HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981-04-22 Board of Survey Minutes April 22, 1981
Meeting of the Board of Survey convened at 7 :30 P .M. in Room
16, Municipal Building.
Present- were Acting Chairman Wood, Board Members, DeHart,
Fallon, Barker, Superintendent Louanis and Assistant Superinten-
dent Bergeron.
A motion by Mr. DeHart was seconded and voted 4: 0:0 to approve
the minutes of the Board of Survey meeting of April 60 1981 as
written .
At 7:35 P .M. DeHart read the legal notice concerning the pre-
liminary hearing for the extension of Kelch Road , Mrs. Wood
welcomed the seven people in attendance and introduced the Board
to them. Mr . DeNutte was present and was represented by his
engineer Howard Buttrick, who briefly explained the proposed sub-
division and indicated the list of fourteen (14) concerns as pre-
pared by the Engineering Division would be taken into account dur-
ing the preparation of the Final Plan. The proposed method of
sewering the lots is by means of on-site septic tanks but no tests
have been made to determine whether the land is suitable at this
point in time. Mr. DeNutte stated he had no intention of making
any improvements on the existing portion of Kelch Road but that
the new section would comply with all of the requirements and would
also provide a turn-around for vehicles not currently available.
Mrs. Noone , 15 Kelch Road , indicated she had no problem with
the proposed plan. Superintendent Louanis indicated there were .
existing problems with the water main at the present time and any
additional ties would further compound the problem unless the system
was looped to another main . The Superintendent stated further that
Longwood Road as it exists is excessive in length and the addition
to Kelch Road would provide an even longer dead and . The Board
discussed using Kelch Road as an access because of the narrow pave-
ment width and steep grade.. Superintendent Louanis stated that a
previous plan to develop the area entitled "Pheasant Hill Estates"
' required the water main be looped to Arcadia Avenue. There were
no further questions. It was moved, seconded and voted 4:0:0 to
close the hearing at 8 : 10 P .M. Mrs. Wood informed Mr. DeNutte
that the Board would consult with the Department and he would be
advised of the Board's findings.
Mr . DeHart read notice of public hearing concerning Sanborn
Lane and .Mill Street at 8: 17 P. M. Mrs. Wood greeted the twelve
people in attendance and introduced the Board. Present were the ,
developer , Mr. John Rivers, his attorney, 0. Bradley Latham and
Peter Ogren from the firm of Hayes Engineering.
Attorney Latham described the proposed one lot subdivision
and the non-buildable Lot B. Mr . Ogren addressed the items of
concern prepared by the Engineering Division and submitted modi-
fied plans and the requested calculations at the hearing. Mr.
DeHart questioned the lengthy sewer main extension proposed in
place of the original proposal to sewer a portion of the land out
to the Mill Street sewer main. It was discussed and the basic reason
was the deep excavation required and the crossing of other utilities
in Mill Street made that alternative more costly than the new pro-
posal. Mrs. Hulse , 107 Sanborn Lane asked if the existing Lot B
not serviced by the new roadway could be subdivided into separate
lots at some future date without further improvements to the exist-
ing Sanborn Lane . Mr . Latham indicated that was not the intention
and the fact that the restriction on the plan indicates the large '
remaining lot is not a building lot, would require another plan
before the Board of Survey to release the restriction. Mr. Mahoney
9 Mill Street questioned how much disruption at Mill Street would
be required. Mr. Ogren outlined a shaded area on the plan indicat-
ing the limits of the proposed work which will consist of relocating
one catch basin and blending the grades at Mill Street and Sanborn
Lane . Carl Gardner, Reading Conservation Commission, asked if the
runoff coming from Main Street was considered in the hydraulic cal-
culations. Mr. Ogren indicated the existing catch basins at the
mouth of Sanborn Lane and Mill Street were adjusted simply due to
the realignment and widening of the intersection and were not
really needed as far as the drainage proposal was concerned . If
flow from Main Street was going down Sanborn Lane due to the failure
of State drains being plugged and/or non-functional then the new
drainage design could be adjusted to compensate for the additional
flows. Assistant Superintendent Bergeron asked if the impact of
the additional flow on the existing culvert on Sanborn Lane and any
additional ponding would occur with the proposal. Mr. Ogren indicated
that aspect had not been investigated.
