16D-011 #8 Greely Ave Florence (letter)� * I
�
-- '----'- _- __--
41
44
r V-e CLA
- -- � - e� -Q.-� � .���: -tom
�j46 SCL
Olt
I � v
c � .mil ��..o env<&
1
r)
f �fiC��,
��,3 s� y 9973
MEMORANDUM
TO: Dan Yacuzzo, Chair, planning Board
FR: Ned Huntley, Assistant City Engineer Department of public Works
DA: July 24, 2001 kl01
RE: File # 00-Sp-62, Greeley Avenue, Map 16D, Parcel 11- 2New 1 f
CC: amily units
file
The DepartmeW of Public Works has reviewed the above referenced application for the following it ems:
Traffic:
-I- Volume & Impact on City Street
x Roadway Capacity
-- -Adequacy of City Road Construction
x Site Distances
x Parking
x Driveway Openings
Utilities:
x Drainage Into City Stormwater System
x Capacity of Stormwater Line
x Sanitary Sewer
_ Water
Other:
The Department of Public Works has the following comments:
No Concerns, project will not have an impact on any items reviewed
Traffic Study is required
Roadway does not have adequate capacity to handle the additional traffic
Roadway's not adequately constructed to handle proposed increase in traffic
Site Distances are not adequate for proposed project
Parking spaces do not meet minimum requirements
Parking spaces are too close to driveway opening
Driveway openings are not adequate for proposed use
x City stormwater system - Shall not be used to
from road acct drarnage fTOm1' (need to grade away
Stormwater system does not meet minimum requirements for reduction of Total
Suspended Solids (TSS)
Sanitary Sewer line is not adequately sired for proposed use
x Sewer line connection is not properly shown — No emneaon shown on plan
Water line is not adequately sized for proposed use
x Water line connection is not properly shown -No connectio shown on plan
__ Other Comments:
Each Unit most have a separate water meter
Each unit must apply for and receive sewer and water entry permits per the DPW requirements
.. .... ..... ......:;_:i.::.,...,.., ... ,._�_.. ,...,,.._.._... _. ,.... >....,. , ..._.... ...,.,._��w::�'�m....,.:: Cal.. .,.�,,...,..,.,.....,,._.��..., ,.,,_...__.. �.. a... ....w.._,_,.,._...,..,....,.... ..�..._........._...�....,
M5
MEMORANDUM
TO: Dan Yacuzzo, Chair, Planning Board l
FR: Ned Huntley, Assistant City Engineer Department of Public Works
DA July 24, 2001
RE: File # 00-SP-62, Greeley Avenue, Map 16D, Parcel 11- 2New 1 family units
CC: file
The Department of Public Works has reviewed the above referenced application for the following items:
Traffic: Utilities:
• Volume & Impact on City Street x Drainage Into City Stormwater System
• Roadway Capacity x Capacity of Stormwater Line
--2L- Adequacy of City Road Construction x Sanitary Sewer
• Site Distances x Water
• Parking Other:
• Driveway Openings
The Department of Public Works has the following comments:
No Concerns, project will not have an impact on any items reviewed
Traffic Study is required
Roadway does not have adequate capacity to handle the additional traffic
Roadway is not adequately constructed to handle proposed increase in traffic
Site Distances are not adequate for proposed project
Parking spaces do not meet minimum requirements
Parking spaces are too close to driveway opening
Driveway openings are not adequate for proposed use
x City stormwater system - Shall not be used to accept drainage from driveway (need to grade awry
from road
Stormwater system does not meet minimum requirements for reduction of Total
Suspended Solids (TSS)
Sanitary Sewer line is not adequately sized for proposed use
x Sewer line connection is not properly shown -N connection shown on plan
Water line is not adequately sized for proposed use
x Water line connection is not properly shown -No connection shown on plan
x Other Comments:
• Each unit must have a separate water meter
• Each unit must apply for and receive sewer and water entry permits per the DPW requirements
c
MCCuteh9on: - Greeley Ave. Type /// 24 -hr Rainfa//= 6.40" - >00 YR STORM
i Prepared by Harold L. Eaton & Assoc.
HydroCAD® 5.97 s/n 000524 ®1986 -2001 Applied Microcomputer Systems Page 1
8.16/2001
Subcatchment LOT: DRAINAGE FROM LOT
Runoff = 0.41 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume=
0.031 of
Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH =SCS, Time Span= 5.00 -30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Type III 24-hr Rainfall= 6.40"
Area (sf) CN Description
5,101 39 Lawn, landscaping
2,534 98 Impervious - roofs, walk, drive
7,635 59 Weighted Average
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity
5.0 Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
Direct Entry,
Pond LCB: Infiltration System
Inflow = 0.41 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume=
Outflow = 0.13 cfs @ 12.47 hrs, Volume= 0.031 of
Primary = 0.13 cfs @ 12.47 hrs, Volume= 0 .031 af, Atten= 70 %, Lag= 22.7 min
0.031 of
Routing by Stor -Ind method, Time Span= 5.00 -30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs / 2
Peak Elev= 96.76' Storage= 306 cf
Plug -Flow detention time= 19.6 min calculated for 0.031 of (100% of inflow)
Elevation Cum-Store
(feet) (cubic -feet)
92.00 0
93.00 52
94.00 111
95.00 176
96.00 250
! rimary OutFlow (Free Discharge)
I =Infiltration
# Routing Invert Outlet Devices
1 Primary 0.00' Infiltration
Elev. (feet) 91.99 92.00 93.00 94.00 95.00 96.00
Disch. (cfs) 0.00 0.04 0.06 0.07 0.09 0.11
j
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT F ".CULATIONS
4+
I /
INFILTRATION SYSTEM - DESIGN CALCULATIONS
LEACHING CATCH BASIN
DESIGN DATA INPUT _ ~~
INSIDE DIAMETER (FT.): 6.00
OUTSIDE DIAMETER (FT.): 6.6
MINIMUM STONE THICKNESS (FT): 2
BOTTOM ELEV OF STRUCTURE 92
EFFECTIVE HEIGHT OF STRUCTURE 4
DESIGN CALCULATIONS (LEACHING CATCH BASIN):
FOR ELEV.
