The Planning Board for the City of Marlborough met on Monday, November 26, 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 Shawn McCarthy. Also present: City Engineer Thomas Cullen.
The Planning Board welcomed their newest member, Mr. Shawn McCarthy to the Board.
MINUTES
November 5, 2012
On a motion by Ms. Hughes, seconded by Mr. Coveney, it was duly voted:
To accept and file the meeting minutes.
CHAIRS BUSINESS
Results Way Mixed Overlay District
Findings
The Planning Board is sending to the City Council a favorable recommendation to endorse the addition of the Results Way Mixed Used Overlay District. They all agreed that the proposal of a location for this zone will provide many significant economic advantages as well as a quality of lifestyle without creating any additional burdens on the exiting residents or businesses.
On a motion by Mr. Coveney, seconded by Ms. Hughes, it was duly voted:
To accept and file the correspondence, to send the finding to the City Council for their review.
City Council Correspondence
Westridge Estates, Dufrense Drive
The City Council is asking if the Planning Board has accepted the subdivision known as “Westridge Estates, Dufrense Drive”. The Planning Board accepted the subdivision on July 23, 2012 and can give a favorable recommendation to the Council to accept the street.
On a motion by Mr. Coveney, seconded by Mr. McCarthy, it was duly voted:
To accept and file correspondence, to send a favorable recommendation to the City Council to endorse the street.
Data and Telecomm Zone Change
Attorney Bergeron
Attorney Bergeron asked the Board if they could authorize the Planning Board Secretary to prepare and advertise a proposed zoning amendment public hearing to coincide with the City Council public hearing schedule. The matter was just placed on tonight’s City Council schedule, which means that it would not be to the Planning Board until the next meeting. By not advertising prior to the referral, the Board's public hearing would be on a different night than the City Council's public hearing. The matter was not placed on the Board's agenda for this meeting which poses a potential Open Meeting Law issue that would preclude further discussion. The City Solicitor advised the Board that granting Attorney Bergeron's request would result in technical non-compliance with the rigid requirements of the law. Solicitor
discussed various solutions to the issue including holding a special meeting. None of the proposed solutions would have resulted in public hearings being held on the same day.
Mr. Fay asked the Solicitor if his understanding was correct that by advertising a public hearing that the Board would be risking a violation of the Open Meeting Law, even though the violation would result in published public notice. The solicitor answered in the affirmative.
A motion was made Mr. Coveney to authorize the advertisement, seconded by Mr. Fay and supported by Dr. Fenby. The motion was opposed by Ms. Hughes and Mr. McCarthy, and lacking a super majority, the motion was denied.
APPROVAL NOT REQUIRED PLAN
Highland Street
Submittal
Mr. Donald Morris is presenting a plan that added an additional line to subdivide the property he owns on Highland Street. He stated the property is in the midst of being sold, with him to keep the remaining portion for his own use.
On a motion by Mr. Coveney, seconded by Ms. Hughes, it was duly voted:
To accept and file correspondence, to have the City Engineer review the plan and report back to the Planning Board prior to the next regular scheduled meeting.
Pleasant Street
Submittal
Mr. Thomas Dipersio, Sr. presented the Plan to take a portion of land to create one buildable lot.
On a motion by Ms. Hughes, seconded by Mr. Coveney, it was duly voted:
To accept and file correspondence, to have the City Engineer review the plan and report back to the Planning Board prior to the next regular scheduled meeting.
PUBLIC HEARING
SUBDIVISION PROGRESS REPORTS
City Engineer Update
Mr. Cullen stated he has spoken to the Engineer for Berlin Farms and only has minor adjustments being made to the acceptance plans prior to him writing the endorse recommendation. He stated that Blackhorse Farms has the curbing in place and the roadside trees are planted. Ms. Hughes asked if the bond certificate was in correct entity on the subdivision, the Secretary will check with the developer. Mr. Cullen also stated that Mauro Farms is near completion of their first phase with rough sidewalks in place and are looking to release more lots to start the next phase of the project.
Country Club Estates
Proposed Agreement
The City Solicitor and Attorney Falk have rewritten the agreement to include the 6 month cushion to section 9 paragraph A. Mr. Fay raised a concern about the timeframe if all of the required work was not competed in a timely manner. Specifically Mr. Fay asked what would happen if the City Council could not act before the current council expired in December of 2013. Mr. Fay asked if it would be possible to include a clause that would automatically extend the agreement if the matter was pending when the current counsel expired. l. Attorney Falk is going back to his client and if it’s approved by his client, he will add that stipulation to the agreement.
