Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutmin of planning brd 01/16/00 (' Planning Board Minutes of February 16,2000 ('" t"'? - 3 Present: Thomas French, Chair, Bernard J. Dolan, Clerk; Rog~t S:' 'Achille; Thomas P. McShane; Kenneth H. Torman. Shaun P. Burke, Director of Plannin and Develo ment f' 1. Minutes of February 2, 2000. Motion: To approve (Torman-Achille) French abstained, McShane not present. PASSES 2. Form J - Eastfield Lots 1,2,3 (Maple Street Form A lots) Motion: To sign Form J (Dolan- Torman) All in favor. PASSES 3. Memo from Michael Ahem, Subdivision Inspector re: surety for Wayfield Motion: To set at $98,907.00 (Dolan-Torman) All in favor. PASSES 4. Memo from Town Manager re: Amtrak review of subdivisions adjacent to train tracks. Mr. Dolan said these subdivisions should be fenced, but did not need to be reviewed by Amtrak. 5. Letter dated February 3, 2000 from VHB re: Draft Section 61 Findings (DEP Permits) on The Park at Great Woods 6. Letter dated January 28,2000 from VHB re: Environmental Notification Form - Commuter Rail Station 7. Memo dated February 4, 2000 from Jay Barrows, IDC Chair, re: Joint Planning Board/IDC meeting 8. Memo dated January 28, 2000 from Lance Lawson re: Players' Choice parking revision 9. Memo dated February 3,2000 from EOEA re: Commuter Rail Station 10. Zoning Board of Appeals decision re: 200 Copeland Drive (signage) Zoning Board of Appeals decision re: 905 South Main Street (lot size and frontage) 11. SRPEDD publication re: traffic accidents 12. Letter dated January 25, 2000 from John Riccio re: Millfarm Drive and Millstone Court requesting final release of remaining surety 13. Notices of Public Hearings - Easton Planning & Zoning Board 14. Notice of Public Hearing - Attleboro Planning Board 15. Notice of Public Hearings - Plainville Planning Board 16. Notice of Public Hearings - Foxboro Planning Board 17. Meeting notice from North Smithfield Heritage Association 18. Planning magazine 19. AP A newsletter 20. The Beacon 21. Memo dated February 10, 2000 from Shaun Burke to John D' Agostino re: single family building permits 22. Letter dated February 9, 2000 from Bertram Cook to Lee Azinheira re: highway garage earth removal 23. Letter dated February 9, 2000 from Bertram Cook to Steven Kaitz, National Lumber re: surplus material removal r - 1 - Meeting of February 16,2000 ~,.. IJ....C ~ .'~ .~ i~~ '._ \\:QS ",... :'r \ ~ /,f- 24. Memo dated February 10, 2000 from Shaun Burke to Bertram Cook re: revised Great Waves site plan 25. Zoning Board of Appeals decision re: 15 Donovan Lane (sideyard setback) 26. Zoning Board of Appeals decision re: 9 Webster Street (sideyard setback) Zoning Board of Appeals decision re: 30 Mayflower Drive (sideyard setback) 27. The Commissioner newsletter 28. Access New England newsletter 29. Public Hearing notice - Attleboro City Council 30. Meeting notice - MAPD IDC members present at the workshop were: Jay Barrows, Chair, Jim Adams, Walter Jenkins, Rich George, Carl Briggs and Tom Prestwich. Mr. Burke presented the group with an outline of the Planning Board's proposed zoning articles for Town Meeting. Mr. French explained the board had looked at by-right industrial uses with regard to the Master Plan and Dr. Mullin's report and considered ways to encourage quality industrial development. f' Changes to Table of Uses Mr. Burke explained concern over retail uses in industrial zones goes back to 1989, when the Southeastern Regional Planning agency did a traffic study based on by-right uses. SRPEDD found that retail uses in the industrial zone would result in a much higher volume of traffic. In addition, during the Great Woods Land Use Study, the Industrial 1 areas from School Street to the Norton town line and in West Mansfield were reviewed. That study recommended a number of retail uses be prohibited or made special permit uses because of the potential loss of business to the downtown area. Similar steps were recommended when the Master Plan was updated in 1996, when the consultant noted a conflict between the plan's goals and the Zoning By-Law. In 1998, the Mullin study also found the retail uses in the industrial zones were not compatible with the Master Plan. Mr. Barrows suggested that if performance standards had been set before the post office, Osco and CVS were permitted, some of the problems on those sites could have been avoided. Mr. Burke agreed, but said since the post office was a federal project, the town would not have had much control regardless of the zoning regulations. He said the proposed zoning changes were not intended to prohibit commercial development, but to place businesses in the right places. r Mr. Barrows was concerned that if the Planning Board has special permit authority, changes in the makeup of the board could effect whether businesses are allowed in town. Mr. George added that if the full board is not at a special permit hearing, the applicant would still need a three-quarter vote. Mr. French explained that in the past, applicants have been given the option to continue the hearing until the full board can be present. - 2 - Meeting of February 16, 2000 ;- Mr. Burke explained that the Planning Board brings proposed changes to Town Meeting, but that changes are made by Town Meeting. He said the proposed changes are intended to raise the standards of development to attract quality businesses. Mr. Adams was concerned with taking that power away from Town Meeting and placing it with one board. Mr. Barrows said it would be hard to work with businesses if he cannot assure the owners they will be able to get the necessary permits. He said the IDC is concerned about retail development within the industrial park, and suggested an overlay district outside of the park where retail uses would be uses by right. Mr. Dolan asked whether there were any covenants remaining in the industrial park; Mr. Burke said