Planning Board, March 24, 2015
PLANNING BOARD
March 24, 2015
TOWN HALL MEMORIAL HALL
Members Present: William Ritter, Tina Stratis, John Michalak, David Lindberg, Otto Lies, Scott Carlson, Jeff Head
Staff Present: Pam Harding, Town Planner, Elizabeth Fotos, Recording Secretary
Others Present: Jeffrey Brem, Meisner Brem Corporation; Joshua Olson, Greenstone Realty, LLC; Mark Popham, Greenstone Realty, LLC; Keith Glenny, Greenstone Realty Attorney; Robert Comen, Abutter; James Ciociolo, Maplewood Realty; Jim Frensch, DCR Land Acquisitions;
7:00PM Meeting Called to order by W. Ritter
PUBLIC HEARING DEFINITIVE SUBDIVISION-SPECIAL PERMIT WACHUSETT VALLEY ESTATES-Greenstone Properties 325 Bullard Street
Jeff Brem, Meisner Brem Corp, Josh Olson, Greenstone Properties, and Mark Popham, Greenstone Properties were all present for the applicant.
J. Brem addressed the board; he stated at the time of the last meeting, there were three issues that remained. First, the Conservation Commission still needed to meet and approve the subdivision (they had previously met but were awaiting a quorum). Second, there was a question on sewer capacity that DPW had asked the applicant to look into and submit for review, and third, a neighbor, Mr. Comen, had brought up an issue with regards to a sump pump and the Board and the DPW had asked the applicant to look into it again. J. Brem told the Board at this time all three issues had been addressed; Con Com had approved the project, the sewer capacity review was completed, and the sump pump would be tied into the street drain when the snow cleared. J. Brem also stated that they had just received a memo from Holden DPW and they asked P. Harding to discuss it.
P. Harding told the Board that DPW was supposed to be attending the meeting. W. Ritter asked about the other three items.
P. Harding told the Board that Con Com approved the project on March 4, 2015. She stated that 307 Bullard St had been sold and the applicant has provided signed documentation that they will have the sump pump connected into the catch basin on Bullard Street and DPW had approved this.
W. Ritter asked if there was anything else outstanding.
P. Harding replied that the applicant had submitted the capacity study and the question was if the three locations (Wagner Meadows, Mayo School and the proposed subdivision) pumping stations were to discharge at the same time, could the line take it. The applicant proved the line had the capacity. She stated that the detailed analysis of the sewer did require a minor adjustment to the pump station. She stated that DPW had asked the applicant conduct a camera inspection of the sewer line downstream to show the impacts of the additional capacity and to remove any inflow and infiltration that they found in the process.
W. Ritter confirmed that the applicant would be doing some I/I to benefit the Town.
P. Harding replied that this was a new issue that had not yet been discussed with the applicant.
W. Ritter asked if there were any other Town issues; P. Harding replied there were not.
W. Ritter opened the floor up for public comment.
J. Olson, Greenstone Realty asked P. Harding if on the new report from DPW she knew the distance they wanted the applicant to cover with the camera. P Harding replied she did not know and she was just made aware of the request as well.
W. Ritter suggested holding that item for the moment to give DPW time to attend the meeting.
Robert Comen, 299 Bullard Street addressed the Board. He stated that he had been at previous meetings and he wanted to thank everyone for listening to him. He stated that he was still concerned about the sump pump and the excessive water that was pumping out of the basement. He stated that DPW and J. Olson had addressed it and they will tie it into the town drainage however the grade of his property had still been changed. He stated that he is unsure if the drain will alleviate any of the water and he is concerned with the high water table, pumping stations, and retention ponds that all surround his property. He asked the Board that before approving the project to really understand what is going to happen to his property.
J. Olson replied that once the sump pump is connected into the catch basin it will eliminate ground water which will be a benefit to Mr. Comen. He stated that once the church parking lot is removed the water will not drain from the parking lot towards Mr. Comen’s property so that would also be a benefit. J. Olson stated that the sump pump is currently taking ground water and removing it from the area.
