Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNINGbrd_02062013 Planning Board Minutes RE 0 E V E n February 6,2013 ;:" `; O F F ICE Present: Tom French, Chair, Beth Ashman-Collins, Clerk, Michael McClanahan, Tony Jodice, Donald Cleary, Ralph Penney, Cheryl Collins 2013 FEB IS A 8: 08 Alternates: Michael Feck Shaun P. Burke, Director of Planning and Development; Jennifer. ra algs.,- dministrative Secretary .. 1 Meeting called to order at 7:00 p.m. � � a � �'` S^,=: ,, in! ilk � � � �� ,� ry �q �t➢ �;�C�,d4� ftti���-� o ,� � Iw '6 ' -n x n.:� s II i x F:'`� 4 `:'0 La., ° �' ,,l,` ? a, a .. fill la ,;I u11� �4E, t• iN 1. January 30, 2013 minutes " Motion: To approve as amended (McClanahan-Penney) Six in favor. One abstention. PASSES 2. Public Hearing notices -Attleboro e•r 'a s _ TPlo is� t ''....:P {q I( 4 '� "K , .1 7 Plannl l$„. � a a,wor � pp,� 4 � R - .aiw AmenuI e t m 'ink r '� Downtown Signage Mr. Burke said he has met with the Downtown Business Association, and has spoken with the Town Manager about the apparent conflict between who grants sign permits (the Board of Selectmen and Town Manager) in the General By-Law and the proposed exemptions. Mr. Burke said has also spoken with a member of the Board of Selectmen, who said he could not remember that board issuing any sign permits other than temporary banner signs. Mr. Burke said he will send the Town Manager a memorandum recounting today's meeting with the Downtown Business Association and the outcome of this Planning Board meeting. Mr. Penney said the members of the Downtown Business Association in attendance at today's meeting seemed supportive of the by-law and were appreciative that the lines of communication with the town are open. Mr. Penney said Mr. Riccio seems supportive of the board's draft by-law. He said there was discussion about using lampposts for Christmas lighting and signage, as well as what kind of signs would be installed on North Main Street, and whether they would be general welcome signs or business-specific signs. Ms. Ashman-Collins suggested a sign on the side of Mansfield Optical on the corner of East and West Streets might be a good idea. Mr. Penney there was discussion about a Downtown Advisory Committee, to include board members and business people and which would report to the Board of Selectmen. Mr. Jodice said the business owners might have a problem with the hold harmless agreement because of insurance issues. He said the building owner might have to sign the building permit application, in addition to the business owner. Mr. Burke suggested the business owner's insurance would have to have a rider. Mr. McClanahan noted the A-Frame sign would not be on the building, but on the sidewalk. Mr. Penney said the DBA members were concerned about this 1 Planning Board February 6, 2013 issue and asked if the town should require an insurance certificate. Mr. Burke said if a business owner signs the hold harmless,his business should have insurance, and if he does not sign the hold harmless, the permit will not be issued. He said requiring the business to sign a hold harmless agreement minimizes the town's risk. Mr. Burke said he has looked at a lot of towns' sign by-laws, especially seasonal communities, and a hold harmless agreement is standard. Consensus of the board was to submit the downtown sign by-law. Site Plan Mr. French said streamlined permitting legislation has been filed at the state level,which includes things like an appeal process,timeframes for review and decision and the number of members needed for approval. Mr. Burke said he changed the board's site plan draft to include an action time of 45 days from submission. Mr. Feck asked what would happen if the board denies a site plan project.t. Mr. French sa d hail rather than denying a plan,the board would likely approve it with conditions. concerned future boards may not understand that as part of its role, deny site plans and get sued. He said regardless of site plan approval,the building inspector may have no choice but to approve a building permit. Mr. Burke said he isn't certain how much this by-law would change the board's legal ability to approve or deny a site plan; however,vMr he said if the state's ppeal of a legislation is adopted, it would give the board more support. Planning Board site plan denial is to the ZBA. Mr. Jodice asked if a ZBA decision is appealed, would the ZBA decision hold up. Mr. Burke said he is not certain a building permit can be denied based on the Planning Board's denial of a site plan. He said if the board's actions are reasonable, a site plan denial would likely be defensible. Mr. French said he thinks if the board puts reasonable restrictions on a decision, it should be defensible. Mr. Feck said Chapter 40A does not address site plan approval, and it appears the only reasons to deny a site plan would be if the application did not supply all the required information or if the use is not actually a use by right. Mr. French said he thinks with site plan approval, the board can require better lighting, landscaping and architecture on plans, which will greatly enhance the value of the property for both the developer and the town. Mr. Jodice said he is concerned about the town's standing if a developer appeals a ZBA decision. Mr. Burke said the fits"reasonableness," on bleness st dards.ddresses both the applicant's business plan and how the applicat ion