Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutmin of planning brd 11/08/00 r--' I RECEIVED TOW~~ CLERKS OFF ICE Planning Board Minutes November 8, 2000 00 DEe - 6 PH 3: 22 Present: H. Thomas French, Chairman~ Bernie Dolan, Clerk~ Scott Frank, Kenneth Torman, Mark Cook, Thomas McShane MAHSFIELD Shaun P. Burke, Director of PI ann in and Develo ment MASSACHUSETTS 1. Memo from Board of Selectmen re: Water Connection Policy Workshop, November 16,2000. Mr. McShane and Mr. Dolan will try to attend. 2. Zoning Board of Appeals application for variance - South Main Street - sideyard setback for an addition Motion: To send the Zoning Board of Appeals a positive recommendation with the suggestion the application should have been for a Finding rather than a Variance because the existing encroachment will not be increased. (Cook-Torman) All in favor. PASSES 3. Letter from FolkmanlZola Builders re: Surety release, Sturbridge Estates/Memo from Jack Smith recommending the release following acceptance at Town Meeting Motion: To release the remaining surety (Dolan-Torman) All in favor. PASSES 4. Letter from Folkman/Zola Builders re: Surety release, Keli GreenlMemo from Jack Smith recommending the release following acceptance at Town Meeting Motion: To release the remaining surety (Dolan-Torman) All in favor. PASSES 5. Letter from Folkman/Zola Builders re: Partial release Eastfield Village, Water system/Memo from Jack Smith recommending partial release Motion: To release the funds for Noreen Road and Nicole Road water systems (Dolan-Torman) All in favor. PASSES r- Mr. French and Mr. Frank arrived at 7:45 p.m. 6. Minutes October 25,2000 Motion: To approve as submitted (Torman-Frank) Three in favor. Dolan, McShane, Cook abstained. PASSES 7. Letter from Mr. Burke to Mr. & Mrs. John Beaton, Foxboro, re: truck traffic 8. Zoning Board of Appeals decision-Smarterkids-145 Plymouth St-Granted 9. Zoning Board of Appeals decision-Town Engineer-Plymouth St Fields-Granted 10. Zoning Board of Appeals decision - Deborah Conway - 474 Franklin St - Denied 11. Access New England newsletter 12. JTPG meeting notice 13. October construction summary 14. Letter from MBTA re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail Restoration 15. Letter from The Trust for Public Land re: lecture series 16. Memo from DHCD re: Planning services 17. Meeting Notices: Norton Planning Board, North Attleboro Planning Board, Attleboro ZomngBoardofAppews 18. Waterline newsletter r 19. New England Real Estate Journal 20. The Beacon (- 21. Transreport newsletter 22. Note from Karl Clemmey re: Sun Chronicle article - cluster zoning 23.2000 Planners Book Service Catalog The clerk read the public hearing notice. David Simmons, consultant to the Stop & Shop gas stations, explained the original station was permitted without signage. They would like to add Stop & Shop logos on the canopy at this point. Richard Westergren, Poyant Signs, explained there would be two 3'x6' internally illuminated signs on the canopy, one on the Route 106 side and one on the parking lot side. In addition, there will be signs on top of the pumps. Mr. Simmons explained customers cannot now identify to whom the gas station belongs, and signage would help. Department Bead Comments The clerk read comments from Mr. Burke, Mr. Cook, Mr. Sullivan, Chief Sliney, Officer Lawson, and Gary D' Ambra. Public Comment The clerk read letters of support for the project from abutters Don and Robert Currivan. r Board Comments Mr. Frank said in the I-I zone, signs can be up to 60 square feet~ these signs will be 18 feet each. Mr. Dolan said he didn't have a problem with the signs as presented, but did not want raised letters as some gas stations have~ he also said the board would likely have approved the signs if they had been included in the original permit. Mr. Frank said the board should consider whether this modification would change the special permit. Mr. McShane said the board had a long discussion about signage during the original permitting, and Stop & Shop agreed they would have no signage at the gas station, since it would be a service to the customers already shopping there. Mr. Simmons explained that when the project was originally permitted, the gas station was a new concept, so they weren't positive what they would need. Since then, Stop & Shop and other retail businesses have begun to do the same thing. Mr. French asked whether the applicant would be willing to eliminate the center aisle sandwich-board sign in the center island. Mr. Simmons said he thought the prices are required to be posted conspicuously, but are on the pumps. Mr. Frank suggested the removal of the sandwich board sign could be a condition of the