P. Harding stated that the review was completed by Graves Engineering as well as the DPW Director and the DPW Senior Civil Engineer. She stated that the Town tries to ensure that no ones property will be negatively impacted.
S. Carlson asked to confirm that the Town approved connecting someone’s sump pump to the sewer line.
P. Harding replied not to the sewer line, to the catch basin drainage line.
S. Carlson stated that he thought that no private water could go into the catch basins that drain into the public street drainage system.
P. Harding replied that you can’t connect private water to the sewer system but you can connect to the catch basins if there is capacity in the drainage system.
S. Carlson replied that he had never heard of doing that. He asked the other Board members if they had heard of doing that.
D. Lindberg replied that he didn’t think you could do that but he had never tried.
J. Olson replied that this basin does not have the water on the road. He stated it was put in specifically to catch the water from the church parking lot and is located on the grassy strip.
W. Ritter asked if the Town signed off on it. P. Hardin replied that it was DPW approved.
Patricia Hill, 28 Walnut Street addressed the Board. She stated that if she were the new homeowner for 307 Bullard Street she would be concerned as to what would happen at the basin if the power went out. She stated that it looked like a stream from a hose and if she were the homeowner she would want a system in place for a power outage.
J. Olson replied that a generator backup is an option for the homeowner.
S. Carlson asked if every home would have a sump pump.
J. Olson replied no but that if they wanted a generator back up Greenstone Properties could do that.
S. Carlson deferred to the rest of the Board to see where their concerns lay.
J. Michalak stated he wanted to see what DPW had to say about the sump pump.
W. Ritter stated that he believed the Board had asked DPW to consider what could be done to help the homeowners in the neighborhood.
J. Head stated that he would also like to hear from DPW. P. Harding replied that they were supposed to be there.
J. Head replied that the water table was still a concern and he asked if it would be a problem throughout the development.
O. Lies stated that he had the same concerns as S. Carlson. He stated that he was told that he could not guide his water into the street or sewer system.
D. Lindberg and T. Stratis both had similar concerns and wished to hear from DPW.
J. Olson stated that the catch basin was not in the road; it was in the grassy area and was designed for this purpose.
T. Stratis asked where the water would go after.
J. Olson replied that it would go into a pipe off the road way. He stated there were two catch basins next to each other, one for the old church and one for the road. He stated once the project goes through and the parking lot is gone the water would drain in different direction.
P. Hill asked when they were speaking about catch basins, where does the pipe go.
J. Olson replied it is a 2x2 metal grate that goes in the pot and drains down to wetlands away from Mr. Comen’s lot.
R. Comen replied that he was not only concerned for his lot. He stated that his lot was not a huge deal because he believed J. Olson would take care of any issue that arose for his particular property. R. Coleman asked if on the larger scale, do they really know what is going to happen.
J. Brem replied that they had completed drainage reports. These reports were reviewed by DPW and Graves Engineering. He stated that they had taken months to go through many issues and several processes to prove the research. He stated that the applicant did what they were supposed to do; peer review, checks, reviews, and made sure that the information was correct and sizes were correct and confirm that what is being done meets DPW standards. He also stated that the applicant recharged every house into the ground which was a benefit that they did not include towards drainage calculations.
T. Stratis asked for confirmation on the location of the wetlands and confirmed that the wetlands would neither dry out nor fill up.
J. Brem replied that there was a bioretention facility and that was the only drainage that would move in the direction T. Stratis was asking about.
P. Hill asked if the applicant expected the amount of flow from the sump pump at 307 Bullard Street. She asked if it wasn’t expected how they can guarantee other homes would be okay and if it was expected why a generator would not originally be part of the home.
J. Olson replied that if there is not an outlet drain, a sump pump is needed. He stated that sump pumps can work either by having a trickle of water continuously or a larger amount of water on a set time table. He stated this pump goes all the way to the catch basin. J. Olson stated that DPW had also previously asked him to clean out the swale from the catch basin which they did. He stated that if a pipe goes in, the water will be eliminated and if someone wanted a generator that is possible as well.
