HomeMy WebLinkAboutmin of planning brd 05142008
Planning Board Minutes RECEIVED
May 14, 2008 fOW~1 CLE!~KS OFFICE
Present: H. Thomas French, Chair; John DeMassi, Clerk; Doug Annino, ~l1Pael
McClanahan, Stan Feck, Beth Ashman-Collins, Tony Jodice, Donald Cle~9\ItJ&lnale A 8: 211
Shaun P. Burke, Director of Planning and Development
Motion: To appoint Mr. McClanahan acting clerk
(Annino-Jodice) All in favor. PASSES
[Mr. Feck arrived at this time]
1.2. .Col'respoJldellce . j
1. Minutes May 7, 2008
Motion: To accept as submitted
(Jodice-Cleary) Four in favor. Three abstentions. PASSES
2. Meeting notices Easton, North Attleboro
Mr. McClanahan said at last week's meeting, the board discussed a hammerhead roadway
for the preliminary subdivision on Winter Street. He said he didn't remember the board
approving a road like that. Mr. French said the applicant plans to bring back a revised
plan, possibly showing a cluster development.
Mr. French asked the board to forward any comments on the draft Master Plan to the
Planning Department or to Pare by May 21, so the consultant can have them one week
before the May 28 meeting.
Mr. Jodice asked why the Planning Board isn't involved in the downtown fa~ade
program. Mr. Burke said the board was involved in putting together the design
guidelines, but the Community Development office is the consultant for that grant
program. He said there had been discussion about what size committee would be
appropriate, and because the grant money is supposed to be spent by June, the most
expedient thing to do was to use the same group that reviews the housing rehab
applications. He said there is only about $170,000, so only a few building facades and
signs will be done, and if it is successful, the town will apply next year. Mr. Burke said
a question has come up about "blade" signs, and asked if the board had an opinion about
them. Mr. Annino said he thinks that type of sign should be encouraged. The board
agreed.
[Mr. DeMassi arrived at this time]
The clerk read a memo from Mr. Burke indicating the board has to specifically find that
the driveway width, which is in excess of 60 feet, will facilitate traffic flow and safety.
Planning Board
1
5/15/2008
The clerk read a memo from Mr. Sullivan indicating his concerns have been satisfied,
provided the board makes the above finding and gets a copy of the Mass Highway curb
cut permit.
Motion: To find that the driveway width will facilitate traffic flow and safety
(McClanahan-Feck)
Ms. Ashman-Collins said she doesn't think the changes go far enough at this location.
Five in favor. One opposed. PASSES
Mr. French said at the last meeting, the board voted to have Mr. Burke prepare an
approval on this special permit application.
Mr. Annino asked about the third party agreement. Mr. Burke said there is a deal
between Drake Petroleum and the owner of 900 South Main Street to provide the funds
necessary for the installation of an air quality system. Mr. Decker explained that abutter
had health concerns about the gas station, the parties met and went through those
concerns and agreed on the specifications for the air quality system. He said the property
at 900 South Main Street is for sale, so under the agreement, a number was arrived at for
the funding of the installation of the system, and the homeowner can install the system or
not. He said the abutters were at the last meeting, and indicated they were satisfied with
the agreement. Mr. Annino said he was concerned about the health of abutters across the
street. Mr. Decker said they will be providing the money for the installation of the
system, and it will be up to the abutter to have it done or not. He said they arrived at the
amount after preparing the specs. Mr. French noted this agreement will not become part
of the special permit. He said the air quality issue was critical because the existing
abutters would be affected by this new use, but a new owner of that property would know
about the gas station before buying.
Mr. Feck said he didn't think the agreement should have come before the board because
of liability issues; he said this is a private party matter and the town shouldn't be
involved.
Mr. Decker said if the house is not sold before construction on the gas station begins, the
homeowner will be able to have the system installed with the funds provided by Drake
Petroleum.
Mr. Annino asked Mr. Burke about the agreement. Mr. Burke said the condition in the
special permit referencing the agreement doesn't leave the town exposed to liability. He
said if the board is uncomfortable with it, that condition can be removed. He said the
parties have come to a private agreement, and the installation (or not) is up to the
homeowner.
Motion: To delete condition 18 as written
(McClanahan-Feck) Five in favor. One abstention. PASSES
Motion: To approve the special permit as amended (McClanahan-Feck)
Planning Board
2
5/15/2008
McClanahan - In favor. The benefits outweigh the detriments, and the applicant has
worked hard on this project. I believe it will help increase safety at the intersection,
especially during Tweeter shows, and will bring jobs and tax revenue. The applicant has
addressed the abutters' concerns.
