CITY OF
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
MONDAY,
JULY 24, 2006 at 7:00 PM
Kyrouz Auditorium, City Hall
MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT STAFF PRESENT
Paul Lundberg, Chair
Gregg Cademartori, Planning Dir
Jeneth Fahey, Vice Chair Lisa English, Recording Clerk
Mary Black
Marvin Kushner
Henry McCarl
Michael Rubin
I. BUSINESS
A. Call to order
with Quorum of Planning Board.
B. Introduction of Planning Board Members and Staff.
II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. Meeting of July 10, 2006
Motion: Ms Fahey moved to accept the minutes of July
10, 2006 as amended.
Second: Mr.
Rubin
Vote:
6-0;
Motion carried.
III. PUBLIC COMMENT
Stevan Goldin, 14 Hodgkins Street, stated that he has three issues to
discuss. First, he stated that the TAG
meetings should be publicly noticed. He
considered it unfair that the opinions of the public cannot be heard in that
forum. He also stated that the Planning
Board prematurely closes the public comment period. Lastly he stated that the Open Space Plan for
the City is required for public funding.
He does not feel that
IV. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Continued Form A Applications:
1. Applicants Mark Hubbard and Anthony &
Marcia Ciarametaro to divide two lots into 4 lots at
Attorney James McKenna received a memo from the City Solicitor. Mr. McKenna stated that the City Solicitor
agreed that the Applicant has complied with the ANR regulations. The City Attorney also concluded in favor of
the Applicant regarding the frontage and the road. Mr. McKenna asked the Planning Board for a
vote.
Mr. Lundberg stated that the Planning Board was also in receipt of
the memo from the
City Solicitor dated July
24, 2006.
Ms Fahey asked if there was documentation about abutters’ rights to
pass.
Mr. Lundberg stated that there was.
Mr. McKenna stated that the abutters were also in receipt of the
documentation.
Motion: Mr. Rubin moved
that the Subdivision Control Law and Gloucester Rules and Regulations do not
apply to Applicants Mark Hubbard and Anthony & Marcia Ciarametaro to divide
two lots into 4 lots at
Second: Ms. Fahey
Vote: 6-0; Motion carried.
Mr. McKenna wanted to get on record that this Application was filed
before the change in
regulations and should therefore be based upon
previous regulations.
Mr. Cademartori confirmed that would be in writing.
2.
Mr.
Lundberg stated that he was in receipt of a letter from the Applicant
withdrawing the Application without prejudice.
B. New
Form A Applications
1. Application
from Christopher & Alice Eastland to divide lot into 2 parcels at 7 Whale
Mr. Lundberg stated that he was in receipt of a memo from Ms. Preston
which found no issues with the Application.
Motion: Mr. McCarl moved
that the Subdivision Control Law and Gloucester Rules and Regulations do not
apply to an Application from Christopher & Alice Eastland to divide lot
into 2 parcels at 7 Whale Rocks Road (Assessors Map 248,
Second: Ms.
Fahey
Vote: 6-0; Motion carried.
2. Application
from Hammond Museum, Inc. to reconfigure lot line at
Motion: Mr. McCarl moved that the Subdivision Control Law and Gloucester
Rules and Regulations do not apply to an Application from Hammond Museum, Inc.
to reconfigure lot line at
Second: Ms.
Fahey
Vote: 6-0; Motion carried.
C.
Chapter 91 Recommendations: There were none.
V. NEW PUBLIC HEARING
A. An application from Carrigan
Enterprises, Inc., for a Cluster Development Special Permit for “Annisquam
Woods” at 7 & 11 Hutchins Court and 14 Tufts Lane for 30 units
(Assessors Map 125, Lots 71 & 22;
and Map 115, Lot 30).
Mr. Lundberg
stated that the Planning Board is the Special Permitting authority. The public hearing is now opened. The rules and regulations are quite lengthy
and the job of the Planning Board is to make sure the Application complies with
them. There will be time for a public
comment period. Mr. Lundberg stated that
there would also be a site visit scheduled.
Michele Harrison, Attorney for the Applicant presented an overview of the project. She was joined by Applicant Mike Carrigan, Attorney
Peter Feuerbach, Architect Jason Gove, and Engineer Peter Ogren.
Ms. Harrison stated
that a preliminary plan was filed with the Planning Board and that plan was
approved. She stated that August 3, 2006
will be the Board of Health review and August 16, 2006 will be the Conservation
Committee review. July 13, 2006 was the
most recent TAG meeting. There have been
many neighborhood meetings that Mr. Carrigan has attended.