W. Ritter asked P. Harding to see if DPW was available; he called a brief recess at 7:26PM.
W. Ritter called the meeting back to order at 7:27PM.
P. Harding told the Board that DPW was not in the building nor were they answering their phones.
W. Ritter asked the Board how they wished to proceed.
O. Lies replied that he wanted answers from DPW.
T. Stratis replied that she was reviewing notes from Con Com and it was mentioned in a calculation post development that water will still fill up.
P. Harding replied that the location T. Stratis was asking about was the interior wetlands.
J. Brem replied that Con Com had requested some analysis of ground water and that the wetlands will not dry up.
S. Carlson asked about the water table and where it was 30”, J. Brem showed S. Carlson the water table and stated once you get past a certain point the grading becomes steeper.
S. Carlson asked how many houses would be impacted. J. Brem replied he thought 5.
P. Harding replied that you cannot tell where ground water is until you dig. She stated that is the case for all subdivisions and stormwater analysis.
J. Brem stated that for the ANR lot, the applicant did not set the elevation. He stated that all the other lots are engineered to tie them into the sewer.
J. Olson replied that most of the other houses will not be dug as deep as 307 Bullard Street and therefore will not be sunk as deep into the ground.
R. Coleman asked if the retention pond next to his home would always be dried out. J. Brem replied within 72 hours it would dry out.
W. Ritter asked how the Board would like to proceed; he asked if the time period to decide was up. P. Harding replied that the applicant had been on extensions.
S. Carlson asked what W. Ritter wanted to do. W. Ritter replied that it was his inclination to have DPW present for the next meeting. He stated that he understood it was an inconvenience however this was a major project that required a super majority and he wanted to ensure that everyone had their questions answered.
O. Lies stated that he did not have any further questions for engineering.
J. Olson asked if the main question for engineering was with regards to the ANR lot and sump pump. He stated that as the applicant they had addressed it and moved forward in the manner suggested and approved by DPW.
Motion by J. Head to accept the applicants written request to continue the public hearing to the next meeting; no member of the Board seconded the motion.
W. Ritter stated that he believed the Board wanted to speak with DPW and address the abutters concerns regarding the required I/I for the project.
J. Brem stated that the I/I project would be a benefit to the Town. W. Ritter agreed.
S. Carlson asked if the connection to the drainage had anything to do with the development. P Harding replied that it was part of the stormwater calculations though the ANR lot was separated out.
The Board discussed the potential dates for the written request for extension of time to ensure that all Board members were present and able to participate.
J. Olson asked if there were any questions that they (Greenstone Properties) could answer for the Board regarding the questions they had for DPW.
J. Head replied that the Board wanted to hear from the Towns representation.
W. Ritter stated that DPW had issued a report that they had not previously seen.
J. Olson stated that he understood it was not the Planning Boards fault however he was frustrated to just receive the information the night of the meeting (March 24, 2015).
W. Ritter replied that they had expected to have DPW present. P. Harding agreed and stated that they were planning to attend so something must have come up that they were unable to be present.
T. Stratis asked if there were a certain number of extensions that the Board approved for a project. W. Ritter replied that there were not.
O. Lies stated that he had heard enough from DPW and he did not believe that an additional session was needed. He stated that he did not believe there was a need to extend this.
S. Carlson agreed with O. Lies that the Board should vote. He stated that he had been reading the notes from the Conservation meeting and he was ready to vote. He stated that the sewer lines were not his only concern.
P. Harding asked if S. Carlson would like to raise his other concerns.
S. Carlson replied that he did not want to raise them and it would be noted in his vote. He stated that he believed there was too much gray area and he was not for the project. He stated that he had read every report from Con Com and heard every theoretical problem and he wanted to build this project conventionally.
P. Harding replied that Con Com did not believe there were any gray areas and she knew this because she was present for every Con Com meeting.