Annino - In favor. I think the applicant has addressed most of the board's concerns, and
the design has improved since the application was submitted. The board spent a lot of
time working on this to get something that would fit in with the neighborhood and the
town. I hope this project will not have adverse traffic impacts.
DeMassi - Opposed. I don't think this is a good use for this site. Its proximity to the
Tweeter Center is a concern, and I believe more improvements on South Main Street are
needed to make this type of use work. I don't think the second entrance is a good idea,
and I don't think these are the kind of jobs the town is trying to attract, and am concerned
this use will encourage crime because of its location near the highway.
Jodice - In favor. The benefits outweigh the detriments. This is the final phase of
developing this property, the value of other businesses in the area will rise, and this will
provide tax revenues. The applicant has satisfied the board's concerns, and I believe the
applicant will monitor any health issues. I am not happy about the traffic on Route 140,
but this will add options for consumers, the area will be helped by the build-out of this
property, and it will draw other businesses and jobs.
Feck - In favor. The benefits outweigh the detriments. I think this is a good location for
this use.
French - In favor. It took awhile, but I think the applicant finally got the plan and
buildings modified to the satisfaction of the board. I share the traffic concerns, but Mass
Highway has given the site a permit, it will provide economic and convenience benefits,
and the building with landscaping and the air system for the abutter will mitigate its
impact on neighbors.
5 in favor. 1 opposed. PASSES
Motion: To close the public hearing (McClanahan-Annino) All in favor. PASSES
Architect David Udelsman explained the revised site plan, including the extent of tree
cutting and the no-build zone around the wetland areas. The plan shows the primary
means of access to the site, pedestrian access with new sidewalks connecting to the
existing sidewalks in the Village at Willow Crossing. The crosswalks will be stamped,
colored asphalt. The walking paths will be added to connect to the existing paths, for a
total of about one mile of paths. The access from Branch Street is for secondary
emergency access only, and the gate will be on Village property. The roadway will be 24
feet wide.
Planning Board
3
5/15/2008
They have met with the landscape architect to find a way to use a majority of drought-
tolerant material. The tree line along the bike path has some gaps, and they will leave the
existing trees and filling the gaps with evergreen to screen the bike path and residents.
The are proposing to add an irrigation system to the property.
Benches are proposed along the walking paths and sidewalk areas. Mr. DeMassi asked if
the paths will be maintained. Mr. Udelsman said they would be. The mailboxes will be
at the clubhouse.
Mr. Udelsman said the existing tree line along Marshall Avenue side of the site is dense.
The tree line along the bike path is substantial, which will be kept and the gaps filled in.
They are proposing a new signage program for this phase and the existing Village to
include directional, traffic and informational signs.
Mr. Udelsman presented a plan showing a cross-section through the center of the site,
which his flat throughout. The bike path is a few feet lower than this site. The proposed
sidewalks are five feet off the roadway with a grass strip in between.
The light poles are of the same style as the existing Village. They are not intended to
light the entire roadway, but to light the path. There will be no floodlights or decorative
wall lighting on the residential units. The residences have covered front porches with
recessed porch lights. The owners will have the option for either a screened porch or a
covered patio, both with downward-facing lighting inside and no wall lighting.
Mr. Udeslman explained the residential unit design. The roof pitch has been changed to a
6-12 pitch on the main front-to-back ridge line with a 9-12 pitch at end. The gable faces
over garage were changed to use a short length of shed roof to break up the profile. The
materials have been changed to cement fiber clapboard with pvc cement fiber trims. He
said they have spoken with their sustainability consultant about the project, and while pvc
doesn't have a high recycled content, it lasts a long time. The larger buildings with four
and six units have roof changes similar to two-unit buildings.
The footprint of the clubhouse has increased slightly to add amenities and mailbox areas.
Mr. Udelsman said they have had their sustainability consultant review the project to see
what could be done for LEED certification. He said they are confident it will be at least
certified, and may be Silver LEED certified.
A resident asked if the same type of pear trees in the existing Village will be used in the
new development. Mr. Udelsman said the landscape architect's plan for street trees
includes drought resistant flowering pear trees, along with two other types of trees, so in
case of disease, all the street trees are not lost.
