PB Minutes 2-6-03

APPROVED

TOWN OF PELHAM

PLANNING BOARD MEETING

February 6, 2003

The Chairman, Victor Danevich called the meeting to order at 7:30 pm.

The Secretary, Mr. Bill Scanzani, called the roll:

PRESENT:

Victor Danevich, Paddy Culbert, Bill Scanzani, Gael Ouellette, Alternate Robin Bousa, Alternate Bob Yarmo, Selectmen’s Representative Hal Lynde (arrived shortly after the meeting commenced), Planning Director Amy Alexander

ABSENT:

Peter McNamara, Henry DeLuca, Alternate Raymond Brunelle

Mr. Danevich informed that Ms. Bousa would be voting in Mr. McNamara’s place, and that Mr. Yarmo would be voting in Mr. DeLuca’s place.

There was a consensus of the Board to hold their work session on Monday, February 17, 2003.

Mr. Danevich said that during the Town Deliberative session, there had been a discrepancy regarding the placement of Hickory Hill Road onto the warrant. He said that the Board was provided with backup data confirming that Hickory Hill Road had been paved in 2001.

MOTION:

(Scanzani/Ouellette) To agree to place Hickory Hill Road onto the Warrant Article for Town acceptance as it meets the criteria of the Planning Board.

VOTE:

(6 - 0 - 0) The motion carries.

Mr. Danevich informed that a court remand had been received regarding the Soucy Realty Development Corp. case, in which the Board was have to answer certain questions and submit a response. He asked that Ms. Alexander place an agenda item for the February 17, 2003 meeting. He said that abutter notification would be necessary and the Town would absorb the associated costs.

ADMINISTRATIVE

Map 1 Lot 112 - New American Homes, LLC - Long Pond Shores - Request for Bond Release

Ms. Alexander said that the original bond amount was $521,000, and the current bond amount was $52,000 (10% maintenance). Both Mr. Don Foss, Highway Road Agent and Ms. Alexander had reviewed with CLD’s (former Town Engineer) final assessment and recommended that the bond be release the bond in its entirety. Mr. Danevich confirmed that there were no new or outstanding issues and that the recommendation was to accept the request. Ms. Alexander answered yes.

Mr. Lynde arrived.

Mr. Scanzani asked when the road had been reviewed by Mr. Foss to determine that an amount of money would not be needed to correct any washouts. He suggested that it be added to the tracking list for approval next year. Ms. Alexander said per CLD comments of December 9, 2001, the project substantially conformed to the subdivision. She said if there were areas that had not established vegetation, CLD would not have recommended that the bond be released to a maintenance bond. She noted that Mr. Foss signed the final bond release form.

MOTION:

(Scanzani/Ouellette) To release the total bond amount of $52,000, plus any interest to $0.

VOTE:

(7 - 0 - 0) The motion carries.

Map 4 Lot 137 - G & M Jeremy Hill Land Development, LLC - Meadowview Estates - Request for Bond Reduction

Ms. Alexander said the original bond amount was $1,000,000, and the assessment by TF Moran was that the remaining work for phase I would cost $62,900. She recommended that $300,000 (30%) be retained $700,000 be released. Attorney Linda Connell of McLane, Graf, Raulerson & Middleton discussed the bonded amount and noted the amount remaining in the phase I bond was $80,000. She said that $310,000 would be bonded for phase II. In an effort to She asked that the Board approve combining the phase I and phase II bonded amounts to equal a total of $390,000.

Mr. Culbert said if the retained bond amount were to be less than the required 30%, he would prefer that a waiver request be submitted to the Board. Mr. Scanzani asked what the necessary bonding amount would be for phase II. Ms. Alexander said the bonding amount necessary for phase II would be $310,000. Mr. Scanzani believed the bonding amount should be lowered to $610,000. Ms. Alexander agreed. She asked if the bonded amounts for phase I and II should be separate or collective. Attorney Connell said that the bonding company would prefer to hold one bond, with the distinction being made between the two phases.

There was a discussion regarding the total amount needing to be bonded for both phase I and phase II, which Mr. Scanzani recalculated. It was decided that that the total bonded amount should be $517,000 (phase I - $207,000 [30% maintenance bond] and phase II - $310,000).

MOTION:

(Scanzani/Culbert) To reduce the total bond to $517,000, which shall document the breakout of $207,000 (30% maintenance for phase I, and $310,000 for phase II.

VOTE:

(7 - 0 - 0) The motion carries.

Attorney Connell will work with Ms. Alexander to update the documentation.

Map 4 Lot 140 & Map 4 Lot 139 - Old Orchard Estates & Collin’s Way - Request for Consideration of a Design Change

Mr. Peter Zohdi, Herbert Associates presented the design change to the Board. He said that there had been three subdivisions in the Jeremy Hill area. He said that Collins way was a 10% grade to vertical station 4900 and the rest was 3% to connect to Rome Avenue. He said it was realized after the road was being constructed that there was a 1.8ft. bust on the topography, which was a common occurrence normally handled in the field. He said that Ms. Alexander requested that the change be reviewed by the Board. He said the vertical curve had been moved approximately 25ft. further and was now located at station 4927. He said all the grades would stay the same and the as-built on Rome Avenue would also remain the same.