Motion by J. Head, seconded by J. Michalak, THE WRITTEN REQUEST BY THE APPLICANT FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME FAILED BY A MOTION OF 3-4-0 (S. Carlson: no; J. Michalak: yes; J. Head: yes; O. Lies: no; W. Ritter: yes; D. Lindberg: no; T. Stratis: no).
W. Ritter stated that it was a special permit, which required five out of seven of the members to vote in favor of the special permit. He stated if someone is voting against the project, the reason why would need to be articulated for the record.
W. Ritter asked if there were any other comments from the public prior to closing the public hearing. No members of the public spoke.
Motion by O. Lies, seconded by S. Carlson, it was VOTED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING BY A VOTE OF 6-1. (S. Carlson: yes; J. Michalak: yes; J. Head: yes; O. Lies: yes; W. Ritter: no; D. Lindberg: yes; T. Stratis: yes).
Jeffrey Head made a motion to approve the Special Permit in accordance with conditions included in a draft and attached for the record. The applicant waived the reading of the site plan special permit cluster subdivision.
S. Carlson stated that he thought the impact for the Town would be great and he was concerned with the water table. He stated that as far as he was concerned this is a special permit and he would like the applicant to build conventionally not denying development of the land.
J. Michalak stated that he believed the developer had done everything that was asked of them. He stated that he would like to discuss some possible conditions that would protect the abutters when they got to the point of construction. .
J. Head stated that he agreed with J. Michalak and that while he did have some concerns he had comfort in the fact that the concerns were vetted by Con Com and DPW. He stated that the applicant had done what was asked of them and that they achieved some of the Town’s low impact goals in the process.
O. Lies stated that he did not believe this parcel was suitable for a cluster subdivision. He stated the proposed density is too high, there are too many drainage problems and that the drainage problems that were there were resolved in a way that the DPW Director, J. Woodsmall had stated they would like to avoid. He stated that comments like that from the DPW Director did not convince him that it was appropriate to move forward in that manner. O. Lies stated that abutters could be negatively impacted and that drainage issues could also impact new homeowners as well. He stated that he felt it was too many houses on too small of a lot.
D. Lindberg stated that he agreed with S. Carlson and O. Lies. He stated he believed that the water table was a problem and that he was not convinced that the abutters would be protected later.
T. Stratis agreed with S. Carlson, O. Lies and D. Lindberg. She stated she was concerned with the water table and with the amount of homes on the parcel.
W. Ritter stated that he believed the developer had met their responsibility. He stated that the Town has passed cluster subdivision so they could build homes with a lower impact and that there was a density bonus offered to do so. W. Ritter stated that he believed it was ironic that the developer is coming in with a cluster subdivision with the same amount of homes that could be built conventionally and it was not supported. He stated that the drainage issues were sufficiently vetted although he did wish to hear from DPW again. W. Ritter stated that the remaining concerns were on the Town side and he did not think it should be the developer’s responsibility.
P. Harding stated that DPW was in favor of cluster subdivision.
D. Lindberg stated that he didn’t know if it effected anything but that he wanted to comment on the letter from DPW that the Board an applicant had received today (March 24, 2015).
W. Ritter replied that DPW was not present at the meeting to discuss and that emergencies do come up but that it was not an issue unless it was the basis for denying the application which it should not be.
Motion by J. Head, seconded by J. Michalak, it was THE VOTE TO APPROVE THE SPECIAL PERMIT FOR WACHUSETT VALLEY ESTATES-GREENSTONE PROPERTIES 325 BULLARD STREET FAILED BY A VOTE OF 3-4 (S. Carlson: no; J. Michalak: yes; J. Head: yes; O. Lies: no; W. Ritter: yes; D. Lindberg: no; T. Stratis: no).
W. Ritter summarized the Boards reasons for denial:
-High Water Table
-Parcel of the land was not suitable
-Density of the site was too high
-One member preferred the subdivision to be built conventionally
W. Ritter stated for the record that the special permit was denied because five of the seven members did not vote for it.