Planning Board
4
5/15/2008
Mr. Valanzola said the fence has been pulled back at the Branch Street emergency access,
which is also proposed as the construction access. He said they are trying to balance the
concerns raised about the bike path and using that as a temporary access. He said they
will be spreading out the burden of access so Cobb Street isn't the only access for
construction. He said there may also be issues with turning radii for construction trucks
on Cobb Street. He said the Branch Street construction access would probably be used
for three or four months, and they will hire an attendant to monitor the pedestrian traffic
across the bike path. He said they would like to leave the asphalt in place and repair any
damage the construction causes.
Mr. DeMassi said the board was concerned about whether a project of this size is feasible
with only one entrance. Mr. Valanzola said they conceded early on that their only access
would be through Cobb Street because they are sensitive to the concerns about the bike
path. However, he said they do have legal access through Branch Street, which they
could use as a second access if the board wants that. He said because this is the same
owner, they can access through the existing Village roadway system. He said he doesn't
think the town can build a bike path and tell those who have frontage over it that they
cannot use it, but he said the concerns about the bike path are why they are proposing to
only use Branch Street as emergency access. He said the roadway length is a result of not
using Branch Street.
Mr. DeMassi asked if anyone had considered building a bridge to lift the bike path over a
Branch Street entrance. Mr. Valanzola said they had not considered that. He said the
feedback he has received from public safety officials indicate there are no concerns with
using Branch Street for secondary emergency access. He said there would be a gate, and
in the event of an emergency in which they cannot use Cobb Street, they will use Branch
Street. There will be a knox box with a key or a crash gate.
Mr. Valanzola said there are currently eight units per acre at the Village, and with the
addition of 56 units on 30 acres in this new phase, there will be two units per acre. Mr.
DeMassi said this is an additional 56 units with a very long access to get from one end to
the other, and he is concerned about that. Mr. Valanzola said his meetings with staff
indicated the town doesn't want the bike path disturbed.
Mr. Annino said there was a request at the last meeting about a traffic study for the Cobb
Street corridor. He asked the total roadway length from the existing entrance on Cobb
Street to the end of the new proposed road. Mr. U said it is 1,600 feet from the Cobb
Street entrance to the new property, and another 1,200 feet of new roadway, for a total of
2,800 feet of roadway.
Mr. French said the original permit included independent, assisted and Alzheimer's
facilities. The Alzheimer's building was not built, and those units were put into the
Lodge. Mr. Valanzola said there are 166 units on 20 acres, and this proposal is for an
additional 56 units on 30 acres.
Planning Board
5
5/15/2008
Mr. Burke said the applicant has legal frontage on Branch Street and despite the bike
path, still has the right to access their land there. He said he is concerned that opening up
Branch Street will create a short cut through this site from Branch to South Main Street.
He said by using Branch Street for emergency access only, the internal traffic will only
be residents and staff. He said he doesn't look at this as a dead-end street, because it is
not a street. He said the length of a dead end street regulation goes to emergency access,
and this site would have a secondary emergency access with Branch Street. He said he
thinks if this project is permitted with an open Branch Street access, that will encourage a
short cut and will be dangerous. He said if the owners of the Village weren't the
applicant on this land, and some other developer came in with a subdivision on this land,
they would be within their rights to use Branch Street as their access.
Ms. Ashman-Collins said if this wasn't age-restricted housing, she would be more
concerned about the traffic issue, but said there is less traffic with this type of housing
than with a single-family subdivision.
Mr. Annino said the issue isn't simply public safety, it is also about aesthetics. He said
going through the existing development all the way to the back to access the new units is
not good planning. Mr. Valanzola said staff told him not to use Branch Street as an
access, but if the board wants them to look at using it, they would.
Mr. Annino said he would like to see a traffic study. Mr. Gillis said there was a traffic
study done for this site. Mr. Annino said he would like to see an internal site study so the
board can see how the site works. Mr. Valanzola said he would put something together.
Department Head Comments
The clerk read memos from the Fire and Engineering Departments.
Mr. Valanzola said he met with the Fire Chief to get an idea about emergency calls. He
said a lot of calls have been for faulty carbon monoxide detectors, which have been taken
care of. In an actual emergency where someone is transported, the town is reimbursed
for most of the expense. Mr. Valanzola noted that most of the ambulance calls to the
Village are to the Lodge, and they are not adding any more of that type of unit. He said
the increase in tax revenue from this development will more than offset any part of
emergency services that are not reimbursed. Mr. Valanzola said he has spoken with the
chief about the possibility of donating funds for a new ambulance.