he did not think there were, and asked how an overlay district would be defined. Mr. Barrows asked why the proposal eliminated restaurants from the Industrial 2 zone. Mr. Burke explained the board did not think that use was conducive to that zone, since the 12 areas in town are all bordered by residential areas. Amendment to Zoning Map - Gilbert Street Mr. French excused himself from the discussion. r Mr. Burke explained there are 54 acres of Industrial 2 land on Gilbert Street, which are surrounded by residential areas, The area currently has very heavy traffic, and the board is concerned with the potential for an additional 600,000 square feet of industrial building in the area. Mr. Barrows asked what protection the existing Gilbert Street businesses would have. Mr. Burke said they would become pre-existing, non-conforming uses and would have to go to the Zoning Board of Appeals for expansion or addition. He also suggested running the new zone line down the middle of Gilbert Street to accommodate Duranco. Mr. Barrows was concerned with a possible additional 30 houses in the area if it were to be rezoned. Mr. Prestwich suggested that would be a good area for an elderly housing project. Amendment to Zoning Map - Branch Street Mr. French returned to the discussion at this point. r This amendment primarily concerns the ISPO/COMPO site, which the town is no longer interested in acquiring. Mr. Burke explained there is currently one residential development in the 12 zone, Tracey Circle. Mr. Adams asked what liability the town could incur by allowing residential uses in an industrial zone. -3- Meeting of February 16,2000 ~ Mr. Burke said it was possible the owners could claim the value of their land would be reduced. Mr. Adams asked if there were enough land to use the Branch Street site as a recreation area. Mr, Burke said the two sites are 10.5 acres, and that use would be allowed. However, he explained the sites are very wet and polluted. Mr. McShane suggested these may be perfect Brownfields sites. Off Street Parking and Loading This amendment would preclude parking between the front of the building and the street in commercial areas in order to create a streetscape. Mr. Barrows said downtown businesses have to unload deliveries on the main street now, and cannot afford to lose anymore parking. Mr. Burke explained the B I area would be exempt from the amendment. Mr. Dolan said the existing parking would not be lost, but there would be no new on-street parking created. He said he was specifically concerned with the Route 106 area when the area around the train station is developed further, and with the other B2 and B3 areas, which still have development potential. ,--. I Mr. Prestwich asked whether if the lot next to Ro-Jack's were developed, the building would have to be moved closer to the street, which may change the site lines of surrounding businesses. Mr. Burke explained only parking would have to be moved back, and that site distance would still have to be maintained. Mr. Prestwich was concerned about the businesses losing visibility. Mr. Barrows said he thought the landscaping and buffering requirements added to the Zoning By-Law in 1994 were supposed to make parking in front of buildings more attractive. Mr. Burke agreed, saying that is why CVS and Osco look so much better than the strip mall across the street. Mr. Adams said he thought that with this amendment, the back would become the de facto front of the business and deliveries would be made in the front. 75-Foot Setback When an Industrial Zone Meets a Residential Zone The members of the IDC said they agreed with the Planning Board's proposal. r Rooming House and Hotel/Motel Mr. Burke explained the board's concern with a proliferation of temporary rooming houses downtown, adding most communities have zoned this use out. The board also wants to clarify the definition of a hotel/motel to avoid long-term temporary stays. Mr. Dolan said his concern was with fire hazards from hot plates in rooming houses without private cooking facilities. - 4 - Meeting of February 16, 2000 /' Mr. Barrows suggested changing the whole definition because this may preclude a hotel like Embassy Suites, which markets long-term temporary stays for professionals. Mr. Burke suggested a definition for an "Extended Stay Hotel. " Reduction of Setback and Building Height in Business 3 Mr. Burke explained this would move the buildings closer to the street and reduce the height proportionally. Mr. Barrows was concerned that this may eliminate options for building styles by forcing builders to use flat roofs. Mr. Jenkins suggested changing the calculations to measure to the top floor instead of the rooftop. Mr. French said the IDC's suggestions will be incorporated into the warrant articles following the additional input received at the public hearing. Mr. Barrows suggested the IDC and Planning Board meet again after Town Meeting to discuss downtown issues. ,--. Mr. Dolan reported the Capital Improvements Committee has met twice and is going well. Mr. McShane asked if the Zoning Board of Appeals had made a decision on the CVS sign. Mr. Burke told him it had not, since the original application may be withdrawn and a new one submitted. Karl Clemmey said he did not like the way the proposed zoning amendments had been handled and he did not feel there was enough notification before the legal ad ran in the newspaper. He said the special permit procedure is very hard on developers, and that the ability to grant special permits would be too much power with one board. He disagreed with the amendment to require parking in the back of buildings, saying that is why the zoning by-law requires landscaping and buffering in the front of buildings. Motion: To adjourn at 10:45 p.m. (Dolan- Torman) All in favor PASSES ~~- 19nature of - .3-')-()iJ Date of Approval r - 5 - Meeting of February 16, 2000