STORAGE VOLUMES PER STRUCTURE:
TREAT EXCAVATION AS TRUNCATED CONE
DEPTH (HEIGHT)(FT)
RADIUS OF BOTTOM (FT):
AREA OF BOTTOM (SQ FT):
RADIUS OF TOP (FT):
AREA OF TOP (SQ. FT):
VOLUME OF EXCAVATION (CU FT):
RADIUS OF BASIN INTERIOR (FT):
AREA OF BASIN BOTTOM (SQ.FT):
VOLUME OF BASIN INTERIOR (CU FT):
NET VOLUME OF STONE (CU. FT):
NET STORAGE IN STONE (CU.FT):
TOTAL STORAGE (BASIN + STONE) (CF):
INFILTRATION SURFACE AND RATES:
DEPTH (HEIGHT)(FT)
DIAMETER OF BOTTOM (FT):
CIRCUMFERENCE OF BOTTOM (FT):
DIAMETER OF TOP (FT):
CIRCUMFERENCE OF THE TOP (FT):
APPROX. SIDEWALL AREA (SQ.FT.):
BOTTOM AREA (SQ.FT.):
TOTAL INFILTRATIVE SURFACE (SQ.FT.)::
UNIT INFILTRATION RATE (CFS /SF):
INFILTRATION RATE FOR STRUCTURE (CFS):
McCutch- LCB.wb3
STONE SIZE (IN.): (WASHED)
% VOIDS IN STONE:
EXCAVATION SIDE SLOPE (ASSUMFr,)
x HORIZ.: 1 VERT.; x =
INFILTRATION RATE (IN. /HR.):
FT /SEC =
92
93
94
95
96
0
1
2
3
4
33.30
33.30
33.30
5.3
5.3
88.2
88.2
88.2
88.2
88.2
5.3
5.8
6.3
6.8
7.3
88.2
105.7
124.7
145.3
167.4
0.0
96.8
211.9
346.7
502.9
3.00
3.00
3.00
3.00
3.00
28.3
28.3
28.3
28.3
28.3
0.0
28.3
56.5
84.8
113.1
0.0
68.6
155.3
261.9
389.9
0.0
24.0
54.4
91.7
136.4
0.00
52.27
110.92
176.49
249.55
0
1
2
3
4
10.6
10.6
10.6
10.6
10.6
33.30
33.30
33.30
33.30
33.30
10.60
1150
12.60
13.60
14.60
33.30
2'; +4
39.58
42.73
45.87
0.00
.87
72.88
114.04
158.34
88.25
88.25
88.25
88.25
88.25
88.25
123.12
161.13
202.29
246.58
0.000463
0.000463
0.000463
0.000463
0.000463
0.04
0.06
0.07
0.09
0.11
1.5 -2
35%
0.5
20
C- 000463
0 /16/01
r
m
mm
H0
Z�
G) cn
--i
C
N >- n
. OZ
=0
CO m
cnrn
H
Z
° am ° r-
0 om
n=rm
00
gmcna
ocn000
m��c cn or-
_ r�o or
oao M N'°v
v 4 4 ; -scan �m
o -� MG)
4
4 4
., 4 4
44' '�� �D
4 _ rn
< <L
° 4
c --C-
0
M
M
'v
0
0
z
M
m
a
CO)
M
Q
4 °
°
a
4 (
4 <
(z
<
4 w
w.
� A
4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 X 4 4 .
4 4
=oo e
c -
ZZN
MM
0
0
N
A
71
4
am - nooc)a
o3aD r
rooc
�o< M. m
x o 0
EOMM
"
z -n-4ED0
qx ° �av
mmmi
z
0
a
N 2
3 m
m a
<z
4 a
of m
-q
M
N
2
N
r
M
a
m
N
n
0
a
N 2
3 m
m a
<z
4 a
of m
-q
M
N
2
N
r
M
a
m
N
n
uaiuzi
THU 09:50 FAX 14132384276 NEWMAN ENVIR ENG
FORM 11 SOIL EVALUATOR FORH
Page 1 of 1
Location Address or Lot No.: Dave McCutcheod
Lot on Greeley Avenue, Florence, MA
g aterla outwash sand & gravel Depth to bedrock: > 120 inches
en h
D o ¢roLn____d«�= Siding eater in hole: NO Weeping from pit face: NO
Estimated Seasonal High Groundwater; 54" based on soil mottling
NOTE: Perc test hole did not have "C 1" horizon; coarse sand stri
"B" d gravel was located directly below
horizon
BASED ON DEP APPROVED FORM - 12/07/95
IC:IBNGE%SOII.SUrr.DOCI
i
k1002
Distances from:
Open water body >
> 100 feet D
Drainageway — - feet (roadway)
Possible wet area >
> 100 feet P
Property line >
> 5 feet
Drinking water well >
> 1 feet O
Other
:DEEP OBSERVATION HOLE LOG
Depth from Soil horizon S
Soil Texture S
Soil Color S
Soil O
Other I
surface (
(USDA
(Munsell) M
Mottling (
(structure, stone. bout
,co��ist., gravel 0
0
A s
sand loam 1
10YR3/2 n
none observed l
loose, friable, roots, n
8 - 25" B v
v. sandy loam 1
10YR&8
none, observed l
loose
25 - 60" C
& gravel g
I ,
gravel -y20 %; 2 - 6" ston s
s - y20%
C 1 s
sandy loam 1
10YR7/4 1
10YR.6/3 l
loose, friable, roots
w/ sandy veins 1
110YR5 /8
60 - 120' C 2 c
> 10% at 54" g
>
- 5%
coarse sand & 1
10YR5 /2 . 1
10YR3/2 l
loose
, granular, roots to 2
2"
gravel b
band at 72" g
gravel --5 %, stones <5%
Parent Geolo is M ' 1
Weather. Snnny. art to
Position on landscape (sketch) :
Onn to Review
Deep Hole Number: N0. 1 Date: 09/01 /01 Time: 4+ AM
Location: See plan by others
Land use: yard Slope ( %): Surface stones: ,one
Vegetation: grasses, shrubs, maple
Landform: outwash plain
08/02/01 THU 09:50 FAX 14132384278 NEWMAN ENVIR ENG Q003
FORM 12 - PERCOLATION TES T
Location Address or Lot No.: Dave McCutcheon
Lot on Greeley Av4nue. Florence, MA
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUStUl
Florence, Massachusetts
Percolation Test,*
Date: August 1, 2001 Time: see below
Observation Hole No. 1
I I
Depth of Pere 62. I
I
Start Pre- Soak 4:50 PM
End Pre -soak Poured 24 gallons & could not maintain le liquid iepth
Time at 12" in pert hole. Pere hole dry at 4:55 PX
r flme at 0" I
Time at 6"
I
Time (0 b - 6
Rate (min.4neh) < 2 mpi
' 3PUDimum of 1 rcoLation test I
l� must he pertoivied in both the p imary area AN' reserve urea,
Site Pmsed ® Site' Failed ❑
Performed by: Gregory J Newman, P.E.
Witnessed by
Comments: Did not find a C 1" horizon at Pere site; tested "C 2" horizon
i -
BASED ON DEP APPROVED FORM - 12/07/95
(C:IBNGIN\SS.S ITEiC -ERVR I A.D0Q
.�
�C; �1b pl J6�9IG� '' n 11 ]3:�
KNOW ALL P BY TNW PRESENTS
AAeefsd Pesnrissis. �rlaie, Florence. MA 01062
`�....ctwn . Nosh rno�.. ;tom p,MGar Avi .
THAT We, Peter J. McNulty, of VYWMeet, MA and Marion Churchill, Sdxftfie, W.
in consideration of Fifty Two Thousand (>);62,000.00) iflollaM
grant to David J. Mcr.'•tftheon of 41 Loudville Road,
Easthampton, MA 01027,
with Warranty Covenants
The land, together with any buildings thereon, in Northampton, Hampshire County,
Massachusetts, more particularly bounded and described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto
and hereof made a part.
sr
WITNESS our hands and seals this day of May, 2001.
County of Sckarb►aws
STATE OF NEW YORK
May Z ' 4 1 2001
Then . personally appeared the above named Marion Churchill and acknowledged the
for%artg
to be her free act and deed, before me
N .o -�: °
r✓Q
Notary Public
,, ., i,tC :. _
My commission expires:
•. : n:
.. �; '''f::; ' ',.•'
\
CKMESAL
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSEN*voF c sr TEOFNExYOR,
'
COMMON EVWS
Hafipsh 8s
AXY31
M 1
May A / a �
Then personally appeared the above named Peter J. McNulty and acknowledged the
foregoing instrument to be his free act and deed, before me
Charles F. Ksienietiv ,Notary Public
My commission expires: December 3, 04
Doc. 9921IYP15 2 AZM 06,IgU"01
A certain tract of land situated at the junction of North Main Street and
Greeley Avenue, in the Village of Florence, in Northampton, Hampshire
County, Massachusetts, being Lot No. 4 on Plan of Lots recorded in Book
340, Page 10, Hampshire County Registry of Deeds, further bounded and
described as follows:
Beginning at the junction of Y77th Main Street with Greeley Avenue;
thence southeasterly by said North Main Street sixty-six (66) feet to Lot
No. 3 on said Plan, which point is marked by a stake; thence S. 57' 35' W.
one hundred fifteen and one half (115 1/2) feet along Lot No. 3 to a stake
and Lot No. 5 on said Plan, which point is marked by a stake; thence N.
