Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning 01/26/2022Planning Board Minutes RECEIVED January 26, 2022 1 '11_.I,KS OFFICE 'ull FEB % A 10 05 MEETING HELD VIRTUALLY USING GOTOWEBINAR PLATFORM Present: Beth Ashman -Collins, Chair; Joseph Cerretani, Clerk; Diana Bren, �aharotY Fr'ie�lia%an;l Ralph Penney; Michael McClanahan; Brendan Roche, Alternate Shaun P. Burke, Director of Planning and Development Priscilla McGill, Administrative Secretary Absent: Michael Feck; Adrian LeCesne, Alternate There were no submitted Form A plans. 1. December 8, 2021 Minutes Motion: To approve the meeting minutes as amended. (Penney-Cerretani) Roll Call Vote Diana Bren — in favor Ralph Penney — in favor Michael McClanahan — in favor Sharon Friedman — in favor Joe Cerretani — in favor Brendan Roche — in favor Beth Ashman -Collins — in favor Seven (7) in favor, Zero (0) opposed, Zero (0) abstained PASSES 2. January 12, 2022 Minutes Motion: To approve the meeting minutes as amended. (Cerretani-Friedman) Roll Call Vote Diana Bren — in favor Ralph Penney — abstain Michael McClanahan — abstain Sharon Friedman — in favor Joe Cerretani — in favor Brendan Roche — in favor Beth Ashman -Collins — in favor Five (5) in favor, Zero (0) opposed, Two (2) abstained PASSES Planning Board Meeting Minutes 1/26/22 Page 1 of 6 The applicant submitted a request for continuance to February 9, 2022 at 8:00 p.m. Motion: To continue the hearing to February 9, 2022 at 8:00 p.m. (Cerretani-Bren) Roll Call Vote Diana Bren — in favor Ralph Penney — in favor Michael McClanahan — in favor Sharon Friedman — in favor Joe Cerretani — in favor Brendan Roche — in favor Beth Ashman -Collins — in favor Seven (7) in favor, Zero (0) opposed, Zero (0) abstained PASSES Mr. Burke summarized the scope that falls under Board purview for the Preliminary Subdivision Plan, including preliminary discussion (not a public hearing) as to what the applicant proposes and minimum subdivision control law requirements for a preliminary plan that will ultimately end up as a definitive plan. Craig Cygawnoski of RIM Engineering and Emily Miller the applicant, were present for the meeting. Mr. Cygawnoski stated that this is a new submission which is different than the previously submitted preliminary subdivision plans. He noted the removal of a second cul-de-sac with a private road extension in its place with a hammerhead turnaround. He referenced police comment for traffic issues, but that it would be a private road serving only the school and one private house and that the hammerhead is large enough to accommodate the largest emergency vehicle. He expressed his opinion that he did not foresee any traffic issues on the private road. Mr. Cygawnoski referenced the advantages to the Town for a private road, where it would not require acceptance, plowing, or maintenance. Mr. Cygawnoski then referenced the lot #3 parcel that would be donated to the Town, which abuts Town land. He also noted the Town engineer concerns regarding the proposed road being over the existing drainage system has been added and that is noted on the revised plan as not interfering with the drainage. Plan changes were also made to show that the proposed plan would not encroach on the Conservation buffer zone. Ms. Miller reviewed previous Board concerns over ascetics and benefits to the Town. She reviewed the cul-de-sac changes, private way, and land donation of Lot 3 at a value of $38,000 to the Town. She spoke of potential taxable revenue to the Town with the subdivision. Mr. Burke summarized that the land is proposed to be broken into three parcels with requested waivers and explained that the Board collectively needs to decide if the waivers serve the publics best interest. Discussion ensued to other project similar waivers. Mr. Cerretani read the submitted project comments and replies to comments. Planning Board Meeting Minutes 1/26/22 Page 2 of 6 Board Comment Ms. Friedman stated she did not see delineated staff parking and the hammerhead composition is off the property for Lot 1. Mr. Cygawnoski explained that the school/parking was previously approved. The school at Lot 1 owns to the hammerhead and explained the delineation of the proposed