall refer to “affordable housing units’. The term “affordable housing units” shall mean those units of housing that are countable in the so-called Subsidized Housing Inventory (SHI) or any subsequent housing inventory used by the Department of Housing and Community Development of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to determine the number of housing units in a community that are countable in meeting the City’s obligation to maintain at least 10% of the total number of housing units in the city as affordable pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40B sections 20-23. Any development subject to this section shall provide that at least 15% of the housing units to be constructed are
countable as affordable housing units in the SHI, or a sum not less than the amount necessary, in the opinion of the city council pursuant to the special permit process, to cause the construction of said number of affordable housing units shall be paid to the Marlborough Community Development Authority at such time as the city council shall determine.
Attorney Arthur Bergeron presented the amendment to the Planning Board. He stated one of the reasons behind the amendment was to allow only the 15% of total construction be allowed to be used as affordable units. At the present time the City is down 43 units to meet the need of affordable units. He also stated the second portion of the amendment would allow developers to take the cost of the affordable units and directly pay the MCDA at the amount the City Council chooses with fair market value. He stated that this is a reasonable alternative because the money will be able to go into rehabbing several housing alternatives.
The Public hearing was closed at 7:53pm.
SUBDIVISION PROGRESS REPORTS
City Engineer Update
Mr. Collins stated he did have updates related to several agenda items and will comment at the appropriate time.
Berlin Farms (Long Drive)
Correspondence from City Engineer
Assistant City Engineer, Timothy Collins, has written several letters within the 9 last months to the developer regarding the remaining completion items left in the subdivision. As stated in the September 7, 2011, letter that if no work was completed prior to the Board’s September 26, 2011 meeting, he will be suggesting to the Planning Board to secure the remaining bond monies for completion of the remaining items.
Mr. Collins stated that he did receive an email from Mr. Freeman this morning stating that he will be reviewing the fencing around the detention basin. However, this is exactly what he stated several months ago and no action has been taken. The discussion from the Board was Mr. Freemen has been alerted several times. They have asked the secretary to start preparing the paperwork necessary for revocation of the bond to have the City Engineer’s office to complete the subdivision.
On a motion by Ms. Hughes, seconded by Mr. Coveney it was duly voted:
To accept and file the correspondence, to notify Mr. Freeman and Peoples United Bank that at the next meeting there will be a vote concerning the signing of the revocation of the performance bond.
Davis Estates, Boivin Drive
Correspondence from the City Council
The City Council is asking the Planning Board for the street acceptance for Boivin Drive. The Planning Board accepted the subdivision on December 20, 2010.
On a motion by Ms. Hughes, seconded by Mr. Coveney, it was duly voted:
To accept and file correspondence, to send recommendation to the City Council to endorse the subdivision known as “Davis Estates, Boivin Drive” to the City Council.
Elm Farm Valley (Cleversy Drive)
Correspondence from Attorney Norris
Correspondence from the City Solicitor
Mr. Norris has prepared a Scrivener’s Affidavit for the original land surveyor to sign. After review, the City Solicitor has revised certain aspects of the document and has asked the Board to review. With a brief overview of the document, Mr. Fay stated he would like to have a new paragraph added regarding the purpose of the affidavit at the beginning. Mr. Rider stated that he will add the new language.
On a motion by Mr. Fay, seconded by Mr. Coveney, it was duly voted:
To have Mr. Hodge and Mr. Fay review the revised affidavit by Mr. Rider when completed.
Mauro Farm (Spenser Circle and Nolan Way)
Bond Release research
Mrs. Lizotte polled a few surrounding Cites and Towns on their bonding approach and release of lots. In most cases, each community followed the state’s guidance with the subdivision control law when it came to the types of bonds whether it was a performance bond or a covenant. However, the towns phased their streets (larger subdivisions) by only allowing several lots or streets to be completed at one time. In that case, the town would only bond a certain amount, wait for completed construction on that portion then repeat the process with a new security.
Mr. Rider discussed of adding this bonding method into the rules and regulations, however Dr. Fenby stated this was done in the past and is where the issues became prevalent. Ms. Hughes asked Mr. Collins if he could follow up with other City or Town Engineers on their bonding recommendations to their Planning Boards. He stated he will contact a few engineers, ask them of their practices and report back at the next meeting.
Correspondence from Attorney Pezzoni
The City Solicitor asked Attorney Pezzoni through email the following question stemming from the Boards last meeting regarding “other remedies besides Paragraph 9 of the Amended Covenant and if so, what those remedies are”. Mr. Pezzoni responded through an email that “Paragraph 9 and any other reasonable Rules and Regulation established and appropriately adopted, have the option to pursue other remedies (modification, etc) if appropriate through M.G.L. Chapter 41, Sections 81U and 81W where applicable”.
Shaughnessy Estates
Correspondence from Attorney Connolly
Avidia Bank through their Attorney stated they have reviewed the remaining items for the subdivision and has decided to let the Planning Board call the bond.
Correspondence from City Engineer
After receiving the correspondence from Attorney Connolly, the City Engineer’s office is recommending to the Planning Board to pull the reaming bond secured for the completion of the subdivision. The initial bond amount began at $542,000.00 and after two reductions remains at $172,000.00.
On a motion by Ms. Hughes, seconded by Mr. Coveney, it was duly voted:
To accept and file all correspondence, to prepare the paperwork to pull the performance bond and sign the revocation at the next meeting.
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. Coveney, seconded by Ms. Hughes, it was duly voted:
To adjourn at 8:00 p.m.
A TRUE COPY
ATTEST: _____________________________
Colleen Hughes, Clerk
| 
