Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning 02/09/2022Planning Board Meeting Minutes CkI VEO February 9, 2022 �i.E S OFFICE G 2 FED 24 A 10: 05 MEETING HELD VIRTUALLY USING GOTOWEBINAR PLATFORM �, Itt Present: Beth Ashman -Collins, Chair; Diana Bren; Sharon Friedman; Ralph 1'dhhby,Ltvliehael r McClanahan; Brendan Roche, Alternate; Adrian LeCesne, Alternate Shaun P. Burke, Director of Planning and Development Priscilla McGill, Administrative Secretary Absent: Joseph Cerretani, Clerk and Michael Feck Ms. Ashman -Collins noted that the Select Board members were also present for the BETA Group presentation. Mr. Rhein, Chair called the Select Board meeting to order. There were no submitted Form A plans January 26, 2022 Minutes — not presented for approval Arek Galle of BETA Group, Landscape Architect and Planner was present and introduced himself. Bill McGrath of BETA Group Transportation Group, also introduced himself. Mr. Galle showed a Mansfield Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Planning Board Briefing presentation. Topics of the presentation were: 1. Housing Choice Community Grant Award to allow work to continue with the TOD district and advance work from a few years prior and incorporate work from the 2020 Master Plan update. 2. Housing Densification for MBTA Communities for the law that came into effect January 2021 to establish multi -family housing within communities that participate in the program. 3. Chauncy Street Design Update. Planning Board Meeting Notes 2/9/22 Page I of 8 Mr. Galle highlighted prior work of the Strategic Development Committee from 2019 for Mansfield Station Revitalization Overlay District Zoning to promote mixed use, pedestrian oriented within walking distance to the commuter rail and establish traffic patterns that are non -intrusive on existing residential neighborhoods. He then presented a 2019 SDC February Master Plan Concept with the idea to make more developable parcels explaining vehicular and pedestrian access, parking garage, scale, and green spaces. He explained that they will be working on a more sophisticated model to visualize what the plan could look like in greater detail, but for this meeting would touch on the Master Plan concept. Mr. LeCesne commented on a few road intersection issues and road irregularities and suggested alternate road arrangement. Mr. Galle noted that the governing factor of road positioning is the location of the intersection with grading and retaining walls. Mr. LeCesne spoke of visibility issues, traffic and accidents and suggested more direct access rather than angles and asked about bicycle access. Mr. Galle acknowledged comments and will refine the plan to create balance. Mr. McGrath also noted appreciation for comments so they can address them. Mr. Galle spoke of the MBTA Housing Densification Initiative for housing across Massachusetts. The goal is to create areas where housing can occur for MBTA communities and identifying where housing is more suited for density of minimum density of 15 units per acre, not more than one mile from the station. Mr. Galle noted that community information for the MBTA Housing Densification Initiative is due the beginning of May and will be working to make the concept better for community working with the Planning Department for where the overlay will work best. The goal is to take what the State will put together and make a better showing for the draft overlay concepts for housing densifrcation within one half mile of the transit station. Mr. Galle noted that participation in the initiative is not mandatory, but certain grants would not be available to communities that do not participate. He spoke of creation of a new overlay district to accommodate the plan for the density and presented three draft concepts. Ms. Friedman referenced attending the MMA conference and that her understanding is that this would require a zoning change. There are different kinds of tests to apply to an area so not all of the housing stock needs to be located around the train station and she would like to confirm if existing housing near station could be counted. Ms. Friedman noted that they would consider mixed use and looking for more than just one- and two -bedroom apartments but also looking for three -bedroom housing for a moderate size family. Mr. Galle spoke of how the Town's area fits to conform and looking forward to the 2023 draft of zoning with time to work out what makes the most sense for Mansfield. Mr. Schoonveld spoke of also attending conference and noted it was a very good presentation. The State would like to encourage singles and families to live near station. He further noted that they implied that it would not just be two or three grant opportunities to miss out on if a community does not comply, but more than that. Mr. Galle noted it should be looked at more block by block basis. He further spoke of the Route 106/Chauncy St. corridor with intersection reconstruction by the State funded in the 2024 TIP with construction to begin spring of 2024. Mr. LeCesne referenced traffic and pedestrian dangers under the bridge. Mr. Galle spoke of new shared use paths with a buffered bicycle lane. Planning Board Meeting Notes 2/9/22 Page 2 of 8 Mr. Penney spoke of previous addition of bike paths and bike racks around Town and has not seen them being used. Mr. McGrath spoke of Phase 1 and 2 of the initiative which