Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutmin of planning brd 05/10/00 "'I 1 "...... ~.,- r Planning Board Minutes of May 10,2000 '0 .,.. .':' -~ ': -, ..... r- 'J " 'F ',._ \~' . I j '. ....:. ~ Present: Thomas French, Chairman~ Bernard 1. Dolan, Clerk~ Roger Adlllle~ Thomas P. McShane~ Scott Frank~ Mark Cook, Kenneth Torman. Shaun P. Burke Director ofPlannin and Develo ment ; r- 1. Minutes April 26, 2000 Motion: To approve as submitted (Dolan-Frank) Six in favor. French abstained. PASSES 2. Zoning Board of Appeals applications * 180 East Street - Finding for an addition off the rear, where the house already encroaches into the side yard setback. The addition will not cause any new non-conformity. Motion: To send the Zoning Board of Appeals a positive recommendation because there is no increase in the non-conformity (Frank-Cook) All in favor. PASSES *670 East Street - Variance for a 5'x8' (40 square feet per side) sign. Mr. Burke explained the Zoning By-Law allows signs to be 32 square feet total. Motion: To send the Zoning Board of Appeals a negative recommendation due to a lack of hardship and a lack of any unique situation at the site which would make a sign of allowed size difficult to see. (Frank-Cook) All in favor. PASSES 3. Request for release - Mayhew Farm Bus Stop Building, $2,500~ Tack Coat, $1,197~ 1 Yz" Wearing Course $6,080 Total Request: $9,777. Balance remaining will be $12,183.76. Motion: To release $9,777 (Dolan-Torman) All in favor. PASSES 4. Zoning Board of Appeals decisions- 18 Ian Keats Drive - Granted~ 261 Chauncy Street - Denied 5. April 27, 2000 memo from IDC re: !DC meeting May 3,2000 6. April 19, 2000 IDC Minutes 7. April 2000 Building Construction report 8. Public Hearing notices - North Attleboro Planning Board~ Attleboro Zoning Board of Appeals~ Attleboro Planning Board~ Easton Planning & Zoning Board~ Foxboro Planning Board~ North Attleboro Zoning Board of Appeals 9. April 20, 2000 letter from Historic Massachusetts re: Ten Most Endangered Historic Resources Program 10. Invitation to SRPEDD Annual Meeting - May 24,2000 11. Advertisement from VHB 12. Planners Book Service Catalog 13. Mass Office on Disability Workshop notice 14. May 10,2000 memo from Richard Lewis re: Conservation Commission decision to accept Lot 3 in Patricia Marie Village 15. SRPEDD Regional Review newsletter 16. MAPD Notes from the Chair~ The Beacon~ TransReport newsletter r - 1 Planning Board Minutes 5/10/00 r r *School Street, John G. Walsh, Jr. Mr. Burke explained there is no note on the plan regarding access to the land. Mr. Frank asked if the use would be frozen if the board signed the plan with the note included? Mr. Burke said he thought it would be. Dr. Torman said he was concerned that all the land on the plan is not currently in common ownership and the only legitimate frontage is on School Street. Motion: Not to endorse the Form A because with the exception of one lot, the lots shown on the plan do not have adequate frontage. (Frank-Torman) All in favor. PASSES *Fruit Street - Riccio & Montaquila. Creating three lots~ Lot 2 is labeled non- conforming, non-buildable due to insufficient frontage and lot width. Motion: To sign the Form A (Dolan-Cook) All in favor. PASSES *Chauncy Street - Robert Currivan. Lots 1 and 3 are labeled non-conforming, non-buildable, Lot 24 has sufficient frontage and area, but the frontage along Route 140 is illusionary because there is no access. Motion: Not to endorse the plan because it does not meet the statutory requirements for adequate frontage and the access in unclear (McShane-Frank) Six in favor. Achille opposed. PASSES *Chauncy StreetIW ood Ave - Robert Currivan. The plan goes through two zones, R3 and B 1, with the only access from W ood Avenue and Creeden Street. None of the lots are labeled non-buildable. Motion: Not to endorse the plan because it does not meet the statutory requirements for adequate frontage. (Dolan-Cook) All in favor. PASSES Mr. French explained the Planning Board would be asked to make recommendations to Town Meeting on all zoning articles and said since the public hearings on all of the articles had been held and closed, the board would not be taking public comment. ANNUAL TOWN MEETING Planning Board Articles Article 51 Any and all Form A lots created out of the original tract of land upon which the Residential Compound is proposed shall be counted