modification. r Mr. McShane said he agreed it was difficult to tell to whom the gas station belongs, but did not think the signs need to be illuminated. Mr. Simmons said the illumination was necessary during nighttime hours. He added the gas station is not open later than 10 p.m., r though Stop & Shop is open 24 hours. Mr. McShane said he would rather not have a sign facing Route 106. Motion: To modify condition #4 of the May 20, 1998 special permit and replace it with the following: To allow the addition of two (2) three-foot by six-foot (each sign to be no more than 18 total square feet) internally illuminated signs as presented at the November 8,2000 public hearing, one to be placed on the canopy of the filling station facing Route 106, the second to be placed on the canopy of the filling station facing the existing Stop & Shop Supermarket parking lot. The signs are to be illuminated only during the hours of operation of the filling station. In addition, the applicant will be allowed to add one (1) non-illuminated placard sign on each pump station, each sign to measure no larger than two feet by three feet, six inches, as presented at the November 8, 2000 public hearing. (Dolan-Cook) r Torman: In favor. There is no detriment to the original special permit. Cook: In favor. There is no detriment to the original special permit. Frank: In favor. The modification does not alter the original decision that the special permit regulations have been met. McShane: Opposed. There has been no demonstration of a benefit to altering the special permit. Dolan: In favor. There is no detriment to the original special permit. French: In favor. The modification does not change the original special permit findings. Five in favor. One Opposed. PASSES The clerk read the public hearing notice. The applicant did not have the certified mailing receipts~ the board decided to continue with the public hearing and asked the applicant to provide the receipts. David Simmons, Tilton and Associates, and David Archibald, representing the property owner, presented the plan. Mr. Simmons said the property is in the Reservoir District, and said he found the Zoning By-Law is confusing regarding this zone. He explained he tried to comply with all relevant sections. r When the office park was originally proposed, there were three buildings at 792-800 South Main Street~ this is the third building. The building will be three stories and approximately 9,266 square feet per floor. Changes have been made to the internal parking pattern, spaces have been restriped, and spaces have been moved to improve traffic flow. A traffic study has been submitted, showing no decrease in service at any intersection. r Mr. Simmons said the site will be connected to town water, sewer, and electric and is in compliance with the Massachusetts Stormwater Policy and the Mansfield Stormwater Management requirements. The drainage system has been designed for the 25-year storm, but Mr. Simmons said Mr. Sullivan had been concerned about the 100-year storm overflowing into the Norton reservoir. A large recharge field has been proposed for all storm water storage, and an existing natural basin currently takes part of the drainage. Perc tests have been done, with clean sand and fast rates. Mr. Simmons said they performed both falling and constant head tests, and found groundwater at 21 feet. He said based on these perc rates, the outflow parameters will change. Department Bead Comments The clerk read memos from Mr. Burke, Officer Lawson, Chief Sliney, Gary D' Ambra, and Mr. Sullivan. The clerk also read a letter from the applicant in response to Mr. Burke's comments. Mr. Simmons explained he had addressed some of Mr. Sullivan's comments, but would have to discuss several others with him. Mr. French urged Mr. Simmons to get together with Mr. Sullivan. (' Public Comment Abutter Nancy Gray-McNeeley said she had no objections to the project, but was concerned about an easement between her property and this land, explaining she needs the easement for a second access to a project on her land. Mr. Simmons said they have discussed that, but it has not been finalized, and is not part of this application. Board Comment Mr. Frank asked about parking. Mr. Simmons said there is enough parking for the new building, but that they would provide cross easements between the parcels. He explained there are 296 proposed parking spaces~ Mr. Dolan and Mr. Frank said they had calculated 304 parking spaces required. Mr. Simmons said he would double-check that. Mr. Frank asked about the buffer, saying it needs to be one-third of the setback from the public way, and with a 66-foot setback, a 22-foot buffer would be required~ the