Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984-11-01 Board of Survey Minutes Board of Survey Meeting of November 1, 1964 Page i A meeting of the Board of Survey convened in Room 11 of the Community Center, 52 Sanborn Street, Reading, Me. at 7:00 P.M. Present were Chairman Barker, Secretary Hampson, Board Member Griffin, Superintendent A.V. Fletcher and Asst. Superintendent William A. Redford. Mr. Hampson read the Notice of Public Hearing at 7:00 F.M. regarding taking an easement through private property located off Pine Ridge Road for drainaqe and sewerage purposes. There were three abuttors present. Asst. Supt. Redford stated part of the Avalon Road Extension Subdivision was predicated on the concept of removing the existing 12" drain pipe and replacing it with a 20" drain pipe to improve the drainage characteristics of this entire area. He stated the Mullins and Franklin properties are impacted by this easement. Mr. Redford stated he spoke with both Mrs. Mullins and Mrs. Franklin and advised them we would be having a Public Hearing. Both of the individuals understood this was a forseeable step for the Town and both indicated they had no problems with this, but were concerned that the debrushing activity he limited and the ground be returned to as close to existing conditions as possible. He informed them this was our standard operating procedure. Mrs. Wood ,joined the meeting at 7: 10 P.M. Doris Dagnese of it Pine Ridge Road was very concerned with her shrubs and her lawn and garden. Mr. Redford informed her the intent is that the developer will do the work and he will be required to bring this area back to its existing condition. This is proposed to be done this fall and abuttors will be notified before they arrive. The Department will replace the bushes and grass. Board of Survey Meeting of November 1, 1984 Page 2 Harry Simmons of 17 Pine Ridge Road stated we have a dogwood tree that we do not want removed. Mr. Redford replied we will try to save it if at all possible. Mr. Mullins of 100 Oak Street asked if the Department is going to widen the easement currently on his property. Mr. Redford replied you currently do not have an easement on your property, we are going to take a 20 foot easement. It was moved, seconded and voted 4:0 to close the hearing at 7: 15 P.M. It was moved, seconded and voted 4:0 to accept the easement on the Franklin and Mullins property according to the presentation tonight. Mr. Hampson read the Notice of Public Hearing at 7: 15 P.M. regarding the approval, disapproval or modification of plans for the Pine Grove Fstates subdivision. There were nine abuttors present as well as 0. Bradley Latham, Attorney for the applicant, Stoneham Savings Bank, and William Jones, Donald E. Martinage and Jack Lougee of Dana Perkins and Associates. Chairman Barker welcomed everyone to the hearing and introduced the members of the Board and the Department. Mr. Jones of Dana Perkins and Associates showed a preliminary plan which created 26 lots on 24 acres of land. The main access to the subdivision is off Rustic Lane. Asst. Supt. Redford put up a plan depicting seasonal standing water, wetlands plants, town-zoned wetland protection district boundaries and town-zoned flood plain area. He stated the developer is proposing a roadway far in excess of the Board of Survey's maximum 900 feet. In September of 1983 the Board granted a variance of the roadway length of 150 feet, which would have made a total of 1050 feet. The proposed Board of Survey Meeting of November 1, 1984 Page 3 ' roadway is now 1,335 feet, which far exceeds the limit. He stated the Department has a number of concerns as depicted on his handout (attached). Chairman Barker read into the record a letter from the Conservation Commission regarding their concerns about this preliminary subdivision (attached). Mr. Griffin asked are there any instances of landlocking? Mr. Redford replied no. Mrs. Wood asked if there is any way they could connect the two roads. Mr. Jones replied there is a problem with the Nichols property extending 35 feet into the Flood Plain and therefore we can not connect the two roadways. Ally. Brad Latham stated we recognize we have to go before the Conservation Commission to address their concerns. He stated they are requesting a waiver of the 900 foot roadway length limitation and presented the Baord with a letter (attached). Mrs. Wood expressed concern about the traffic volume generated on Rustic Lane because of the new roadway entrance. She stated she would like to see the two roadways connected to alleviate some of the traffic problems. She would also like them to address the Environmental Impact statement. Mr. Jones stated we will address this at the Definitive Stage. Mark Nichols of 430 Haverhill Street asked why did the Board of Appeals deny your appeal? Ally. Latham replied because of the Flood Plain. We are now t going through a legal battle over this. Curt Nitzsrhe of 453 Haverhill Street stated I think the developer has addressed some of the problems. My main concern is drainage. Board of Survey Meeting of November 1, 1984 Page 4 He stated any access on to Haverhill Street would be a danger to the people who would be using it. Roger D'Entremont of 398 Haverhill Street