Mr. Gillis said they are working on addressing Mr. Alves' comments.
Public Comment
Mabel Badger, Willow Crossing, asked if a comparison had been made between
emergency services to the Village and the other elderly housing developments in town.
Mr. French said the fire chiefs memo addressed that. Mr. DeMassi said as a percentage,
the emergency runs are about the same.
Planning Board
6
5/15/2008
Martha Nicodemus, 245 Branch Street, said her house would be next to the Branch Street
entrance and that would be very dangerous. Mrs. Nicodemus said even using that as a
construction entrance would impact her family dramatically.
Attorney Peter Clarke, 200 Chauncy Street, representing four Village residents, said his
clients are not opposed to the project, but are concerned, especially about access and
traffic. He said there aren't complete sidewalks in the existing Village and residents have
to walk in the roadway at some points. He said there is a 15 mph speed limit posted in
the development. He said his clients are concerned about the traffic increasing drastically
with the new phase. He suggested the main entrance should be off Branch Street with an
emergency gate off Cobb Street, which would prevent people using the development as a
short cut. He said Cobb Street is a very narrow right-of-way.
Mr. Udelsman said there are places in the development without sidewalks, and some
places with sidewalks but that are not connected. He said that could be done. Mr. French
suggested doing a study of the sidewalks so all residents can be safely off the street. Mr.
Valanzola said they would put something together.
Richard Gordon, Walnut Street, said the Nicodemus' concerns should be seriously
considered. Mr. Valanzola said they have met with the abutters and take their concerns
very seriously, especially with respect to the roadway issues. He said their goal is to have
a neighbor who is happy with what they are doing.
Roy Watson, Village at Willow Crossing, said he lives on the street that will likely
become the primary access to the new units. He said they already have a problem with
speeding traffic, and the existing roadways are in bad shape and will not last with
construction vehicles using them.
Mr. Clarke said he would be concerned about the use of stamped concrete in the
wintertime because it would accumulate snow and dice.
Mr. Clarke suggested there should be an ongoing contribution for ambulances. Mr.
Clarke said the Village recently got a new passenger bus, which the residents fought for
for over a year, and his clients would like to see a continuous passenger service for the
residents.
Mr. Clarke said there isn't enough seating capacity to provide a meeting place for all
residents in the clubhouse, and the new clubhouse doesn't have a swimming pool, so the
existing pool would be overburdened.
Mr. DeMassi asked if the original special permit addressed these types of maintenance
issues. Mr. French said it does not because it is private property. Mr. Valanzola said
these are agreements the residents have with Benchmark, and isn't within the town's
purview. Mr. Clarke said the standard for a special permit is what is in the best interest
of the town.
Planning Board
7
5/15/2008
Mr. Valanzola said the application is to amend the original special permit, but they could
have filed a new special permit and not opened up the other portions of the Village.
Board Comment
Ms. Ashman-Collins said she is pleased about the developer's concern for sustainability
and suggested a moisture sensitive irrigation system. She said there doesn't seem to be
much of a village feel in the building design and layout.
Ms. Ashman-Collins asked why the sidewalks are proposed on only on one side. She
asked that be looked at during the circulation study.
Mr. French asked about the design. Mr. Udelsman said the clubhouses are meant to be
for the entire Village; the new one would take some of the activities the existing
clubhouse does and would focus more on entertainment and gathering spaces. The layout
was based on the wetland situation and maintaining appropriate buffers. He said 50% of
the new area has been left untouched. Ms. Ashman-Collins suggested alternative parking
configurations, so the site isn't wrapped with parking. Mr. Udelsman said two of the
parking areas are already there, and the new third one has been pulled back.
Mr. Annino said more could be done to create a neighborhood identity with a central
green or gathering space. He said the inside of the loop could be a beautiful green rather
than buildings. He said the clubhouse shouldn't be at the entrance with a big parking lot,
it should be a focus.
Mr. Cleary said the board had asked for views looking into this site from Marshall
Avenue, not looking from this site onto Marshall Avenue. Mr. Udelsman said he did it
that way because there isn't anything on this site to see from Marshall Avenue. Pat
Paravachi, Village at Willow Crossing, said the new houses on Marshall A venue have
impacted their views.