includes meeting bike inclusion requirements. Mr. Penney expressed that he was not a proponent for the Draper extension to Chauncy St. but the Town made a commitment to the neighborhood to curb traffic in the neighborhood. He further noted the proposed parking structure and feels that the Town should not be in the business of building parking structures for the MBTA. He then inquired about the proposed buildings shown on private current private parking areas. Mr. Galle stated that the goal was to create a vision for the Master Plan but that individually land owners would develop their own proposals. Mr. Penney inquired if with the higher use for property apartments would property values increase. Mr. Galle suggested that discussions with landowners would need to take place to reconcile frontage for land assembly and needs to be looked at in more detail. Discussion took place for pedestrian overpass from the train to North Main St. Mr. Galle showed a slide depiction of County Street Roundabout explaining how the concept would work with reorganization of the area. He then explained the next steps: • Planning Board Meeting March 9, 2002 • Community Engagement • Planning Board Meeting April 13, 2022 • Community must decide on participation regarding MBTA Densification Initiative Mr. Burke noted that bringing all Board members up to speed was productive and that there are three to four additional dates on the Pending Business List for BETA/TOD discussions cumulating with the November Town Meeting bringing the project to a close. Mr. Rhein inquired if the May timeline is a one-time deadline or the Town could decide to do this in a year. Mr. Galle stated that his understanding is the May timeline is a hard deadline for indication if the Town is willing to participate in the program. Mr. Burke suggested that the Select Board have a listening session and a joint meeting between the Planning Board and Select Board in the near future to determine participation in the program. If the answer is yes, then how to do it. May 2nd is a hard deadline for submission of the Community Information form. Mr. Schoonveld expressed that the Town is in a good position for participation and he is looking forward to further meetings. Mr. Trowbridge spoke of previously discussed promises over the years to the neighbors to not increasing traffic and confirmed that the plan is to funnel traffic away from neighborhoods. Motion: To adjourn the Select Board. (Trowbridge-Aptowitz) roll call vote. Jess Aptowitz — in favor Michael Trowbridge — in favor Steve Schoonveld — in favor Frank DelVecchio — in favor Neil Rhein — in favor Five (5) in favor, Zero (0) opposed, Zero (0) abstained PASSES Planning Board Meeting Notes 2/9/22 Page 3 of 8 Ms. Ashman -Collins reopened the public hearing. Ms. Friedman recused herself. Craig Cygawnoski of RIM Engineering and Bill McDermott the owner of the property were present. Mr. Cygawnoski apprised the Board of recent changes to the plan. One being the reduction of seven unit to five units with two -car garage under, reducing outdoor parking around the building. He referenced a conversation with Rich Alves the Town Engineer, who did not see an issue with the change to the building or parking. There will be 27 feet from the edge of the garage to the edge of the parking. Rick Alves submitted a comments memo and Mr. Cygawnoski stated that they addressed the concerns noted in the memo. He referenced retaining walls previously shown on property line have been moved off the property line. They will be constructed of 8" block with the highest area being about 2%s feet high and he clarified where they will be located on the property. New A/C units will be at the ground level mounted to the building approximately eight feet off the ground. The drainage has also been approved by Rick Alves. Mr. Cygawnoski described the proposed grass areas, landscaping, and shrub planting for visual barrier between the properties. Pursuant to Mr. Burke's request, the height of the building was added to the plan. Mr. LeCesne commented that it is difficult to assess the scale of the proposed building in relation to the neighboring properties. Board members commented that the new elevation drawings are much better than previous submission. Ms. Ashman -Collins noted that there was no Clerk appointed for the meeting. Motion: To appoint Ms. Bren as Clerk. Ms. Bren accepted. (McClanahan -Penney) Roll call vote Brendan Roche — in favor Adrian LeCesne — in favor Michael McClanahan — in favor Ralph Penney — in favor Beth Ashman -Collins — in favor Five (5) in favor, Zero (0) opposed, Zero (0) abstained PASSES Ms. Ashman -Collins stated that the only correspondence submitted was from Rich Alves and inquired if the Board is satisfied that all items have been addressed. Mr. McClanahan expressed concern that five units on the lot is too dense for the area. Ms. Bren inquired how many parking spots will be available for guests. Mr. McDermott noted that there is enough space in front of each garage for guest parking and limited street parking. The units will be rental managed by a property management company. There will also be added restrictions for large vehicle parking on the premises. Mr. McDermott also noted that the fence behind the building will be a new six -foot -high vinyl fence stepped back from the street on the westerly end of the property. The existing chain -link