32' 25' W. along Lot No. 5 on said Plan sixty-six (66) feet to said Greeley
Avenue, which point is marked by a stake; thence N. 57' 35' E. along said
Greeley Avenue to said North Main Street one hundred fifteen and one half
(115 112) feet and the place of beginning. Containing 28 square rods of
land, more or less.
Being the same premises described as Parcel 11 in deed to these
grantors recorded in the Hampshire County Registry of Deeds in Book
2265, Page 64.
MMTHAMPTON
DEEDS REt31:s
HAMPSHIRE
C ANCELLED
06!01/01 1:4" 01
0W= VAM%
FEE $237.12
COF ; E237 _ 12
ATTZST: SAt.^. �.o b itZCIS'1'E!t
MAaiJl101iZ Z. DONOWIL
C l.".. a
IRV 20
A(
AA
U5/UZ /Ui THU UU:4U FAa 14132384276 NEWIIMI ENVIR ENG
NEWMAN ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING
FAX COVER PAGE
DATE: Aug ust 2, 2001
TO: Don. Miner (H.L. Eaton
FROM: Greg Newman PHONE: 413- 238 -5383
FAX: 413- 238 -4276
ADDRESS: NEWMAN ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING
21 Guard road
Worthington, MA 01098
Number of pages (including this page) 5;
MESSAGE:
RE : McCutcheon Properties — Greelev Ave. & Hatfield Street
Attached are soil logs and perc test results for your 'use.
10001
08/02/01 THU 09:50 FAX 14132384276 NEWNAN ENVIR ENG 0002
FORM 11- SOIL: EVALUATOR FORM
Page 1 of 1
Location Address or Lot No.: Dave McCutcheod
Lot on Greeley Avenue, Florence, MA
OnnYUe Revie
Deep Hole Number: NQ. 1 Date: OS101 /01 Time: +
4 AM Weather. Snnny. partly to •dv _
Location: See plan by others
Land use: yam,_ Slope (� /u): _2-3%, Surface stones: one
Vegetation: grasses, shrubs, maple
Landform: outwash plain
Position on landscape (sketch) : -
Distances from:
Open water body > 1 dU feet Drainageway > 10 feet (roadway)
Possible wet area > 100 feet Property line > 5 feet
Drinking water well > 100 feet Other
DEEP OBSERVATION HOLE LOG
Depth from Soil Horizon Soil Texture Soil Color so Other
(USDA (Mansell) MoWutg ' (structure, stones, boulders, resist.,
(inches) 1p+vd .
i
0 ` 8 " A sandy loam , 10YR3/2 none observed loose, friable, roots,
8 - 25" g
v. sandy loam 10YR6/8 none, observed loose, granular, roots
& gravel I gravel —20 %; 2 -6" sto es
25 — 60" >� 20%
ICI sandy loam 10YR7 /4 10YR6/2 loose, friable, roots
W/ sandy veins 10YR5 /8
> 16% at 54" gravel —5 %; 2 -6" stop s-5%
60 — 120" C 2 coarse sand & 10YR5 /2 10YR3/2 loose
I , granular, roots 72"
gravel band at 72" gravel ^-5 %, stones <59
i
Parent Geologic Material: outwash sand &gravel Depth to bedrock: > 120 inches
Death to M tnri«A=- Standing water in hole: NO Weeping from pit face: NO
Estimated Seasonal High Groundwater: 54" based on soil mottling
NOTE: Pere test hole did not have "C 1" horizon;
"B" horizon coarse sand and gravel was located directly below
BASED ON DEP APPROVED FORM - 12/07/95
[C:IENCINWILSU1TMOCI
;,_
08/02/01 THU 09:50 FAX 14132384270 NEWNAN ENVIR ENG IM003
FORM 12 - PERCOLATION TESL'
Location Address or Lot No.: Dave MCCutc6eon s
Lot on Greeley Avenue. Florence. MA
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHWSEITS
Florence, Massachnsetta .
Percolation Test*
Date: A }
ugust I, 2001 Time: see below
Observation Hole No. 1 I I
Depth of Pere 6T
I
Stall Pre -Soak 4:M PM I
End Pre -soak Poured 24 gallons & could not maintain 12' liquid depth
Time at 12' in pert hole. Perc hole dry at 455 PM
r1li a at J" I
TimeM6'
Time (9' - 6") i I
Rate (min./inch) < 2 mpi
'N"nimum of 1 percolaliou test must be performed in boar the p `
prim' are ?�I�'D reserve area.
Site Ptusspd ® Site Failed
Performed by: Gregory J Newman, P E.
Witnessed bar
Comm
one: Did not find ° C 1 horizon at peso site; tested "C 2" horizon
BASED ON DEP APPROVED FORM - 12/07/95 :' (C:\ENGIN\SS S1TE\C ERVRIA E fir:
8.9SV
A"an of Land in #crjhj#pb
Scale /6 feel to an 1,wh
sfpr. Z If, /922
GRFELEY A YENIF
Y �,
AN AK7,
of sw
A7
It
flldrk
114.6
s
i�
LAND
51W 27
Hampohire PoStstry DIstria
Se.* -'f ' I . n 3.?
CA,1'1th S&r►l!)Vrfw
P&mPs)'IPO tiounty,Fteneli
Re(vied
A !644tpLnt,Rs,,O
point where it now can be said that a stri/vocal den re s
he who claims a way is public, to show t
"it has become public in character in a ways:
1) a laying out by public authorie mann r
p scribed by statute (see G.L. c. 832); ( pr cription; and (3) prior to 1846, a on by t e
owne to public use, permanent and ul (cit i tions mtted), coupled with an ex impli_ -d
accepta a by the public." Fen Town of
Middlebor h, 7 Mass. App. 80, 83 -84 979).
The trial la er in the Fenn case h obviously read the
Clark case as he put 'nto evidence t same type of evidence
as had satisfied the Su eme Cour , in 1903, that the "road
leading to Jeffries Neck" as public way. The same evi-
dence was insufficient in 19 to convince the Appeals Count
that Tispaquin and Sho Stre is in Middleborough were
public. The Court ob erved rathe acidly that "[alge by
itself is a neutral actor, there bei ancient private, Ls
well as ancient p lic ways...." Fenn at
I suggest o you that the Courts are 1 swilling thr.n
previously t assume that ways are "public" and ow require a
higher qu tum of proof that such is the case to avoid the
conseq nces attendant to a way being public, such as iabil.-
ity or failure to maintain, the expense of maintenanc acrd
sn w removal and, not coincidentally, ready divisability w
and by ANR plans.
1.2.3 STATUTORY PRIVATE WAYS
Note that Sections 21 through 24 refer as well o
"private ways." Massachusetts is alone, so far as I
- 11 -
aware, in having this anomalous creature called a "priva e
way" which is laid out by public authority and the existenc
•
in the statues, of this creature has been the cause of muc h
litigation and uncertainty.
A statutory private way is open to use by the public.
It is laid out by the selectmen by the same procedure as a
town way, although usually on the petition of one or more
persons to whom the way will be of most benefit. The costs
of the layout, necessary land acquisition, construction,
maintenance and repairs are chargeable to "the persons upon
whose application such way is laid out, relocated, altered or
discontinued or upon whose application specific repairs are
made...." (Section 24). The town has no obligation to
maintain a statutory private way and, while such a way is
laid out upon the petition of an individual(s), it is not
only he (they) who have the right to use the way; the public
likewise has an easement of passage o -Pr statutory private
ways.