Mr. Feck said it might be safer to either not allow or make certain things ngs special permit uggested a the board knows it does not want specific uses in certain areas. form-based code for downtown. Mr. Burke said the draft asks for additional information the current site plan by-law does not,which will provide the board with more information than it gets now. 2 Planning Board February 6, 2013 Mr. Bill Clemmey asked what the board is trying to accomplish with this by-law. Mr. French said the board currently spends a lot of time reviewing site plans and sends recommendations to the building inspector, but the developer does not have to follow the board's recommendations, and the building inspector is not bound by them. Mr. French said he thinks the Planning Board works hard to follow the law, and said it has not been appealed in many years. Mr. Bill Clemmey asked if the board has invited the building inspector to discuss this proposal. Mr. Cleary asked what would happen if the board does not act within the required timeframe; Mr. Burke said the implication is the application would receive a constructive approval. He said if the board applies a reasonable approach and uses reasonable conditions, chances are it will not end up in court. However, conditions that are not reasonable and do not speak to health, safety and general welfare, could cause problems. Mr. Penney said he thinks this should have been done years ago, but the board needs to build public support for it prior to Town Meeting. Mr. French said there should be a program to get the word out on all of the proposed zoning changes, so voters do not see them for the first time at Town Meeting. Mr. Penney asked if this would take authority away from the building inspector; Mr. French said he thinks this would give him more authority because it would provide backup and conditions for him to enforce. Mr. Penney asked if the conditions would be incorporated into the building permit; Mr. French said he thinks they would be. Mr. Burke said the board would approve the site plan rather than the building inspector, but the building inspector would still issue the building permit with conditions based on the board's decision. He said the by-law will specify the required information, which makes the board's decision more defensible. Mr. Penney said that would improve the quality of the plans the board reviews but would increase the cost of preparing plans. Mr. French said a good set of plans is the basis for a good project; he said most lighting suppliers will prepare a photometric plan for a developer. Mr. Jodice said an as-built would still have to be prepared; Mr. Burke said that would have to be prepared for any project. He said the town has to have correct as-built information in order to have an accurate GIS record. Mr. French said he thinks the items the board proposes to ask for in site plan approval are reasonable. Mr. Jodice noted a number of items required in the draft are currently required. Ms. Ashman- Collins said adding things like screening will be beneficial to the abutters. Mr. Penney said those issues are not always raised until a public meeting. Mr. Burke said the board should consider how a proposal fits in with the neighborhood in Section 5.3.4, Review Procedures, h), which talks about"aesthetic assets." Mr. Jodice asked if the board would look at things like color; Mr. French said he doesn't think so. Mr. Jodice said 3 Planning Board February 6, 2013 adding specifics would probably help the building inspector. Mr. Burke said the more specific items included in the by-law, the more defensible it will be. Mr. French suggested adding "aesthetic assets and how the proposal relates to site features, unique characteristics and neighborhood character." Mr. Bill Clemmey said Section 4.3, Landscaping and Screening, of the Zoning By-Law already includes requirements for landscaping plans. Mr. Jodice suggested the site plan by-law refer back to that section and that 5.3.4, Review Procedure, i) say"landscaping and Screening in accordance with Section 4.3 of the Zoning By-Law." Mr. Burke noted the B1 zone is exempt from landscaping and setback requirements. Mr. Bill Clemmey said this by-law would not only apply to new construction, but also to new uses in existing buildings. Mr. French said the same basic materials would have to be submitted for site plan approval as currently have to be submitted for site plan review. Mr. Burke said adding the specific requirements into the by-law would make it more defensible. Mr. Jodice asked if the by-law should include standard lighting requirements. Mr. McClanahan said he could provide the board with some language. Mr. French suggested requiring cutoffs to prevent light spilloff onto adjacent properties and that lighting be designed to maximize safety and minimize light pollution. Mr. Penney suggested referencing "standard practices." Mr. Penney said he was concerned about site plan negatively impacting the board's other articles. Mr. French said this would be a separate article that will be voted up or down on its own merits. He said some of the other zoning articles of a like nature may be bundled together. Mr. Burke said he thinks presenting the article to a full Town Meeting early in the evening stands a reasonable chance of passing, but if it is presented as over-reaching, it will not. He said he thinks requiring additional information would make the by-law more defensible, but an unreasonable denial would open the board up to an appeal. Mr. French said the state legislation requires a decision within 90 days, which does not seem reasonable. Mr. Burke said the board's process is faster than that now. Mr. French noted the timeframe can be continued. Consensus was to require a 45-day timeframe for site plan. Request for Proposals—Train Station Area Access Mr. Burke distributed and explained the revised RFP; there have been no changes to the maps. The tasks have been separated into three sections, including immediately implementable tasks, which Mr. Burke suggested could be best identified by the commuters and residents. 