stated this property was surveyed on a frozen ground November day and felt the surveys were wrong to start with, the Flood Plain is much larger. He felt the Board was wrong in listening to Latham a Latham who are, in his opinion, representing "crooks who want to make a lot of money". David Schurman of 453 Haverhill Street stated he felt there will be a major problem with the traffic on Haverhill Street. He gave the Board some photographs of the area depicting the present conditions in regard to traffic and sight lines. It was moved, seconded and voted 4:0 to close the hearing at B: 15 P.M. Mr. Hampson read the Notice of Public Hearing at 8:30 P.M. regarding the laying out as public ways, the following roadways, under the Betterment Act: Roadway From To F Street Libby Avenue Westerly to End Pine Avenue Minot Street Westerly to End Eastway Pearl Street Southerly to End Granqer Avenue Existing end of Eastway Public Way Layout Chairman Barker welcomed everyone to the Hearing and introduced the members of the Board and Department. There were approximately 20 abutters present. Board of Survey Meeting of November 1, 1984 Page 5 Asst. Supt. Redford stated the Board received a petition in each ' case from some of these abuttors requesting the Town accept certain roadways as public ways. He explained the difference between a public way and a private way. He explained that only after Town Meeting appropriates the funds would a private way he converted to a public way. He stated the plans we have prepared are preliminary in nature. In most cases, the Town is not being stringent about a 50 foot layout, Regarding F Street, Mr. Redford stated there are five homes on this roadway. He stated it will cast $24,1.64.69 to bring this road up to acceptable standards under Option I (no sidewalks). Helen LeFavour of F Street asked what trees are you going to remove? Mr. Redford replied down near the Griecos lot and one between the Griecos and the Sterins. Mrs. Sterin of 4 F Street asked can we elect not to have seeding and fertilizing. Mr. Redford replied no. Regarding Pine Avenue, Mr. Redford stated this is currently a 30 foot layout. The total cost to bring this up to standard under Option I would be 430,985.08. The water main does need to be upgraded. There are some laterals that need to be upgraded or replaced. He stated we do not charge the cost of a water main to the abuttors and to his knowledge all of the homes are connected to the sewer. Regarding Granger Avenue, Mr. Redford stated the total cost to bring this up to Town standards would be $429.00. There were no abuttors present. Regarding Eastway and Eastway Extension, Mr. Redford stated this is generally in good shape. The first section of Eastway needs quite a ' Board of Survey Meeting of November 1, 1984 Page b bit of work and an overlay. Bob Kursmark of 153 Eastway asked are you saying the new portion of Fastway by itself will not he accepted as a public way? Mr. Redford replied the Department's recommendation is to accept streets in total only. Mr. Kursmark stated it would make a lot of sense to me to accept only the new portion of Eastway at the same time you accept the new portion of Granger Avenue. Mr. Linscott asked haw much damage was done by installing the sewer main one year after the development. Mr. Redford replied I am not sure. There is a lot of sand underneath that roadway. The trenches were filled in and repaired to the pre-existing condition. After further discussion, it was moved, seconded and voted 4:0 to close the hearing. It was moved, seconded and voted 4:0 to accept the Sewer Permit Policy as stated in the Superintendent's memorandum. Mr. Hampson moved and it was seconded to go into Executive Session to discuss personnel matters, not to reconvene in open session and the Chairman polled the Board as follows: Mr. Griffin - aye Mr. Hampson - aye Mrs. Wood - aye Mr. Barker - aye The meeting adjourned at 10:00 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Sec E* " wa CONSERVATION COMMISSION TOWN OF READING, MASSACHUSETTS 942-0539 942-0725 ,�� 1P� November 1, 1 �✓���ELI)- BOARD OF PUBLIC Mr. Douglas Barker, Chairman Town of Reading 1 Board of Public Works TOWN OF READING RE: Preliminary Plan - Pine Grove Estates Dear Mr. Barker: The Conservation Commission has reviewed the preliminary plan on the above-referenced project and offers the following comments : 1) The project presents many wetland and floodplain problems. It appears from the Preliminary Plan that at least 22 lots directly will come under the jurisdiction of the Conservation Commission. Some of these subject lots are located on what could clearly be called marginal land at the further end of A Street. These wetland complications would be lessened if the length of A Street were more in compliance with the Reading Board of Survey Rules and Regulations, Section 5 B. 6. 