M I N U T E S
Tuesday, August 2, 2005
Mr. Neal Rooney, Chairperson, called the Tuesday, August 2, 2005 meeting of the Community Planning Commission to order at 7:30 p.m. in Room 10 of the North Reading Town Hall, 235 North Street, North Reading, MA.
MEMBERS
PRESENT: Neal Rooney, Chairperson
Christopher Hayden, Vice Chairperson
Patricia Romeo, Clerk
Warren Pearce
M. Shepard Spear
STAFF
PRESENT: Heidi Griffin, Planning Administrator
Debra Savarese, Administrative Assistant
CPC August 2, 2005 Page 2
Minutes
Mrs. Romeo moved, seconded by Mr. Spear and voted 5-0:
that the Community Planning Commission vote to accept the minutes of June 14, 2005 as amended.
Mrs. Romeo moved, seconded by Mr. Pearce and voted 5-0:
that the Community Planning Commission vote to accept the Executive Session minutes of June 21, 2005.
Ryers Store - Informal Discussion
Mark Hall presented plans to the Community Planning Commission. He stated that the proposal is to raze the existing building and build a new store with the look of an old country store, both inside and out. The new building would be setback from the street and closer to the wetlands as the bylaws allow. The United States Postal Service has a lease for parking in the rear that will expire in one and a half years. The property in the rear will then be vacated. A section of the original building will be preserved and moved to the new site. Curbing is being placed on Rte. 62 at this time and he would like to have the State cut a new curbing for the future store and eliminate the old curbing.
Mr. Pearce asked if the State needed the approval of the Community Planning Commission?
Mark Hall stated that he would like to have the approval of the Community Planning Commission because he is unsure of the time limit for informing the State.
Mark Hall stated that it is possible that the parking lot would be painted a different configuration to accommodate the new curb cuts. Trees will be added to the front area and one old tree will be saved. A granite or curbstone retaining wall will be constructed.
Mr. Pearce stated that if the curb cuts were put in now, the store would have to operate under the current configuration. He would like to have more information provided at the next meeting.
13 Second Street – ANR
Mrs. Romeo read the Public Hearing notice into the record.
Heidi Griffin stated that the plan proposed is an even land swap between the applicant and the Town of North Reading.
Mr. Kubierschky stated that he is satisfied with the plan.
CPC August 2, 2005 Page 3
Mrs. Romeo moved, seconded by Mr. Pearce and voted 5-0:
that the Community Planning Commission vote to endorse as “Approval Not Required” the plan entitled “Plan of Land in North Reading, MA.” Prepared for Town of North Reading” dated June 28, 2005; drawn by LeBlanc Survey Associates, Inc.
51 & 53 Central Street - ANR
Mrs. Romeo read the Public Hearing notice into the record.
Maria Higgins representing the applicant stated the proposal is to convey land from 53 Central Street to 51 Central Street.
Mrs. Romeo moved, seconded by Mr. Hayden and voted 5-0:
that the Community Planning Commission vote to endorse as “Approval Not Required’ the plan entitled “Plan of Land in North Reading, MA” for 51 and 53 Central Street, prepared by LeBlanc Survey Associates, Inc., dated July 12, 2005.
Holt Lane – Informal Discussion
David Giangrande of Design Consultants Inc. stated that Holt Lane is a private way that was approved for a one-house lot subdivision. He stated that the development of the private way includes the following:
1. An 8 inch water line and hydrant at the end. (Municipal infrastructure)
2. Drainage.
3. Bridge.
He stated that this is more than what is typically standard on a private way. He would like some directive from the Community Planning Commission as to what his responsibilities are in terms of inspections. He feels that it is the town’s responsibility to inspect and be sure that the above construction is done properly and efficiently.
Mr. Pearce asked if a preliminary estimate for the inspections had been done?
David Giangrande stated yes. Initially, a quick inspection was done for the bridge. When he visited the site and received a copy of the plans he realized that there was more that needed inspecting than just the bridge.
Mr. Pearce stated that there are various problems with this development. He wanted to know why this project was not given to Design Consultants prior to the final approval for an estimate?
David Giangrande stated that he was unsure why he did not receive notification.
CPC August 2, 2005 Page 4
Mr. Pearce asked if the drafted Conditional Approval stipulates that there would be inspections?
Mrs. Romeo asked if a bond was posted.
Heidi Griffin stated that the Conditional Approval does state that there would be inspections and the Town Engineer informed her that a bond does not have to be posted until the road is up to binder.
Mr. Pearce stated that the developer should meet with the Community Planning Commission to discuss this issue.
Heidi Griffin stated that she would send a letter requesting that the developer attend the next meeting.
Edgewater Place (40B)
Attorney James Senior stated that this property is a 4.3 acre parcel of land on both sides of Pilgrim Road. There is an existing one single family home on the property. The proposal is to build 16 units, consisting of duplexes and triplexes. The design of the building was purposely selected to blend into the existing residential neighborhood. The size of the buildings will be similar to single family home in a new subdivision. The application to permit the property under Chapter 40B is being processed.