I
Mr . Carlson of 26 Alden Circle indicated the pipe in Sanborn
Lane was installed around 1964 when the Baptist Day Camp was running
as a request of the homeowners to allow two vehicles to pass at the
same time over the narrow section of road. It was not sized properly
and should be replaced with a proper sized culvert. Mrs . Boviard,
67 Sanborn Lane indicated the current condition of road was very bad
and theabutters were thinking about having the bad areas repaired
but they do not care to expend funds if it is going to be necessary
to excavate in the near future. Mr . Rivers indicated the proposed
work would begin as soon as the necessary approvals are obtained.
The question was asked if the project had been filed with the Con-
servation Commission for an order of conditions. Mr . Latham stated
they had not filed to date, rather they were proceeding one step at
a time . When questioned as to where the house would be built on
Lot A Mr . Rivers indicated a location but alsostated there was a
possibility of a land swap with the existing corner lot at Mill
Street that would benefit both lots however nothing has been finalized
as yet. Mr. Barker requested Mr . Rivers review the alternate means
of access for the residents and emergency vehicles during the con-
struction period . Mr . Rivers indicated the existing roadway was to
the left of the telephone poles and the utility easement was fifty
(50) feet wide and there was an equal amount of room to the right
of the poles to install the temporary access. Mrs. Boviard stated
this temporary access method worked well when the sewer main was
installed last year. The omission on the plan of the wheel chair ramp
on the southwesterly corner of Mill and Sanborn Lane was discussed.
The developer was asked to submit information regarding the impact
of drainage on Cedar Glen from Sanborn Lane. As there were no
further questions, Mr . DeHart moved , it was seconded and voted
4:0:0 to close the hearing at 9: 13 P.M.
The Board met with 0. Bradley Letham, Esq, regarding the re-
quest for an extension of time for the Sunnyside Avenue Extension
development, Mr . Fallon moved, it was seconded and voted 4:0:0 to
reconsider the Board ' s previous action taken at the March 30, 1981
meeting. Attorney Latham explained that a final order from D.E .q.E.
was not obtained until this year and in fact work was not allowed
to commence until April 18, 1981. The request for an extension of
time was not needed due to any lack of action on the owner ' s part but
was due to other approvals . Mr . Latham pointed out that the proposed
work has not been altered and would still meet all of the current
Board of Survey standards with no variances. Mm Wood indicated ,
the reason the original request was denied was primarily due to
the fact that only one member of the present Board was on the Board
at the time of the approval . The delay was to up-date the*oard so
that a proper determination could be made. Mr. Ogren of Hayes En-
gineering outlined the plan and the various aspects of it. The
amount of fill to bring the roadway up to the proposed grade was
discussed and it was felt that it would be better to allow the
roadway to go through one complete winter prior to the placement of
the final surface treatment. Mr. DeHart moved that the completion
date for theconstruction of Sunnyside Avenue Extension in the
Agreement dated May 109 1979 be extended until June 30, 1982 pro-
vided that the final bituminous concrete pavement not be placed until
the Spring of 1982 . It was seconded and voted 4:0:0.
The Board reviewed the letter from Attorney William Wagner
concerning Lots 37 and 38 Criterion Street. Mr. Louanis explained
that the landowner wanted to build without making the required Board
of Survey improvements, stating that the section of Criterion Street
was only a paper street and not a travelled way. The sewer was in-
stalled in the section as an easement to the trunk main abutting
the property and prior to that the area was merely wooded . Follow-
ing a discussion the Board instructed Clerk of the Board Louanis to
write a letter indicating the proposed use of Lot 37 and 38 would
require the standard Board of Survey requirements.
Meeting adjourned at 10:05 P .M.
RWt fpll,�ted,
Secretary