The Planning Board for the City of Marlborough met on Monday, August 27, 2012 in Memorial Hall, 3rd Floor, City Hall 140 Main Street, Marlborough, MA 01752. Members present: Barbara Fenby, Colleen Hughes, Sean Fay, Edward Coveney and Clyde Johnson. Also present: City Engineer Thomas Cullen.
MINUTES
August 27, 2012
On a motion by Mr. Fay, seconded by Mr. Coveney it was duly voted:
To table the minutes until the next meeting.
CHAIRS BUSINESS
City Council Correspondence
Special Permit Application
The City Council will be holding a special permit hearing to construct a three townhouse condominium project on Monday, October 15, 2012.
On a motion by Ms. Hughes, seconded by Mr. Coveney, it was duly voted:
To accept and file correspondence.
Amendment to the Zoning Code
Attorney Gadbois is petitioning the City to change to the Zoning Code of the City of Marlborough Chapter 650 by adding Article VI section to become 650-32 RESULTS WAY MIXED USE OVERLAY DISTRICT.
On a motion by Mr. Johnson, seconded by Ms. Hughes, it was duly voted:
To accept and file correspondence and to set a public hearing date of October 15, 2012 at 7:00 pm.
40B Project, Ames Street
The Planning Board has been asked to review the proposal. The Planning Board would like to invite the developer to come in and discuss the project at their next meeting.
APPROVAL NOT REQUIRED PLAN
Slocumb Lane
Decision
The City Engineer has reviewed the ANR plan known as “Slocumb Lane” and is in the position to give a favorable recommendation to endorse the plan.
On a motion by Mr. Johnson, seconded by Mr. Coveney it was duly voted:
To accept and file correspondence.
On a motion by Mr. Fay, seconded by Mr. Coveney it was duly voted:
To accept and endorse a plan of land believed to be Approval Not Required of “Plan of Land” owned by Slocumb Realty, LLC, 120 Quarry Drive, 2nd Floor, Milford, MA 01757. Name of Engineer: Guerriere & Hanlon, Inc. PO Box 235, Milford, MA 01757. Deed of property recorded in Worcester District Registry of Deeds Book 43031Page 384, Land Court Book 1285 Page 161.
PUBLIC HEARING
SUBDIVISION PROGRESS REPORTS
City Engineer Update
Mr. Cullen gave a status update on the Mauro Farm Subdivision stating they have installed some of the granite curbing and sidewalks. He also informed the Board that the City Solicitor is in discussions with Urban Affairs regarding the Indian Hill access path.
Blackhorse Farms
Lighting
Donald Seaburg with Benchmark Engineering sent the correspondence that they sent to National Grid for the lighting connections for Slocumb Lane.
On a motion by Mr. Johnson, seconded by Mr. Coveney it was duly voted:
To accept and file correspondence.
Extension
Mr. Fay stated that he believes that the developer has shown enough good faith to justify the Board taking a vote to extend the subdivision as long as they continue on this path and adhere to the conditions stated in the extension vote. Mr. Fay said he would consider making a motion to extend the approval until the end of December 2013 to allow the developer complete the subdivision and to work with the Board. The Chair polled the members and they were all in agreement that the developer showed good faith by doing some of the work that was discussed at the last meeting. Chairperson Fenby stated that since it is early fall, and the construction season is almost over, that granting an 18 month extension would not be out of the ordinary, however there is work that is still achievable during this construction season.
City Councilor Joseph Delano stated that the Board should consider only granting a 3 month extension because of the terrible record the developer has and prior instances of disregard for the neighborhood. Mr. Fay responded stating that as a condition of the extension, the Board is imposing strict guidelines that must be met on an ongoing basis, and that if the Developer does not fulfill its obligations, that the Board will consider taking action as an enforcement action at that time. Mr. Fay stated that developer is aware that the subdivision needs to be treated as a neighborhood with the street being kept open and that lighting be installed to address problems that are the developer's responsibility to monitor.
On a motion by Mr. Fay, seconded by Mr. Coveney, it was duly voted to grant the subdivision extension until December 31, 2013 on the following conditions and conditioned upon the developer complying with the following:
- That the developer follow through with the NGRID application and provide proof of payment when National Grid responds with a payment figure for the required lighting;
- That the developer complete all required plantings by the end of November 2012;
- That the developer seed lots and level lots where possible by October 15, 2012, and maintain the property in the Spring and Summer of 2013;
- That the developer install all required granite curbing by end of November 2012;
- That the developer gravel set of all sidewalks by end of November 2012;
- That the developer conduct no blasting on the site for the remainder of this year unless the blasting is required to install foundations for new homes in the subdivision; and,
- That the developer move existing loose rock to the base of the "cliffs" to make the site more stable;
Country Club Estates
The Board discussed the bond release with the City Solicitor who gave a brief overview of the complete file. When the subdivision was accepted in June of 2006, there was discussion at that time regarding a new bond in the amount of $300,000 in place of the existing $246,000 that was left in the subdivision bond. The developer never followed through with the replacement bond.
He also stated that in 2010, Attorney Bergeron came to the Planning Board with an agreement for the taking required by the approved plan. This agreement provided for a partial release of the bond as certain benchmarks were met by the developer.
Mr. Fay stated he had three main concerns: whether the City had adequate access to the land surrounding the roadway should repairs become necessary or if future improvements became necessary, whether the existing water and sewer lines were within the land the City had legal access to, and the areas where the existing roadway encroached on land not owned by the city.
The developer’s attorney, Brian Falk, stated there was no pressing case on why the bond should remain. Mr. Fay explained that the Board needed more time to look at the history of the subdivision, what votes were taken, what representations were made by the developer's representatives, and the reason why certain actions were taken, before reaching a conclusion.
Mr. Falk then discussed a letter that was sent to a representative for the developer, from former City Engineer Arsenault, asking about the takings at that time. That letter was not found in the City’s files, was copied and passed to the chair.
The Board discussed the possibility of whether an easement takings alone could address the Board's concerns.
The Board further discussed keeping the subdivision listed under unfinished business on their agenda until a solution is agreed upon by both parties. Mrs. Lizotte will be reviewing the files to prepare a timeline to distribute to all parties.
PENDING SUBDIVISION PLANS: Updates and Discussion
PRELIMINARY/ OPEN SPACE SUBDIVISION SUBMITTALS
DEFINITIVE SUBDIVISION SUBMISSIONS
SIGNS
Correspondence from Code Enforcement
Trombettas
The Code Enforcement Officer sent correspondence to the owners regarding the illegal use of signage at this site and asking for them to review the illegal signage. Some of the Board members noted some of the signage has been removed; however they are still out of compliance. The Board agreed that while some signage was removed, maybe a letter asking them to appear to discuss them to consider redoing their main sign to allow equal signage for all businesses in that complex.
Collection Boxes
Chairperson Fenby will talk to Ms. Wilderman regarding an update.
UNFINISHED BUISNESS
Master Calendar
INFORMAL DISCUSSION
COMMUNICATIONS/CORRESPONDENCE
On a motion by Ms. Hughes, seconded by Mr. Coveney, it was duly voted:
To accept all of the items listed under communications and/or correspondence.
On a motion by Mr. Johnson, seconded by Ms. Hughes was duly voted:
To adjourn at 8:30 p.m.
A TRUE COPY
ATTEST: _____________________________
Colleen Hughes, Clerk
| 