Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutmin of planning brd 03/15/00 c"". , \ ~ ~ ..~ ''"': ( Planning Board ,.., .... Minutes of March 15, 2000 :~ ". ' . r; Q ~.', p: ;) 'J Present: Thomas French, Chair, Bernard J. Dolan, Clerk; R6gef' S.' 'Achille; Thomas P. McShane; Kenneth H. Torman, Scott Frank, Mark Cook. Shaun p, Burke, Director ofPlannin and Develo ment c\TS ~- \ ,- 1. Minutes of March 1, 2000 Motion: To approve the minutes as submitted (Dolan-Achille) Six in favor. Cook abstained. PASSES 2. Zoning Board of Appeals Applications 18 Ian Keats Drive - Variance from side yard setback. Mr. Burke suggested a negative recommendation, since the applicant could build an addition off the back of the house without encroaching into the setback. Motion: To send the Zoning Board of Appeals a negative recommendation (Frank-Cook) Six in favor. Achille opposed. PASSES 3. Form J - Wayfield Estates - Wayfield Realty Trust Motion: To sign the Form J (Dolan-Cook) All in favor. PASSES 4. Request for release of funds - Millfarm Estates Motion: To reduce the balance in the Millfarm Drive Phase to $8,745.00 and the balance in the Millstone Court Phase to $3,510.00 (Frank-Dolan) All in favor. PASSES 5. March 3,2000 letter from Canoe River Advisory Committee re: removal of underground storage tanks at DPW garage 6. Memo from Board of Selectmen re: directional signs at WestIForbes. The board asked that this request be clarified before it makes a recommendation. 7. Public Hearing notices - Foxboro, Norton, Easton, North Attleboro Planning Boards; Water Resources Commission 8. Workshop notice - GIS 9. Memo from Department of Housing & Community Development re: Community Response Line 10. Memo from Department of Housing & Community Development re: Peer to Peer Grant Funds II, Community Connections newsletter 12. Planning magazine The clerk read the original and corrected public hearing notices. Due to typographical errors in the original advertisement, lines 3.5.1, 3.5 .15 and 3.5.20 of Article 60 will be heard at a public hearing on March 29,2000. r-- - 1 - Meeting of March IS 2000 r The chair explained the purpose of the public hearing was to gather input on the proposed Town Meeting articles, then the board will make recommendations to Town Meeting. Mr. French then left the meeting. Motion: To appoint Mr. McShane acting chair (Dolan-Frank) All in favor. PASSES Mr. Cook read a statement disclosing that he and his father own property on Gilbert Street. He has spoken with the Ethics Commission, and was told he should disclose these facts, but could still participate in the discussions. Article 62 - Gilbert Street Rezoning Motion: To amend the proposed article to include the land on the westerly side from the centerline of Gilbert Street only (Dolan-Torman) Mr. McShane explained the board has discussed this issue with the landowners and abutters, and the board's intent was not to disrupt existing businesses, so the amendment would exclude Duranco. Mr. Frank said the amendment would avoid more commercial traffic while leaving the existing business a conforming use. All in favor. PASSES Public Comment - Proponents Carl Nelson, 606 School Street, asked whether this would constitute spot zoning. Mr. McShane explained it would not because it would effect multiple owners. r Barbara Hammond, 156 Gilbert Street, asked if the existing business could be expanded. Mr. McShane told her that with the amendment, there would be no restrictions on Duranco expanding. Ed Flowers, 431 Gilbert Street, asked how long the parcels had been industrially zoned; Mr. Burke said approximately 40 years. Mr. McShane explained that over that time, there has been significant residential development in that area, without any changes to the small, windy roads. He said several land use studies have recommended that several isolated industrial parcels do not really go along with the town's Master Plan. Todd Dean, 18 Bungay Road, asked how many homes could be built on those parcels. Mr. Frank explained it could be approximately 28 houses, depending on issues such as wetlands, He added that if the parcels remain industrially zoned, they could be developed at R3 standards with a special permit, which could allow 120-plus houses on smaller lots. r-- Sandy Doran, representing Doranco, requested the board withdraw the whole article. She said the 1998 Mullin report recommended studying ways to bring industry to town and noted the importance of having industrial development to balance residential development. She said Doranco had looked at many surrounding towns, decided Mansfield was the best place for their business, and have been good neighbors. - 2 - Meeting of March 152000 r Carrie Flynn, 43 Lantern Lane, said Duranco has been a good neighbor and their land should remain industrial, but that because the neighborhood has changed so much, the vacant land on the other side of the street should be rezoned, Ed Mertens, 363 Balcom Street, said the neighborhood had changed since the bridge re-opened and was concerned about the negative effect of increased industrial development. Joseph Ricci, 85 Balcom Street, said he would like to see the parcels rezoned. Ken Bergano, 89 Gilbert Street, said there is an existing traffic problem and he would like to see the area stay residential. Barbara Hammond, 156 Gilbert Street, said Doranco has been a good neighbor, but she is concerned about unknown industrial development. ,-. Brian McCafferty, Carriage House Lane, previously a resident of Otis Street, said