Motion by S. Carlson, seconded by O. Lies, it was UNANIMOUSLY VOTED TO DENY THE SUBDIVISION BECAUSE IT DID NOT COMPLY WITH ZONING REGULATIONS WITHOUT THE PRIOR SPECIAL PERMIT APPROVAL.
J. Michalak asked if the developer could try to develop a more traditional subdivision. P. Harding replied that they could.
W. Ritter thanked the applicant.
PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION 3 LOT CUL DE SAC MAPLE CIRLCE-MAPLEWOOD REALTY MEADOW WOOD DRIVE
W. Ritter read the public hearing notice into the record.
He stated that this was a preliminary subdivision which meant that they were not required to send in all the details. He stated that this allows the developer to come before the Planning Board and then subsequently make any changes necessary. The benefit is that they are locking themselves into the current zoning laws for a time period in advance of any possible zone changes. W. Ritter stated that there were not any zone changes pending for Town Meeting and this just allowed the Board and the applicant the opportunity to discuss the project.
James Ciociolo, Maplewood Realty was present and addressed the Board. He told the Board that he is not a developer and that property has been in his family for years. He stated that he has gone through the process of working with developers and Eco Tec (for the wetlands) with the intention of selling the land to DCR and not to develop on it. He stated that the approval of the preliminary subdivision was a requirement of the sale to establish value.
P. Harding replied that the Town had received comments from the Fire Department requesting the turning radius of the roadways to accommodate the fire departments tower trucks and they also wanted to ensure that fire hydrants would be placed adequately. P. Harding told the Board that DPW noted all BMP’s must be located outside of Zone A and that the ownership of the right of way at the entrance needed to be investigated
W. Ritter asked if any members of the public wished to speak.
Steve O’Neil, 132 Meadow Wood Drive addressed the Board. He asked how the state would go about establishing market value by doing this. He asked if the state often brought land for this purpose.
Jim French, Land Acquisition Coordinator for DCR was present at the meeting. He stated that Mr. Ciociolo approached DCR and asked if they wanted to purchase the land. He stated that in order for the DCR appraisers and legal personnel to move forward they required Mr. Ciociolo to go though this process so their questions are answered.
S. O’Neil asked what would happen to the wetland buffer zone.
P. Harding replied that question was under Con Com jurisdiction and the wetland line had not yet been reviewed or approved by them.
J. Ciociolo stated that he did have a detailed report on the wetlands from Eco Tec. P. Harding replied that Eco Tec was a very reputable firm that Con Com worked with often.
J. Michalak asked if the land was not developed would the fire department need to see the turn radius accommodated. P. Harding replied if it wasn’t developed they wouldn’t need it.
J. Michalak asked if it had been treated as a private way. J. Ciociolo replied that it had been plowed and treated by the Town though ownership is private.
O. Lies asked if the Town owned some of it. P. Harding replied they did not. J. Ciociolo replied his family owned it.
O. Lies asked if there were sewers on Meadow Wood Drive. P. Harding replied yes.
O. Lies asked if individual septic would be allowed. P. Harding replied that if sewer was that close, the Town would not allow septic.
Motion by O. Lies, seconded by T. Stratis, it was UNANIMOUSLY VOTED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR 3 LOT CUL DE SAC MAPLE CIRCLE – MAPLEWOOD REALTY MEADOW WOOD DRIVE.
Motion by J. Michalak, seconded by J. Head, it was UNANIMOSLY VOTED TO APPROVE THE PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION FOR 3 LOTS LOCATED ON A CUL DE SAC NAMED MAPLE WOOD CIRCLE – SUBMITTED BY MAPLEWOOD REALTY OFF MEADOW WOOD DRIVE.
The approval is subject to plans entitled Maple Wood Circle Preliminary Subdivision Plan with a date of February 23, 2015, the property is in the R-1 Zoning District and is subject to the following conditions;
- The roadway must accommodate the turning radius of the Holden Fire Department’s Tower Unit.
- The fire hydrants must be placed to the satisfaction of the Holden Fire Department.
- Ownership of the existing “future street connection” utilized for the cul de sac must be provided during the definitive filing.
