Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutmin of planning brd 05/08/02 f,t IVEo Planning Board Minutes n ' '{:' C F F ! C E Tom French, Chair; Bernie Dolan, cle~~:~e~01~hille, Mark Cook, Keif1Mk~ PI'I 2: 3 I Walter Jenkins 'i.' ..! C~ I 0 Shaun P. Burke, Director ofPlannin and De\l~~?_Il1~l1t "1,,,1(' II, ;;'~}!I;" - TS :~'-_~:~1ll"t@ijf9~~~t:#t:7=:~9P~.,.:_n .... - - -. . -..... -.. Motion: To oint Mr. Achille Actin Chair All in favor. PASSES r 1. Request for Site Plan Review and Municipal Clearinghouse Review for 2-Lot unpaved parking area - Essex Street conservation land Richard Lewis, Environmental and Conservation Planner, explained the project. As part of the Department of Conservation Services Self-Help grant, which helped with the purchase of the 19-acre parcel, a parking area for public access is required. The project will need two variances; one for the unpaved parking lot, and a second for a sign larger than allowed. The Engineering Department has prepared a plan; Mr. Sullivan has said there are no drainage issues provided the lot is not paved. r I As part of the grant, a management plan has been submitted, and will be complete when this plan is submitted. The area, which is in the Canoe River watershed, will be kept open space. The town owns a piece of abutting land; there is also a part of the parcel still owned by the family trust, which is under Chapter 60A. If that were to go up for sale, the town would have the right of first refusal. Mr. Lewis explained the parking lot has already been completed because he didn't realize he needed to go through the Municipal Clearinghouse process. There are boulders at the entrance to the land to prevent cars from leaving the parking area. The rest of the site is open, with some wetland areas and forrested areas. He explained this is similar to the lot constructed on Oak Street for the Scott-Goyea land. The material used will allow infiltration, so no drainage structures will be necessary. The clerk read department head comments. Patrolman Lawson has requested a stop sign at the entrance; I\1r. Lewis said they would install one. Mr. Sullivan said there will be no increase in runoff because the lot will not be paved. Mr. French arrived at this time. Mr. Burke said while Essex Street is a scenic road, no trees have been removed and the stone wall has not been disturbed, so no public hearing is necessary. He explained the application is for both site plan and Municipal Clearinghouse. Motion: To send the Building Inspector a positive recommendation on the site plan providing all department head comments are addressed, and acknowledging the need for two variances as described above. (Dolan-Cook) All in favor. PASSES r Motion: As Municipal Clearinghouse, to send the Board of Selectmen a positive r recommendation on the project, as the parking area for public access is a requirement of the grant, and acknowledging the need for two variances as described above. (Dolan-Cook) All in favor. PASSES 3. Request to withdraw special permit without prejudice - Steve Hansen - Karen's Way Motion: To accept the withdrawal without prejudice and send a recommendation to the Board of Selectmen that the application fee be credited to the new submission. (Dolan-Cook) All in favor. PASSES 4. April 24, 2002 Minutes Motion: To approve as submitted (Achille-Cook) Four in favor. Torman abstained. PASSES Mr. Jenkins arrived at this time. 5. ZBA Application for Variance - 89 Walnut Street - Lester Epstein - FrontagelLot Width. The current parcel, while far in excess of the minimum area required in R2, has one-third less frontage than is the minimum requirement. Mr. Burke suggested the applicant may consider other means of development and suggested a negative recommendation be sent to the Zoning Board of Appeals. r Mr. Dolan said he thought there was a hardship because of the piece of land taken by the state; Dr. Torman agreed. Mr. Cook said he could apply for a subdivision with waivers and still get two lots. Motion: To send the ZBA a negative recommendation and suggest there may be alternate development paths the applicant could consider (Achille-Cook) All in favor. PASSES 6. ZBA Application for Variance - 7 Mill Street - Richard Coffey - Frontage/Lot Width The applicant has owned this parcel for a number of years. It had been zoned Business, but Town Meeting recently rezoned it to Residential. The applicant has taken what action he could to acquire adjacent