The Waterford Single Family homes project was not
scheduled to appear on a Planning Board agenda until October 24.
However, it surfaced a month ahead of time on September 22. In
addition, a distinct procedural irregularity took place.
Although the meeting was clearly not a public hearing, a number of members of the Waterford development team were permitted to speak. (This irregularity was allowed to occur despite the fact that several members of the Planning Board voted against it, noting that there had been no notification given to abutters and/or "equal time" given to individuals who had expressed opposition to the development.)
Prior to the meeting, the developers had submitted a written formal request to the Planning Board. It asked for a re-consideration of the previous denial by the Planning Board of a reduced road width for the single family homes project. At the September 24th meeting, several members of the development team elaborated on the reasons for this request, noting that site plans had been drawn up for the narrower width and that the narrow roads would impart a "rural" aspect to their "communities." Moreover, they noted that the reduced runoff from the narrower width streets would be more favorable to the environment.
There was considerable discussion about the road widths. It was noted that wider streets would be more appropriate for the side-by-side passage of fire engines. In addition, several members of the Planning Board noted that the development team had produced no evidence that the construction planned for Lot 17, which is within the watershed of the major Atlantic white cedar swamp basin, would not impact the swamps.
After the discussion, the Planning Board voted to table the project application for the fifth time, and to review it again on Oct. 24.
Prior
to the October 24 business meeting of the Planning Board, Waterford
agreed to greater road widths (30 feet) for their single family homes
project, with the exception of reduced widths (28 feet) at places
where there were to be two wetlands crossings. They also submitted
evidence that an agreement for the discontinuance of Millstone Avenue
had been obtained (as discussed at the August 8 meeting of the
Planning Board). In addition, they submitted agreements for "no
touch" (vegetated) buffers of 25-100 feet on those house lots on Lot
17 which abutted wetland areas; and that a restrictive Homeowners
Covenant would be placed on all Lot 17 houselots. Only natural
fertilizers would be allowed for use in that area. In addition, it
was stated that all landscaping done by the developer would not
contain invasive species, although a restriction of this sort would
not be placed on the individual homeowner.
They noted that "we have provided you with an analysis from Gove Environmental Consultants which confirms that the treatment design is effective in dealing with road runoff with no impact to the conservation area."
It was also noted that "Our discussions with the Nature Conservancy were very positive and we believe this letter reflects our understanding."
Prior to the October 24 meeting, the Planning Board also received a communication from the Manchester Conservation Commission. There were 26 comments about inadequacies or incomplete information in the Waterford plans. The communication also referred to the portion of the Gove report which dealt with the control of pollution via grass swales, vegetated buffers and flow of runoff into a red maple swamp prior to reaching the Atlantic white cedar swamp basis. It suggested a modification of these plans.
The MCC also requested that "the Manchester Planning Board not vote on this application until the above comments are addressed." It was noted that "a full set of revised plans and a response to each of the above comments should be submitted to the MCC for consideration at one of its meetings in November."
Materials supplementary to the Planning Board's agenda can be obtained by the public prior to the established meeting date. While the balance of the above information was supplied as requested to a member of the Sierra Club on October 22, the Gove study was not included in these materials. Moreover, the study had not been discussed in any detail at meetings of the Manchester Conservation Commission, nor was it made available to the public either at these meetings or from the Planning Department office.
On October 24, when the Waterford application was about to be considered, Pam Goucher, Deputy Director of Planning, announced that Todd Connors, Cindy Carlson and two other members of the Conservation Commission had met with members of the development team in the Planning Department office that afternoon. The Gove report was apparently discussed at that time. Goucher announced that she and Mr. Connors felt that the majority of the outstanding issues that the MCC felt needed to be addressed had been resolved. There was no public notification of this meeting and no reporters were in attendance.
At the actual Planning Board meeting, Connors, who is also an alternate member of the Planning Board, stated that he felt the vegetated buffers would be helpful and that "there will be additional drainage detail which will be sent to the Conservation Commission if necessary." He also noted that agreements on water quality testing and monitoring of the construction had been arranged. The previously-stated requested reappearance of the developers at a Manchester Conservation Commission meeting was not mentioned.
It was announced that the Planning Department Staff recommended that the Board give "tentative" approval to the development application pending the completion of a list of conditions which primarily concerned financial arrangements, inspections, reviewing agencies, permits, homeowner's covenant, special development plans etc.
The Planning Board then voted unanimously to approve the application. Attending the meeting were Board Members: Chair Joan D. Bennett, Vice-Chair Ronald Poltak, Peter Capano, Kevin McCue, Raymond Clement, Christopher Dodd, Alderman Mary Sysyn; and Alternates: Todd Connors and Steven Freeman
BACK TO OTHER TOPICS FOR: