Cannery Village Phase 4 allowed half of its waivers

Cannery Village Phase 4 in Milton cannot proceed with site-plan review, as a requested waiver from the subdivision code is still pending before town council.

Developer Chestnut Properties II LLC is proposing 117 new units on a parcel at the intersection of Front Street and Cave Neck Road. Project designer Brock Parker of Parker Associates of Salisbury said the units will include duplexes, triplexes and quads. Parker said each unit will have two parking spaces in the driveway and a space in the garage, plus there will be 97 spaces throughout the development for surplus parking. The new development would have access to the existing amenities serving other parts of Cannery Village but would not be connected via street or sidewalk.

With the new units, Cannery Village will have 338 units total; Cannery Village’s large-parcel development plan allows for a maximum of 538 units.

On March 19, the Milton Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of four waivers from town subdivision code: a 650-foot-long dead-end street, smaller parking spaces, a 20-foot-wide travel lane, and a sidewalk down one side of a street instead of on both sides.

However, the commission declined to go to preliminary site-plan review until the waivers were approved by town council.

At council’s April 1 meeting, council approved two waivers: allowing for a 650-foot-long dead-end street - town code allows for only 400 feet - and allowing 9-by-18-feet parking spaces instead of the mandated 10-by-20-feet.

The request for a 20-foot-wide travel lane met with resistance from council. Under town subdivision code, major streets must be 24 feet wide. However, code allows for alleys, which can be a maximum of 15 feet wide. Chestnut Properties proposed the street, to be known as Elder Lane, as an alley, but councilmen Sam Garde and Kevin Kelly said Elder Lane constitutes a major street and should be 24 feet wide.

Garde said Elder Lane will be difficult to navigate for snow-removal trucks and emergency vehicles, noting while the existing Cannery Village has alley-like roads, none of the homes there front the street as the homes on Elder Lane are proposed to do.

“I don’t know how we are going to get fire equipment or snowplows on Elder Lane even at 20 feet,” Garde said. “Every other frontage has a street width.”  

Kelly said there is only one way in and out of Elder Lane, which has cul-de-sacs at both ends. Mayor Ted Kanakos said he wanted to see more flow through the development instead of dead-end roads. Garde added that Elder Lane appears as an access road, not as an alleyway that would connect other streets in the development.

“I don’t understand why this is called a lane or why you’re seeking approval to expand it to 20 feet when it should be the width of a street. I’m confused by what this street is supposed to do,” Garde said. “I don’t think Elder Lane should be approved by the town at its current width.”

Parker said Elder Lane is a dead-end street because there are wetlands that prevent connection to the main access road, to be known as Devenshire Road, and because the intersection point would be too close to Front Street.

Garde moved to table the item for additional discussion at a later date, and council voted unanimously to do so.

Council denied a request from Parker for sidewalks on only one side of a street. Parker said the idea was to avoid wetlands on the left side of Devenshire Road, put in a crosswalk to guide people to the other side and widen the sidewalk on the right side of the street. He said this would improve safety by having people cross within the development rather than on Front Street.

However, Kelly and Garde said sidewalks could be accommodated on both sides. Garde said he wanted sidewalks on both sides in part for children getting off school buses. He said as soon as the children get off the bus, they should be able to get on a sidewalk instead of having to cross a street.

Parker said he would consider putting two sidewalks in. Garde said if he is willing to do that, then council should deny the waiver, because it is better for an applicant to comply with town rules rather than waiving them.