Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Subdivision Highview Estates topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Developer offers scaled-back Highview Estates plan to reduce ledge removal; board asks for engineered concepts
Summary
Sanco Builders proposed a reduced Highview Estates subdivision — shrinking road length, reducing blasting and cutting lots from 10 to 9 — and the planning board responded favorably in principle but asked the developer to submit engineered concepts and to identify required variances before any formal application.
WOBURN, Mass. — A developer seeking to build on a longtime subdivision approval told the Planning Board on April 8 that he will propose a smaller plan for Highview Estates to reduce roadway length, cut excavation and preserve more open space.
Michael Santullo of Sanco Builders described an initial concept that would shorten the approved roadway, reduce the number of homes (he described a 9‑unit clustered option versus the approved 10‑lot plan), and reduce the volume of ledge removal by as much as 45 percent. “I want to do something that makes sense,” Santullo said, describing the proposal as a way to leave roughly five acres in unbuilt open space while still producing housing and tax revenue for the city.
Director Cashel (Planning Department) summarized the concept for the board and said the developer indicated the change would avoid crossing an Eversource easement and could require fewer construction impacts. Santullo said the property is roughly 7.8 acres as previously characterized and that the proposed cluster concept would yield lots generally between about 10,000 and 11,000 square feet with frontages in the mid‑80s to 100 feet on his sketch plan.
Board members expressed broad support for the idea of reducing environmental and neighborhood impacts but stressed procedural clarity. Members said the applicant must decide whether to present the change as a modification to the existing subdivision approval or as a new application; either path will require engineering details, public notice to abutters, and clear identification of any relief requested from subdivision regulations or zoning (for example, frontage or lot‑size variances). Board members warned that nonconforming lot concepts would likely require relief from the Zoning Board of Appeals.
Several members noted the developer currently benefits from statutory protection under a permit‑extension mechanism that preserves his existing approval for a limited time, giving Santullo room to prepare new plans. The board asked the applicant to return with two or more concepts and to list explicitly any variances or waivers sought (examples requested: roadway grade, roadway width, sidewalk and drainage designs, water pumping station need).
No formal vote was taken on Highview Estates at the April 8 meeting. Board members encouraged the developer to engage an engineer and submit concept sketches and a clear statement of requested relief so the board could provide directed feedback and, if appropriate, schedule a public hearing on a modification or new application.
Key technical points mentioned in the discussion included an estimate of roughly 300 feet to the edge of an Eversource easement from existing ledge removal, a previously planned water pump station (which may be avoidable under the shorter-road option), and lot sizes/frontages in the proposed cluster plan. Santullo said his preference would be a 9‑unit clustered plan but that he would present both conforming and nonconforming alternatives for the board’s review.
The board outlined next steps: the developer will return with engineered concept plans, identify any zoning or subdivision relief required, and the board will determine whether the submission is a major modification (requiring a new public hearing) or a new application. The developer and the board agreed to proceed with public notice and departmental coordination as part of the next filing.