Mr. Danevich asked if there were any impacts to the drainage calculation or the drainage study. Mr. Zohdi answered no. Mr. Danevich asked if there were any lot line modifications or changes. Mr. Zohdi answered no. Mr. Danevich asked if any new impacts associated with the WCD were created. Mr. Zohdi answered no. Mr. Danevich confirmed that there was no need for the plan to be re-recorded at the Registry of Deeds. Mr. Zohdi answered yes.

Mr. Scanzani asked if the low point of the road could be raised. Mr. Zohdi said the project had been approved based upon minimum impact and if the road was raised there would be more of an impact on the wetland. He said the request was to change the grade at the end of the road.

Mr. Yarmo asked how the bust in the bench mark occurred. Mr. Zohdi said when the topo was carried from one subdivision to the other, the bench mark was 1.8ft. off.

Ms. Alexander had no problem with the plan.

It was noted that the date on the final plan was to be corrected (two dates listed - January 16, 2003 and January 17, 2003).

MOTION:

(Scanzani/Culbert) To approve the design change to the plan presented to the Board dated January 17, 2003.

VOTE:

(7 - 0 - 0) The motion carries.

OLD BUSINESS

Map 6 Lot 180 - Carol O. Reeser - 18 Mammoth Road - Proposed 2-Lot Subdivision for Continued Consideration

Neither the applicant, or their representative was present. Mr. Danevich said that he would table the plan until the end of the meeting. He wanted to provide the applicant with the opportunity to arrive.

* further action taken by the Board, noted below.

Map 9 Lot 40 & 40-3 - St. Onge, Rita - Hobbs Road - Proposed 2-Lot Subdivision for Continued Consideration

Mr. Henry St. Onge, representing his wife, Rita St. Onge presented the plan to the Board.

Mr. Danevich confirmed that remaining issue of receiving a Variance from the Board of Adjustment had been resolved. Mr. St. Onge answered yes.

Mr. Scanzani still had issue with land in the back of the lot that could be developed in the future. He felt if the building was to occur, the access road should be brought up to Town specifications. Mr. St. Onge pointed out that of the 14 acres from ML 9-40-3, only 3.3 acres were buildable.

Mr. Culbert asked if other property owners would be able to access and subdivide off the road. Mr. St. Onge said because the road was private, they would have to get easement rights from the owners. Mr. Culbert confirmed that anyone wishing to subdivide off the private road would also have to go to the Board of Adjustment for a Variance. Mr. Culbert was concerned with further development on the private road.

Mr. Danevich noted that the Board of Adjustment granted a legal lot. He was also concerned with further development. He said one of the major discussion points over the last couple subdivisions brought forward by Mr. St. Onge was issues with the private right-of-way. Ms. Cathy Masson (Mr. St. Onge’s daughter) noted that there would be no further subdivision requests. Mr. St. Onge also said he would not be coming forward with any further subdivision requests.

Mr. Danevich said that the Fire Chief was concerned with the installation of a 10,000 sistern. Mr. St. Onge said the Fire Chief also requested that a cul-de-sac at the end of ML 9-40-2. He said both conditions would have to be met before a building permit was issued. Mr. Culbert noted that the plan would need to be updated.

Mr. Peter Zohdi, Herbert Associates said that he did the plan and would be glad to add the cul-de-sac and the location of the 10,000 gallon sistern. He said that they would comply and work with the Fire Chief. Ms. Alexander confirmed that no building permit would be issued unless the cul-de-sac and sistern were in place and approved.

Mr. Lynde asked if the corrections listed in TF Moran’s memo dated November 25, 2002 had been done. Both Mr. Zohdi and Ms. Alexander answered yes. Mr. Lynde noted that there should be a waiver relieving the Town of all responsibility. Mr. St. Onge said that ML 9-40-2 had a deed notation that the Town was not responsible for the road, and that ML 9-40-3 would have the same notation.

Ms. Bousa asked that the well radius be shown on the plan. Mr. Zohdi believed that the Planning Department had a copy of the plan that showed the well radius for ML 9-40-2.

Mr. Danevich noted that a waiver request of the $1000 subdivision fee and asked that the application be viewed as a single lot, with a fee of $250.

MOTION:

(Scanzani/Culbert) To accept the waiver request to lower the $1000 subdivision fee to $250, the fee for a single lot.

VOTE:

(7 - 0 - 0) The motion carries.

MOTION:

(Scanzani/Culbert) To approve the waiver request as submitted, to lower the $1000 subdivision fee to $250, the fee for a single lot.

VOTE:

(7 - 0 - 0) The motion carries.

There was no public input.

MOTION:

(Culbert/Bousa) To approve the plan conditioned upon: 1) the plan being updated to show the sistern and driveway turnaround (installed and approved by the Fire Chief prior to any building permits being issued), 2) file to include release of Town liability documentation regarding the road, 3) well radius of ML 9-40-2 be included on the plans, 4) plan to note single buildable lot.

VOTE:

(6 - 1 - 0) The motion carries. Mr. Scanzani voted no.