traffic increased after the bridge opened, but that residents knew the bridge would eventually be opened. He said he would rather see the parcels remain industrial than have additional houses, which would also increase traffic. He suggested the town try to attract more good industrial neighbors, since small businesses support town causes and provide jobs. Mr. McCafferty noted that since the Master Plan was adopted, lot sizes have been increased, which is an indication of Town Meeting's desire to reduce residential development. Mr. Burke explained that Duranco was not the issue, but rather the potential development of the rest of the industrial land. Michael Barrows, 523 Gilbert Street, said he would like the parcels to be rezoned. Norm Thibault, Gilbert Street, said he was concerned about water issues. Carl Nelson asked whether there were any plans to widen Gilbert Street, regardless of what the land is zoned, Mr. Burke explained that because Gilbert Street is a scenic road, there are no plans for changes. Todd Dean, 18 Bungay Road, asked if road improvements would be forced by additional industrial traffic. Mr. McShane explained that the issue would likely have to be forced by some sort of traffic incident. ~ Steve Thomas, 946 West Street, asked what impact the rezoning would have on West Street. Mr. Frank said he thought if that much industrial land were developed, all of the surrounding streets would be effected. -3- Meeting of March $2000 ( Walter Jenkins, 15 Conrod Court and IDC member, said there would be no way to know what might go in there, so the board should withdraw the article and work with the IDC to come up with an alternative. Sam Andrews, Duranco CFO, was concerned that the landowner's rights have not been addressed out of concern for non-existent residents. Sandy Doran, Duranco, suggested adding another industrial zone with different standards and restrictions, and offered to assist. Joe Doran, Duranco, said one of the issues in the Mullin Report was the need to mix industrial and residential uses. Cathy MacDonald, 945 East Street, asked what problems had been identified by the Mullin study. Mr. McShane explained one of the issues is pockets of land that have become isolated and no longer fit in with the neighborhoods. Mr. Barrows said he thought the point of the Mullin report was to come up with their best use. //...... Vincent Laforge, Deer Path Lane, suggested an additional industrial zone that would be more compatible with a situation like this. Ruth McKnight, 174 Gilbert Street, suggested a separate zone for office buildings. Rich George, 43 Marshall Avenue and IDC member, said the IDC had received letters from Gilbert and Otis Street businesses who are opposed to the rezoning. Jim Betts, 250 Otis Street, asked ifthe board had heard from all ofthe landowners. Mr. Doran said he had not been notified; Mr. Burke said all of the landowners had been sent copies of the public hearing notice, John O'Driscoll, formerly of Gilbert Street, said he would like Gilbert Street to remain rural, but that the neighborhood has changed, and he supports Duranco. Article 61 - Branch Street Rezoning Mr. French returned to the meeting. Mr. Torman and Mr. Cook did not participate in this discussion. r- Public Comment - Proponents There was no public comment. Public Comment - Opponents Peter Martin, ISPO attorney, said the land has been historically industrial with disposal practices that have left pollution issues. These issues are being monitored and will be remediated, but the land is inappropriate for residential use. Mr. Martin said ISPO was willing to work with the town to use the land, but does not want to lose any economically viable use of it. - 5 - Meeting of March 152000 /" Public Comment - Opponents Dave Doran, representing Duranco, said his company tries to be a good neighbor and suggested the board work with the landowners. He was concerned that if houses are built, future residents will complain about his business. Karl Clemmey said the Mullin report suggested balanced industrial and residential growth, but he did not think there would be houses built on those parcels because there is no sewer on Gilbert Street. He suggested the article be withdrawn and the board work with the landowners. Jay Barrows of the IDC said that board had voted not to support the article and would not support the amendment. The IDC is concerned about keeping existing and attracting new businesses because of the increase in taxes and decrease in industry since the 1970s. Mr. Barrows said "industry" could mean an office use; the IDC would like to determine what would be the best use of the land and balance that with the needs of the community. He said the road would probably have to be widened for residential development, and asked if the special permit provision for R3-sized lots could be eliminated. Mr. McShane said the board wants to work with the IDC to attract the kind of industry Mr. Barrows wants; Mr. Frank agreed, but said he didn't think most industrial uses would be appropriate. "" / Jack Vultaggio, 350 Gilbert Street, said rezoning the area to residential would cause its own problems, and may not be the best use of the area. He suggested encouraging good businesses to locate in town. Kevin Byrne, Tri- Town Chamber of Commerce, said he was concerned about taking industrial land off the market, and suggested the town be proactive in bringing in appropriate businesses. He said a special permit requirement would make locating here an uncertainty for