2) From the Preliminary Plan it is unclear as to what would happen to the wetland area which fronts on Haverhill Street and lies between the area of lots 6, 7, S and lots 26 and A. The wet nature of much of this subject land will require a major filing with the Conservation Commission for the necessary wetland approvals. The Commission anticipates cooperation in the effort to make this project a benefit to the proponents and the Town of Reading. The Conservation Commission appreciates this opportunity to express its ccmmients to this Preliminary Plan. nFor the Conservation Commission, Charles T. Costello Administrator ' CTC/mc Cone ' tie .1"' toe been, M, witalil" and a 6eauti�uL town wlCL ProJr" TOWN OF READING BOARD OF SURVEY PRELIMINARY HEARING Pine Grove Estates November 1, 1984 In accordance with current State statutes, no Person shall make a subdivision of land unless they have first submitted to the Board of Survey. The Board must hold a public hearing and act an the submission (approve, approve with modifications, or disapprove) within 60 days. The Board uses the forum of the public hearing to obtain reports, information and concerns specific to the submitted plans from the developer, Board of Health, Conservation Commission, various Boards and Committees and effected public.. The Board may use the remaining time within the EO day limit to deliberate on the information presented and review the subdivision for its conformance with State requirements, local zoning ordinances and the Town's Subdivision Rules and Regulations. In the case of this Preliminary Plan Hearing, a more detailed submisiion of these subdivision plans is required and an additional hearing conforming to the requirements previously described must be held prior to any utility or housing construction. The Board of Survey encourages all individuals affected by this planned development to offer input consistent with the provisions of Subdivision Control Law during the hearing process. The Reading Department of Public Works Engineering Division, after review of the information filed to date, submits the following list of concerns: Formalaction on this subdivision is required by Nov. 25, 1984. �A. Lots 5 and 12 have insufficient frontage to be considered separate building lots (must have a minimum of BO.0' along a 50 - 200' radius curve). Catch basin configurations at end of the roads are unacceptable as proposed. '4, Catch basins are required at all roadway intersection. Drain outlets are shown as straight discharges (without any velocity or volume reducing devices). The plan does not indicate the protection or handling of the stream on Lots 8 and 9 (or what equalizing effect this Swale has on overflow from the two wetland ares). A number of lots may not comply with the 12,000 s.f. outside \ the Flood Plain or Wetland Protection District. R The drain easement on lots 13, 1.4, 19, and 20 must be 30.01. 9. The proposed roadway far exceeds the 900' length limit and the previous waiver grant of 1,050' (proposed is 1,335'). LATHAM AND LATHAM, P.C. 643 MAIN STREET READING, MASSACHUSETTS 0I867 KENNETH C. LATHAM AREA CODE 617 O. BRADLEY LATHAM TELEPHONE: 949-OSOS DAVID J. LATHAM WILLIAM C. WAGNER SANDOR RABKIN November 1 , 1984 KATHLEEN M. MITCHELL Board of Survey Town Hall Lowell Street Reading, Massachusetts 01867 Re: Request for Waiver as to Dead End Road Length; "Pine Grove Estates" Subdivision, Reading, Massachusetts Request is hereby made that roadway "A11 as shown on the preliminary plan be approved as to length (approximately 1 ,300 feet) . Although from a traffic flow perspective, it may be considered beneficial to connect the roadway to Haverhill Street directly, such a connection is impossible by virtue of the Reading Zoning By-Laws and the refusal by the Reading Zoning Board of Appeals to grant a variance to allow for such connection. The Regulations of the Board prescribe that a permanent dead end street should not be more than nine hundred feet in length" . However, the Regulations also provide that the road length limitation can be waived because of topography or other considerations. There are special considerations with reference to the premises that warrant the granting of a variance to allow the proposed road length, as follows: 1 . The Reading Zoning By-Laws (Flood Plain Overlay District) and the refusal by the Reading Zoning Board of Appeals to allow the roadway to cross the edge of the flood plain, preclude the extension of the roadway to cause it to be connected to Haverhill Street; to avoid a dead-end street. 2. The only way that the rear portions of the upland can be utilized for single family house lots, consistent with the zoning is to allow the roadway to be of the length requested . Otherwise, appropriate uplands will be landlocked. 3 . The reason for having a road length limitation is to provide for adequate emergency vehicle access to houses near the end of a road and to provide for looping of utility lines. The applicant can address these concerns: (a) The water and sewer lines would be looped ; ( b) Adequate emergency vehicle access can be provided to Street "A" from Haverhill Street by means of an emergency vehicle easement. We ask the Board to recognize, as it has in the past (Carriage Estates -- Beaton Road) that circumstances are present that warrant allowing the road length as requested. We ask the Board to further recognize that the reasons why a dead-end road length limitation is imposed have been addressed by the proposed plan. The Applicants respectfully request a favorable variance from the Board. Sincerely, LATHAM AND LATHAM P. C . O. Brldley Latham OBL: tld