toward the maximum density (6 dwellings) allowed by this by-law. Motion: To make a positive recommendation to Town Meeting (Dolan-Cook) Mr. Frank asked about putting a time limit on the article. The board had discussed this, but had not settled on a number. Mr. French asked if this would force traditional subdivisions to be built rather than residential compounds. Mr. Burke said he did not think so. r- Six in favor. Frank opposed. PASSES - 2 Planning Board Minutes 5/10/00 r- r r Article 52 In the Business 1,2, and 3 districts, no parking space or other paved surface other than access driveways, common driveways or walkways, for other than single or two-family residential uses, shall be located between the principal public street or way and the principal structure. Mr. Achille asked what, other than the streetscape aspect, was the intention of the article. Mr. McShane said he was concerned about pedestrian safety and traffic calming issues. Mr. Frank said there may be problems with the abutters behind businesses if the parking is moved. Motion: To withdraw Article 52 (Frank-Achille) Four in favor. French, McShane opposed. Torman abstained. PASSES Article 53 To reduce the required front setback and building height as follows: B-3 Zone From To 45 35 By-Right Maximum Building Height Minimum Setbacks (ft) Front 50 30 Motion: To withdraw Article 53 because it is so closely connected with Article 52 (McShane-Frank) Mr. Burke said he looked at the building plans for several buildings that had been discussed during the hearing, and found that 200 Chauncy Street is 35' high, 272 Chauncy Street is 32' high, Osco is 29' and CVS is 32'. He explained these buildings seem much higher because of their mass and the amount of fill used on the sites. He said without Article 52, this one would not be very effective. All in favor. PASSES Article 54 (3) In the II and 12 districts, side and rear setbacks shall be 75 feet when business or industrial uses are within 75 feet of the property line of a residential use or a residential zone line. Said setbacks shall be waived when abutting a railroad easement in the 11,12 and 13 districts. Motion: To make a positive recommendation to Town Meeting (Frank-Torman) Six in favor. Cook abstained. PASSES Article 55 To amend Section 3.3.4 Rooming House by deleting the definition and by deleting the use from the Schedule of Principal Use Regulations. Motion: To make a positive recommendation to Town Meeting (Torman-McShane) All in favor. PASSES -3 Planning Board Minutes 5/10/00 r Article 56 To amend Section 3.5.7 Hotel/Motel by deleting the words H.__ more or less.." to read asfollows: 3.5.7 Hotel/Motel: A building or portion thereofusedfor the temporary occupancy of individuals who are lodged with or without meals and in which provision for cooking is preponderantly in a central kitchen and not in the individual rooms or suites. Said use may incorporate small shops and restaurants. Motion: To made a positive recommendation to Town Meeting (Torman-Frank) All in favor. PASSES r- Article 57 To amend Section 3.6.2 Bulk Material Storage and Sales by deleting the comma after the words H.__ or similar establishment for open and enclosed.__ " to read as follows: 3.6.2 Bulk Material Storage and Sales: Contractor's yard, fuel oil/heating service facility, lumber yard, recreational vehicle center or similar establishment for open and enclosed distribution or sale at wholesale and retail of material, merchandise, products or equipment provided that all smoke, odor, particulate matter, toxic matter, fire or explosive hazard, glare, noise and vibration shall be effectively confined to the premises or disposed of in a manner so as not to pose a present or potential hazard to human health, safety, welfare or the environment. Motion: To make a positive recommendation to Town Meeting (Torman-Dolan) All in favor. PASSES Article 58 To amend Section 3.0 Principal Use Regulations, Table 3.5 Schedule of Principal Use Regulations - Business Uses - to read as follows: (changes shown in bold type) Mr. Achille said there had been discussion of an overlay district in the industrial park, which he said should be followed up on. Mr. French suggested setting a date to discuss that with the IDC after Town Meeting. Mr. McShane said he did not think that discussion would be a bad idea, but thought the first time the board and the IDC discussed it, it was