A private way laid out across land of Denham from u
public way to land of Slade, which Denham alleged to be foi
the "use of a single individual, and not for'any public use;
that the effect [of the layout was] to compel them to sell ar
easement in their land [to Slade, and was therefore ar
unconstitutional action]" led the Supreme Court in Denham v.
County Commissioners of Bristol,, 108 Mass. 202 (1871) to say:
- 12 -
"It is true that ways of this description arB
denominated 'private ways' [by the-predecessor statute,
and they are allowed] to be laid out for the use of on:
person, who may be, and in this case is, ordered to pay
the whole amount of land damages thereby incurred. It
appears to us however that such a way is not distin-
guishable in any other respect from a town way, properly
so called. The easement or right of passage, created b7
laying it out, is not the private right of the individu-
al whose special accommodation it may have been laid
out, nor is it meant exclusively for his individual
travel. It is laid out on his petition; but it is no
his way, in the sense of belonging to him personally, o=
as one of the appurtenances or easements of the farm o�
estate with which it communicates. He has no power to
close, alter, widen or control it; and he has no righ.
in it, except in common with all others who have occa-
sion to pass over it. The public easement is exactl-
the same as it is in all other ways laid out by public
authority.
"All the different ways, which towns are authorize
by law to lay out, are in truth public highways, for the
public without discrimination has the right to use them.
It is wholly immaterial by what name they are callei
[citations omitted].
"Our system for the laying out and establishment of
public roads recognizes three different kinds: 1.
Highways, technically and properly so called, which ar
laid out by county officers, and i,n which the land
damages are paid from the county treasury; 2. town
ways, which may be laid out by town authorities, and i;n
which the town is required to pay the land damages; ant
3. private or particular ways, in which the selectmen
(or in case of appeal, the county commissioners) may
order the whole or part of the land damages, as they
deem reasonable, to be paid by the person or persons
specially and peculiarly benefited by the laying out.
In all these different kinds of ways, the towns are to
pay all the expense of construction with their respec-
tive limits; and as has been shown, all are public
roads."
Thus, a "statutory" private way is a way laid out by a
town, where the land damages occasioned by the layout, are
charged to the petitioner (G.L. c. 82, Section 24).
- 13 -
A "statutory" private way is not a "public way" or a way
"maintained and used as a public way" for the purposes of tre
Subdivision Control Law (G.L. c. 41, SS 81L and 81P),
Casaqrande v. Town Clerk of Harvard, 377 Mass. 703 (1979),
and hence the subdivision of land abutting on a statutory
private way requires compliance with the definitive subdivi-
sion process.
In passing upon whether the Legislature could pass a law
permitting the expenditure of public funds to remove ice and
snow from "private ways open to the public use" the Supreme
Court said, in Opinion of the Justices, 313 Mass. 779 (1943)
that while the words "'private' may occasionally be used iz
the statutes with a different meaning (citing G.L. c. 84,
Sections 12 -14], they commonly mean ways of a special typ:
laid out by public authority for the use of the publi:
[citing G.L. c. 82, Sections 21 -32A and Denham]. Suc',z
'private ways' are private only in name, but are in all other
respects public." The Court then went on to discuss ways
open to public use by virtue of dedication (discussed infra)
and then added to the confusion by saying:
"But the words 'private ways,' as commonly under-
stood and as sometimes used in the opinions of this
court, have a broader meaning than either of the mean-
ings here mentioned [citations omitted]. The words may
well mean or include defined ways for travel, not laid
out by public authority or dedicated to public use, that
are wholly the subject of private ownership, either by
reason of the ownership of the land upon which they are
laid out by the owner thereof [citations omitted] or by
- 14 -
1 -1� .
reason of ownership of easements of way over land :)f
another person."
1.2.4 PRIVATE WAYS
In distinguishing the "statutory" private ways from tie
more commonly understood private way last referred to in t e
Opinion of the Justices, supra, it can be seen that there s
also in Massachusetts a "private way" which is not available
for public use.
In W. D. Cowls, Inc. V. Woicekoski, 7 Mass. App. 18
(1979), the plaintiff sought to enjoin the defendants from
interfering with its use of Old Stage Road in Belchertown,
claiming that Old Stage Road was a public way and defendants
could not maintain a barrier across it.
"If a road has never been dedicated and accepted,
laid out by public authority, or established by pre-
scription, such a road is private [citations omitted],
If any road could be made public solely by acts of th
landowners, with no accompanying act by public author
ities, the municipality would be responsible for th
maintenance and repair of countless roads."
After reviewing the facts in the case including words is
deeds describing the way as a "town road" and "the highway'
and an 1830 map showing Old Stage Road, the Court held "no
conclusive evidence was presented which would have shown tha:
the road came, under the 'public,' rather than the 'private'
designations.... ". W. D. Cowls at 20. See, also, Wittevel(i
V. City of Haverhill,, 12 Mass. App. 876 (1981) .
The Cowls case and several of its progeny, including
Fenn v. Town of Middleborough, 7 Mass. App. 80 (1979) and
- is -
Casag rande v. Town Clerk of Harvard, 377 Mass. 703, make i't
clear that: (1) the burder of proof as to whether a way is
public or private can no longer be met, as it was in 1915 i;i
Reed v. Mayo, by a "presumption" that all necessary publi
actions were accomplished; (2) that there can be ancien•:
private ways as well as public ways; (3) that the proponen
that a way is public must prove it "conclusively "; and (41
that a statutory private way (G.L. c. 82, Section 21 -32A) is
not a "public way" or a "way maintained and used as publi:
way" under the Subdivision Control Law. G.L. c. 41, Sections
81K -81GG.
Private ways most commonly known to us in our practic
are subdivision ways; private ways are in all respects
private, being laid out, constructed and maintained by
private individuals for their private purposes. The publi:
uses such ways only with the consent of the owner, although
such consent is so often given in the case of residential
subdivisions it is often assumed by laymen that subdivision
roads are "public" long before they are accepted by towr.
meeting.
1.3 MAINTENANCE
Public ways are maintained at public expense. Chapter
81 state highways must be maintained by the state and c. �2
highways and town ways must be maintained at town expense
(some of which may be reimbursed by the state).
- 16 -
Failure to maintain a state highway results in the
imposition of liability on the state (G.L. c. 81, Section 1;1)
and such is also the case as to c. 82 highways and town ways
for a town (G.L. c. 84, Sections 1, 15, 22).
G.L. c. 84 sets the obligations of a town, not only to
maintain, repair and remove snow and ice from highways ar.d
town ways, but also dedicated (see discussions infra) ways
(Section 23 -25) in certain circumstances.
Section 23 states in part: "A way opened and dedicated
to the public use, which has not become a public way, shall
not except as provided in the following two sections, be
chargeable upon a town as a highway or town way unless laic
out and established in the manner prescribed by statute."
Section 24 imposes liability for failure to maintainz
dedicated ways where the town fails to maintain barrier;
between a public way and an unsafe dedicated way, and sectio:l
25 imposes liabi -'Aty if it can be proven that the town
maintained the dedicated way at any time within six years
prior to the accident.
Private ways are maintained at the expense of abutters
(G.L. c. 84, Section 12) but public moneys may, if the town
so votes, be, expended on private ways for removal of snow and
ice (G.L. C. 40, Sections 6C and 6D) and temporary repairs of
private ways may be authorized in municipalities adopting a
bylaw pursuant to c. 40, Section 6N.
- 17 -
c
measurements of the way, is filed with the town clerk, and
"not less than seven days thereafter ", is accepted by the
town meeting (Section 23).
The town meeting vote to accept a lay out requires only
a majority vote, but if funds for construction are to be
appropriated, or land taken, those votes require a two - thirds
vote.