hammerhead and building box lines and how the hammerhead would service emergency vehicle turning. Mr. Cerretani inquired as to the benefit of the project to the Town. Ms. Miller explained that it is a tax benefit to the Town with creation of new house lots and value in the donation of land for open space. Ms. Ashman -Collins noted that the waiver for the hammerhead would create additional frontage for the lot. Mr. Cygawnoski explained the current road status meeting the property with a gravel drive to existing house and the existing cul-de-sac easement that would be redefined as a private way, through a homeowner association, to the hammerhead to create frontage. Mr. Burke noted that the purpose of subdivision control law is to create frontage. The applicant does not have frontage and cannot use the ANR process and has submitted under subdivision control law to create frontage. Mr. Burke further noted that the application for preliminary subdivision is to provide the applicant guidance to move forward with a definitive plan. He also explained two other examples of similar waivers to other projects which were granted for very different reasons. Mr. Burke recommended vote of the waivers and plan individually. Public Comment Rick Rosemark of North White Pine Land expressed his opinion that the submitted application is an attempt to freeze zoning. He questioned who did the surveying and who was the engineer confirming the plans. Mr. Cygawnoski explained who approves the RIM Engineering plans. After presentation by the applicant, questions and comments from the Planning Board and questions and comments from the public, the board took the following votes on the waiver requests: Waiver to extend the right-of-way known as Knight Way beyond the allowed 650 feet an extension of 228.55' feet is requested Motion: To not grant the waiver to extend the right-of-way (McClanahan -Penney) roll call vote Joseph Cerretani — in favor Ralph Penney - in favor Michael McClanahan - in favor Sharon Friedman — in favor Diana Bren — in favor Brendan Roche — in favor Beth Ashman -Collins — in favor Seven in favor. Zero (0) opposed. Zero (0) abstained. PASSES 2. Waiver from the requirement of 80-foot radius cul-de-sac at the end of the roadway extension. A hammer -head design is requested. Turning radius and length required for emergency vehicle access. Planning Board Meeting Minutes 1/26/22 Page 3 of 6 Motion: To not grant the waiver from the requirement of 80-foot radius cul-de-sac at the end of the roadway extension to allow a hammer -head design. (McClanahan-Bren) roll call vote Joseph Cerretani — in favor Ralph Penney - in favor Michael McClanahan - in favor Sharon Friedman — in favor Diana Bren — in favor Brendan Roche — in favor Beth Ashman -Collins — in favor Seven in favor. Zero (0) opposed. Zero (0) abstained. PASSES Waiver from the requirement of straight granite curbing to allow the use of Cape Cod bituminous concrete curbing. Motion: To not grant the waiver from the requirement of straight granite curbing to allow the use of Cape Cod bituminous concrete curbing. (McClanahan-Cerretani) roll call vote Joseph Cerretani — in favor Ralph Penney - in favor Michael McClanahan - in favor Sharon Friedman — in favor Diana Bren — in favor Brendan Roche — in favor Beth Ashman -Collins — in favor Seven in favor. Zero (0) opposed. Zero (0) abstained. PASSES The Planning Board then entertained a motion and second to deny (disapprove) the Field of Dreams Preliminary Subdivision Plan. Motion: To disapprove the Field of Dreams Preliminary Subdivision Plan. (McClanahan- Bren) roll call vote Joseph Cerretani — in favor Ralph Penney - in favor Michael McClanahan - in favor Sharon Friedman — in favor Diana Bren — in favor Brendan Roche — in favor Beth Ashman -Collins — in favor Seven in favor. Zero (0) opposed. Zero (0) abstained. PASSES It should be noted that the denial of waiver requests at the preliminary subdivision stage does not prevent the applicant from requesting same if a definitive subdivision plan is filed for this site. Doug Annino, Annino Assoc. and Jack Foster, owner of the building at 127-129 North Main Street. A three-story building of approximately 14,000 square