4 Planning Board February 6, 2013 Mr. Bill Clemmey suggested the traffic counts be done over several days because traffic flow during the week. He said the busiest days at the train station are T es differences Wednesday and Thursday. The board discussed requiring the traffic co Tuesday, days, rather than Monday and Friday. unt be done on those Mr. French asked if the traffic analysis should be done on all of the options, the viable options or the top three options. He said he thinks the board's main focus should be on the things that will provide the most immediate improvements, but also to identify long-term o that could be done in future studies. ' ng term options Mr. Burke said he spoke today with Miryam Bobadilla at DHCD about where the town is Transit-Oriented Development work. Ms. Bobadilla said the town may be able to for with its apply funding from the Priority Development Fund, a planning assistance grant, for the our public portion of the study, which would help stretch the town's money further for other treach project. Mr. Penney asked if that would have to be in the RFP; Mr. Burke said he wo s of the about that with Ms. Bobadilla. uld talk Mr. Burke noted there is $200,000 earmarked for Mansfield in the transportation bond which has not been released yet. He said he talked with Ms. Bobadilla about ettin bill, the TIP and bringing it to MassWorks, which has infrastructure money. g g he plan on Mr. Burke said people he has spoken with at the state level have been very supportive town's plans, but have said it should get more focused by moving forward with the a ces she and TOD zoning. Mr. Penney said Mansfield could be a model community; Mr. Burke s study and said DOT is looking for a success story. Mr. Penney said with the agreed use of public transportation is increasing. price of fuel increasing, Mr. Penney suggested the RFP include a requirement for the consultants to supply at 1 references "on similar projects." He also suggested pP Y east three actually be assigned to the project. ggested requiring the resumes of the people who will Mr. Penney asked if the contract would be awarded on a time and expenses basis or Mr. Burke said the contract will be "not to exceed"$100,000 with a lump sum amount lump sum. task. Mr. Burke said the contract will be signed by the Town Manager and written accord each to the requirements of the inspector general's office. Consensus of the board was to ing F to include "time and expenses not to exceed $100,000." write the RFP Mr. Penney asked if a conceptual plan for the widening of Route 106 could be required RFP and if the town could have a copy of that plan. Mr. French asked how much time in the and 5 Planning Board February 6, 2013 money the consultant should spend on the Route 106 widening. Mr. Penney said the widening is a long-term project, but that it has to be started soon and would cost $8-10,000. Mr. Penney asked about including the bridge option; Ms. Ashman-Collins said the consultant should tell the board what the best option is. Mr. Karl Clemmey said he wants to see something done and he would be willing to contribute; he said the other land owners should also contribute. He said he would donate something to the town to help get a feel of what could be done with the Route 106 widening. He said he had plans done several years ago for widening Route 106; Mr. Penney asked if Mr. Clemmey would be willing to share those plans. Mr. Clemmey said he would be willing to share those plans. He said sometimes it is less expensive to go underground than overhead; Mr. Penney said there is a fairly shallow water table in that area. Mr. Clemmey said he would like to see this plan move forward and would be willing to make a donation to the town. Consensus was to go forward with the RFP. 6.' Public co:►imment 7. Around the Table Mr. Penney said he will not be able to attend the February 13 meeting. Mr. Burke said the Capital Improvements Committee will meet on February 12 to discuss the telephone system. Mr. Penney asked if the TOD map would be added to the Zoning By-Law if it is adopted. Mr. Burke said it would be. Mr. French said he attended a Strategic Plan Implementation Committee meeting on February 4 and updated that group on the board's plans for zoning amendments. He said the group seemed supportive. He said the schools and town are working together on a joint budget for Annual Town Meeting. Mr. Penney suggested including the CSX property within the TOD district. 8 ;Adjournment ° „' Motion: To adjourn at 9:30 p.m. (McClanahan-Penney) All in favor. PASSES Next Planning Bo d meeting: February 13, 2013 at 7:00 p.m. A 1 ft kV . / 013 Signature of Clerk Date of Approval 6 Planning Board February 6, 2013