CITY OF GLOUCESTER

             PLANNING BOARD MINUTES                          

                   MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 2006 at 7:00 PM

                                Kyrouz Auditorium, City Hall

 

 

 

MEMBERS PRESENT              MEMBERS ABSENT               STAFF PRESENT

Paul Lundberg, Chair                   Jeneth Fahey, Vice Chair             Gregg Cademartori, Planning Dir

Mary R. Black                                                                                    Ellen Preston, Assistant Planner 

Marvin Kushner                                                                                 Lisa English, Recording Clerk

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 September 11, 2006

 

Motion:  Ms. Black moved to approve the minutes of Monday, September 11, 2006 as presented.

            Second:  Mr. Kushner

            Vote:      5-0; Motion carried. 

 

III.       PUBLIC COMMENT

 

      Stevan Goldin, 14 Hodgkins Street, stated that he had some issues with the Symes   Development project.  He stated that the development plan contains too many houses and that

      legally there should not be that many.  The frontage requirements are less in Gloucester than       most other communities.  Mr. Goldin questioned the granting of sewer extensions.  He also       commented on TAG meetings, saying that they are legal meetings, which the public should be   

      allowed to attend.  He stated that the public       should have a right to ask questions.  He stated that      

      the recommendations that come out of TAG      meetings are not published.  He would like to see   

      the public be able to participate, not just Staff and developers.

      Sarah Kiely, 3 Riggs Point Road, stated that she was concerned with the Symes Development. 

      The sewer system on Washington Street was built in 1991 and should last approximately 15

      years.  She is concerned that Symes will not have to be responsible for the sewer infrastructure.

      She encouraged the Planning Board to take a broader look at the proposed development.

      Bob Walsh, 31 Vine Street, suggested that the Annisquam Woods Development and the Symes

      Development join together and create their own sewer system.  Mr. Walsh stated that the existing

      system has reached its capacity.

 

IV.       CONSENT AGENDA                                  

            A.  New Form A  Applications:  There were none.

                                                                                                                       

B.  Chapter 91 Recommendations:  There were none.

 

 

           

V.        CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING

            A.  An application from Carrigan Enterprises, Inc., for a Cluster Development Special Permit entitled “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).  Definitive Cluster Plan    prepared by Hayes Engineering; dated June 26, 2006.

 

            Mr. Lundberg stated that the Planning Board had received a number of documents, submissions          and a memo from Mr. Cademartori.

 

            Peter Feuerbach, Attorney for the Applicant, stated that regrettably Ms. Harrison is absent

            from the meeting due to a family illness.  He is aware of all submittals, but in light of the fact that

            Ms. Fahey is absent from the    meeting, he wanted to ask for a continuation.  He wanted the

            Planning Board to also consider a separate meeting just for the Annisquam Woods hearing. 

            Mr. Lundberg stated that the Planning Board would discuss the submittals.

            Mr. Feuerbach stated that the Planning Board should not hear any additional evidence without             the presence of Ms. Fahey.  According to Mullen Rule, if a member misses a meeting s/he cannot      vote on project.

            Mr. Lundberg agreed to go through the memorandum of submittals.

            Mr. Feuerbach stated that an itemization of submittals is fine.

            Mr. Lundberg stated that the Planning Board would not hear any new information; just a review           of submittals thus far. 

      1.  A memorandum for Mr. Cademartori

      2.  A letter from the Board of Health dated September 11, 2006 approving the cluster

      3.  A letter from Ms. Harrison requesting the decision be continued until October 27, 2006

      4.  Two articles from Noelle Mann dated September 12, 2006

      5.  A letter from Mr. Groves dated September 15, 2006 and a letter dated September 19, 2006

          acknowledging Chief McKay’s letter

      6.  Memorandum from Ms. Harrison dated September 21, 2006, providing a status report

      7.  Letter from Douglas and Brenda Pike received September 22, 2006

      8.  A letter from Attorney Tillotson received September 25, 2006

      9.  A letter from Bill Saunders received tonight, September 25, 2006

 

            Mr. Lundberg stated that the Planning board would hear public comment tonight but that the    Public Hearing would be continued.

 

            Motion:           Mr. McCarl moved to accept applicant’s written request to continue the public                                      hearing for application from Carrigan Enterprises, Inc., for a Cluster Development                                  Special Permit entitled “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)                                         until Monday, October 27, 2006.

            Second:           Mr. Rubin

            Vote:               5-0; Motion carried.

 

            Public Comment:

 

            Mr. Groves, 50 Revere Street, Vice President of the Annisquam Bayview Woodlands          Association, stated that he had no objection to the continuance but would like the Planning Board    to give several days notice of the documents submitted.

 

 

 

 

            Noel Mann, 12 Dorset Drive, stated that the Conservation Commission’s restriction is not     properly correct.  She stated that she is concerned about the protection of Open Space.  She        would   also like to see that an access be granted to the Essex County Greenbelt.

            Stevan Goldin, 14 Hodgkins Street, suggested that the communications be read at public      hearings. He stated that the Applicant has yet to address the concerns of Mr. Cademartori and the   neighbors.  He stated that the Applicant has also failed to demonstrate how this Cluster        Development is superior to a conventional subdivision.  He requested that there be no further        discussion until the number of houses can be shown on land. 

