Feb 27, 2017 Planning Board Meeting Summary


Next hearing is March 16th. Will keep everyone informed. Planning Board wants to move the process along and provide all parties with answers.

At tonight’s meeting, National Development withdrew it’s planned 3 story building and is now proposing a two story building in the same location. Ted Tye, representing National Development, said they had listened to the concerns and agree to lower the height and now have a height of 40,000 sq ft instead of 54,000. They also supplied the project tracking spreadsheet on the number of sq ft and the number of parking spaces.

The chairman opened the floor for comments. These are the comments that I noted.

Pat Campbell – Not what was originally proposed. Buildings are different. National Development is now asking for a tax abatement

I spoke next and provided a PowerPoint that pointed out the following from the agreements signed with the Town and it’s citizens:

  1. This project is about a new two story building in a location that National said they wouldn’t build on.
  2. The project would be sensitive to the community at large and the neighborhood by mitigating impacts of the project.
  3. Increase of the building setbacks from Walnut Street.
  4. Project will be screen by setbacks, berm.
  5. The berm shall be landscaped with a combination of evergreen and deciduous plantings of varying canopy heights to help provide a natural screening to the development.
  6. Larger taller buildings will be located in the West and North. This building will be located in the East section of the development.
  7. I pointed out that there would be substantially fewer questions if they located the building according to what they had agreed to.
  8. You can view the presentation at: https://topics01940.files.wordpress.com/2017/02/planning-board-presentation-feb-27th-2017.pdf or visit www.ctpl01940.org
  9. Please forward the link to anyone you think might be interested. The website is: www.ctpl01940.org

Karen Ruecker – asked if there could be a new traffic study and if there were plans for a parking garage.

Joe Demaina – noted there would be 46 doctors each having multiple patients, there by exacerbating the current traffic problems

Dave Basile – asked if there would be sufficient parking spaces. Doctor office require additional spaces. He also asked for a new traffic study.

Rober Williams – concurred with the prior speakers and asked for a traffic study.

Prior comments after the last hearing include:

  1. There are concerns about the Urgent Care component- especially with Union Hospital closing. Cannot help but think the MBTA bus will be coming with this medical building and Urgent Care.
  2. There will be 20O-250 individuals all driving their cars to work every morning. Not to mention the additional 40 or 50 patients at the beginning and the end of the day. For an intersection that is already clogged and only rated I believe D that’s a lot of additional traffic I wonder if the addition of this building would require another traffic study by the DOT
  3. Lahey’s description of their urgent care. Note 18 years and older
  1. http://www.lahey.org/Departments_and_Locations/Departments/Primary_Care/Burlington/Routine_and_Urgent_Care_-_Primary_Care_-_Burlington.aspx

Selectmen and Planning Board said that they would not allow ambulances, but Medical personnel point out that doctors call for ambulances all the time if the patient needs to be seen immediately.

Thank you,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: