Residents' presentationAbutter and Near Neighbor Concerns
RE: Proposed Development at 39 Day Ave.
Mass, Scale, Open Space, Distance Between Buildings
350 Attachment 7:3-3 “For new buildings, setback, scale, massing should fit within the block face.”
350 attachment 7:1 “40% Open space”
350-6.8.A “Principal structures on the same lot shall be located at least 10 feet apart.”
Include set backs here?
Storm Water
Stormwater
Chapter 290:28-B.2 specifies that “post-development peak discharge rates for stormwater management systems shall not exceed pre-development peak discharge rates.”
Their stormwater calculations are inaccurate
Rain Barrels capacity is too small for any rainfall more than .155”
Increased street flooding poses safety and cost issues
Set backs, sidewalks, transformers, rental cost
Code 350 Attachment 7:1 Setback of accessory structure – 4 feet from side line
350-11.6.F.2.a In all residential zoning districts, sidewalks shall be at least five feet in width
290-36 All sidewalks shall be handicapped-accessible from the roadway at all intersections
Location of transformer at Glenwood entrance to driveway
All abutters have requested or will request fencing
Rental costs
Parking
350-11.6 “The requested use will promote the convenience and safety of vehicular and pedestrian movement within the site.”
350 Attachment 7:7-A.1 Parking shall be located behind buildings or designed otherwise to minimize view from the public street
350 6-11.C.3.a.6 The planning Board may issue a special permit for alternative parking configurations when the proposed design . . . no more than four cars will be visible from a public
way.”
Practical difficulty of 10 parallel parked cars
On street parking will be over-taxed
Curb-cut
350 8.8.G The Planning Board may only issue a second curb cut if the applicant can show that there is something unique about the property that would otherwise render flow to and from
the property unsafe and unmanageable.
350 8.8.G the Planning Board may, as part of site plan approval, allow additional driveways/curb cuts if, and only if, such permit will promote and improve safe and efficient traffic
circulation
It would become a cut through for people coming down Glenwood
Curb Cut
From Planning Board hearing on Mar 14 regarding special permit for a curb-cut: “I wouldn’t want the roads to be connected, to be like a cut-through. I’d want there to be something to
stop a cut-through from happening. . . “
“You know, Sam, your question about setting a precedent and all. We may see this more and more. “
Curb cut was approved with the condition that “the new curb cut not connect to the existing curb cut”
Traffic
Developer does not provide the traffic analysis required by 350-11.5.B
Their analysis should include additional traffic that will result from those cutting through from Glenwood
If $7000 contribution to traffic mitigation fund is not applied to measures on Day Ave and Glenwood Ave it would have no impact on the increased traffic and resulting issues.
Park, Design Issues, Missing information
Benches under cherry tree in front meets letter of code not spirit
Backs of buildings are 34’ tall and 23 or 30 feet wide blank wall - need some design changes to make them less stark and unappealing to neighbors and those driving along Sherman or Glenwood
Plan does not include some material required by code
Summary
There are too many buildings, too close together, too unappealing in design and not enough open space.
Parking is too visible from Day Ave and too impractical to work
Curb-cut does not meet “if and only if” requirement in code
They are not “lovely cottages” and they will not improve the neighborhood as developer contends in narrative
Summary
We urge the board to continue the public hearing and resume it when the developer has submitted all required material at least 2 or 3 days in advance of the hearing.
We strongly urge the board not to approve with conditions since that removes the public’s opportunity to comment on changes to the plan