land to increase the frontage and lot width, and is approximately 26 feet short of what is required. Mr. Burke suggested a positive recommendation be sent to the Zoning Board of Appeals because Mr. Coffey has gone through the steps as he was advised; the 1994 zoning change made the lot non-conforming for frontage. Motion: To send the ZBA a positive recommendation (Achille- Torman) All in favor. PASSES r 7. ZBA Application for Variance - 45 Winter Street - Scott Nevius - Frontage/Lot Width - The parcel lacks sufficient frontage to conform to the minimum that existed in that zone for many years. It appears as though the lot may have been non- conforming when it was created. However, it is unclear from the application if that is the case. Should this lot have been created as a non-conforming lot, Mr. Burke's suggestion would be a negative recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals. r Mr. Dolan said the lot is oddly-shaped. Mr. Burke agreed, but said the application does not explain when the lot was created, so it impossible to tell what kind of rights the land has. Mr. Jenkins asked whether the taxes the landowner has been paying should be considered; Mr. Burke said :fmancial hardship could be an argument, but not enough of one for the grant of a variance. Motion: To send the ZBA no information because of a lack of information. The board agrees the lot is oddly shaped, but because the application does not explain when the lot was created, it is impossible to tell what kind of rights the land has (Achille-Dolan) All in favor. PASSES r 8. ZBA Application for Finding - 315 Balcom Street - Thomas Hellard - Front Yard Setback - As the house is pre-existing, non-conforming because the front yard setback does not meet the minimum standard, the applicant has a right to petition for a fmding. However, it is unclear from the petition whether a fmding is necessary, in that the last line of the petition states, in part". . . the proposed addition conforms to the IS-foot setback." It was Mr. Burke's opinion that if the application conforms to the sideyard setback in existence at time, the parcel may be grandfathered and a finding unnecessary. Mr. Burke suggested the applicant check with the Building Inspector on this issue and suggested sending the Zoning Board of Appeals a positive recommendation. Motion: To send the ZBA a positive recommendation; the board suggests the applicant investigate the possible grandfathering issues with regard to the sideyard setback (Achille-Cook) All in favor. PASSES 9. ZBA Application for Variance - 44 Oak Street - James Reid - Lot SizelLot Width While the petition suggests Parcel Al contains a pool, and the intent of the conveyance of land is to keep the pool on that parcel, with the landowner on Parcel A, no pool location is shown on the plan. This additional information may be of assistance to the Zoning Board of Appeals. Given the lot lines on the balance of the lot are not changing, and the lot is conforming as it exists for frontage, area and lot width, Mr. Burke suggested a positive recommendation on the Variance. Motion: To send the ZBA a positive recommendation (Dolan-Achille) Five in favor. Jenkins opposed. PASSES ",.- 1 O. ZBA Application for Variance - 8 Eddy Street - Ryan Sheehan - Frontage/Lot Size There is currently a single family home on the lot that appears to conform to the Zoning By-Law. Mr. Burke said he understood this parcel was originally three separate lots, which have become married through zoning over time and the parcel as it exists is significantly larger than those found at the northern end of Branch Street and in the Eddy Street area. The applicant seeks to create one conforming lot for the future construction of one house, and one non-conforming lot for the existing home. Given the house was constructed in 1904 and existed long before the adoption of Zoning in Mansfield in 1953, Mr. Burke suggested a positive recommendation on this Variance to the Zoning Board of Appeals. Mr. French said he was concerned about the precedent this might set. Mr. Jenkins said he would rather see two similarly sized lots rather than one smaller and one larger. r Motion: To send the ZBA a positive recommendation (Achille-Cook) Five in favor. French opposed. PASSES 10. Draft Open Space & Recreation Plan 11. ZBA Decision - 905 South Main Street - Granted 12. ZBA Decision - 157 Dean Street - Granted 13. ZBA Decision - 8 Northridge Road - Granted 14. Letter from Board of Selectmen Chair Louis Amoruso re: Appointment of Walter Jenkins to Planning Board 15. April Building Permit Summary 16. Meeting Notices: Attleboro, Foxboro, Norton 17. Request for Nominations - New Mayflower Compact Awards 18. Notice of 15th Annual Canoe River Awareness Day - May 18 19. Journal of the American Planning Association 20. The Beacon ...............