Mr. Jodice said he is happy with the walking trails, sustainability efforts, the idea of the
breakaway between the existing Village and Cobb Street, and the possibility of a
pedestrian bridge at Branch Street. He suggested work could be done during the winter,
when there are fewer people using the bike path.
Mr. Feck said he hopes Attorney Clarke and Benchmark are working together on the
residents' concerns. Mr. Feck suggested speed bumps could help. He said the Branch
Street entrance might be the answer, but the neighbors would have to be taken care of. r.
Mr. McClanahan suggested the board visit the site.
Mr. Burke asked to have a traffic engineer look at travel routes, traffic calming,
maintenance issues with pavement treatments throughout the site. Mr. Annino asked the
study explain which access option is the best.
Motion: To continue to June 4, 2008 at 7:30 p.m.
(DeMassi-Annino) All in favor. PASSES
Planning Board
8
5/15/2008
Article 34
To see if the Town will vote to amend the Zoning By-Law to the extent necessary to revise Section 5.3 as
follows: (changes in bold)
5.3 Site Plan Review
5.3.1 Purpose
The purpose of Site Plan Review is: to provide an orderly review procedure where site plans of
proposed projects can be approved with reasonable conditions which will maintain the character and
integrity of all zoning districts and adjoining zoning districts; to ensure that new, expanded or
reconstructed sites are planned and designed to minimize impacts on the environment, abutters, and
town services by proper design and construction of storm water systems, parking and loading areas,
waste removal, sediment and erosion control, lighting, landscaping and buffering, points of access
and egress, pedestrian access and signage.
5.3.2 Applicability
In all instances specified in Section 3 Schedule of Principal Regulations, indicating that site plan approval
is required, no building permit shall be issued in any case where a building is to be erected or externally
enlarged and no area for parking, loading, or vehicular service (including driveways giving access thereto)
shall be established or substantially changed, except in conformity with a site plan bearing an endorsement
of approval by the Inspector of Buildings after review thereof by the Planning Board. Site plan approval
shall not be required in any case where a building is to be externally changed for the purpose of closing an
entrance or creating a new entrance thereto and for other extension(s) to a building, which in total shall not
exceed more than 15% of the gross floor area of the building or 10,000 square feet, whichever is less.
Uses which require a site plan review and issuance or denial of a development approval by the
Planning Board are identified by the letter "V" under the column heading "SPA" of Schedule of
Principal Use Regulations.
5.3.3 In instances where site plan review is required, a site plan shall be submitted in accordance
with Section 5.5.2 and 5.5.3 of this Zoning By-law, as well as the following which shall be required by
the applicant for site plan review:
a) locus plan;
b) location of structures within 100 feet of property lines;
c) existing and proposed buildings, showing setbacks from property lines;
d) signage;
e) existing and proposed contour elevations in two-foot increments;
f) parking areas, driveways, and facilities for pedestrian movement;
g) drainage system ;
h) utilities and lighting, including a photometric plan;
i) landscaping, including trees to be removed and retained;
j) loading and unloading facilities
k) provisions for refuse removal;
I) existing and projected traffic volumes from the site and effect on the local road network;
m) drainage calculations and soil tests for the location of the building(s), parking areas and drainage
facilities;
n) other information as may be necessary to determine compliance with the provisions of this
bylaw.
0) Building elevations, floor plans
5.3.4 Review Procedure
The Planning Board shall examine the following concerns in reviewing the site plans of the proposed
development:
Planning Board
9
5/15/2008
a) proper drainage of the property;
b) safe access to the development, minimizing the number and width of curb cuts;
c) acceptance design and layout of ways, streets, and parking areas;
d) that the projected traffic increases to the local road(s) is within the capacity of the existing
network for both daily and peak hour volumes;
e) proper lighting design for parking areas and abutters;
t) complies with the Mansfield Master Plan and Open Space and Recreation Plan.
g) design features, building elevations
h) aesthetic assets
i) screening
5.3.5 The applicant shall submit such material as may be required regarding measures proposed to
prevent pollution of surface or groundwater, soil erosion, increased runoff, changes in groundwater level,
and flooding.
5.3.6 The applicant shall submit material regarding design features intended to integrate the
proposed new development into the existing landscape, to enhance aesthetic assets, and to screen
objectionable features from neighbors.
5.3.6 The applicant shall submit such material as may be required regarding the projected traffic flow
patterns into and upon the site for both vehicles and pedestrians and an estimate of the projected number
of motor vehicle trips to and from the site for an average day and for peak hours.
