Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA 09/19/2023Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes RECEIVED TOWN CLf Rt S OFFICE September 19, 2023 Y023 OCl 18 A 4 01 Meeting Held in Person in Meeting Room 3A/B an4 �, fl C F I E L D VirtuallyUsirigGoToWebinarPla(form MASSACHUSETTS Present: Darlene Pruitt, Chair; Matthew Cummings, Clerk; Eric Correira, Matthew List, Ryan Maxwell; Michael Reed, Associate Nadine DePillo, Administrative Secretary, Priscilla McGill, Administrative Secretary, and Sarah Raposa, Director of Planning and Development Absent: Edward Valanzola, Associate Darlene Pruitt, Chair read public notice into the record. Ms. Pruitt appointed Eric Correira as voting member for the meeting [Mr. Correira watched the recording of the August 15, 2023 meeting and submitted the Missed Meeting Certification]. Application of Attorney Jay Talerman for an appeal of a Planning Board Decision from Zoning Bylaw Section 230-5.3 for an Appeal and reversal of Site Plan Approval to permit the construction of a 16,800 square foot elementary school with daycare and 32 parking spaces at 19 Knight Way, (Assessor's Plot 3, Parcel 51) in the Residential 1 (RI) zone. Chair Pruitt noted that the public comments portion is closed but asked Nix. Talerman to present his memo. Mr. Talerman who represents the abutters for 19 Knight Way was present. Mr. Talerman stated that the September 15, 2023 memorandum is a summary of the issues previously raised. He suggested that if the Board was inclined to move towards an approval of the project that they add teeth to the conditions as they relate to the network and school bus issues. They maintain that the ZBA to take a flesh look at traffic with peer review. Alternatively, there are suggested conditions in his memo for the Board's consideration such as drop-off & pick-up, school bus conflicts, lighting, and landscaping. Ms. Pruitt commenced deliberations and stated that the Planning Board's decision determined that 19 Knight Way is protected under the Dover Amendment, M.G.L. c. 40A Section 3. Ms. Pruitt stated that the Hands -on -Montessori Elementary School was presented as registered in Massachusetts. Ms. Pruitt further stated that the Hands -On -Montessori, Inc., will be leased as a new building for educational use. Ms. Pruitt further stated that Mansfield Zoning by-laws further permits educational use of a building in a Residential (RI) zone per M.G.L. c. 40A Section 230- 3.4B and the Planning Board added conditions that Ms. Miller of FOD, LLC will provide an annual report to confirm the use is still educational. ZBA Meeting Minutes — 9-19-23 Ms. Pruitt further stated that the elementary school is a non-profit educational corporation (Hands on Montessori Inc) and the Hands-on Montessori Elementary School Inc., is for a for - profit. Mr. List stated that he agreed with Ms. Pruitt by reviewing the earlier decision from the Land Court in 2020, that the Town wasn't a party to, stating that the project was structured in a similar method. Mr. List stated that the FOD, LLC was the owner of the land and there was a lease to a non-profit to operate the school and the land court judge upheld that the decision was protected by the Dover Amendment. Ms. Pruitt noted the public comments regarding financial information and IRS filing and stated that the proof had been submitted for the non-profit entity. Mr. List summarized by saying that under the Dover Amendment, the entity does not need to be a non -taxed or charitable non-profit and is satisfied with the information. Ms. Pruitt fiuther commented on another public comment regarding the Planning Board's decision and that that was based on (pre-2022 amendments also referred to as the "old" bylaw) governing site plan review and the zoning freeze for this application on whether or not it applies per the M.G.L. c40A Section 6 paragraphs 5 and 7 aka Zoning Freeze. Ms. Pruitt fiuther explained that the Planning Board approved the site plan review that was submitted prior to any bylaw changes. Ms. Pruitt farther stated that the Zoning bylaw that was applied made the proper decision based on the Massachusetts General Laws according to section 6 and paragraphs 5 and 7 that they could consider the previous zoning bylaws that was applied because of the time the site plan review was originally submitted. Ms. Raposa clarified Ms. Pruitt's statement regarding the timing of the submittal of the site plan which was not the issue. Ms. Raposa stated that the protections set forth in M.G.L. c40A Section 6 paragraphs 5 and 7 are a part of the Zoning Freeze by an appeal of the subdivision application creating the environment for the applicants to apply to the Planning Board under the old bylaw in relation to the subdivision application relates to the site plan approval process. Mr. List asked since the subdivision application was denied, was there an appeal pending in the Land Court? Ms. Raposa responded to Mr. List stating yes and that the Planning Board denied the application for a