-...........--............... ,_........ -.--........".., ---. .......--........--............-.......-.........-.-...-.....-.."........ t,..-::~t#-J:'~ijR~ym~t%~~#:.!r:iI'r~~t,-~'~lqW~~W~rmjh.M$)----~~!.lfffl.wi~. .:--_.-_:::::: rrA~~ij~#.::::...::::.::......:.:.:::.:.:.......::??:::...:.:?::?:??:...:.......::..:.....:.:..:......:.... _. _. ..:.... ..:..:::<\:..............:..:.::......:.:.::: Jim Dunn, P.E., Dunn-McKenzie, Inc., explained the plan for the expansion of the area for the storage of containers. The expansion is for 280,000 square feet above what was r approved under a 2001 site plan. The whole site was not included in that site plan because of the discovery of excess material removal, which had to be removed. Mr. Sullivan had suggested getting site plan approval for this phase at the same time. The application is also for the removal of approximately 32,640 cubic yards of excess material. The buildout will include areas at the back and side of the site for additional container storage areas. The customs portion of the site is currently fenced. No new buildings or building expansions are planned under this application. Mr. Dunn explained there will be a larger detention basin for infiltration and to contain the IOO-year storm. The buffer behind the basin, adjacent to St. Mary's, will be left and a berm will be added. There will be approximately 375 feet from the basin to St. Mary's, providing a visual buffer. The detention basin on NR T property will remain the same. A dike has been installed across the NR T property as part of the previous site plan. There are loading doors for the present operation; small trees have grown up in that area, which will be cleaned up and the area paved for easier access. Mr. Dunn presented the lighting plan, showing the illumination patterns along with the poles and ftxtures. The lights are oriented to face the building to provide the best coverage with the smallest number of fixtures. The lighting meet!) the requirement of one foot candle at the property line. Mr. Dunn presented a grading plan and temporary material storage plan. The area to the r- south of the site will be used for storage. I r Mr. Dolan asked where the new parking would be. Mr. Burke explained this is container/tractor trailer parking, not parking lots as the board usually considers. Because storage of these trailers and container units is the primary use of this site, the plan doesn't look like a traditional parking lot. Mr. Dolan asked whether there would be problems with the trucks turning into the site and how many more trailers there would be. Rick Souza, owner, explained the function of the site; the section previously approved is a customs facility. The section currently used for container storage is unpaved; he would like to pave it. There are currently 7-8 acres not being used, which is the land in question; with that much usable land, 280 trailers could be stored there. Mr. Souza said trucks for the customs facility come in and out every day, but the rest of the site is storage, with perhaps 10-15 truck movements each day. There are trucks coming into and out of the warehouse every day. There will be no new points of access to the site. Mr. Dolan asked if the new drainage basin would take the additional runoff; Mr. Dunn said it would. There will be an oil-water separator in the new system. I\.fr. Burke said this is 1-2, so this is a use by right. He said during the last site plan, a portion of the site was in the Surface and Groundwater Protection District and required a special permit. In the early 1980s, the ZBA issued a special permit for this use on the site, which is why the new work is simply a site plan review. r The clerk read department head comments from Mr. Sullivan and Mr. Burke. Mr. Sullivan has reviewed the revised plan and is satisfied with the changes made to the plan. Two additional test pits will be needed in the basin to determine soil conditions and high groundwater level, along with two permeability tests prior to the start of construction. The applicant has also committed