5.3.8 Prior to rendering its decision, the Planning Board shall examine the technical quality of the
site plans and evaluate the advisability of approval after considering the following matters:
5.3.9 Protection and enhancement of existing site features;
5.3.10 Protection of adjoining premises against detrimental uses by provision for surface water drainage,
sound and sight buffers and preservation of views, light and air;
5.3.11 Convenience and safety of vehicular and pedestrian movement within the site, the location of
driveway opening in relation to traffic or to adjacent streets and, when necessary, compliance with other
regulations for the handicapped, minors and the elderly;
5.3.12 Conformance of the arrangement of parking and loading spaces in relation to the proposed uses of
the premises to Section 4.4 of this by-law;
5.3.13 Proper methods of disposal of refuse and other wastes resulting from the uses permitted on the
site; applicant must demonstrate availability of adequate water supply and waste disposal systems;
5.3.14 Relationship of structures and open spaces to the natural landscape, existing buildings and
other community assets in the area and compliance with other requirements of this by-law.
5.3 .15 Protection of environmental features, particularly groundwater resources, on the site and in
adjacent areas, adequate protection to prevent pollution of surface and groundwater, soil erosion,
increased run-off, changes in groundwater recharge or elevation and flooding.
5.3.16 The original and eleven (11) copies of the development application and plans shall be
submitted to the Town Clerk, who shall give the applicant a dated receipt. Within three (3) days of the
receipt of said application, the Town Clerk shall transmit the original and all copies to the Building
Inspector for distribution and review.
Planning Board
10
5/15/2008
5.3.17 The Applicant shall submit to the Building Inspector a final as-built ofthe site plan, stamped by
the Engineer and Land Surveyor (as necessary) in both hard copy and digital format (preferably in
AutoCAD DWG format, but DXF format will be acceptable). The media shall be a 3.5" floppy disk or CD.
The plan Vertical Datum shall reference the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NA VD88), and the
plan shall contain a minimum of two benchmarks. The horizontal orientation shall reference the North
American Datum of 1983 (NAD83). The plan shall show the locations and dimensions of the building
foundation(s), and all utilities, including sanitary sewer, storm drain, water and electric. The location of the
foundation(s) shall be shown with respect to the lot lines. The locations of all utility connections shall
include the elevation, the size and material of the connections, and the distance from the points where the
services leave the foundation to the nearest foundation corner. For sewer and drainage, swing ties shall
also be provided from at least two foundation corners to any sewer or drain structure, or change in
horizontal or vertical line ofthe services and the distances from the nearest Town manhole to the points of
connection to the Town mains. For water service(s), swing ties shall also be provided from at least two
foundation corners to any bends, valves, fittings, curb stop and corporation stops. For electric service,
swing ties shall also be provided from at least two foundation corners to any underground conduit bends,
hand holes or manholes. The Engineer or Registered Land Surveyor shall certity that the construction
conformed to the approved site plan or approved modifications thereto. Both the above as-built plan and
the certification must be received and approved prior to sign off of the Certificate of Occupancy.
5.3.18 The Building Inspector shall arrange for said site plan to be reviewed by, but not limited to, the
following departments; Police, Fire, Engineering, Planning, Conservation, Electric, Water, Wastewater,
Health, and Public Works. Written comments from the departments shall be forwarded to the Planning
Board prior to the Planning Board's review.
5.3.19 If the Planning Board, determines that said site plan complies with the purpose and
specification of this bylaw, the Board shall approve the site plan with or without conditions. If the Board
determines the plan does not comply with the specifications of this by-law, it shall be disapproved.
5.3.20 The Planning Board shall take action on said plan within thirty (30) days of receipt of the site
plan from the Town Clerk.
5.3.20 Appeals
The Zoning Board of Appeals as established by Chapter 40A of the General Laws of the
Commonwealth shall hear and decide appeals in regards to determinations or decisions made by the
Planning Board in the enforcement or administration of this section.
Mr. Feck said he is in favor of some form of site plan approval, but not in this form. He
said it should be more detailed so it isn't open to interpretation. He said he is concerned
about this becoming a special permit process.
Mr. Jodice said he understand the arguments for this by-law, but he is concerned about
the effect this will have on downtown business owners and said he wouldn't want to
create an atmosphere that will discourage downtown development, especially in the B 1
zone. He said parking issues make it hard to redevelop properties in that zone. Mr.