Map 12 Lot 42-1 - Samuel Road LLC - Spring Street - Proposed 8-Lot Subdivision for Continued Consideration

Mr. Peter Zohdi asked the Board permission to present the next three plans simultaneously to provide the Board with an overall view. He reviewed the various subdivisions that provided connections to Spring Street. He said that a portion of land previously owned by Mr. Fauvel that would be deeded to the Town, which would help with the connection to Spring Street. He believed that all subdivision and zoning requirements were in compliance, with the exception of waiver to be requested. Mr. Zohdi said that the cul-de-sac within the Pultar subdivision had been curved in an attempt to keep it out of the WCD. He went on to explain the curvature of the road (at a maximum slope of 12%) through the Harris property, which was noted on a plan previously approved by the Board.

Mr. Lynde recalled asking if consideration had been given for the use of Town land abutting the property to mitigate the slope. He asked if the Safety Committee had reviewed. Ms. Alexander said the Safety Committee was due to review the plan at their February 7, 2003 meeting. He said that one of the main reasons for the access was for emergency access and asked if more of an emergency would be created due to the extensive length of 12% slope. Mr. Zohdi said that other designs had been drafted and reviewed (and filed with the Town) by both former Planning Directors, Mr. Clay Mitchell and Mr. Dave Brouillet, with the current design being favored. He said he would be glad to meet with the Safety Committee and show them the plans that had previously been reviewed. Mr. Lynde asked if the intersection of the road connecting from Stonepost met the subdivision requirements. Mr. Zohdi said the intersection slope requirements would be met.

Mr. Zohdi said that there were four waiver requests: 1) exception to 11:11b part 2 - 75ft. well radius on one lot was 2ft. within the right-of-way; 2) waiver of 10% grade requirement to be 12%; 3) waiver of 1000ft. tangent to be 100ft. (he said the 1000ft. was a typo in the regulations); 4) waiver of 15,000SF building area with 100ft.x150ft - lot 5 has an area of 17,625SF contiguous buildable area, outside the setbacks, but is slightly irregular.

MOTION:

(Culbert/Scanzani) To accept the four written waiver requests for consideration: 1) exception to 11:11b part 2 - 75ft. well radius on one lot was 2ft. within the right-of-way; 2) waiver of 10% grade requirement to be 12%; 3) waiver of 1000ft. tangent to be 100ft. (he said the 1000ft. was a typo in the regulations); 4) waiver of 15,000SF building area with 100ft.x150ft - lot 5 has an area of 17,625SF contiguous buildable area, outside the setbacks, but is slightly irregular.

VOTE:

(6 - 1 - 0) The motion carries. Mr. Lynde voted no.

Mr. Danevich noted that there was a safety concern that should be addressed. He said from the beginning discussion had occurred regarding the construction sequence and wanted to reiterate that there would be conditions placed on the plan. Mr. Zohdi said that a condition had already been placed on the plans that no occupancy permit would be issued until there was a paved connection to Spring Street. Mr. Danevich reiterated that the level of consistency was maintained. He asked the status of the acquisition of the piece of land along Spring Street. Mr. Zohdi said that his client had a purchase and sales agreement with Mr. Fauvel, of copy of which can be submitted to the Board. Mr. Danevich said there was an agreement and understanding on the first extensions that the bonding and construction fees for the 300ft. Town portion (through the Harris property connecting to Spring Street) would be paid for as part of the subdivisions. Mr. Zohdi said that the entire road, including the Town portion would be bonded.

Mr. Lynde questioned if the building permits should be issued until the road was connected. Ms. Alexander noted that a building permit would not issued until she received sign off from the Fire Chief that he could access any combustible materials. Mr. Danevich said that Legal Counsel provided comment that if a road was bonded, a building permit could not be denied. He said NFPA took precedence as a life-safety issue. Mr. Lynde pointed out that there was no active recreation land proposed, as called out for in the subdivision regulations and the Master Plan, which he felt should be addressed. Mr. Zohdi said that a lot had been deeded at the last meeting, and also the Stonepost subdivision deeded some land to the Town. He believed approximately 20-25 acres of land would be acquired. He then showed the location of the abutting Town parcel. Mr. Danevich noted that per the topo, the area was not flat, and it contained ledge outcroppings. Mr. Lynde felt that the experts should be bringing in proposals to address the need.

Mr. Scanzani asked if there were any calming methods that could be used. Mr. Zohdi felt the plan accurately presented traffic calming.

Mr. Culbert left the meeting, but returned at a later time (see notation below).

Mr. Zohdi discussed an agreement made by Mr. Harris to give some land, if in return, he was allowed access through Town land for a connection to Poplar Hill Road. He said the plan would be submitted within three or four months.

Mr. Danevich asked if all the engineering concerns of TF Moran been addressed. Ms. Alexander answered yes. Mr. Danevich said that action would not be taken on the plan until formal Safety Committee review had been completed.

Mr. Lynde asked if erosion control had been satisfactory addressed. Ms. Alexander answered yes, with the underdrain design. She had sever concerns regarding erosion control during construction due to the slopes involved. She said the contractor would need to contain the erosion. Mr. Zohdi said that proper notes had been added to the plan, which said that a proper plan had to be in place for erosion control measures.

Mr. Scanzani asked that consideration be given during the Safety Committee meeting to add warnings such as steep slope signs, a blinking yellow light, and a stop ahead sign.

PUBLIC INPUT

Ms. Monica Bedard, Ledge Road, asked where the drainage would be placed at the bottom of the road. Mr. Zohdi said that an ‘S’ curve treatment swale would be installed that would lead to two existing culverts on Spring Street and emptied into Mr. Fauvel’s land. He noted that per state requirements, the drainage that left the site pre- and post-development would be equal.