- The Applicant must ensure all best management practices shall not be located within the Zone A as required by the Massachusetts Stormwater Standards.
- No disturbance is permitted within 25’ of the wetland line.
APPROVAL NOT REQUIRED R-40 SOUTH ROAD ROBERT AND ANNETTE LORING
P. Harding handed out plans to the Board for review. She told the Board the applicant is creating one additional building lot from a 16 acre parcel. She stated the lot has the required area and frontage.
P. Harding answered questions from the Board regarding the placement of the existing shared driveway.
Motion by D. Lindberg, seconded by T. Stratis, it was UNANIMOUSLY VOTED TO ACCEPT THE ANR FOR R-40 560 SOUTH ROAD ROBERT AND ANNETTE LORING.
APPROVAL NOT REQUIRED R-1 -143 QUINAPOXET STREET JEFFERSON MEADOWS, LLC AND SGG LAND TRUST
P. Harding handed out plans to the Board for review. She stated that this property is combining land from the sand and gravel operation with a lot located at 143 Quinapoxet Street to create three buildable lots. She stated that all lots had the required area and frontage.
Motion by T. Stratis, seconded by O. Lies, it was UNANIMOSLY VOTED TO APPROVE THE ANR FOR R-1 143 QUINAPOXET STREET, JEFFERSON MEADOWNS, LLC AND SGG LAND TRUST.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
March 10, 2015 meeting minutes to be reviewed at next meeting
Motion by D. Lindberg, seconded by T. Stratis, it was VOTED TO APPROVE THE FEBRUARY 24, 2015 PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES AS CORRECTED BY A VOTE OF 5-0-2 (J. Head: abstain; S. Carlson: abstain).
OTHER BUSINESS
S. Carlson asked to review large developments over 40 homes and permits related to the Phased Growth Bylaw.
P. Harding stated that it was broken down by categories. She stated that Section 15 Page 2 in the bylaws breaks down subdivision size and permits that you can pull over a 12-month period. She stated that there was a table that outlined it.
J. Michalak asked for clarification on the sump pump for 307 Bullard Street and asked if Con Com knew about it.
P. Harding replied that they did not know about it.
J. Michalak stated he wanted to know what J. Woodsmall DPW Director allowed and what contingencies would be made to ensure the runoff did not get into the water stream.
O. Lies stated that the Planning Board had an involved subdivision application in front of them that a lot of time was spent on. He stated that one of the goals for 2015 was better communication and that the letter from DPW (dated for March 24, 2015 meeting) was unacceptable because it did not allow the Board enough time to read and review it.
O. Lies also stated that he was able to read the meeting minutes from the February Con Com Meting. O. Lies stated that P. Harding had information and notices that he felt would have been helpful for the Planning Board to have access to.
P. Harding asked O. Lies what information he meant.
O. Lies replied that he wanted the Board to be more informed.
P. Harding replied that she took issue with that statement. She stated that she had provided the Planning Board with updates and information from the Con Com hearings and that if members of the Planning Board wanted meeting minutes they should have asked for them. She stated there were no hidden agenda items, peer reviews were completed and the members of Con Com were very qualified to review the information.
O. Lies replied that it was not required but it would have been helpful.
P. Harding replied that she has issue with that statement as she does provide the Planning Board updates. She stated she let the Planning Board know about the status of the wetland review and provided them with copies of the reports from Graves Engineering (peer review). She stated that if more information was needed the Board should have asked.
O. Lies replied that he understood but would have liked more information.
P. Harding replied that Con Com deals with a lot of technical information that is not the Planning Boards area of jurisdiction or expertise regarding wetlands.
Next Meeting: April 14, 2015
Motion by D. Lindberg, seconded by T. Stratis, it was UNANIMOUSLY VOTED TO ADJOURN THE MARCH 24, 2015 PLANNING BOARD MEETING AT 8:48PM.
The March 24, 2015 Planning Board meeting minutes were approved on April 28, 2015.
APPROVED: ________________