Annino said what goes downtown must be regulated so the character isn't lost. Mr.
French said this intends to supplement what is already required in order to allow the
board to look at aesthetic issues.
Motion: To support Article 34 (DeMassi-Annino) 4 in favor. 3 opposed. PASSES
Planning Board
11
5/15/2008
Article 35
To see if the Town will vote to amend the Town's Zoning Bylaw to the extent necessary to change the
Schedule of Principal Use Regulations - Section 3.3.10, Residential facilities for Residents Fifty-five (55)
Years of Age or Older, subsection A from its present six (6) to five (5) acres.
New Entry would be:
A. The facility shall be located on a parcel, or contiguous parcels, of land which has a total acreage of not
less than five (5) acres.
Mr. Burke said he is opposed to dropping the minimum acreage again. Mr. Annino noted
the state minimum is five acres. Mr. Burke said cities and towns have the ability to make
their regulations more restrictive. Mr. Feck said there aren't many areas left where this
use could be done, and this type of housing creates diversity. Mr. French asked if this
could result in 40B developments. Mr. Burke said there could be friendly 40B
developments, but the town is well over the state's mandated 10%. He said he isn't
concerned about that issue, especially with the town's inclusionary housing by-law,
which creates one affordable unit for every six.
Motion: Not to support Article 35
(McClanahan-Annino) 3 in favor. 4 opposed. FAILS
Motion: To support Article 35 (Jodice-Feck) 4 in favor. 3 opposed. PASSES
Article 36
To see if the town will vote to amend the Town's zoning map to the extent necessary to rezone from its
present classification of Residential 2 (R2) to the classification of Business 3 (B3), the following parcel of
land:
Beginning at a point of the southwesterly sideline of Chancy Street, said point being at northeasterly end of
the corner rounding where the sideline of Walnut Street meets the sideline of Chauncy Street; Thence
running southeasterly by the southwesterly sideline of Chauncy Street 750 feet more or less to the corner of
the westerly sideline of the relocated Mass highway, Route 140; Thence running southerly by the westerly
sideline of the relocated Mass highway Route 140,91 feet more or less to a point intersecting lot 151 along
the Mass highway, Route 140; Thence running westerly 303 feet more or less to a point intersecting the
easterly sideline of Lot 146 with the southwest corner point of lot 150; Thence running northerly 30 feet
more or less by the easterly sideline of lot 146 to the point intersecting lot 146 with lot 152; Thence
running westerly 167 feet more or less by the southerly sideline of lot 152; Thence running northerly 29
feet more or less by the lot line oflot 152; Thence running westerly 103 feet more or less by the southerly
sideline of lot 152; Thence running northerly by the easterly sideline of Walnut Street 2900 feet more or
less to a point of curvature starting the corner rounding to Chauncy Street; Thence running clockwise 20
feet more or less by the sideline of Walnut Street to the point of beginning. Intending to encompass Parcels
147, 148, 197, 198, 150, 152, and parts of lot 151 on Assessors Map 20, or take any action in relation
thereto.
Motion: Not to support Article 36 (DeMassi-Jodice)
Mr. Feck said this area is right on Route 106 and it shouldn't be residential. Mr. Annino
said this rezoning would devastate the existing residential neighborhoods. Mr. DeMassi
said those residents have to deal with this nearly every year, and have come to the board
every time to ask for help protecting their neighborhood.
All in favor. PASSES
Planning Board
12
5/15/2008
Mr. French said Representative Barrows talked about the regional sewer and will need
town meeting votes to start the process of negotiating with Norton and Foxboro.
Motion: To support the regional sewer (McClanahan-Feck) All in favor. PASSES
Mr. French asked for volunteers to present the recommendations to Town Meeting. Mr.
DeMassi said he would present the site plan article. Ms. Ashman-Collins said she would
present the 55 and over article. Mr. Annino said he would present the rezoning article.
Mr. French said he would present the regional sewer article.
I 6. Form A (ANR) Plans
Mr. McClanahan said the final CIP number is $3.27 million.
Motion: To adjourn at 11 :00 p.m. (McClanahan-
Next meetings: TOWN MEETING Tuesday, May 20, 2008 at 7:00 p.m., MHS
Wednesday, May 28,2008 at 7:30 p.m. (Master Plan)
Wednesday, June 4,2008 at 7:30 p.m. (Planning Board)
~~
diD 8
,
Date of Approval
Planning Board
13
5/15/2008