Ms. Ruth Blakesly, Ledge Road, believed that if trees were removed the water flow would be increased. Mr. Zohdi reiterated that there would be no additional water flow post-development due to the detention treatment swale within the property. Ms. Bedard said there was current stagnant water area on the corner of Shepard and Harley, which she felt was a safety hazard. Mr. Zohdi further explained the proposed drainage plan. He said that the calculations had been submitted to the Town.

Ms. Paula Socha, Matthew Drive, wanted to know if the connection from Shephard to Spring Street decreased the amount of time from emergency response. Ms. Bousa answered yes. Mr. Danevich said that the Police and Fire Chiefs testified during a Board of Selectmen meeting that there would an increase in response time of approximately 10-12 minutes.

Mr. Chris Bedard, Bedard Road, questioned if the school busses would travel the road due to the steepness. Ms. Alexander will solicit comment from the bus company. Mr. Danevich said they had been contacted in the past, but had not responded.

Mr. Yarmo believed that each subdivision had conservation land, and asked that they be noted on the plan.

Mr. Danevich informed that the plan would be date specified to the March 3, 2003 meeting. He asked Ms. Alexander to obtain written comment from the Safety Committee as well as make a request to the bus company for written comment. He said the additional concerns of the Board to be reviewed by the Safety Committee were the guardrail, grade percent, drainage and additional signage.

Map 12 Lot 63-1 - Life Estate of Pultar - End of Shephard Road - Proposed 7-Lot Subdivision for Continued Consideration

Mr. Peter Zohdi, Herbert Associates presented the plan to the Board. He noted that a design change had been made to the cul-de-sac. He discussed one of the lots (approximately 4.5 acres in size) and said if the 15,000SF - 100ft.x150ft. regulation was waived, he would build a house on one end, and deed the remaining 2 acres to the Town. The additional land would connect two Town owned parcels that abutted the lot. Ms. Alexander felt the presented plan was better than the last. Mr. Danevich believed that granting the waiver request would benefit the Town.

Mr. Scanzani asked the length of the cul-de-sac was from egress and what the number of lots would be. Mr. Zohdi said from the point of egress to the end of the cul-de-sac length would be approximately 900ft. Mr. Danevich said that the measurement met the 36 homes, 360 trip count and the 2400ft. from second point of egress. He said that without the connection to Spring Street, the conditions would not be met.

Ms. Ouellette asked if the well radius for ML 12-63-1 could be contained completely within the lot. Mr. Zohdi answered yes.

Mr. Scanzani asked if the building envelope waiver request had been submitted. Mr. Zohdi said it had not yet been submitted, but that he would send a copy Friday.

There was no public input.

Mr. Danevich said that the plan be date specified to the March 3, 2003 meeting.

Mr. Yarmo asked if the land discussed by Mr. Zohdi would be deeded to the Town, or if it would be a conservation easement. Mr. Zohdi said that he would deed the portion of land to the Town, it would not be an easement. He showed where the lot line would be and which portion would be deeded. Mr. Yarmo confirmed that the parcel would be marked by corner bounds and signs. Mr. Zohdi said that the bounds would be placed. Mr. Yarmo said that the signs would have to be created. Mr. Zohdi said Mr. Yarmo should give the proposal for the signs and he would put them on the lot. He said that he would be requesting a dredge and fill, and would therefore need to meet with the Conservation Commission.

Map 12 Lot 192 & 203-16 - Richard Kirsch Investment Trust - off Mulberry Lane - Proposed 12-Lot Subdivision for Continued Consideration

Mr. Peter Zohdi, Herbert Associates presented the plan to the Board. He said that his engineers met with Ms. Alexander to review TF Moran’s comments. He said two waivers were requested 1) per section 1104:bshape of lots 2 & 3 - he said the subdivision regulations specified that ‘pie’ shaped lots were required to have a minimum of three acres, but he did not feel that the zoning requirements allowed the Board to request three acres. He said the outside boundary was changing the lot shapes. 2) per section 1105:b5 lot shape minimum allowable is 50ft. He said that the lot line would be changed to 80ft. if the waiver request was not granted, but he did not want to take it back at this time.

Mr. Scanzani questioned why a waiver request was not submitted for lot 4. Mr. Zohdi didn’t feel that lot 4 was ‘pie’ shaped.

MOTION:

(Scanzani/Yarmo) To accept the two waiver requests for consideration - per sections 1104:b4, and 1105:b5

VOTE:

(6 - 0 - 0) The motion carries.

It was noted by Ms. Alexander that TF Moran’s issues had been satisfied. Mr. Danevich asked if the special permit had been requested for the WCD. Mr. Zohdi said the application had previously been submitted. Ms. Alexander said she had seen a copy.

Mr. Lynde asked if the sites had been walked. Mr. Danevich said that four separate site walks had been performed. Mr. Lynde questioned if an additional site walk should be scheduled. Mr. Danevich said that site walks were not done when there was an excess of 4” of snow.

Mr. Scanzani asked the measurement of the cul-de-sac from the point of egress. Ms. Alexander said the length was 1700ft. Mr. Danevich pointed out that without the connection to Spring Street. He said the construction sequence would be stipulated. Mr. Zohdi said an agreement between all the parties for connecting roads would be given to the Board before construction began.