 

VI.             OTHER BUSINESS

                A.  Pursuant to Gloucester Zoning Ordinance Section 5.15.6 Pre-Application for Open Space Residential Development (OSRD) and Section 6.3(A) of the Rules and Regulations Pertaining to OSRD, Symes Associates, LLC has requested the Planning Board to consider an informal pre-application review of a proposed OSRD entitled “Goose Cove Village” located at 602 & 606 Washington Street for 24 units (Assessors Map 112, Lots 25 and 93).

 

Mr. Lundberg read the criteria for 5.15.2 as well as the procedure of Section 5.15.6.  He stated that the Planning Board was in receipt of a letter from Hayes Engineering dated September 14, 2006.

 

Rich Williams, Hayes Engineering

Mr. Williams reported history of the project.  He stated that they had filed a pre-application plan with the Planning Board in addition to a site plan.  It had been in limbo due to the Conservation Commission and some testing.  The testing was complete at this time.  The new plan has an aligned driveway located on the west side of Washington Street with Vine Street and Riggs Point Road to the south and east.  The site has access on Washington Street as well as Riggs Point Road.  There are Open Space areas with wetlands in the front and a small area in back.  Mr. Williams also showed other options.  In February 2005, they suggested a driveway on the south side.  One option was to have a road down the middle with a cul de sac that took advantage of the grade; a “Y” configuration with scattered houses in the middle.  Another option is the present one with houses around an elliptical open space so that the houses in back have a view.  This would also take advantage of the topography.  Mr. Williams believes that this is the most attractive plan.

 

Mr. Lundberg scheduled a site visit for Saturday, September 30, 2006 at 9:00 am.  He suggested that if the Planning Board could not attend as a group then all should go individually. 

 

            B.  Reappointment to Plan Implementation Review Committee for three year term:  Linda Brayton, Henry McCarl, Donna Polizzia, Liz Steele, Janis Stelluto, Bill Fonvielle

 

                  Motion:     Mr. Kushner moved to reappoint to the Plan Implementation Review Committee    

                                    for three year terms Linda Brayton, Henry McCarl, Donna Polizzia, Liz Steele,

                                    Janis Stelluto and Bill Fonvielle.

                  Second:     Ms. Black

                  Vote:         4-0; Mr. McCarl abstained.  Motion carried.

 

 

 

            C.  Discussion regarding Technical Advisory Group (TAG) meetings

 

Mr. Lundberg stated that this discussion was brought up by Linda Lowe’s letter.  He then explained the purpose of the TAG meetings: that they provide input to the Planning staff from the developer.  Everything else is done in a public forum.  Planning Board members are not present at the meetings.  Ms. Lowe stated that staff who attend TAG meetings is not a governmental body.  They also can be explained as a staff meeting for the purpose of meeting with Applicants.

Mr. Kushner asked if meetings are open to the public how will the public know if they are not noticed. 

Mr. Rubin suggested that since minutes are taken of the meeting that they then be made available to the public.

Ms. Black stated that she felt it was productive to have the public come but not participate.  She suggested that the notification be done by the developer and perhaps be posted on a website.

Mr. Lundberg stated that then that would be noticing when the Planning staff did not have to.

Mr. Rubin stated that the TAG meeting is a courtesy to the Applicant to meet with staff in one place.  It has no bearing on the vote of the Planning Board.  He suggested that the TAG meetings be allowed to happen.  It should be an efficient meeting without having to be a secret.  Then have the minutes available to the public.

Mr. Lundberg stated that the report of the TAG is comprehensive.  The Public Hearing is a question period for both the public and the Planning Board.

Ms. Black stated that she did not see harm in letting the public attend and listen.

Mr. Lundberg stated that the Applicant goes to the Planning Director to ask questions and clarify certain issues.  No decisions are made and therefore it is an internal meeting.

Ms. Black stated then she would leave things the way they are.

Mr. Cademartori stated that it was difficult to keep track of pre-application meetings.  The logistical concern is over whom to notify.

Mr. Lundberg stated that the transparency is left to the Planning Board, which is appointed by the Mayor.  He stated his preference was to let the Planning staff continue as they have been doing.

Mr. Kushner stated that he thought it came down to perception; what the public can see and hear.  They might be suspicious of the meetings.

Mr. McCarl brought up the issue of site visits.  Occasionally there are neighbors present.  He stated it is also an issue of safety and liability. 

Mr. Lundberg stated that site visits very often are on private property and not everyone has a right to be there.

Mr. Rubin suggested that the Applicant contact the public to choose a representative to attend the TAG meeting and site visit.

Mr. McCarl stated that City Councilors have a history of attending site visits.

 

D.    Planner's Report

Mr. Cademartori reported on the continued effort of P & D and the Zoning Task Force.

                  The next meeting was scheduled for October 2, 2006 at the guidance office at Gloucester

                  High School.  There are also Lighting and Wind Turbine Ordinances making progress.  Mr.

                  Cademartori stated they are working with Sam Cleaves who also worked on model wind

                  turbine ordinances for Lynn and Cape Cod. 

 

 

 

Mr. Rubin questioned the Turbines.  He stated that it is very specific technology that is now

obsolete.  There are other devices that are more compact, safer, and less dangerous to birds. 

 

E.     Chairman's Report

      Mr. Lundberg stated that there are two candidates for the position of Community Development Director who will be furthered interviewed.

                 

VII.           ADJOURNMENT

            Mr. Lundberg adjourned the meeting at 8:15 pm.

 

 

 

Respectfully Submitted,

 

Lisa English

Recording Clerk