Brad McKenzie of McKenzie Engineering Group stated that the site eligibility letter was issued in July of 2004 for 16 units; four units will be designated as affordable. The town’s departmental memos were sent to Mass. Housing and design modifications have been made in regard to the comments. (Reducing wetland impacts, reducing the density, incorporating a water loop and adding more hydrants.) The Muise property has frontage on Pilgrim Road (private way). The existing single family home will be razed. The proposed development will be serviced by an approximately 550’ long roadway. Each unit will have two designated parking spaces. In response to concerns by the Fire Department and the Development Team, ten additional parking spaces have been added; sidewalks have been
added for pedestrian access. A subsurface sewerage disposal system will accommodate all the units. The water loop will be constructed through town property to Cameron Road. The drainage system continues with a subsurface detention facility underneath the cul-de-sac. This system would fully meet the stormwater management policy. Buffering will be accommodated where it is needed.
Mr. Hayden asked what year the drainage calculations were derived from?
Brad McKenzie stated two through one hundred year storms.
Mr. Hayden asked if all of the roof space was taken into consideration?
CPC August 2, 2005 Page 5
Brad McKenzie stated yes. There are roofing drywells for the roof. Each building has a separate set of subsurface drywells to accept infiltration.
Jim DeCola the Building Inspector for the Town of North Reading asked who owns the R.O.W. to Pilgrim Road.
Peter Barbagallo stated that he owns to the center on both sides of each lot.
Jim DeCola asked if the Town has any right to the R.O.W.
Attorney Senior stated that Pilgrim Road is a private way. The abutters own to the center of the road. This is not a granted easement; there is a right to access for use of the property. The Condominium Association would be responsible for maintaining the road.
Mrs. Romeo stated that 40B’s force the town to grow in an un-orderly fashion 40B’s can be helpful in a very limited way with affordable housing, but it is certainly not filling the obligation to the town. The proposal is too dense, no sidewalks are proposed on a narrow street. This is very discouraging.
Mr. Pearce asked how many units would the pump station handle?
Brad McKenzie stated all of them.
Mrs. Romeo read the Conservation Commission’s (7/27/05) memo into the record.
Mr. Rooney asked if there would be a traffic study?
Attorney Senior stated that they would be evaluating the site distance.
Mr. Hayden stated that the parking spaces are too small.
Mrs. Romeo stated that handicap parking spaces should be added.
Jim DeCola stated that handicap parking spaces are not required.
Maureen Doherty asked what the setbacks would be to the abutters at the rear of the property?
Brad McKenzie stated that the buildings would be 10’ from the lot line.
Continued to September 6, 2005 @ 8:00PM.
CPC August 2, 2005 Page 6
John Bickford Way – 235 Elm Street
Rich Williams of Hayes Engineering stated that the plans have been revised at the request of the Town Engineer. The items modified are as follows:
1. More cover over the drain at the low point of the entrance. The grade of the road was revised to a 1/2.% to accommodate this change. (A waiver will be required)
2. Based on the monitoring well results, the grading was revised. The final soil testing is scheduled for the septic systems.
3. Under drains that discharge to the catch basins in the street. (plans were submitted) The town engineer requested that the Community Planning Commission make a condition subject to: Street opening permit from the Department of Public Works. This process would waive the Town’s responsibility of the drain.
4. Driveway connection for an apron and street opening at the DiMeo property for the purpose of rebuilding the driveway added to plan.
5. Hydrants shown on detail sheet open the wrong way. This will be revised.
Public Hearing closed.
Mrs. Romeo moved, seconded by Mr. Hayden and voted 5-0:
that the Community Planning Commission vote to grant the requested extension of time in which to render a decision on the Definitive Subdivision Plan entitled “Definitive Plan, John Bickford Way, North Reading, Mass”; until August 19, 2005 and that the scheduled working meeting be on August 16, 2005 @ 9:30PM..
Great Lott Estates – Discharge of Lawsuit
Mr. Hayden stated that the Community Planning Commission requested that the applicant move the road closer to the wetlands and an abutter to give one of the lots 160’ of actual frontage. Because of this change there was a possibility that the applicant could be sued by the abutter, in turn the applicants put a suit against the Community Planning Commission.
3 Cheyenne Drive – Re-endorsement of Plans
Mrs. Romeo moved, seconded by Mr. Pearce and voted 5-0:
that the Community Planning Commission find that the “Approval Not Required Plan” dated October 17, 2003 drawn by O’Neill Associates for 3 Cheyenne Drive has been revised in accordance with the updated certificate and plan numbers as required by Land Court; and that the Community Planning Commission vote to re-endorse said Approval Not Required Plan with the updated information that was originally endorsed on September 7, 2004.
CPC August 2, 2005 Page 7
Blueberry Woods – Bond Estimate
Mrs. Romeo moved, seconded by Mr. Spear and voted 5-0:
that the Community Planning Commission vote to accept the July 26, 2005 report from Design Consultants, Inc. and that the amount of $49,906.76 be established as sufficient security to ensure the completion of the Blueberry Woods Subdivision.
ADJOURNMENT AT 10:30PM.
Respectfully submitted,
_______________________________
Patricia Romeo, Clerk
| 