Section 24 requires that the selectmen adopt an order of
taking for the lay out within 120 days of the town meeting
vote accepting the lay out; obviously, this is not required
if the way is to be given to the town as would be the case
with a private subdivision way.
NOTE: There is no statutory requirement for the DPVA,
county or towns, to record highway plans at the registry of
deeds!
A "q 2 :'4 ':7 4 "P7tIVATE '`WAYS
Private ways, if they are intended to constitute front-
age under the Subdivision Control Laws, must be laid out and
constructed in accordance with the provisions of G.L. c. 41,
SS 81K -81GG, otherwise a landowner may create such private
ways crossing his property as he wishes.
A landowner whose interests will be served by the layout
and acceptance of a public way may make a voluntary gift cf
the land or an easement in the land over which the way is
constructed or to be constructed. All governmental entities
- 21 -
L
are authorized to accept gifts of land or interests in lan9,
but must do so by some objective, overt act (such as accept-
ing a deed of the land at the time the layout is accepted ay
the town meeting or city council); mere acquiesence to a
purported gift is insufficient. A common form of volunta =y
transfer is the conveyance to a town of an approved subdivi-
sion way and the town's acceptance of the developer's layout
of such way by town meeting vote.
3. OBTAINING FEE TITLE OR EASEMENTS OF PASSAGE FOR
PUBLIC WAYS
3.1 EMINENT DOMAIN
sually, common convenience and necessity requJKs the
lay out r alteration of a public way wher a voluntary
transfer is possible, either because a landowner _s
unwilling to make gift or because u
se the numbers of land-
owners who have to be alt wi In this situation, tke
Massachusetts Constitution,
1, Art. 10, Amend. Art. .19
y purposes.
Art. X And whenev the public exigenci s
require that a property of an individual should e
appropriate o public uses, he sha receive a reaso -
able compe sation therefor.
authorizes takings for
Xeets, legislature may by special acts the purpose
of ng out, including or relocating 'highways �r
st authorize the taking in fee by the commoni-
wealth, or by a county, city or town, of more land a;zd
property than are needed for the actual construction , Df
such highway or street . .
- 22 -
�0 �o
Vr t
front vard
z.
N ` '
ao r .......�...�
15.0' finish floor = 103.0 \i
n ` "j 5.0'
\ \\ \ \\ \ \\\\\\ \\34.0' \ \ \\ , \ \\\\ \ \\
•�,`. .11 O.
h a' #
porch ga 111
(n r 12.0'
t 1 1 0
porch tO L
V
m * o 4 \ v M
Z - finish floor = 103.0 rn
LLJ / N o
ELI \
1AJ d
UA-
/U) 0
m
drivewa
5
C x rear void L /
x RELOCATED WORD FRAME
O '2 GARAGE
0 ,o o FINISH FLOOR = 00.5 DEEP TEST
.c o AND PERC
U) m o
20.0'
N \ 4.5 N 24'42'36" W 66.21' ". �•�
MARY E. PERONI
BOOK 3431, PAGE 213
SEE: PLAN BOOK 32, PAGE 3
gon age
i
U
N o, house #6
1 � 0 7
O
S 24'42'36" E 66.00' I
s
Vl
O
®.
C)
J
C
N
J
�0 �o
Vr t
front vard
z.
N ` '
ao r .......�...�
15.0' finish floor = 103.0 \i
n ` "j 5.0'
\ \\ \ \\ \ \\\\\\ \\34.0' \ \ \\ , \ \\\\ \ \\
•�,`. .11 O.
h a' #
porch ga 111
(n r 12.0'
t 1 1 0
porch tO L
V
m * o 4 \ v M
Z - finish floor = 103.0 rn
LLJ / N o
ELI \
1AJ d
UA-
/U) 0
m
drivewa
5
C x rear void L /
x RELOCATED WORD FRAME
O '2 GARAGE
0 ,o o FINISH FLOOR = 00.5 DEEP TEST
.c o AND PERC
U) m o
20.0'
N \ 4.5 N 24'42'36" W 66.21' ". �•�
MARY E. PERONI
BOOK 3431, PAGE 213
SEE: PLAN BOOK 32, PAGE 3
gon age
i
U
N o, house #6
1 � 0 7
O
S 24'42'36" E 66.00' I
s
IS
I
Ot-
A. � �ls 1:
..
� . .A�7
i
+
� ,
� ,
�. "
v
J
�',-
x..,
;'�"s'rnw��
� �� �
r.. , � f ,
���
Y �4 �
.�,
r
w -
i
x 4i
T
AM
f
mom 9 a r
} f ,
S
Y �
f
NflRTHAMPTON POLICE DEPARTMENT
1 r ? usse llrl�, cSie�rkiemicz
CHIEF OF POLICE
Date: July 18, 2001
To: Office of Planning
From: Captain Michael B. a
RE: Zoning Board Appeals
• Cluster Development at 408 Bridge Road - Concerns about traffic exiting and
entering the complex. Traffic will be traveling at 40+ in both directions. Traffic
exiting will likely travel Easterly on most occasions, necessitating crossing the
Westerly lane of traffic. Also consideration should be given to making a turning lane
at the entrance. Wide entrance area is mandated.
• Northern Woods on North Farms Rd. - The Police Department has no objection to
this development. Three single- family homes will have no appreciable impact on
traffic or the area.
• Valley Milbank Partnership at 18 Michelman Avenue - Concerns about traffic
exiting onto Pleasant St. with limited view to the North is obscured by parked
vehicles. Pm unable to ascertain if vehicles can also exit through Milbank Avenue
(Pound Lane). I had previously expressed concern over suitable parking for all the
units, as well as guests, and that the lots be properly monitored for illegal parking.
• Slyvester's Restaurant on Pleasant Street - The Police Department has no objection to
the additions or renovations.
• North Main Street/Greeley Avenue Duplex - The Police Department has no objection
to this project.
• 40 Roe Avenue addition - The Police Department has no objection to this project.
• 53 -55 Chestnut Street renovation - The Police Department has no objection to this
project.
29 CENTER STREET, NORTHAMPTON, MA 01060 -3090 (413) 587 -1100 F AX: (413) 587 -1137
Planning Board - DecisiorS
File No.: PL- 2001 -0104
APPLICATION TYPE: SUBMISSION DATE:
PB Intern. Site Plan & Special Permi I 612912001
Applicant's Name:
NAME:
David McCutcheon
ADDRESS:
POBOX43
I
STATE: 2 E
EASTHAMPTON I
MA
1 01027
PHONE NO.:
FAX NO.:
(413) 529 -9973 I
(413) 529 -9231
EMAIL ADDRESS:
cell 563 -2315
Site Information:
STREET NO.:
NORTH MAIN ST
TOWN:
NORTHAMPTON MA 01060
MAP: BLOCK: LOT: I MAP DATE:
16D 011 1 001
Owner's Name:
NAME:
MCNULTY PETER J & JUDITH ANN
ADDRESS:
1 9 GREELEY AVE
TOWN: STATE: ZIP CODE:
FLORENCE I MA 1 01062
PHONE NO.: FAX NO.:
EMAIL ADDRESS
SITE ZONING:
URB
SECTION OF BYLAW:
16.12. 10.1 & 11.0
ACTION TAKEN:
Approved With Conditions
NATURE OF PROPOSED WORK:
Driveway access over side lot line for access to 2 -family house.