with the understanding the IDC would support Article 58. Mr. Dolan said the board and the IDC should get together after Town Meeting, but that this article should go to Town Meeting now. Mr. Frank agreed, but said he did not want Town Meeting to think Article 58 is a temporary measure. Motion: To make a positive recommendation to Town Meeting r- (Torman-Frank) Six in favor. Cook abstained. PASSES - 4 Planning Board Minutes 5/10/00 r- Article 59 To rezone a 21.11 acre area of land along Branch Street and abutting the former Old Colony Railroad right-of way from its current designation of 1-2 to a proposed designation ofR-l; said parcel is comprised of land identified on Assessors Map 34 and Parcels 100, 102, and a portion of 149 now or formerly owned by Compo Chemical and ISPO USA, Inc. Motion: To withdraw Article 59 (Dolan-Cook) All in favor. PASSES Article 60 To rezone a parcel of land consisting of approximately 46 acres on the west side of Gilbert Street from the center of Gilbert Street westerly from its current designation of 1-2 to R-l. Said parcel is identified on Assessors Map 3 as parcels 13, 8, 9, 10, P/O 5, and 238 now or formerly owned by Wolf & Pittman, Quirk Trust LLC, and Massapoag Realty Trust. Mr. French left the room at this point. r Motion: To withdraw Article 60 (Dolan-Achille) Mr. Frank said he was more concerned with traffic, safety and infrastructure issues than with the potential tax loss. Mr. McShane said he thought there was a lot of neighborhood support for the rezoning. Mr. Dolan said he did not think rezoning those parcels would accomplish anything. Mr. Frank said there was no way to tell what kind of neighbors the future landowners would be, but said residential neighbors take the risk that there are industrial uses in the area. Mr. Achille said that argument was speculative, and he has not heard any strong argument why the land should be rezoned. Mr. Frank said it would be a general benefit to the town, since the roads are unable to handle heavy traffic. Dr. Torman said Mr. Wolf had told the board he was unable to get an industrial use for his land because it is so far from the highway, making industrial use of that land a low risk. He added residential uses would be a tax burden, while industrial uses would be large taxpayers. Mr. Burke said the land is isolated and does not lend itself to easy development. He explained there are 186 acres of undeveloped residential land on Gilbert Street, which will eventually be built out, leaving the existing industrial uses with residential neighbors. He said it doesn't make sense to have an industrial use in the middle of a residential zone. Mr. Burke was also concerned that any new industrial uses on Gilbert Street would be downmarket because the land is inexpensive and isolated. r- -5 Piamring Board Minutes 5/10/00 r Mr. Cook said he visited the site and found it to be very wet, which would limit both the number of houses and the amount of industrial buildings there. Mr. McShane said there are a lot of unknown factors at this point, but the currently allowed uses are known, which would not be good for the neighborhood. Since those uses are allowed by right, the Planning Board won't have any say in the development. Mr. Achille said he was optimistic that something good might go in there. Mr. Frank was concerned that in the Industrial 2 zone, houses can be built now on 10,000 square foot lots with a special permit. With the rezoning to Rl, there would be fewer houses because the lots would be much larger. Four in favor. Frank, McShane Opposed. PASSES Article 61 Installation of sidewalks on the south side of Pratt Street from Hope Street to the East Street fork. Motion: To support Article 61 (Dolan-McShane) Three in favor. Achille, Frank, Cook, Torman Opposed. FAILS r Citizens' Petitions Article 64 Reducing open space in the 1ndustriall zones from 35% to 25%. Mr. Burke said he had not seen any indication the parking problems in the industrial park are caused by too much open space. He explained open space has a value to the community, and without a compelling reason, would not recommend lowering it. One of the factors that contributed to the establishment of35% open space was that was what most of the sites in the park had when the by-law was written. Mr. Frank suggested the board could consider a special permit to allow 25% open space in certain circumstances, with