Laserfiche WebLink
i t <br /> Road. Mr. Costa added that,to crown and gravet there would be no expansion to the <br /> road- Ms. Waygan whether it would occur on-private property and Mr. Costa confirmed <br /> that it would in some areas. Ms_ Waygan stated tit#to accept the offer, people owning the land <br /> would need to provide permission for the work to be completed. Mr. BaLurini pointed out that <br /> the road had been in place for 50 years, and had been the road used by the residents. Mr. <br /> I ooharian pointed out that it would be seuing precedence and Ms. Waygan stated that she <br /> wanted to bear their opinion before the Special Permit Hearing was over. Chairman Petersen <br /> noted that-there was also concern the additional traffic on Degrass Road. <br /> Regarding the waiver lid Mr. Rowley confirmed that the street width and curb radius waiver <br /> were no longer an issue but that items 4 and 5 continued to be an issue since the location of the <br /> pavement was still unknown- lir. Rowley had not yet seen a revised profile plan so was not yet <br /> ready to reduce the minimum grade to 1%. Rxgarding Blue Castle, Mr. Rowley agreed about <br /> ensuring that all residents were in support of the because the Plang Board likely <br /> did not have the authority to authorize work outside of'the rwd last d remm ended <br /> forwarding a public document to the residents. Mr. Costa emphasized that it was an offer they <br /> could present to the abutters and wire feedback from the residents. To ensure that all of the <br /> residents were contacted and informed, Ilrfs. Waygan would like to see their address. Chairman <br /> Petersen pointed out that rye-paw the road would create even greater lenges. fir. Fudala <br /> confirmed that there was no ent for a similu issue. Mr. ffitbmrinibested the <br /> developer was offering an improvement to the road and it would not be fay for the developer to <br /> be told to pave the road, <br /> Mr. wall stated that he had been recently retained by the developer, so was unable to forward the <br /> letter any sooner and believed that there would be a co ce to al.lor further discussion of <br /> the.-matter- Mfr_ Wali indicated his letter p resented reasons why it would be unreasonable to <br /> require that the developer improve the road within the layout a .a coon of approval- <br /> However, <br /> pproval_Ho weever, to be a good neighbor, the developer had offered to re-grade the road, applying a <br /> permeable surface_ Mr_ Nall confirmed that he would be in touch with the abutters who would <br /> be impacted by road re-grading. <br /> Mr. Fudala reported that the Board of Health approved the subdivision but would need to apply <br /> for a nitrogen aggregation agreement plan to the Board of Health and DEP. <br /> Wayne Reed, of Blue Castle, referenced the 10 new homes driving on the road and inquired <br /> about who would be maintaining the road, Mr_ Reed stated that $1200 per year was currently <br /> being spent to maintain the road for existing residents. Mr. Reed felt that the issue should have <br /> been addressed initially when the lots were est sold. fir,.steed questioned why homes outside <br /> of Blue Castle would be considered part of the tract andexpressed concern rgrding the density. <br /> Ibis. waygan responded that it was a comer division more open space than usual was <br /> required to be set aside. Imo-.Reed added that Blue Castle should be paved with the addition of <br /> the homes. Mr. Balzarint` suggested contacting new neighbors to ask for contributions to street <br /> improvement and Mr. Deed stated that the developer was asked to contribute and did not, lair. <br /> Fudala clarified that the zoning bylaw defined a tract as a contiguous area of land that could be <br /> subdivided or note crossed by roadways or shmamsatnd may be single or multiple ownership- <br /> 4 <br />