to the placement of rip rap in the channel. I\1r. Dunn addressed Mr. Burke's comments. Landscaping: The area to the south of the site is much lower than the surrounding wooded area, which will remain undisturbed. The proposal is to plant trees along the southerly side of the site to act as an additional buffer. On the westerly edge of the site, there is a vegetated berm of 6-8 feet, and continues around the detention basin. Fencing: The proposed container storage area will not be fenced; Mr. Souza said the containers kept there are empty; however, they are not locked. He said he has chased children off the lot before. Mr. Jenkins was concerned that while the current owner may have empty containers there now, subsequent owners may store unknown materials. Mr. Souza said he has 24-hour security, along with cameras that will scan the site. Berm: Mr. Burked had been concerned about height of berm, which is proposed to be 6- 8 feet at its highest. r Oil/water Separators: The cost of installing these throughout the site would be very high; there are four proposed at places where problems are most likely. r Maintenance Plan: A revised plan has been submitted. Lighting: This had been addressed; shields have not been added to the fixtures, but Mr. Dunn said he does not believe there will be spillover, except perhaps at one point at Bicentennial Court. He said if that is a problem, the fixtures will be shielded. !vIr. Dolan suggested shielding them before there i') a problem; Mr. Souza said the fixtures are already there and there have been no complaints. Many of the fIXtures, while approximately 30 feet tall, are set in low areas, so they will not appear to be that tall. Public Comment Tom Dwyer, 6 Tanya Drive, representing St. Mary's, said many of his concerns have been addressed by Mr. Souza and he is basically satisfied with the outcome. 1\1r. Dwyer explained there will be fencing installed along the property line. Motion: To send the Building Inspector a positive recommendation on the site plan as presented, including staff comments and a recommendation that if the light fixtures become a nuisance, either the fixture be changed or shielded. (Dolan- Achille) All in favor. PASSES r 1::$..::.::$iw:~f##:R~~~ill::Bll-y:~ti)~~Yf'Q~...;:J49:PJm~ffl:Y~f~f:.}:.::: ..::.:::.....::.:.::..::..:...:.....:.....:.::....:...:.: .::1 John Parmentier, P.E., Dunn-McKenzie, Inc., explained the proposal for expansion of the existing parking lot; 14 new parking spaces are planned for the right side of the building, including two handicapped spaces at the front. The proposal also includes widening of the entrance from 30 to 40 feet to accommodate the turning movements of large trucks. There is an existing building on the site and an existing retaining wall about 15 feet from the curb line of Chauncy Street. The proposal is to take out pad of the existing hill at the side of the site for the creation of new parking; the existing parking spaces are often in the way of the truck traffic. There is no change to the building or its use. Mr. Sullivan had requested the flow from the site be reduced, which has been done. A pocket over the center of the parking lot will collect water and drain into an underground vault, then be released slowly. An earthen retaining wall extension will allow the same grade for access to the new parking area; the slight raise in grade is to avoid rocks. Five honey locust trees will be added along the street line, which is at a higher level than the proposed parking. Notes on the plan include parking calculations and impervious surface area, lot area, building area, and floor-to-area ratio. Mr. French asked if the open space conforms with zoning; 1\11". Burke said he has reviewed this site, which requires 35% open space, and believes the plan meets the requirements. Mr. Dolan asked what would become of the existing parking spaces to the left of the building; Mr. Palmentier said they will remain, but they may not all be used. The new lot will provide more convenient parking. r r The clerk read department head comments from Mr. Field and Mr. Burke, as well as a response letter from Ivtt. Parmentier addressing these issues. Mr. Parmentier said he has discussed the retaining wall with the Building Inspector, who agreed the plan could be stamped by a Civil Engineer, which has been done. Mr. Burke's questions were as follows: Landscaping: Mr. Parmentier's response was that there is no change in the building or use, but honey locust trees will be planted along the street. Curb Cut Permit: Note no longer references the Board of Selectmen, but rather a DPW curb cut permit. Board Comment Mr. Burke said he was pleased that the staff comments had been addressed. He suggested a positive recommendation. Motion: To send the Building Inspector a positive recommendation with all department head comments addressed (Achille-Cook) All in favor. PASSES :..