Mr. Scanzani said he had previously requested a 50ft. right-of-way off Swane Drive so additional connections could be made to future developments. Mr. Zohdi provided a right-of-way to a parcel that could be deeded to the Town. He said the land would need to be walked. Mr. Danevich suggested a standard right-of-way, rather than the creation of a separate lot. Mr. Scanzani questioned the right-of-way between lots 203-13 & 14. Mr. Zohdi felt it may be an easement, not a right-of-way and asked Ms. Alexander to review. Ms. Ouellette discussed the top of Wellesley and noted there was an established right-of-way. Mr. Zohdi showed on the plan where an additional right-of-way could be created. Mr. Danevich noted that a future connection to Mulberry was feasible, and further discussed the other connections that could be made in the area. Mr. Scanzani noted that the connectivity issue had been ongoing since the 1980’s. Mr. Zohdi suggested the Board perform a site walk of the area.

Ms. Bousa asked if a waiver request were needed regarding the traffic study. Mr. Zohdi said a waiver request would be submitted. Mr. Lynde asked if an Environmental Impact Analysis (EIA) had been submitted. Mr. Danevich said an EIA had not been specifically requested. Mr. Scanzani asked if an Economical Impact Study had been produced. Mr. Zohdi noted that the request was for an 8 lot subdivision, not 10 lots. Mr. Lynde asked if a Wildlife Study had been done. Mr. Danevich noted that a study had been done for the area.

Mr. Lynde went back to the lot shape issue and confirmed that the regulation valid, and of the authority of the Planning Board. Mr. Scanzani answered yes. Mr. Lynde noted that lots 3,4 & 5 were basically flat, and could sustain ball fields. Mr. Scanzani agreed that the regulations called for green space. He suggested a location for active recreation. Mr. Zohdi reviewed the area and proposed an area (0.78 acres) that could be retained for green space. He showed where a 20ft. right-of-way could be placed for access to the lot. He said he would create a proposal.

PUBLIC INPUT

Ms. Monica Bedard, owned the abutting parcel to the green space proposed by Mr. Zohdi. She cautioned that there was a quarry (over 30ft deep) abutting the area and felt a safety hazard would be created. She asked if Kirsch acquired ML 203-16. Mr. Lynde said the plan his name on it. Ms. Bedard asked that a proper deed, with angles and footages be created for the lots ML 203-16 and ML 191. She said that the Town map needed to be corrected before any further development was done. She said that the corner bounds needed to be corrected. She said because the Town map was not according to any deed description, she was not able to have her land surveyed. She claimed that the stone bounds on the Kirsch property were incorrect. She asked that the development stop in the area until the Town helped rectify the boundary dispute situation. She noted that the original 160 acre subdivision was done by Mr. Webster. Mr. Scanzani believed the boundary dispute was a civil matter. Mr. Danevich said the Planning Board’s obligation was to follow the surveyor’s stamp as shown on the plan. Mr. Zohdi said that Ms. Bedard had been a previous client and noted that the plan being presented was in accordance to a plan (done by a different company) that was court approved as a settlement, and registered at the Registry of Deeds. Mr. Danevich said if the Board were to approve the plan, Ms. Bedard would have twenty days to submit an appeal. Ms. Bedard said she could not have her property surveyed, because the surveyors pull the Town map, which was incorrect. Mr. Zohdi noted that the plan, prepared by Cuoco & Cormier was registered at the Registry of Deeds as plan #30-224, draw #138. Ms. Bedard discussed the discrepancy of the plan, as called out for in the copy of the deed. Mr. Danevich reiterated that the court would need to resolve the boundary issue. Ms. Bedard then reiterated her concern for opening up the quarry.

Ms. Ruth Blakesly asked if a requirement could be placed to fence in the property around the quarry. Mr. Danevich said the Safety Committee should review the area and noted that the fence could be paid for by the developer through some sort of exaction or an agreement. Ms. Alexander will present the concerns to the Safety Committee.

Mr. Mike Scanlon, Shepard Road, asked how realistic the connection would be above the Kirsch property. Mr. Zohdi said he would like to stake the property and walk the site with Ms. Alexander. Mr. Scanlon said that the right-of-way on Wellesley Drive existed, but was virtually a driveway easement. He wanted to ensure that whatever right-of-way was placed in the area, that it would be something the Town could use. Mr. Scanzani asked that Ms. Alexander review the right-of-way at the end of Wellesley Drive. Mr. Scanlon asked what had changed in the calculations between the original submission of the Kirsch property (in October, 2002) and the current presented plan. Mr. Danevich said the Harris property calculations were not known, since it had not yet been submitted. Ms. Ouellette noted that the development would not be done until the connection was made. Mr. Scanlon asked if a multitude of cul-de-sacs could be installed if the connection was not made. Mr. Scanzani answered yes. It was reiterated that the connection would have to be made for the other developments to be built.

Mr. Danevich reviewed the action items to be done: 1) reposition the 50ft. right-of-way for the road access, 2) Ms. Alexander to follow up with the Safety Committee for considerations, including the offsite exaction to place some sort of safety facility around the quarry if they decide to, 3) Mr. Zohdi to get back to the Board regarding the connection to Wellesley Drive.