subdivision plan and the applicants appealed which extended the Zoning freeze. Mr. List stated in relation to the old site plan bylaw and the new site plan bylaw, is that the new site plan approval bylaw provides a clear discussion of the traffic study; i.e. if the level of service of the traffic study declines then the Planning Board may require a condition of the site plan approval which could bring back the original level of service. Mr. List noted that with the Dover Amendment protection and under the new site plan approval law, he's not sure how much the Town can require to mitigate those intersection sections back down to a level A condition from a level B condition. Mr. List also agrees that the subdivision freezes zoning. ZBA Meeting Minutes — 9-19-23 Ms. Pruitt stated that the Planning Board created stipulations on having a management report according to conditions 6 and 7 regarding queuing. Mr. List had concerns regarding the queuing conditions in relation to conditions Section 6 and 7; are they actionable? Mr. List further stated that the traffic safety officer could be more involved in this situation. Mr. List further expressed concerns about whether or not there is a queuing problem, he did not see a clear threshold of what constitutes a queuing problem. Ms. Pruitt stated that according to the site plan approval states that 200 student maximum enrollment with 212 trips weekday AM, 220 trips weekday PM, and 30 trips weekday PM cormnuter peak hours. Mr. Maxwell stated that the criteria for what is a queuing issue is not clear and questioned whether a single car waiting for 5-10 seconds on Knight Way is a problem. Mr. List suggested it defers to the Police Department. He wants to make sure the Board is comfortable because there isn't a hard and fast metric on Conditions 6 and 7. Ms. Pruitt stated that the driveway is not completed and the longer driveway would mitigate some of the queuing issues. Mr. Reed expressed concerns with the traffic in and around Knight Way and suggested that the neighborhood will be inundated with school buses and vehicles in the neighborhood. Mr. Reed expressed concern regarding the winter time the snow causes a major impact because the streets are narrow and with students coming in and out of Knight Way will cause major traffic. Nh•. Reed expressed the zoning of Knight Way is a residential neighborhood and is not commercially zoned. Mr. Reed expressed that the project for 19 Knight Way will cause issues with the value of the homes in the neighborhood and disagrees with the plan to build a school at the end of a cul-de-sac. Mr. Correira stated that the project for 19 Knight Way will be constructed for a school. Mr. Reed stated that the applicants could build in another location where it would not inundate the neighborhood. Mr. Reed further stated that he is not bias to the fact that if he owned 13 acres of land he would make use of the land as well. Mr. Cununings stated that he understands the frustrations of the residents in the area regarding the building of a school. Mr. Cummings further explained that the applicants are not building a factory or a standard commercial building in the area, which would immediately have been turned down, but the Dover Amendment allows this type of application in this location. Ms. Pruitt stated that she understands the concerns from the residents regarding the traffic. Ms. Pruitt further stated that there are no significant traffic pattern changes since 2017. Ms. Pruitt cited the expert that prepared the report for Ms. Miller has 25 years of experience and confirmed via email that the report is still valid, with slight fluctuations, insignificant, but there is more traffic than normal. ZBA Meeting Minutes - 9-19-23 Mr. Cummings stated that the prior traffic study shows the same dynamic in that there is no other change in the traffic pattern other than the Project's traffic. Mr. List wondered what you could do to mitigate the traffic, in the context of site plan approval. He cited the Primrose School case in Natick. He is not sure there is a way to fix the narrow roads network of the Knight Way neighborhood through site plan approval, Mr. List stated that the use is protected under the Dover Amendment with a by -right use even in residential neighborhoods. Perhaps if this was proposed prior to the neighborhood being built, things might be different. He agrees that it will add a lot of traffic but doesn't know of a way to fix that via site plan approval. Mr. Cummings also noted that the Primrose decision indicated that enrollment cannot be limited. Ms. Pruitt stated that according to the landscaping and lighting which was noted in the Planning Board's decision on page 10, number 8:Ms. Miller would address the landscaping based on the response from the department of early education and they would provide a copy of that report to the planning board and the plamiing board noted that there will be some landscaping installed at the rear of the parking. The light fixtures are to be positioned