plan shows a 15 foot buffer. Mr. Simmons said 15 feet was all they could fit in, so they would have to apply for a variance. Mr. Frank said a tree is required every 27 feet in the divider islands. Mr. Simmons said they could do that. Mr. McShane asked about the open space requirements. Mr. Simmons said the entire parcel has 42 percent open space, and he will provide a detail of that. .r-- Mr. McShane asked about the drainage system. Mr. Simmons explained the existing grassy basin takes the sheet flow now~ post-development, that water will go to the new drainage system. He said when the figures are revised following the perc test results, r they will show the system can handle the 100-year storm. The system is not within 100 feet of any wetland~ the water currently leaving the site flows onto the abutting property, and will continue to do so post-development. Mr. McShane suggested prohibiting the use of salt on the parking lot. Mr. Simmons said he would make every effort to do that, but was concerned about liability issues. Mr. Cook said the state uses salt on Route 140, but suggested using calcium chloride or magnesium chloride. Mr. Dolan said the plan was incomplete, which has been a topic of discussion lately, and the applicant should have met with the town engineer and addressed his comments prior to the public hearing. He said he would not be willing to vote on the plan in its current state~ he suggested the applicant meet with the town engineer and submit a revised plan at least one week before the next meeting. Motion: To continue the public hearing to January 10,2001 at 8:00 p.m. (Dolan-McShane) All in favor. PASSES The clerk read the public hearing notice. r Cynthia Treannie, Hickory Development, explained the application to modify the original special permit to allow building envelopes on each lot with 30-foot front and rear setbacks and lO-foot sideyard setbacks. The original plan included footprints, but the potential buyers want larger homes. Board Comment Mr. Frank asked about wetland issues. Ms. Treannie explained lots 5 and 6 have some wetlands, but those houses would be built on the opposite side of the lots. Mr. Frank was concerned about the 10-foot sideyard setbacks~ Ms. Treannie said 20-foot setbacks would be acceptable, and that all of the potential homeowners had been notified of the possible change. Department Bead Comments The clerk read a memorandum from Mr. Burke. Motion: To grant the Special Permit with the following conditions: 1. Delete condition #6 of the December 17, 1997 special permit and replace it with the following: Residents will be allowed to construct or modify residential structures within a building envelope, to be established as a 30-foot setback from the front and rear property lines and a 20-foot setback from each ofthe side property lines. r 2. The December 17, 1997 special permit is incorporated into this decision by reference and attachment, and all terms and conditions of that special permit, with the exception of condition #6, remain in force. . r Mr. McShane - In favor. The modification is consistent with the zoning by-law and the original approval, and provides flexibility for the homeowners. Mr. Frank - In favor. The modification will have no detrimental impact on the original special permit. Dr. Torman - In favor. There is no detriment with the project and it is similar to previously approved plans. Mr. Cook - In favor. The modification is consistent with previously approved plans. Mr. Dolan - In favor. The modification is consistent with the zoning by-law and with previously approved plans. Mr. French - In favor. The modification is consistent with the zoning by-law and with previously approved plans. All in favor. PASSES Motion: To close the public hearing (Torman-Dolan) All in favor. PASSES The board discussed its meeting schedule for the next few months, deciding to post for November 29, but as there is nothing pending, to cancel the meeting if nothing is submitted. The next meeting will be December 13. r The board discussed sending Mr. Sullivan a letter asking whether the subdivision regulations should be amended to require drainage systems to be designed for the 100- year storm. Mr. Cook asked that the definition of fast food be added to the board's work list. Dr. Torman said he was still concerned about the incomplete state of some of the plans coming before the board. The board discussed the possibility of having staff meetings for special permit plans, similar to the practice with site plan applications. Motion: To adjourn at 10:30 p.m. (Torman-Frank) All in favor. PASSES Date of next meeting: November 19,2000 at 7:30 p.m. ~J)~ ignature of Cler J/-- ~~-() t; Date of Approval .r