Ms. Harrison stated
that this was a well thought out plan that evolved over time. The Initial Conditions plan included all the
natural resources. With the Conservation
Committee and Dept of Environmental Protection the resources were
delineated. Then the houses were drawn
in and then the roads. Ms. Harrison
stated that this plan stays out of the buffer zone. She stated that preservation of open space and
reduction of impervious areas was very important to Mr. Carrigan. The result is three clusters made up of 24
buildings. The area is zoned R-RA,
meaning large lots with lots of open space.
Ms. Harrison stated that there will be a shift in the property of Mr.
Tuft’s. Mr. Tufts and Mr. Carrigan are
not taking advantage of the density bonus.
If they did take advantage of it 46 units could be built. Ms. Harrison stated that the developers have
agreed that 10% will be affordable not because it is required but because they
recognize the need for affordable housing.
These units may or may not be onsite.
69.7% is designated as open space.
11% is the only nonbuildable portion of the lot. Also a recreational area will be designated
as open space. Ms. Harrison stated that
there is not a requirement that the open space be available to the public just
that it remain in its natural state. Ms.
Harrison stated that the developers are aware of a concern that this development
will upset the wildlife in the area. The
Applicant is providing a wildlife habitat corridor. Ms. Harrison stated that the Applicant is proposing
the water line be looped from
Sewer: Ms. Harrison stated that the sewer connection
permit was issued by the Engineering Department and not the mayor or anyone
else as the papers have implied. It is
required that a study be done to ensure there is adequate capacity to accommodate
the line. That pumping may be done at
off peak hours. Also this STEP system is
owned, managed, and maintained by the Homeowners Association.
Stormwater: Ms. Harrison stated that there are changes
made to the stormwater management plan based on the TAG meeting of July 13,
2006.
Traffic: Ms. Harrison stated that traffic is also a
big issue. Two access points will be
Misc: Homeowners will be responsible for the pick
up of trash and recycling. Each unit
will have a fire suppression system.
Each unit will be designed individually.
Ms. Harrison provided a sample of Jason Gove’s designs. The cluster will be comprised of 2, 3, and 4
bedroom units. Ms. Harrison stated that
the driveways will be shortened to keep more open space; the runoff will be to
impervious areas. The Homeowners
Association will be responsible for the sewer, plowing, and repair of the
roads, trash removal and recycling, stormwater management program. Ms. Harrison
stated that this development will be a phase development and therefore also a
phase construction. Ms. Harrison stated
that a list of waivers was given to the Planning Board and that almost all have
to do with road design. Ms. Harrison
stated that she believed that this was a well thought out plan and design. The developers are local and plan to stay
here.
Mr.
Kushner asked if buses are not
available to access the road how can fire apparatus access it.
Ms. Harrison
stated that
Mr. Kushner
asked if the Homeowners Association and the Condominium documents are the same.
Ms.
Harrison replied yes
Peter
Ogren, Hayes Engineering
Mr. Ogren
presented his overview of the development.
He stated that the plan would upgrade 1200 ft of
Sewer: The Application proposes two forms of
collection by gravity and pumps. A study
will be conducted to determine if capacity exists during the high times of flow
in the system. If there is not capacity,
then off peak pumping will be considered.
There are odor considerations if it is held in the tank too long and the
Applicant will also make sure that it is not an issue.
Drainage: Mr. Ogren stated that this Application is not
only subject to the City of
Traffic: A fairly complete
traffic report was submitted by the Applicant.
It provided a count of existing conditions as well as what the impact of
traffic would be at the intersections of Dennison and
Mr. Lundberg
would like Mr. Ogren to elaborate on the improvement to
Mr.
Ogren stated that there would be a reduction
in pavement in the intersection.
Mr. Lundberg asked if there would be an additional roadway next to
existing roadway.
Mr. Ogren
replied that there will be a new roadway that comes up as the access to the
development that will not be as steep as the existing roadway.
Mr. Lundberg asked how these changes to
Mr. Ogren stated
that what is proposed is to fill in the steep section and then the embankment
will be held by walls.
Ms. Black
asked when visitors are going to the development will they be able to access
from
Mr. Ogren stated
that they would possibly take that route the first time but given the condition
of
Ms. Black asked
about the posting of a sign designating Tuft’s Lane as a private road. Where would that be and would it prevent
access?
Ms. Harrison stated
that they anticipate people will want to take the shortcut and even though it
is a private way within the development, it will still be available for access. Ms. Harrison also stated that they anticipate
that emergency vehicles will want to take the shortcut as well.
Ms. Black
asked about the proposed improvement to
Ms. Harrison
stated that the preferred access would be through
Ms. Fahey asked
about the 1200 feet of improvements to
Mr. Ogren stated
the plan also includes widening the roadway to a 24ft width. There is one area where the site distance is
poor and that will be improved. There
are general improvements along the entire way.