HARDSHIP:
CONDITION OF APPROVAL:
City of No ampton
Date: Septem r 11, 2001
Surveyor's Name:
COMPANY NAME:
ADDRESS:
I
TOWN: I STATE: I ' IP CODE:
PHONE NO.: I FAX NO
EMAIL ADDRESS:
I. A 4' high, continuous row of evergreen hedges must be planted along the property boundaries
abutting 179 North Main Street and 6 Greeley Avenue prior to the Issuance of a final Certificate of
Occupancy. -
2. The City stormwater system shall not be used to accept drainage from the driveway(driveway must
be graded away from the road).
3. Each unit must have a separate water meter.
4. Each unit must apply for and receive sewer and water entry permits per the DPW requirements
FINDINGS: S. The driveway may not be expanded beyond the existing width of 21 feet
The Planning Board GRANTED the Special Permit with Site Plan Approval based on the following plans:
I. "Site Plan, Northampton, Massachusetts" prepared for David McCutcheon, prepared by Harold L. Eaton and Associates, Inc. dated
June 13, 2001 and revised August 13, 2001.
2. 'Elevations" prepared for McCutcheon Development, Greeley Street, Florence MA., prepared by Lynn F. Dechesser, dated May 5, 2001
and revised June 21, 2001.
3. "Planting Plan & Plant List" prepared for David McCutcheon, Greeley Ave., Northampton MA., prepared by Marchele McCutch «on,
dated July 16, 2001.
In Granting the Special Permit, the Planning Board found.
A. The requested use protects adjoining premises against seriously detrimental uses because the project will add residential ho rsing
and utilize the existing driveway on Greeley Avenue.
B. The requested use will promote the convenience and safety of vehicular and pedestrian movement within the site and on adjacent
streets, minimize traffic Impacts on the streets and roads In the area because only one existing curb cut exists, there are no side alks in
front of the property and the existing driveway is 100 feet from the intersection of North Main Street and Greeley Avenue.
C The requested use will promote a harmonious relationship of structures and open spaces to the natural landscape, existing b !/dings
and other community assets In the area because the proposed structures will be in keeping with the existing neighborhood and
additional plentings will help the building blend with the neighboring residential structures.
GeoTMS ®1998 Des Lauders & Asaociates, Inc.
Planning Board - Decision City of No hampton
File No.: PL- 2001 -0104 Date: Septem t r 11, 2001
D. The requested use will not over load, and will mitigate adverse impacts on, the City's resources including the effect on the City's water
supply and distribution system, sanitary and storm sewage collection and treatment systems, fire protection, streets and sch Bois
because all runoff will be contained on site and recharged to the ground.
E. The requested use meets all special regulations set forth in Section 10 & 11 of the Zoning Ordinance.
F. The requested use bears a postive relationship to the public convience or welfare.
The use will not unduly impair the integrity of character of the district or adjoining zones, nor be detrimental to the health, mo a /s, or
general welfare.
The use shall be in harmony with the general purpose, and intent of the Ordinance.
G. The requested use will promote City planning objectives to the extent possible and will not adversely effect those objectives, as
defined in City master or study plans adopted under M.G.L Chapter 41, Section 81 -C and D.
In addition, in reviewing the Site Plan submitted with the application, the Planning Board found that the application complied with the
following technical standards:
1. Curb cuts are minimized by the use of the existing curb cut and driveway.
Z Pedestrian, vehicular and bicycle traffic are separated on site to the extent possible.
COULD NOT DEROGATE BECAUSE:
FILING DEADLINE: MAILING DATE: HEARING CONTINUED DATE: DECISION DRAFT BY: APPEAL DATE:
715/2001 711912001 812312001 91001
REFERRALS IN DATE: HEARING DEADLINE DATE: HEARING CLOSE DATE: FINAL SIGNING BY: APPEAL DEADLINE
7/12/2001
912/2001 812312001, 812312001 10/1/2001
FIRST ADVERTISING DATE: HEARING DATE: VOTING DATE: DECISION DATE:
711212001 1 7/26/2001 812312001 911112001
SECOND ADVERTISING DATE: HEARING TIME: VOTING DEADLINE: DECISION DEADLINE:
7119/2001 7.30 PM 121112001 121112001
MEMBERS PRESENT: VOTE:
Anne Romano votes to Grant
Julie Hooks Davis votes to Grant
George Kohout votes to Grant
Keith Wilson votes to Grant
Daniel Yacuzzo votes to Grant
Kenneth Jodrie votes to Grant
MOTION MADE BY: SECONDED BY: I VOTE COUNT:
DECISION:
Kenneth Jodrie
Keith Wilson 6 I Approved with Condhrons
MINUTES OF MEETING:
Minutes are available in the Office of Planning 8 Development
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
Pursuant to M.G.L. Chapter 40A, Section 11, I, Angela Dion, Board Secretary, hereb,r
certify that I caused copies of this Decision to be mailed, postage - prepaid, to thy:
Applicant and Owner on September 11, 2001.
GeoTMS ®1998 Des Lauders & Associates, Inc.
Planning Board - Decision City of Northampton
File No.: PL- 2001 -0104 Date: - September 11, 2001
Pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws (1VIGL ), Cha p ter 40A Section 11, no Special Permit y ,
or an extension odification
or renewal thereof, shall take effect until a copy of the decision bearing the certification of the City Clerk that tw my days
have elapsed after the decision has been filed, or if such an appeal has been filed that it has been dismissed or den d, is
recorded in the Hampshire County registry of Deeds or Land Court, as applicable and indexed under the name o the owner of
record or is recorded and noted on the owner's certificate of title. The fee for such recording or registering shall paid by the
owner or applicant. It is the owner or applicant's responsibility to pick up the certified decision from the City Clerk and
record it at the Registry of Deeds. (Please call the City Clerk prior to picking up the decision.)
The Northampton Planning Board hereby certifies that a Special Permit with Site Plan Approval has been APPROVED and
that copies of this decision and all plans referred to in it have been filed with the Planning Board and the City Clei k.
Pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 40A, Section 15, notice is hereby given that this decision is filed with the
Northampton City Clerk on the date below.
If anyone wishes to appeal this action, an appeal must be filed pursuant to MGL Chapter 40A, Section 17, with the Hampshire
County Superior Court or the Northampton District Court and notice of said appeal filed with the City Clerk with 'R twenty
days (20) of the date of that this decision was filed with the City Clerk.
Applicant: David McCutcheon — North Main Street
DECISION DATE: August 23,2001
200,1
)t--!a4j
j �A -0 �-
DECISION FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: September 11,
File # MP- 2001 -0153
S 6
APPLICANT /CONTACT PERSON David McCutcheon
ADDRESS/PHONE 12 TURKEY HILL RD (413) 529 -9973
PROPERTY LOCATION NORTH MAIN ST /GREELEY AVE
MAP 16D PARCEL 011 ZONE URB
p E C r �.
JUN t J 2001
CITY CLERKS OFF1 ;E
NORTHAMPTON MA 0 !060
THIS SECTION FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY:
PERMIT APPLICATION CHECKLIST
ENCLOSED REQUIRED DATE
ZONING FO�FILLED OU
Buildine Permit Filled out
Fee Paid
Tvneof Construction: CONSTRUCT TOWNHOUSE DUPLES W /12 X 24 PORCH CONNECTING MAKING
USE OF EXISTING GARAGE
New Construction
Non Structural interior renovations
Addition to Existine
Accessory Structure
Buildine Plans Included:
Owner/ Statement or License
3 sets of Plans / Plot Plan
THE FOLLOWING ACTION HAS BEEN TAKEN ON THIS APPLICATION:
A roved as presented/based on information presented.