downward to shield any lighting shining on any abutters property in the neighborhood. Ms. Pruitt further discussed the landscaping for the school was mentioned by Ms. Miller stating that she would like the children involved in the landscaping process of the project. Mr. Maxwell expressed concern regarding what is the timeframe when the landscaping. Mr. Maxwell stated that there should be a condition in regard to the landscaping timeframe. He asked about which condition had the lighting requirement in it. Mr. List said he saw it in the departmental feedback from the Electric Department commented about the light temperature. Mr. Maxwell suggested a dark -sky compliant condition should be added. Mr. Correira stated that according to the September 15, 2023 memorandum from Mr. Talerman suggested language for a condition regarding the lighting, which doesn't seem unreasonable. Mr. List stated that condition 2 relates to the departmental comments. Mr. Maxwell asked if there was a list of the outstanding departmental commments. He noted the comment regarding a turning analysis for the fire truck. Ms. Raposa said no, but she could provide one. She then clarified the meaning behind condition 2 by stating that it's a catch-all condition for anything that may be outstanding, for example, that the Town Engineer's continent regarding requiring for a new traffic study, which was brought tip at the last meeting was a verbal communication that she had with the Town Engineer after lie wrote the memo where he rescinded the suggestion for a new traffic study because he was basing that off of the Mass DOT requirement. Ms. Raposa further stated that there is neither a local regulation and this is not a Mass DOT project so he didn't have any teeth to require the new traffic study; which, therefore was a comment but does not remain an outstanding issue. Ms. Pruitt and Ms. Raposa discussed the next steps for coming to a vote and potential conditions on lighting and landscaping. Mr. Correira said he would probably vote to uphold with conditions regarding lighting and suggested the Board members provide feedback to the Planner. ZBA Meeting Minutes — 9-19-23 Ms. Pruitt said she would vote to uphold with conditions regarding landscaping timeframe Mr. Cummings said he would vote to uphold with conditions Mr. Maxwell said he would vote to uphold with conditions to clarify the issues with queuing; timeline for the landscaping and the condition on the dark sky compliance with lighting. Mr. List said lie would vote to uphold with the dark sky compliance with lighting conditions; timeline for landscaping. Mr. List further stated according to the site plan approval with reference to page 9 number 1 which states that the school will be for a 200-student maximum enrollment. Mr. List expressed concern whether or not it is enforceable with having the Dover Amendment protection with the 200-student enrollment. Mr. List would like to add to condition 7 that the vehicular management plan be updated with any future increase in licensed capacity so that the vehicular management plan remains current with the driveway updated/expanded as necessary. Ms. Pruitt clarified that queuing and traffic are different issues. Mr. List reviewed the public continents regarding the Subdivision Rules and Regulations and the Primrose School in Mansfield is on the state portion of Copeland Drive (Route 140) so Mass DOT had jurisdiction on that project; so both comments are not applicable. The Board will review and vote on an actual document at the next meeting. Ms. Kawamoto was present via webinar video referencing the enrollment cap is typically is not enforceable but because the applicant volunteered a 200-cap enrollment, it is enforceable. Mr. List suggested the vehicle management plan should be updated with increases in enrollment with respect to the queuing and traffic. Mr. List asked about the timing of the decision. Ms. Raposa noted the 100-day timeline. Mr. Talerman gave a verbal extension from the audience. Ms. Raposa will follow-up with the paperwork. Motion: To continue the Appeal and reversal of Site Plan Approval dated May 2, 2023 from the Mansfield Planning Board pursuant to Section 230-5.3 for permitting the construction of a 16,800 square foot elementary school with daycare and 32 parking spaces at 19 Knight Way to October 17, 2023 at 7:30 p.m. (Cummings/Maxwell) Five (5) in favor, Zero (0) opposed, Zero (0) abstained PASSES. Motion: To approve the minutes of July 18, 2023 (Correira/List) Five (5) In favor, Zero (0) opposed, Zero (0) abstained PASSES Motion: To postpone the minutes of August 15, 2023 (Correira/Cummings) Five (5) In favor, Zero (0) opposed, Zero (0) abstained PASSES ZBA Meeting Minutes - 9-19-23 Next Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting: October 17, 2023 at 7:30 p.m. Motion: To adjourn at 8:00 pm (Cummings/List) Five (5) in favor, Zero (0) opposed, Zero (0) abstained PASSES -t'Z I e�� I /6//-7/Z,? Signature of Clerk Date of Approval ZBA Meeting Minutes — 9-19-23