HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985-06-10 Board of Survey Minutes Board of Survey Meeting of June 10, 1985 Page 1
A meeting of the Board of Survey convened in Room 16, Municipal
Building at 7: 45 P.M. Present were Chairman Barker, Secretary Hampson,
Board Members Polychrones, Griffin and Boucher, Superintendent A.V.
Fletcher P.E. and Assistant Superintendent William A. Redford.
The Board discussed the Duck Road Preliminary Subdivision.
It was moved, seconded and defeated 0: 5 (all opposed) that the Board
approved the preliminary subdivision plan entitled "Plan of Land in
Reading, MA dated February 23, 1985".
There were five abuttors present.
Assistant Superintendent Redford stated I have contacted Mr. Pelli,
Mr. Pressey and Ms. Crowley and informed them action was intended this
evening, and advised them of the Department's recommendation for
disapproval.
It was moved, seconded and voted 5;0 to inform the developer of the
rationale for disapproval and include in the letter the following two
comments:
"In addition to the previous requirements, the Board is very concerned
about the sensitive nature of the existing wetlands and some of the
disturbance which has already occured in the wetland areas included within
this tract of land. Any Definitive Plan submission will require a
comprehensive Environmental Impact and Evaluation Statement, detailed
surface water drainage design, detailed final grading plan, and
restoration of any disturbed areas, and
In view of the size of this proposed subdivison, the Developer will be
required to conform to the Board of Public Works 2 for 1 I/I replacement
policy."
Board of Survey Meeting of June 10, 1985 Page 2
Mr. Pressey requested that all abuttors and any other interested
parties be notified of any further proceedings.
The Board next discussed thew Colburn Road Extension subdivision
filing at 8:00 P.M.
There were nine abuttors present.
It was moved, seconded and voted 3:2 (Mr. Polychrones and Mr. Hampson
opposed) that the Board approve the subdivision entitled "Definitive
Subdivision Plan Colburn Road Extension" dated January 16, 1985, as
revised in the June 4, 1985 submission subject to the conditions listed on
the attached sheet from Assistant Superintendent William A. Redford.
Mr. Hampson asked did they submit a better EIR?
' Mr. Redford replied no.
Mr. Polychrones asked is this now three lots?
Mr. Redford replied yes, there were originally four lots.
Mr. Hampson stated I have a major problem with a through way. I
sympathize with the abuttors of this area. They were never told that this
street would be a through way. I have serious problems with this. I also
have a problem with the traffic impact statement. It is insufficient in
my estimation. I would like to vote against this approval based on the
through street. I do not feel the traffic impacts were addressed with any
degree of competency and the character of the neighborhood will change.
There is a viable alternative that would be much better for the
subdivision, in building a cul.-de-sac rather than a through way.
' Mr. Redford stated this cul-de-sac plan has been suggested to the
developer about four times.
i I
Board of Survey Meeting of June 10, 1985 Page 3
Mr. Griffin asked does this meet with all of the standards set up by
the Board of Survey?
Mr. Redford replied yes the through street requirement was included in
the Board of Survey Rules & Regulations as far back as 1975 and reaffirmed
by the Board in 1981. This was also requested by the Police and Fire
Departments for public safety reasons.
Eileen Lotterio of 22 Deborah Drive stated our neighborhood is a
well-established one. Why shoud we be subjected to this? Can't we look
to another alternative? Why can't the Board insist upon a cul-de-sac? We
were told by a lawyer that it is well within your jurisdiction to provide
an alternative to this through street.
Mr. Griffin replied the developer has submitted a plan, which in no
way violates our rules and regulations.
' Charles Wayne asked is it within the Board's jurisdiction to reject
this plan in view of an incomplete EIR?
Mr. Barker replied no.
Mrs. Lotterio asked what about the hydraulic calculations?
Mr. Redford replied these have been addressed
Mr. Griffin asked did the ESR meet the criteria you have established?
Mr. Redford replied this was no more deficient than any other, and it
did address the issues.
Mr. Lotterio asked what is the next procedure?
Mr. Boucher replied this now has to go before hhe Conservation
Commission, who must work under Chapter 131.
Mr. Hampson requested the minutes of this meeting be sent to the
' developer with the reasons given for the opposition votes.
The meeting adjourned at 8: 45 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,`--'
SecretaFy
MEMORANDUM
To: A.V. Fletcher, P.E.
From: W.A. Redford
Date: June 7, 1985
Subject: Colburn Road Extension Subdivision Definitive Filing
I recommend the following Board action:
1. The Board APPROVE the subdivision entitled "Definitive Subdivision
Plan Colburn Road Extension dated January 16, 1985, as revised in the
June 4, 1985 submission subject to the following conditions:
a) The submission of a satisfactory Covenant Agreement by
July 1, 1985;
b) The submission of a satisfactory Conveyance of Easements &
Utilities by July 1, 1985;
c) The submission of two (2) modified sets of mylar plans by
July 1, 1985;
d) The submission of satisfactory Center Line and Street Line
coordinates by July 1, 1985;
e) Submission of the following modifications/additions to the
plans, acceptable to the Department of Public
Works:
1. Revising the Plan to reflect a MAXIMUM sidesloping in
any area of activity to 3: 1.
2. Revising the Proposed Drainage Detention Area by:
a) Eliminating the westerly Berming along the
existing ditch section.
b) The bottom must have a slope to encourage
the area to empty.
3. Set Minimum Cellar Floor Elevations on the Plans (sheet
1).