Mr. Danevich informed that the plan would be date specified to March 3, 2003.

Administrative break........

Mr. Danevich reviewed the remaining agenda items with the Board. It was decided to date specify the following applications:

March 3, 2003 - Map 4 Lot 180-17 - Two M Construction Co. - off Benoit Avenue Extension - Proposed 2-Lot Subdivision for Submission. There were two abutters present that were informed that the Board would not take any action, except to formally review and accept for consideration.

February 17, 2003 - Map 6 Lot 126 & 127 - P.J. Keating Materials Company - off Bridge Street (Route 38) - Proposed Asphalt Batching Facility for Site Plan Review for Submission. There were no persons present in the audience in connection with the application.

Map 13-39 - Best Built Realty Trust - Youngs Crossing Road - Proposed 2-Lot Subdivision for Continued Consideration

Mr. Matt Hamor, Meisner Brem Corporation presented the plan to the Board. He asked if the Board had a quorum. Mr. Danevich answered yes and noted that Alternate Robin Bousa and Alternate Bob Yarmo had been appointed to vote in the absence of Mr. Peter McNamara and Mr. Henry DeLuca.

Mr. Hamor said the outstanding issue remaining from the last meeting was to approach abutter Ray Ferland and request access a portion of his land to eliminate the waiver request to decrease the 50ft. width requirement to 20ft. He said that Mr. Ferland was not interested in allowing access through his property. Mr. Hamor said that two formal waivers had been submitted in connection with the lot width, and the well radius.

Mr. Lynde asked for clarification of why the lot line could not be moved. Mr. Hamor said that a Variance had been granted by the Board of Adjustment due to the high and dry area of the lot.

There was no public input.

MOTION:

(Scanzani/Ouellette) To approve the two waiver requests (accepted for consideration on January 6, 2003) submitted: 1) reduce the lot width from 50ft., to 20ft; 2) well radius.

VOTE:

(4 - 1 - 1) The motion carries. Ms. Bousa voted no. Mr. Yarmo abstained.

MOTION:

(Scanzani/Ouellette) To approve the plan as shown.

VOTE:

(4 - 1 -1) The motion carries. Ms. Bousa voted no. Mr. Yarmo abstained.

DISCUSSION

Map 5 Lot 89 - Best Built Realty Trust - off Castle Hill Road - Proposed 7-Lot Subdivision for Preliminary Conceptual

Mr. Danevich said that no abutter notification was necessary during preliminary conceptual, but that the developer chose to send notifications out. He said any comment from the Board, or requests from the abutters were considered non-binding at this time.

Mr. Scanzani read the list of abutters aloud. There were no persons who did not have their name read, or who had a problem with notification. The file did not contain any written correspondence from abutters.

Mr. Matt Hamor, Meisner Brem Corporation, representing Mr. Al Torisi, reviewed the plan for the Board. He noted that Mr. Torisi currently lived on the property, but his home was not shown on the plan. He familiarized the members of the Board with the location of the proposed subdivision. He said that currently there was a Town right-of-way off of Castle Hill Road being used by Mr. Torisi as a driveway to access his home. He said the intention was to improve the 50ft. right-of-way to enter the proposed backland area (10 acres), a 7-lot subdivision. He understood that there had been previous discussion with the Board of Selectmen regarding the right-of-way. He proposed that the beginning of the access be improved to class 5. He said currently there was a 50ft. right-of-way, 30ft. of which had been allowed for Mr. Torisi to provide a driveway to access his home.

Mr. Lynde recalled the granted access, which was originally 10ft, and was later widened to 30ft, conditioned upon a buffer being maintained between himself and his neighbors. He said the buffer was not maintained, which created issues with slope erosion. He didn’t feel the Selectmen would have approved as an access at the time it was reviewed. He said the current owner of the parcel was the Town, and that it was not a road. Mr. Hamor provided a copy of a letter from Town Counsel (Soule, Kidder, et al) dated March 23, 1998 to then Town Administrator, Mr. Peter Flynn. The document contained language discussing the right-of-way, which Mr. Hamor read aloud: “Although the ‘strip’ has been dedicated, the road has never been constructed and opened for public travel, nor has it been accepted by vote of the Town Meeting. The strip leading into ML 5-89 is a paper street. It has been dedicated, but it has never been accepted. The back lot owner has an implied easement to use the paper street to get to his land and the right to develop the paper street, at his expense, as a public highway, if he wishes to do so.” He said when the land was originally parceled out the intention was in accordance to the plan being proposed.

Mr. Danevich said that the plan appeared to be straight forward, but wanted the 50ft. easement resolved with the Selectmen through a current review by Town Counsel regarding its status. Mr. Scanzani asked that the March 23, 1998 legal review be re-read. Mr. Danevich re-read the portion of the correspondence previously read by Mr. Hamor (with a notation that a prior court case from 1978 had been cited) , and went on to read the remaining paragraph: “Thus, while the owner of ML 5-89 had the right to use the strip, for access to his lot, it cannot be used to satisfy the frontage requirement, until a road, built in accordance with Planning Board requirements for construction of a Town road, has been built. At that point, a cul-de-sac could be added to give ML 5-89 the 200ft. of frontage the zoning ordinance requires.”