Mauro Farms
Bond Reduction and Lot Release request
Mr. Fay reminded that he has a conflict with this subdivision and that his appointing authority granted relief.
Mr. Martin Loiselle, project manager for the developer, is requesting a suitable bond reduction and for the release of lots 26, 27, 28 and 29. Mr. Loiselle also stated that he believed the date for the tri-partite has lapsed, however upon the Secretary checking, the extension date is June 1, 2014.
On a motion by Mr. Coveney, seconded by Ms. Hughes, it was duly voted:
To accept and file correspondence, to refer the bond request to the City Engineer.
The Residences of Oak Crest
Bond Reduction Request
The Developer, John Breslouf, is asking for a bond reduction and an acceptance of the subdivision. The City Engineer stated he is close to having the subdivision completed and his endorsement to accept the subdivision is awaiting a few minor changes to the acceptance plans.
Mr. Fay asked when the current extension is scheduled to expire. Mrs. Lizotte confirmed that the subdivision is in compliance until June 2013.
On a motion by Ms. Hughes, seconded by Mr. Coveney, it was duly voted:
To accept and file correspondence, to refer the request to the City Engineer.
PENDING SUBDIVISION PLANS: Updates and Discussion
PRELIMINARY/ OPEN SPACE SUBDIVISION SUBMITTALS
DEFINITIVE SUBDIVISION SUBMISSIONS
Ravenswood (January 9, 2013)
The Developer and his Engineer have received the comments that were discussed by the Planning Board at their last meeting. Mr. Hamor stated that he has reviewed comments and wanted to clarify a few points with the Board. He stated that they did have the permission from Avidia Bank to cross onto their land to connect to the sewer and they are still in discussion with the neighbors about access through their land for the connection. Mr. Hamor stated that if they are not able to make a connection, then the two new homes would be using septic tanks.
Mr. Hamor stated that he spoke to the Fire Chief and that with the reduced road width; they were able to move their apparatus within the roadway. Mr. Hamor also discussed that they were in front of the Conservation Board identifying the location of the wetlands and are looking for the determination from the Board in the next few weeks.
Mr. Hamor also showed the Board the conception plan that would only require a waiver for the road width.
Mr. Hamor discussed the future of the low impact subdivisions, where less of the natural state would be affected. He also stated he thought that between the informal meetings and the public hearings that the Board was willing to consider these waivers to create a low impact subdivision. He could not understand the Boards reluctance in granting the waivers.
Mr. Fay stated that Mr. Hamor should have been well aware that the Board was not in favor of multiple waiver requests connected to the current plan. He reminded Mr. Hamor of Mr. Hodge's comments from the last meeting that drastic departure from the current subdivision regulations to include low impact developments should not be made on a case by case basis but by a comprehensive modification of the rules and regulations. Mr. Fay stated that approving the current plan with the requested would be setting a bad precedent. He referenced another similar subdivision, Padula Drive that is the exact same number of houses and the same concept that was required to be built following the rules and regulations without significant waivers.
Dr. Fenby stated that the Board cannot consider anything that would hinder the public’s safety and interest, nor are they willing to consider the required waivers. Dr. Fenby stated that if they would like to introduce a conventional subdivision plan, a public hearing would have to be advertised. In doing so, the developer would have to re-advertise for a public hearing and possibly creating a time issue for approval. It was suggested that the developer withdraw without prejudice.
Mr. Hamor verbally requested to withdraw without prejudice.
On a motion by Ms. Hughes, seconded by Mr. Coveney, it was duly voted:
To accept the verbal request to withdrawal without prejudice; with the understanding that Mr. Hamor will provide the request in writing.
SIGNS
Mr. Fay stated it was time for a sweep again of the signs. All members agreed and will send the list to the secretary.
UNFINISHED BUISNESS
The members discussed sending a thank you letter to the Building Commissioner for attending the last meeting and to summarize the discussion. The letter will address the following:
- Sign Enforcement
- Collection Bins
- Requirement for Civic organizations to apply for a variance for their temporary signs
Ways to improve the code enforcement fines and ticketing system.
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. Coveney, seconded by Ms. Hughes was duly voted:
To adjourn at 8:50 p.m.
A TRUE COPY
ATTEST: _____________________________
Colleen Hughes, Clerk
| 