Denied as presented:
fi
!/ Special Permit and/o Site Pl equired under: § , ° 1? /f GG
�C PLANNING BOARD ZONING BOARD
Received & Recorded at Registry of Deeds Proof Enclosed
Finding Required under: § w /ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
Received & Recorded at Registry of Deeds Proof Enclosed
Variance Required under: § w /ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
Received & Recorded at Registry of Deeds Proof Enclosed
Other Permits Required:
Curb Cut from DPW
Septic Approval Board of Health
Water Availability Sewer Availability
Permit from Conservation Co ssion
Signature of Building Official
Well Water Potability Board of Health
Permit from CB Architecture Committee
/, �' /--/ 2�
Date
Note: Issuance of a Zoning permit does not relieve a applicant's burden to comply with all Zoning
requirements and obtain all required permits from Board of Health, Conservation Commission, Department
of public works and other applicable permit granting authorities.
E L
'1 E����� 2001
iii F'i1e No. Q lS3
r�
CITY CLEF KS OFFICE
,; �; �ZO 7G PERIUrT APP.LIGATXON R (APT )N MA 01060
LEASE TYPE OR PRINT ALL INFORMATION
DEPT Of BUILDING INSPECTIONS ( / q �% / I ` �` 1
1. Nrfjj 0,
t_C ti.
�1• a 6 � j
Address:
L Telephone: `T
J l C t r �� --
2. Owner of Propl_rty:
Address: l/ �c1 �C (� . � �� /% /Z1 Telephone: S � 9 `( q
I
3. Status of Applicant: !/ Owner __Contract Purchaser Lessee -�_—
/ Other (explain): �/ f
4. Job Location: ( ew tvt ` 1��� 1��E� / ��
Parcel Id: Zoning Ma p# �r /` /
9 P Parcel# l ( District
(Td BE FILLED IN BY THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT)
5. Existing se of Structure/Pr /-
g -le
"
6. D scri ( (on of Proposed Use/V /Occupab7n: (Use additional sheets if necessary)
L `: r USA n �� cif -�Ct &7e /w i✓ f�✓t,' 1 fs 7'�r'�
7 ' t C I I P.M
7. Attached Plans: r/ Sketch Plan
Site Plan Engineered /Surve fed 'la is
Answers to the following 2 questions may be obtained by checking with the Building Dept or Planning Department Files.
8. Has a Special PermiWariance/Finding ever beeissued for /on the site?
NO DON'T KNOW • il, YES
IF YES, date
IF YES: Was tfle permit recorded at the Registry of Deeds?
NO DON'T KNOW YES
IF YES: enter Book
Page and/or Document #
9. Does the site contain a brook, body of water or wetlands? NO I/ /— S-
DON'T KNOW Y "E.S _
IF YES, has a permit been or need to be obtained from the Conservation Commission? - — -
Needs to be obtained Obtained
date issued:
(FORM CONTINUES ON OTHER SIDE)
11 1�
1 --i
Do any signs exist on-the property? YES NO
IF YES, describe size, type and location:
CM CLEMP. MI.
Are there any proposed changes to or additions of signs intended for the property? YES,
IF YES, describe size, type and location:__
11 - ALL XNFORMATXON MUST BE COMPLETED, Or PM?JfXT CAN .13B D1Q1XEL,) 1)1 r-:�-
LACK OF XNFORJ�TXOM. fl.
Existing Proposed
C__ I
r
76.�3
1 columa r o I., f-_ . : , '_. I j:1
C3,
L
- Required
By 1
Lot size
Frontage
Setbacks :!:JhC1n t
S i d E!
L: R:
rear
Building height
Bldg Square footage
%Open Space:
(l-ot area MiJIU-5 bldg
&P-Ixled parking)
� I
C —
L: _R: /5
17
L, a-3
# If -Parking S'pe /I.J
Jf If Loading D•:)(:ks Afq?zte
Fill:
(vO ' Z _ L ' m e'_& 10 C.2tion)
S 6
13. Certif
_
is tj _ U _catic-.n: I hereby cer;tify that the information
E: and accurate to the best Of my knowl edge.
- contairec"
DATE:
n
Noyr-
_: goo APPLICAN 's SIGNATURE
Permit d
,pniin r__ zarvin
q u i reme , r , Q as 9 coe-sa not r elieve an nii bLsrd
C13 MMIssal-on, Dep,.,rt-' a nd obtain nil "iquired n t" q>C'noittly jzIll
M,nt _f publia Works P from the Board off ",
and atherup Jon
P Perm Firijin•11rig
FILL #
- w)
CITY CLERKS OFFICE
NORTHAMPTON MA 01M
j i
rt
3 .
li
Ma
CITY OF NORTHAMPTON
PLANNING BOARD APPLICATION FOR:
3. Applicant's Name: DAVID J. MCCUTCHEON I
Address: PO BOX 43, 41 LOUDVILLE RD, EASTHAMPTOITelephone: 529 -9973
4. Parcel Identification: Zoning Map # 16D Parcel # 11 Zoning District: URB
. Street Address: NORTH MAIN STREET
Property Recorded in the Registry of Deeds: County: HAMPSHIRE gook: 6229 Page: 258
5. Status of Applicant: Owner X Contract Purchaser : Lessee
Other ; (explain)
6• Property Owner: SAME
Address: Telephone:
7• Describe Proposed Work/Project: (Use additional sheets if necessary):
CONSTRUCT TOWN HOUSE UNITS, CONNECTED BY ENCLOSED PORCHES AND
UTILIZE THE EXISTING GARAGE ON SITE.
Has the following information been included in the application? Site/Plot Plan YES
List of requested waivers YES Fee YES .. Signed/Denied Zoning Permit Application
8. Site Plan and Special Permit Approval Criteria. (If any permit criteria does not apply, explain wh y)
Use additional sheets if necessary. Assistance for completing this information is available througl
the Office of Planning & Development.
A. How will the requested use protect adjoining premises against seriously detrimental uses?
WILL ADD RESIDENTIAL HOUSING AND UTILIZE THE EXISTING DRIVEWAY (20 FEET WIDE)
ON GREELEY AVENUE.
How will the project provide for:
surface water drainage: WILL BE RETAINED ON SITE AND RECHARGED.
sound and sight buffers: MUCH OF EXISTING VEGETATION WILL BE RETAINED I
OR REPLACED.
the preservation of views, light and air: NO VIEWS EXIST; NO BARRIERS ARE
PROPOSED, AND RESIDENTIAL HOUSING USUALLY DOES NOT AFFECT THE AIR.
n
B. How will the requested use promote the convenience and safety of pedestrian movement within the ; ite and
on adjacent streets ? __OM y ONE EXTSTTN RTTRR CTTT FYT0'P0 e*Tn --TT -- ..w -.. J
NO SIDEWALKS EXIST IN FRONT OF PROPERTY.
How will the project minimiz traffic impacts on the streets and roads in the area?
USE OF EXISTING CURB CUT WILL RESTRICT ACCESS ON NORTH MAIN STREET]
Where is the location of driveway openings in relation to traffic and adjacent , ,
THE EXISTING DRIVEWAY IS 100 FEET FROM THE INTERSEC'�
NORTH MAIN STREET AND GREELEY AVENUE.