They will expand the culvert, improve the sight distance, and improve
the island.
Ms.
Fahey clarified that the widening
would be from the Tuft’s property onward.
Mr. Ogren stated
that was not correct and showed Ms. Fahey the extent of the widening on the
map.
Ms. Harrison
stated that Hayes Engineering has provided a supplemental plan to the Planning Board
on improvements to
Mr. Lundberg
stated that the Planning Board will rely on persons with expertise other than
themselves. Traffic and drainage will be
advised by a third party reviewer, environmental aspects will be advised by Conservation
Committee.
There
were none who wished to speak in favor.
Those
speaking in opposition:
James Groves, 50 Revere Street, represents the Annisquam Bayview Woodlands Association. The Association is made up of approximately
200 members. He asked how many people
present are in opposition to this project.
All hands were raised. He stated
that he feels that this is a disaster in the making. He stated that the developer has had enormous
advantages in developing this project. Mr.
Groves feels that TAG meetings give the developer a unique opportunity to
present his plan and get advice without the public input. Mr. Groves stated that the Applicant was denied
sewer connection and then suddenly after a closed door meeting with the Mayor
it was approved. He stated that in his
opinion special treatment has been the standard of this project. There has been no wildlife impact study. He does not feel that the traffic study is
realistic. Since this is a phase development, will the
neighbors be affected by the traffic and noise pollution for a 3 year period? The Condominium Association document must be
part of the permitting process. He
stated that it is not yet written. He
stated that he feels that there are four issues that have not been addressed by
the developer.
Sewer: The Mayor and City Solicitor agreed that the
STEP system connections needed to be frozen. Mr. Groves quoted form various articles found
in the Gloucester Daily Times regarding the problems with the STEP system and
why no additional homes should connect.
The Mayor’s reversal puts the health and safety of the City at risk
Water pressure/fire
safety issue: Mr. Groves stated that current
pressure is dangerously close to being below minimum and adding additional
homes will only add to this problem. In
his opinion, no permits should be issued without the pressure being
addressed. The closest full time fire
station is more than 3 miles away.
Traffic: Mr. Groves stated that these long winding
roads will not provide adequate access to fire safety traffic. The traffic study does not address the real
issues of traffic safety.
Condominium
documents: The Condominium agreement has
to be made part of the Order of Conditions but yet the document is not yet
written.
Mr. Groves handed his
written statement to the Board.
Noel Mann, 12 Dorset Drive, as well as a member of the Annisquam Bayview
Woodlands Association. Ms. Mann
presented a map of her property, Langsford Pond and other resource areas. She stated that the area is beautiful land
and difficult to navigate. She also
stated that habitats are plenty on this property. This project would cut directly across the most
important drain and buffer zone. She submitted
a letter to the Planning Board stating that the Definitive Plan contains no
more information regarding the wildlife and resource area than the Preliminary
Plan.
Sally Kiely, 3 Riggs Point
Road, Riggs Point Road Association, stated that she is here to support the neighbors of
Annisquam.
Janice Chick, 16 Hutchins
Court, stated
that an easement was signed to put water on
Roberta Crawford, 43 Revere
Street, stated
that she would like to discuss the Homeowners Association documents. She has owned two condominiums in
Charles McGinn, 39 Revere Street,
asked the
Planning Board how the developer plans to widen
Anna Crouse, 11 Bennett Street,
stated that
she had lived on
Robert Smith, 60 Bennett Street,
stated that
he is concerned that the existing
road cannot handle the current houses let alone 30 more. He stated that
Judy Francis, One Tufts Lane,
stated her disappointment
that bus stop time was not considered in the traffic study. Ms. Francis read a letter from her 11 year
old son. He stated that he is concerned
about walking home form O’Malley school.
He feels that
David Murray, 34 Dennison
Street, stated
that his primary concern is the expenses that the tax payers will have to pay
down the line. He stated that there will
be ruptures to the STEP System, there will be a need for the opening of the Bayview
Fire Station, and the school budget will
need an increase to compensate for the children going to school.
Andre Bouchard, 34 N Bennett
Street, stated
he doesn’t feel the traffic study is realistic or that the development fits in
with the natural topography of the neighborhood.
Robert Stewart, 20 Leonard
Street, a member of the Zoning Board of Appeals, stated that the use of
Thomas Hale, 44 Bennett Street,
stated that
the sewer system cannot handle additional houses. He said that a lightning strike burnt out his
“box” and the City basically used a band aid approach to repairing it. His concern is that the entire system will be
faulty given the band aid approach to repairs.