fence at the northern end will remain. They have eliminated the fence in the front of the building and they will add shrubs. Mr. McDermott explained the type of siding and addition of windows on the side of the building. Planning Board Meeting Notes 2/9/22 Page 4 of 8 Public Comment Marcia Szymanski of 29 Pleasant Street questioned if the set -backs for the property have changed and expressed concern about parking. Mr. Cygawnoski clarified the site is in the B-1 zone where no set -backs are required, but that the set -back will be about seven feet from the street. Mr. Roche also noted concern with guest parking and inquired what each unit parking width would be. Mr. Cygawnoski stated that each will be about 25 feet. Mr. Roche also inquired about drainage. Mr. Cygawnoski clarified that the driveways will pitch away from the units to catch basin. Ralph inquired if the transformer was removed and not needed and Mr. Cygawnoski confirmed it would not be required. He also clarified that snow will not be stored on site and will be trucked out. Mr. Penney expressed concern with drainage flow to adjacent property and confirmed that there will be no additional drainage to the adjacent property with catch basin and two large infiltrators. Mr. Burke noted that the one and one-half spaces per unit have been met where seven spaces are required and they are providing ten spaces. Mr. Penney noted applicant will also repair sidewalks and addressed comments as best as they could. Mr. LeCesne commented to the possibility of making an arrangement with the adjacent property owner to utilize their back lot, owned by the neighbor, for snow storage as opposed to trucking it off site. Mr. McDermott stated that he will look into the prospect. Ms. Bren expressed concern with the building being close to the property lines. Mr. Cygawnoski noted that it does comply with zoning. Ms. Ashman -Collins spoke of outdoor living space, but noted that the proposed structure does create needed units. Motion: To have the applicant return with a four -unit proposal. (McClanahan - Mr. LeCesne inquired as to the reason for a reduction to four units as the current proposal meets requirements for the site. Mr. McClanahan expressed concern with the density of the proposed building on the small property size, tight parking and drainage, and snow removal. Mr. Burke suggested taking a "straw" vote for a Board consensus, requests a continuance, and a decision would be written with conditions for Board review and vote at the next hearing. Mr. McClanahan withdrew his motion. Non -binding straw vote of the Board that if there were a motion prepared for a positive decision to approve the Special Permit would they be in favor. Diana Bren — not in favor Brendan Roche — in favor Adrian LeCesne — in favor Michael McClanahan — not in favor Ralph Penney — in favor with conditions the Mr. Burke spoke of Beth Ashman -Collins -in favor Four (4) in favor, Two (2) opposed, Zero (0) abstained, where five favorable votes are required for a Special Permit, this would not pass. Planning Board Meeting Notes 2/9/22 Page 5 of 8 Ms. Bren commented of parking spill out to the front of the building and concern of snow removal. Mr. Penney stated that they do meet the parking requirement having ten spaces where only seven is required. Mr. McDonald also noted that the garage parking is 27 feet wide, which is more than adequate and they will make provisions for snow removal. Ms. Ashman -Collins did not have issues with parking. Motion: To request Town Planner to prepare a positive decision with conditions as discussed. (Penney-Bren) Roll call vote Diana Bren — in favor Brendan Roche — in favor Adrian LeCesne — in favor Michael McClanahan — not in favor Ralph Penney — in favor Beth Ashman -Collins — in favor Five (5) in favor, One (1) opposed, Zero (0) abstained PASSES Motion: To continue the hearing to February 23, 2022. (Penney-Bren) Roll call vote D, yes Diana Bren — in favor Brendan Roche — in favor Adrian LeCesne — in favor Michael McClanahan — in favor Ralph Penney — in favor Beth Ashman -Collins — in favor Six (5) in favor, Zero (0) opposed, Zero (0) abstained PASSES Atty. Edward Valanzola and Josh Kline of Stonefield Engineering were present. Atty. Valanzola spoke of having a positive meeting with Kevin Dumas, Town Manger and Chris McDermott, Economic Development Director and a Department Head meeting in which they received good comments which were addressed to move forward for this presentation. He then presented a assessor plan depicting the property for the site development. The Paine School at 215 Chauncy St. will be razed. Parcel 205 Chauncy St. with the doctor's office will also be razed. The two parcels will be the site for Chase Bank development with ATM drive-thru. The parcel at 234 Central St. where currently there is a house, will remain as it is and not developed at this time, but there will be reciprocal agreement that will Chase ingress/egress to access Central St. Arty. Valanzola stated that this will be a traditional Chase bank. He noted with addressing comments, that they are considering a right turn only in/out from Chauncy St. with signage to direct traffic. He further noted that site plan application property owners are listed on the first page and feels that the Site Plan Decision, in addition to the current owners, should name the entity that will be acquiring title to the