businesses. Mr. McShane asked Mr. Byrne if the had a model the board could use to bring the right kind of industry to town. Peter DeGirolamo noted these industrial uses had been established before most of the houses, and problems began after the residential development. He was concerned the same thing would happen to Duranco, and said he is having trouble finding a location in town for his long-time business. Tom Prestwich, 4 Shady Brook Lane and IDC member, said taxes are increasing because of child-related issues and older residents won't be able to afford to keep their homes in a few years. William Wolf, 199 Gilbert Street, owns 15 acres of industrially-zoned land in the area and does not believe 600,000 square feet of industrial use is possible, both due to the infrastructure and as a business decision. He said he thought a special permit for smaller lots was a worst-case scenario, should not be used to make a decision, and could be considered a land taking without compensation. -4- Meeting of March 152000 /"' Mr. Frank asked about the land's DEP status; Mr. Martin said there is an industrial use limit, but did not know if there would be a residential use limit. Bob Hyde, Compo attorney, said his company did not receive notification of the public hearing. He said the environmental issues on this site are being remediated for light industrial standards and would not be compatible with a residential use. Mr. Clemmey said he agreed with the previous two speakers and suggested the possibility of an overlay district on these two parcels. Mr. Barrows said the IDC does not think the best use of these parcels would be residential, and is concerned about losing industrial land. Vincent LaToita, Deer Path Lane, said the sites have significant wetlands and an existing landfill. He asked the number of potential homes. Mr. Burke said depending on wetland and other issues, there could be 8-10 houses. He added the bike path will be going through the area along the old railroad right-of-way. r Article 60 - Changes to the Table of Uses Mr. French explained that due to typographical errors in the original ad, items 3.5.1,3.5.15 and 3.5.20 would be heard in a March 29,2000 public hearing. Mr. Torman and Mr. Cook did not participate in this discussion. Mr. French explained the proposed changes came out of the recommendations of several land use studies as a way to encourage quality development. Public Comment - Proponents Mr. Barrows suggested the IDC and Planning Board get together to discuss all of the proposed changes to the table. Carl Nelson, School Street, said there is no reason to exclude any kind of business from the industrial park. Mr. Clemmey was concerned about the number of changes being proposed, and the amount of decision-making power that would rest with the board. He said the special permit requirement would make it harder and more expensive for businesses to locate in Mansfield. ~ Mr. Nelson asked how the need for a special permit is determined; Mr. French explained that was the purpose of the Table of Uses, and that the proposed changes to the table were arrived at after lengthy discussion. Bob Currivan, 300 East Street, was concerned about the power the board would have regarding whether someone can build or not. He said a special permit would - 6 - Meeting of March l' 2000 (' add to the cost and time of development, and make it uncertain for the landowners; he said a hotel/motel should not be a special permit use. Mr. Currivan said he thought the Planning Board works out what they want to let in and what they don't, and that is unfair. Walter Jenkins, IDC member, said some of the proposed changes are over- reaching and could inhibit the IDC's ability to attract businesses to town. He said he disagreed with the items on restaurants, hotels, and vehicular dealerships. For clarification, Mr. French explained the board was not proposing any changes to industrial uses within the industrial zones. Mr. McShane asked the IDC for examples of businesses that have been scared off by the town's zoning regulations. Mr. Barrows said he did not know of any, but the IDC is trying to be proactive in bringing businesses to town. Mr. Barrows was also concerned about what would happen when the members change, but the Planning Board still has the ability to approve or deny projects. Mr. McShane explained the board was not proposing to make all development special permit uses, and said he would rather not allow certain things at all, but that this proposal was a compromIse. ,,- Peter DeGirolamo said special permits used to be only for extreme cases, but now it is becoming the norm. Cynthia Sarro, AMB Property (landowner in the industrial park) said there should be a variety of business types in any industrial park. She thought the number of proposed special permit uses was unusual, and said the restaurant and hotel/motel uses should be part of an industrial park. Mr. Clemmey suggested an auto repair business would not want to be in the industrial park because the land would be too expensive for that use. Mr. Dolan said an overlay district might be a good idea, but that right now, there is no separate zone for the industrial park. Motion: To continue the public hearing to March 29, 2000 at 9:00 p.m. (Dolan-Frank) Four in favor. McShane opposed. PASSES Mr. Torman and Mr. Cook returned to the meeting. ) Motion: To adjourn at 11 :30 p.m. (Me Shane- Torman) All in favor. PASSES ~&fk'~- Signature of rk .3 .- ~ ~,-CJ () Date of Approval r- - 7 - Meeting of March ~ 2000