What features have been incorporated into the design to allow for: J
access by emergency vehicles: FFICE
USE OF 20 FOOT WIDE EXISTING DRIVEWAY. N RTNAMPT
the safe and convenient arrangement of parking and loading spaces:
GARAGE WILL BE MOVED TO REAR TO PROVIDE 2 -- 20 FOOT DEEP PARK NG SPACES.
provisions for persons with disabilities: DRIVEWAY AND SIDEWALKS WILL I
PROVIDE AT GRADE ACCESS TO FRONT DOORS. I
C. How will the proposed use promote a harmonious relationship of structures and open spaces to:
the natural Iandscape: PROPOSED STRUCTURES WILL HAVE FINISHED FLOOR
2 FEET ABOVE ELEVATION OF GREELEY AVENUE.
to existing buildings: PROPOSED STRUCTURE WILL HAVE A COLONIAL DESIGN.'
other community assets in the area: N/A
D. What measures are being taken that show the use will not overload the City's resources, including:
water supply and distribution system: ONLY TWO UNITS ARE PROPOSED TO .TIE
INTO THE EXISTING'WATER MAIN.
sanitary sewage and storm water collection and treatment systems: ONLY TWO UNITS
ARE PROPOSED TO TIE INTO THE EXISTING SANITARY SEWER LINE. I
fire protection, streets and schools: FIRE HYDRANTS EXIST IN THE AREA i t
AND THE UNITS ARE INTENDED FOR PERSONS OVER 55. i t
How will. the proposed project mitigate any adverse impacts on the City's resources, as listed i
above? A MINIMUM NUMBER OF UNITS IS PROPOSED.
E. List the section(s) of the Zoning Ordinance that states what special regulations are required for the
proposed project (flag lot, common drive, lot size averaging, etc.)
SECTION 6.12: VEHICULAR EGRESS /ACCESS TO A LOT.
5
How does the project meet the special requirements? (Use additional sheets if necessary)
THE PROPOSED PROJECT RETAINS THE USE OF GARAGE AND UTILIZES THE
EXISTING CITRR ('TTT (9 FFFT W TDF.)
F. State how the project meets the following technical performance standards:
1. Curb cuts are minimized: iTSF. nF FXTSTTNr. CURB TLT ANTI
DRTVF.W
Check off all that apply to the project: D E C E 0 LS
use of a common driveway for access to more than one bus i i
X use of an existing side street use of a loopei a rM 2
2. Does the project require more than one drivewav cut? CITY CLERKS Of ICE
X NO YES (if yes, explain why) NORTHAMPTON MA 1060
i
3. Are pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular traffic separated on -site?
YES X NO (if no, explain why)
FOR PROJECTS THAT REQUIRE E TERMEDIATE SITE PLAN APPROVAL, ONLY , SIGN
APPLICATION AND END HERE.
9. I certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. The
undersigned owner(s) grant Planning Board permission to enter the property to review this
a pIication.
Date: 2 0 Applicant's Signature:
Date: Owner's Signature:
(If not the same as annlicam's)
not unduly impair the integrity or character of the district or adjoining zones:
not be detrimental to the health, morals or general welfare:
be in harmony ith the general Y g purpose and intent of the Ordinance:
6
F. Explain why the requested use will:
G. Explain how the requested use will promote City planning objectives to the extent possible and wild not
adversely effect those objectives, defined in City master study plans (Open Space and Recreation Pl
Northampton State Hospital Rezoning Plan; and Downtown Northampton: Today, Tomorrow and
Future).
i
i
i
i
9. I certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. The
undersigned owner(s) grant the Planning Board permission to enter the pr T J +].;,
a pplication. Date: Applicant's Signature:
Date: Owner's Signature: 2 9 X01
(If not the same as applicant's)
CITY CLERKSXFFICE
NORTHAMPTnN A Amen
(IF NO, explain why)
Will the project discharge stormwater into the City's storm drainage system? Yes No
(IF NO, answer the following :)
Do the drainage calculations submitted demonstrate that the project has been designed so that there is n
increase in peak flows from pre- to post - development conditions during the: 1, 2, or 10 year Soil
Conservation Service design storm ? Yes No
(IF NO, explain why)
Will all the runoff from a 4/10 inch rainstorm (first flush) be detained on -site for an average of 6
hours? Yes No
(IF NO, explain why)
Is the applicant requesting a reduction in the parking requirements?
Yes No
If yes, what steps have been taken to reduce the need for parking, and number of trips per day?
7
Does the project incorporate 3 foot sumps into the storm water control system? Yes No
SITE PLAN REQUIREMENTS
REQUEST FOR WAIVERS APPLICATION
The application MUST include a site plan containing the information listed below. The Planning B )ard
may waive the submission of any of the required information, if the Applicant submits this form with a
written explanation on why a waiver would be appropriate. To request a waiver on any required
information, circle the item number and fill in the reason for the request. Use additional sheets if
necessary.
A. Locus plan
B. Site plan(s) at a scale of 1 " =40' or greater
B -1. Name and address of the owner and the developer, name of project, date and scale plans:
B -2. Plan showing Location and boundaries of
the lot
adjacent streets or ways
all properties and owners within 300 feet SEE ABUTTER LIST
all zoning districts within 300 feet
Existing and proposed:
- buildings
- setbacks from property lines
- building elevations
-all exterior entrances and exits
(elevation plans for all exterior facades structures are encouraged)
B -4. Present & proposed use of
the land
buildings:
B -5. Existing and proposed topography (for intermediate projects the permit granting authority may accept
generalized topography instead of requiring contour lines):
- at two foot contour intervals
- showing wetlands, streams, surface water bodies
- showing drainage swales and floodplains:
- showing unique natural land features
B -6. Location of
- parking & loading areas
- public & private ways
- driveways, walkways
- access & egress points
- proposed surfacing: �'--- --
B -7. Location and description of:
all stormwater drainageldetention facilities
water quality structures
public & private utilities/easements
NOR AM TON OF O so
8 f -
sewage disposal facilities
water supply facilities
B -8. Existing & proposed:
landscaping, trees and plantings (size & type of plantings)
stone walls,
buffers and/or fencing:
B -9. Signs - existing and proposed: i
Location
dimensions/height i
color and illumination
i
B -10. Provisions for refuse removal. with facilities for screening of refuse when appropriate:
B -11. - An erosion control plan and other measures taken to protect natural resources & water supplies:
C. Estimated daily and peak hour vehicles trips generated by the proposed use, traffic patterns for vehicle i and
pedestrians showing adequate access to and from the site, and adequate vehicular and pedestrian circulz tion
within the site.
i
Site Plans submitted for major projects shall be prepared and stamped by a: _
Registered Architect, Landscape Architect, or Professional Engineer
E#
I#
JUN 2 gin
MY NORMA I OFFICE ,
ON MA 01060
0
B
i-a
04
r 00
O
O
0
0
N
a
0
z
x
w
0
0
H
ti
0
0
N
q
N
d
ti
b
O
d
00 0 O
o
0
O o O N N N N N N N N N N N N cv cV N N
— — — — - O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
w o w
v w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w
v U U v v U v v u U v U v U v U v U v U v
C° z pOpqq Z Z Z Z WW� Z Z WW WWZ r WW WW WW WW WW WW WW WWz r WW WWz zW
O U O w O a rx c� rx rx rx rx rx rx rx rx c� rx rx rx
Q a a a a o a o a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
U www 'w�wwP+"wzwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww
1 4 V
U
y o x w x x x a x
zO 00oo000000zozw °z °z °z °z°
a �z zzPOz�zzz z
z
en r- 00 to v C7 C7 C7 C7 C7 o v,
O M N N C4 C4 N o0 oo C1 C1 C1
P � u � O O �
a w � x
O v aA,A�WwwH H w x
a a a a a a a O x x p
O z x o a o o g g o o z z H a
o aaUaaaaAAAwC7C7C7�C�Caw,�� °�3
° IC zz z z z zz z z °z ° x��w� z z ° z 0
b 00 M l� "t Vl �O C1 l� N 00
r- 00 �0 00 O to O
V ao N a, �n O O o 0 O `O
.
O N M N \O M
00 to 00
�n �n �p �n .--� .--� .i .�-� O O O M 0 •--� _ _
N
l
N
O
O
a
N
U
z
o
U w
5
05 4
b
d �
Q
z
0
o
w
d
E �
z �
a
Q
O N
E-�
O
o
a o
v
_O M
W o
ea A
W