February 21, 2007
Meeting Minutes
Attendees: 48
The meeting was brought to order by Michael Ptak at 7 PM with the Pledge of Allegiance
The first guest speaker of the evening is Selim Noujaim, who addressed the group concerning the proposed apartments at Vivian Drive/Scott Rd. There are many issues of controversy regarding the site: Blasting will be done too close to the water tower, 20,000 c.f. of ledge will have to be removed by 2,000 trucks, impact on schools ( the city charter must be changed because it doesn’t consider the school issue). Selim asks that we attend the 2/27 public hearing at 5:30 PM at the Aldermanic Chamber. Selim proceeded to assure that developers historically come, make their money and leave. Selim has prepared charts and graphs and documents in reference to the development.
Attorney Patrick Zailckas was next to address the group as planned. He explained that he spent 13 years on the Zoning Board and a year on the Wetlands, Inland Board. He proceeded to review the latest condo development plans submitted by the developer for the Rte. 69/ Hamilton Ave. area, stating that there are two different plans; one for a subdivision, and the other for a group dwelling special permit. Jim Sequin is aiming for a March 27th city Plan Commission public hearing at Wendell Cross School, but the commission must first agree on the date and place. Since the plans are new submissions they will have to be processed back through Inlands, Wetlands, but will probably pass.
The subdivision plan will be more difficult to reject, since the only requirement is to pass zoning requirements.
The Vivian Drive would be higher density, stretching 2.5 to 3 levels to reach higher density; it will set a precedent
The group dwelling: The plan commission has the zoning regs. Patrick notes that Passive Solar Effects are to be considered, which can be used for argument against the subdivision
Patrick stresses that all our neighbors must fight the development.
Many questions arose such as traffic problems and what to do about them. A private study is recommended. The topsoil replacement order issued to the developer which was never done was mentioned, which can be argued as a credibility issue in terms of the honesty of the developer.
Respectfully Submitted
Patricia Mencio, Secretary