Mr. Scanzani said that the Board would want to review the connectivity and if the culvert was sufficient. Mr. Danevich asked what the retaining wall was used for. Mr. Hamor said currently the grade was up to 16%. He said they would begin at 2% and go up to 10%, with a portion of the retaining wall showing. He said there was a request from the Selectmen to establish the existing conditions, which would be done. He discussed further how the retaining wall would be installed up over the sides of the road.

Mr. Danevich identified the issues discussed: 1) retaining wall, in connection with the slopes; 2) address the Selectmen’s concern, possible re-review of the agreements put in place previously.

PUBLIC INPUT

Ms. Sandra Crawford, Castle Hill Road, discussed her concerns with the Board as follows: 1) water problems increased with additional homes; 2) concerned with well water due to run-off; 3) water run-off of a 7-lot subdivision through private property; 4) negative impact on current traffic flow onto Castle Hill Road; 5) can the 50ft.x200ft. right-of-way meet Town slope requirements without using her property; 6) right-of-way in present condition is unacceptable; 7) if the Board approved the subdivision, she requested that the access road meet Town standards. Mr. Danevich said that the Selectmen would have to address the current situation, as they are the custodians of the Town property. Mr. Scanzani said that because the proposed was conceptual, the full-engineering review would still need to be done by the Board. Mr. Danevich said that the road and the retaining walls would be reviewed. Ms. Crawford asked if the retaining wall would support her property. Mr. Hamor said that the retaining wall would be addressed. He said that they would like to greatly improve the existing drainage pattern. Ms. Crawford said that she no longer had a buffer zone to the 50ft. right-of-way that was supposed to be retained. Mr. Danevich said that the buffer would be addressed.

Mr. Al Dubois, who lived across from the proposed development, asked what the maximum limits were for the road. Mr. Danevich said that the current regulation called for 10%. Mr. Hamor said the existing conditions were 16%, but that they would propose no more than 10%. Mr. Dubois said that half the road was in his yard, he no longer had lawn, and a great amount of water drained onto his property. He also informed that his well was approximately 30ft. from the road. Ms. Cheryl Dubois said that one home in the area made a big amount of difference, and was concerned of the effects with a 7-lot subdivision. Mr. Hamor said one of the main objectives would be to correct the drainage problem.

Ms. Gayle Plouffe, Castle Hill Road, said she was a 30-year resident of the neighborhood. She gave a brief history of the surrounding area and the problems with the drainage running south toward Beaver Brook. She was interested to know how the surrounding lots would be protected and continued discussion regarding the drainage flow. It was her belief that further clearing of trees would affect the velocity of drainage. Ms. Plouffe said from the beginning the neighbors had discussed the issues of the area but now that their parcels were being further impacts the neighbors had great concerns. Mr. Scanzani asked that the abutters get together and address all the issues so they could be presented to the developer. Mr. Danevich noted that the parcel could not have any increase, or decrease pre- or post-development.

Mr. Lynde noted that when Mr. Torisi met with the Board of Selectmen, permission was granted to access his property and to clear the trees. He didn’t recall permission being granted to dig up the property and create the slopes. Mr. Torisi understood that Mr. Don Foss, Road Agent granted permission through the issuance of a driveway permit, for a driveway to be built and maintained. He said that the steepness of the hill required him to lower the grade and have at least 30ft., if not more. He understood the intention was to create a buffer to the neighbors, but the well being of his family came first. He said he had to ensure that emergency vehicles could access the parcel.

Mr. Danevich summarized the concerns discussed: 1) drainage; 2) retaining walls; 3) access with regard to the Selectmen. He said additional items may come up during subsequent meetings.

NEW BUSINESS

Map 6 Lot 162 - V & G Development Corp. - Hildreth Street - Proposed 2-Lot Subdivision for Submission

Mr. David Kelley of Diversified Civil Engineering, representing Jerry Gagnon of V & G Development Corp. presented the plan to the Board. He said that Mr. Gagnon owned a parcel on the Town/state line of Dracut and Pelham. He said they had met with Dracut for a 2-lot subdivision approval (for his son and daughter). He noted that all engineering, roadways, utilities and drainage would be serviced by Dracut. He said that the houses were located on the state line in the middle of the parcel. He said that no further subdivision would occur.

Mr. Danevich asked if any waiver requests were necessary. Mr. Kelley believed the only waiver request would be to not have the engineering reviewed.

Ms. Alexander recommended the plan for acceptance of consideration.

MOTION:

(Scanzani/Ouellette) To accept the plan for consideration.

VOTE:

(6 - 0 - 0) The motion carries.

Mr. Yarmo asked if there were any wetlands on the property. Mr. Kelley said the wet areas were contained in Dracut.

Mr. Scanzani was concerned with how the fair market value of the structures would be assessed. He asked if the houses should be shifted to be entirely in Pelham. It was noted that the Assessor would need to work out the problem. Mr. Kelley discussed a Variance that had been approved to construct two single-family homes.

PUBLIC INPUT

Ms. Ellen Berkentier, an abutter wanted it noted that they didn’t want the proposed houses to impede access to the surrounding lots. Mr. Danevich said the development would have to be built per the plan. He said if it deviated, it would have to be presented again.