property, Cobblehill Mansfield LLC. Mr. Kline, representing Chase Bank, presented a site plan depicting the site area and explained the access points and the existing buildings on each site. He then presented a proposed site plan with as of right use and described the proposed new building, open space, plantings at the building foundation, and site landscaping with the goal of having an architecturally pleasing view to the site and buildings from the street. He explained that the building and parking will be ADA compliant. Planning Board Meeting Notes 2/9/22 Page 6 of 8 He stated that in response to department head feedback of traffic concerns, that the applicant has agreed in a condition of approval would be to restrict right in/out movement with the use of signage as well as pavement markings and noted that through a traffic study, the site will not have adverse impact to the traffic signal or roadway network. Mr. Kline spoke of the bank being a traditional bank with investment component. The parking will accommodate employees and customers and the ATM location at the top of the property, meets requirements for queuing lanes and setbacks. Mr. LeCesne inquired if the future abutting site is developed, would they have access to the bank parking area. Atty. Valanzola stated that if the site is to be developed, it would stand on its own for compliance and not have use of the parking. Mr. McClanahan inquired if there is an agreement in place for the redevelopment of Chauncy street and land taking to the property. Mr. Kline stated that they are aware of future capital improvements and did meet with BETA Group as part of the design process and the design will safely accommodate future improvements. Mr. Burke spoke of the submitted comments, specifically the right in/out concerns and is satisfied with how Atty. Valanzola and Mr. Kline addressed the issue with signage and street pavement markings. He noted that there would be elevation drawings supplied to the Town engineer, but no outstanding staff issued. Mr. Kline presented elevation views of the building to the Board explaining finish materials and landscaping. Mr. Penney inquired about lighting. Mr. Kline explained that the site will have 24-hour ATM banking which will have security lighting designed to Chase security standards providing safe lighting for customers. The lights will be LED downward facing, shielded, compliant to Town bylaws, but will not be dimmed due to the ATM 24-hours operation. Lighting will not spill onto residential properties. Ms. Bren noted that nearby properties and also 24-hour businesses and will not have adverse to surrounding area. Mr. Kline presented the illumination plan for Board review explaining light levels meeting standards with no adverse impact to surrounding properties. Mr. Roche inquired why there are 37 parking spaces where only 25 are required. Mr. Kline stated that the number of spaces is Chase driven and also leaves space for snow storage. Mr. Roche inquired about the secondary traffic lane at the ATM. Mr. Kline explained that it is a common Chase safety feature for bypass traffic. Mr. Penney confirmed that all setbacks meet bylaw requirements and that Chauncy Street right in/out restrictions will be clearly noted. Public Comment Marie Grygienc of 165 Stearns Ave. commented that she has been a chase customer for over 25 years and is pleased they will be coming to Mansfield. It will be a great addition to the community. Lovely plans. Motion: To approve the Site Plan as prepared, taking into consideration discussed turnings for right turn only in/out at Chauncy Street and addressing all department head comments. (Bren-Roche) Planning Board Meeting Notes 2/9/22 Page 7 of 8 Roll call vote Diana Bren — in favor Sharon Friedman — in favor Brendan Roche — in favor Adrian LeCesne — in favor Michael McClanahan — in favor Ralph Penney — in favor Beth Ashman -Collins — in favor Seven (7) in favor, Zero (0) opposed, Zero (0) abstained PASSES Mr. Penney inquired as to when the most current Zoning Bylaw would be available. Ms. McGill commented that the Attorney General's office has recently approved the submitted articles and that copies would be available soon. Mr. Penney suggested that at the next meeting there be a discussion for applicant submission deadlines. He noted the past deadline was Thursday for submission to the Board for weekend review. Mr. Burke agreed that timeline and noted that future documents will be available through Dropbox and that at times there are important submissions after the Thursday deadline. Mr. Burke spoke about the Town hired consultant, Judi Barrett, for the school/daycare facilities and that she held her first neighborhood meeting and will be getting feedback from Judi. A future meeting date with the Board will be confirmed. Ms. Bren noted that there will need to be a placeholder submitted for Town Meeting in order to make edits for final copy. Mr. Burke explained that there will also be an amendment submitted updating the sign bylaw. Motion: To adjourn at 10:20 p.m. (McClanahan-Bren) Roll call vote Diana Bren — in favor Sharon Friedman — in favor Brendan Roche — in favor Adrian LeCesne — in favor Michael McClanahan — in favor Ralph Penney — 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 23, 2022 at 7:00 p.m. Signature of Clerk Diana Bren, Acting Clerk Date of Approval Planning Board Meeting Notes 2/9/22 Page 8 of 8