Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Subdivision topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

9‑lot subdivision at 82 Brookwood Lane moves forward; commission continues matter for additional wetlands and access details

2243137 · January 29, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Applicant seeking a nine‑lot subdivision of 31.79 acres at 82 Brookwood Lane presented a high‑level overview; the commission raised questions about shared driveway width, conservation easement configuration and wetland impacts and continued the application to a future meeting.

The Planning and Zoning Commission opened discussion on a proposed nine‑lot subdivision of roughly 31.79 acres at 82 Brookwood Lane and continued the matter for further engineering, wetlands and frontage detail.

Amy Sabatakis, attorney for Brookwood Hills LLC, presented a conceptual subdivision map showing four lots with road frontage on Brookwood Lane and five lots accessed by a deeded paper access or an existing eastern driveway. The applicants propose to retain an existing east‑side driveway as a shared private drive (to be widened from about 14 feet to approximately 18 feet in one concept) and to provide open space and conservation easements along the eastern boundary to buffer neighbors. Project engineers and wetlands specialists (Len D’Andrea, William Kenny) attended; Sabatakis said the health department has preliminarily approved septic and well viability for the lots.

Commissioners asked for additional analysis of alternatives, including whether some lots could be accessed directly from Brookwood Lane instead of using the long shared drive; they also questioned whether 18 feet was necessary and noted the subdivision regulations set a 16‑foot minimum for shared drives serving more than two lots (with a waiver option for resource preservation). Commissioners asked the applicant to explore whether the shared drive could be narrowed, to provide clearer plans for the proposed cul‑de‑sac and dry‑hydrant pond access for fire protection, and to provide a more complete planting/open‑space plan. The applicant said she would refine plans with wetlands staff and the fire marshal and return with the additional detail.

The commission continued the application to a future meeting; a neighbor intervention has been filed and will be considered at subsequent hearings.