compensatory measures. Mr. McShane said the board had never seen an applicant request a reduction in the open space requirement. Motion: Not to support Article 64 (Dolan-McShane) Six in favor. Cook abstained. PASSES Motion: Not to support Article 64 if it is amended to 30% as per Mr. Clemmey's April 5, 2000 letter (Frank-Dolan) Six in favor. Cook abstained. PASSES Article 65 r To allow Residential Facilitiesfor Age 55 and Older in the Residential 2 Zones. - 6 Planning Board Minutes 5/10/00 r Mr. Burke explained that currently, no multi-family uses are allowed in the R2 zone. He said the change would not be in keeping with the policy established by Town Meeting, as it would open more of the R2 zones to multi-family uses. Mr. McShane said it would add to the tax base, and without children allowed it wouldn't add to the town's expenses, and it would be a special permit use. Mr. Burke said he had reservations about the potential for other types of multi- family development projects. Motion: To support Article 65 (Dolan-Torman) All in favor. PASSES Article 66 Amendment to Rowhouse/Townhouse definition. r- Mr. Clemmey said he would amend the article to specify age 55 and over. Motion: Not to support Article 66 as written because it is inconsistent with zoning and superfluous with Article 65. (Frank-Dolan) All in favor. PASSES Motion: Not to support Article 66 as amended to specify age 55 and over for the above reasons and because in areas where rowhouses/townhouses are allowed, future construction would have to be 55 and over. (Frank-Dolan) All in favor. PASSES SPECIAL TOWN MEETING Article 16 - To prohibit retail uses from the Industrial 1 zones. Mr. Dolan said he was uncomfortable eliminating a use entirely. Motion: Not to support Article 16 at Special Town Meeting (Dolan-Achille) Mr. McShane said he supports the article, and had been against the Planning Board's special permit for the same issue. Mr. Burke explained he had an opinion from Town Counsel on what would happen if this article passes prior to the board's article passing. He said his sense was that the last article to pass is the one that carries. However, if this article passes and the board's fails, this article will pass without the footnote regarding ancillary retail uses. Mr. McShane said he was concerned the changes to special permit uses may be seen as a power grab by the board. Mr. Dolan said he did not think that was true. Mr. Frank said the special permit requirements are a good idea because there are some retail uses that might be appropriate in some locations, citing Stop and Shop. Mr. Dolan explained that project had been a site plan, not a r- special permit, and the board had no say in the design. Five in favor. McShane opposed. Cook abstained. PASSES - 7 Planning Board Minutes 5/10/00 (' Mr. Frank suggested speaking with the petitioner to see if she would be willing to add the footnote to her article on the floor of Town Meeting. Motion: To support Article 16 ifthe ancillary retail use footnote is added (McShane-Dolan) Two in favor. Frank, Dolan, Achille, French Opposed. Cook abstained. FAILS Mr. Frank suggested if this article passes, the board could amend that portion of its article dealing with retail uses in the industrial I zone. Mr. McShane said the vote on Article 16 may be indicative of what the town wants, and suggested the board could not go ahead with a less restrictive proposal later. Mr. Frank asked if the Board of Selectmen had responded to the request to withdraw the charter article reducing Planning Board terms. Mr. Burke said they had not responded. Mr. Clemmey said the board had spent a lot of time on the proposed changes to the Table of Uses and suggested the board make a motion at Town Meeting to put the citizens' petition at the end of the agenda. r- Mr. Clemmey said when the advertisement for the Planning Board's articles ran, his attorney told him he would be protected ifhe filed a Form A, so if the special permit amendment passes at Town Meeting, his plan cannot be denied. He added he had filed his Form A before the citizens' petition, ~o he would be protected from that. Mr. Burke explained that for a Form A, the plan has to be in before the vote to freeze the zoning use. Motion: To adjourn at 11:15 p.m. (Torman-Cook) All in favor. PASSES meeting: May 24, 2000 at 7:30 p.m. 3/;'1/00 Date of Approval f' -8 Planning Board Minutes 5/10/00