Mr. Scanzani asked if it were possible for additional subdivision. Mr. Kelley said that the cul-de-sac was already at the maximum length per Dracut’s requirements. Mr. Scanzani asked if a road could be placed on Pelham’s side to access the parcel. Mr. Kelley said that there were no other real access points, except through Dracut, due to the surrounding wetlands.

Mr. Kelley submitted a written waiver request that engineering review not be performed, per the subdivision regulations.

MOTION:

(Scanzani/Ouellette) To accept, for consideration, the waiver request to waive the engineering review of the 2-lot subdivision.

VOTE:

(6 - 0 - 0) The motion carries.

MOTION:

(Scanzani/Ouellette) To approve the waiver request, that waives engineering review of the 2-lot subdivision.

VOTE:

(6 - 0 - 0) The motion carries.

MOTION:

(Scanzani/Ouellette) To approve the subdivision based upon the minor impact to Pelham and the information contained in the file that there are no roads, utilities etc. in Pelham.

VOTE:

(6 - 0 - 0) The motion carries.

Map 8 Lot 20-4 & 20-5 - Louise Gaudet - Heather Lee Lane - Proposed Lot Line Adjustment for Submission

Mr. Peter Zohdi, Herbert Associates, presented the plan to the Board. He informed that foundation was too close to the lot line and would like to transfer 1200SF from lot 5 to lot 4. He said that the proposed leach bed, and approved septic design had been submitted. He said when the foundation was certified, it was found that the placement was too close to the lot line. Mr. Danevich noted that there would be zero impact since the entire subdivision was still under construction. He said that similar requests had been granted.

Mr. Culbert returned to the meeting.

Ms. Ouellette asked if the well radius would be affected. Mr. Zohdi answered no.

Ms. Alexander had no issue with the proposed.

MOTION:

(Scanzani/Ouellette) To accept the plan for consideration.

VOTE:

(6 - 0 - 1) The motion carries. Mr. Culbert abstained.

There was no public input.

MOTION:

(Scanzani/Ouellette) To approve the lot line change, as shown on the new plan, with the understanding that a new plan will be filed with the Town.

VOTE:

(5 - 1 - 1) The motion carries. Mr. Yarmo voted no. Mr. Culbert abstained.

Map 4 Lot 180-17 - Two M Construction Co. - off Benoit Avenue Extension - Proposed 2-Lot Subdivision for Submission

Mr. Lynde questioned if action should be taken at this time. Mr. Danevich said that the Board was required by state law to take action within 35-days from receipt. He said the Board had received the information from former Planning Director and Town Counsel. Mr. Lynde asked what would happen in the event of a problem with abutter notification. Mr. Danevich said in the event of a problem, the abutter notification process would need to be redone.

Mr. Danevich informed that the plan would be date specified to the March 3, 2003 meeting.

Map 6 Lot 126 & 127 - P.J. Keating Materials Company - off Bridge Street (Route 38) - Proposed Asphalt Batching Facility for Site Plan Review for Submission

Mr. Matt Hamor, Meisner Brem Corporation requested a site walk. Mr. Danevich scheduled a site walk for Saturday, February 15, 2003 beginning at 8:00am.

Mr. Danevich informed that the plan would be date specified to the February 17, 2003 meeting.

OLD BUSINESS CON’T....

Map 6 Lot 180 - Carol O. Reeser - 18 Mammoth Road - Proposed 2-Lot Subdivision for Continued Consideration

Mr. Scanzani made a motion to deny the plan based upon the fact that the applicant was no present, issues were not addressed, and a Board of Adjustment Variance was not granted. Mr. Danevich noted that the lot did not meet the subdivision regulations for contiguous high and dry land. Mr. Lynde said he would be more comfortable if the motion stated that the application was denied based upon not meeting subdivision regulations. Mr. Danevich said that the motion had to specify which regulation was not met.

MOTION:

(Scanzani/Culbert) To deny the proposed 2-lot subdivision based upon the fact that the applicant was no present, issues were not addressed, and a Board of Adjustment Variance was not granted

VOTE:

(7 - 0 - 0) The motion carries.

The plan was denied by an affirmative vote.

MINUTES REVIEW

January 6, 2003 & January 20, 2003 - deferred to next scheduled meeting.

DATE SPECIFICATION

The following case was date specified to the February 17, 2003 meeting:

Map 6 Lot 126 & 127 - P.J. Keating Materials Company - off Bridge Street (Route 38) - Proposed Asphalt Batching Facility for Site Plan Review

The following cases were date specified to the March 3, 2003 meeting:

Map 12 Lot 42-1 - Samuel Road LLC - Spring Street - Proposed 8-Lot Subdivision

Map 12 Lot 63-1 - Life Estate of Pultar - End of Shephard Road - Proposed 7-Lot Subdivision

Map 4 Lot 180-17 - Two M Construction Co. - off Benoit Avenue Extension - Proposed 2-Lot Subdivision

SITE WALK

A site walk was scheduled for Saturday, February 15, 2003 in connection with the following case:

Map 6 Lot 126 & 127 - P.J. Keating Materials Company - off Bridge Street (Route 38) - Proposed Asphalt Batching Facility

ADJOURNMENT

A motion was made and seconded to adjourn the meeting.

The motion was adjourned at approximately 11:55pm.

Respectfully submitted,

Charity A. L. Willis

Recording Secretary