~....:"ub,ij~H~fingg.~g~:$ilb,jiVi$i~Iiilijj~~*i..~t~~@:Yii~ijAi.ljg~....:::.::. ". do n_ ....n _.. . n_ _.. n_ . _ .. _ ..__ .H .... ... _ P" ...__ ..._ _ _____.. _. n_.. _ .. _.. _n> __ __ _._ The clerk read the public hearing notice for a two-lot subdivision. r Michael Trowbridge, Hutchins-Trowbridge Associates, explained the parcel existed as three separate parcels prior to the establishment of zoning in Mansfield. A frontage variance was applied for because the pavement ends prior to the proposed lot, and the applicant did not see a benefit to extending the pavement further. That variance was granted. Mr. Burke explained there are two options for a plan like this; a subdivision with a new roadway, or a ZBA variance for a lot with less than the required frontage and a subdivision approval with a waiver on the construction of the roadway. There had been three lots, all smaller than required. Benefit Street was laid out to the end, but never paved the whole way. Mr. Burke said if it had been fully constructed, this would have been a simple ANR Plan. Because there isn't adequate frontage on a constructed street, a Form A Plan is not an option. Mr. Trowbridge said the roadway waiver has been requested because it would not serve the new lot or any abutters, and would create additional roadway to be maintained. r The clerk read department head comments from the Fire Department (no comments) and Light Department. Mr. Trowbridge has addressed the Light Department's comments by moving the pole. Officer Lawson's memo indicates no safety issues. Mr. Sullivan's memo said he has reviewed the revised plans, which address his concerns, including a leaching catch basin. A permeability test will be required prior to construction to verify soil conditions. r Public Comment Steve Garneau, 45 James Street, said he was concerned about whether this would give other landowners the ability to develop land behind this site. .r...1r. Burke said Benefit Street is laid out now, so legally, that could happen. However, this applicant is requesting not to build that street, so if a landowner at the end of the street wanted to develop his land, he would probably have come to this meeting to discourage the board from allowing the applicant not to construct the rest of the road. This will not prevent that development in the future, however. Board Comment Mr. Burke suggested the plan warrants approval under subdivision control in light of the variance having been granted; the suggested granting the waiver for frontage. The finding should be the construction of the way would serve no purpose and would create a maintenance expense Motion: To grant a waiver for the frontage requirement for Lot 1 (Dolan- Torman) Five in favor. Cook abstained. PASSES Motion: To approve the defmitive revised subdivision plan including all staff comments (Dolan-Achille) Five in favor. Cook abstained. PASSES Motion: To close the public hearing (Dolan-Achille) All in favor. PASSES r- IIHt{A.r9ijij~:JIW[iij~~:.._: ....::r.:::::...n:::.::....::..: .. . . . .. ... ......_........-:................\..........................._...................................... ::.::.:.:.:::, Mr. Jenkins informed the board he would be keeping his seat on the IDC for a few months; there does not appear to be a conflict, since one is appointed by the Board of Selectmen and the other by the Town Manager. This is the first meeting after Town Meeting, at which the board traditionally reorganizes. Motion: To reappoint Mr. French Chair and Mr. Dolan Clerk (Achille-Torman) All in favor. PASSES I:.$._..-Aij.w~r~m~~t:...:.-:.-...:..:-...._................:.............:.........:...........:..-::....:..::.......-..........::....:....::....:.._-....-..:..:........:......:............:...................-:........................-:.........:....:...-......:..:.....:1 Motion: To adjourn at 1O:30p.m. (Cook-Achille) All in favor. PASSES Date of next meeting: May 22,2002 at 7:30 p.m. ~,~ gnature of Cler~ c.) .-- 22- -t)' '2 Date of Approval r