feet on a 9,400 square foot lot with retail on the first floor and currently the 2nd and Yd floors contain small office suites. Mr. Annino stated that Planning Board Meeting Minutes 1/26/22 Page 4 of 6 Mr. Foster would like to improve the building by adding 8 to 12 apartments on the 2"d and 3`d floors. He also expressed interest in leasing parking spaces from the town as currently overnight parking is limited for the building. Mr. Foster stated that it is a beautiful old building with the 2nd and Yd floors consisting of rental suites, which are not all rented at this time. The first floor will remain commercial rental with the existing tenant staying. Ms. Ashman -Collins expressed interest in revitalizing an historic building. Mr. Cerretani inquired about required parking. Mr. Annino answered that the number of units proposed is not confirmed and parking would be considered with number of units. Discussion ensued for off street parking, public parking areas, and obligation to provide parking to meet 1.5 spaces per unit. Mr. Annino stated that their next step for parking would be to reach out to the Select Board and Town Manager to discuss what type of parking lease could be negotiated. Ms. Friedman inquired if this building falls within the proposed MBTA overlay district and if the new units could be considered in the count for the MBTA overlay district. Mr. Burke stated that the building would be in the overlay. Ms. Friedman noted some points of consideration for this building to meet the requirements for the new district. Mr. Cerretani expressed concern that tenant parking should not take away from viable business parking and would like to have a good plan moving forward. Mr. Annino spoke of other towns that created 3-4 story deck structure parking and that the developers creating structures in downtown areas are putting money into a "bank" to buy parking for their downtown buildings. Ms. Ashman -Collins expressed concern with leasing spaces versus private parking lots because of the Town's obligation to provide parking. Mr. Penney inquired if the building has sprinklers and Mr. Annino stated that they will be added during the renovation process with bringing everything up to code. He also noted that there is no elevator and under 20 units does not require one. Mr. Penney expressed interest in working with Mr. Annino and Mr. Foster for the building revitalization. Mr. Annino stated they will research parking options as a next step. Mr. Penney inquired if the 2"d and 3`d floor change of use requires going before the Zoning Board. Mr. Burke stated that they would not and that it is a code issue because the mixed use is allowed by right downtown. Mr. Penney requested a copy of the Planning Board letter of recommendation to the Select Board to exercise first right of refusal to acquire 177 Old Elm Street. He further commented that the site could be a potential future drinking water source area. Mr. Burke stated that the Select Board has not yet voted on acquiring the land since they are waiting to receive a letter from the Conservation Commission which will be meeting on January 31 sc Mr. Penney inquired as to the potential articles to be presented at Town Meeting. Mr. Burke stated that he would submit an updated summary to the Board. Ms. Ashman -Collins inquired about the State hearings for the Balcom Street bridge. Mr. Burke explained that MassDOT is proposing to replace the bridge with upgrades to portions of the nearby streets with pedestrian and bicycle access. They will have to come before the Planning Board for a scenic road permit and will also require permitting from the Conservation Commission regarding the adjacent wetlands. Planning Board Meeting Minutes 1/26/22 Page 5 of 6 Motion: To adjourn at 9:31 p.m. (McClanahan-Bren) Roll Call Vote Diana Bren — in favor Ralph Penney — in favor Sharon Friedman — in favor Joseph Cerretani — in favor Michael McClanahan — in favor Brendan Roche — in favor Beth Ashman -Collins — in favor Seven (7) in favor, Zero (0) opposed, Zero (0) abstained PASSES Date of Next Planning Board Meeting: February 9, 2022 at 7:30 p.m. Signature of Clerk Date of Approval Planning Board Meeting Minutes 1/26/22 Page 6 of 6