Allen Young, 62 Bennett Street,
stated that
he would like some clarification on the bridge for the critters. He is concerned that kids will try to crawl
through. He asked if it can be made
large enough for adults to walk through.
Richard Crangle, 30 Bennett
Street, asked
about the amount of fill it would take to fill this bridge. The slope is a 12% grade. He is concerned about the winter conditions. He asked since the Homeowners will be
responsible for the maintenance of the STEP System, will they have a full time
engineer to handle maintenance as well as emergencies. He asked if this individual would be
available 24/7 for 365 days per year. He
wondered if there would be a holding tank in the homes for the sprinkler
system. He also asked about an
alternative pump in case of loss of
electricity. He asked who would
pay for the damage done to the existing roads during the building of this
development. He feels that this proposal
is too much for such a delicate area.
Anne Rolland, 39 Revere
Street, wanted
to mention the increase in traffic to
Cara White, 4 Brierwood Street,
encouraged
the Planning Board to use common sense when considering this development. She urged the Board to remember that
Motion: Ms. Fahey
moved to continue the Planning Board meeting past 10:00 pm.
Second: Mr. Rubin
Vote: 6-0; Motion carried.
Lindsay Crouse, 28 Leonard Street,
stated that
she would like the Planning Board to really listen to the neighbors who are
here tonight. She stated that she has
seen many changes to
Kate Somers, 54 Bennett Street,
stated that
she is concerned about the drainage that will come over
Joe Grace, 75 Holly Street, stated that he is concerned
about the intersection of Holly and Washington Streets. He questioned why the traffic study was not
conducted there. He stated that he felt
the development was unsafe and not needed.
Mr. Grace is a master plumber and he questioned why there was only one
pump for the entire STEP system.
Jackie Hardy, 29 Cherry
Street, stated
that this plan may look great on paper but is it really great. This plan may be “smart” but is it safe? Ms. Hardy feels that insufficient water
pressure, traffic, a questionable STEP System all should lead the Planning
board to a vote of no on this development.
Councilor Hardy asked for a separate traffic study paid for by the
developer. She questioned if the STEP
System leaks who is responsible for the cleanup? Ms. Hardy asked that a representative of the
neighborhood be allowed to attend the site visit. She also requested a special TAG meeting for
the neighbors.
Ken Gleason, 13 Rockholm Road,
asked what
will happen to the STEP System when the power goes out.
Russell Hobbs, 1166
Washington Street, stated that in
Stevan Goldin, 14 Hodgkins
Street, stated
that the Conservation Committee has limited permitting power but strong
advisory power. He feels that the
Applicant needs to study the wildlife and habitats that are in this area. Mr. Goldin stated that the Environmental
Impact Study
is skimpy. At the Preliminary
Plan, a conventional plan was requested.
Mr. Goldin stated there has not been one presented and he does not feel
that one will be.
Mr. Lundberg stated that the Public Comment period will be
continued until the next meeting.
Everyone has the same rights. The
Planning Board has a solemn burden to make sure the Application is complete and
that all the rules and regulations are complete. As far as the traffic study, the Planning Board
subdivision rules state that it should include: “An analysis of the adequacy of
the existing street system to provide safe and convenient access to the
proposed subdivision. If system
deficiencies are detected, recommendations for their improvement, along with
cost estimates, should be included.” [Section 3.2.1(m)(4)] He scheduled a site visit for Thursday,
August 10, 2006, and James Groves has been invited to attend as a
representative of the Annisquam Bayview Woodlands Association, along with
Councilor Hardy.
Mr. McCarl stated that he would like
to point out that this is not the first public comment period for this
issue. There have been many
opportunities for people to speak out about this. Citizens should understand that the Planning Board
does listen but ideas presented should not be in an accusatory manner.
Mr. Lundberg stated that the Planning Board
was in receipt of a memo from Lt. Joe Aiello as well as correspondence from the
Essex County Greenbelt.
Motion: Mr. Kushner moved to continue the public
hearing for an application from Carrigan
Enterprises,
Inc., for a Cluster Development Special Permit for “Annisquam Woods”
at
Second: Ms. Fahey
Vote: 6-0; Motion carried.
VI. OTHER BUSINESS
A. Election of Planning Board Chair
This was continued until
Monday, August 14, 2006.
B. Planner's Report
Mr. Cademartori had no additional comments.
C. Chairman's Report
Mr. Lundberg had no additional comments.
VII. ADJOURNMENT
Mr. Lundberg adjourned the meeting at 10:50 pm.
Respectfully
Submitted,
Lisa
English