Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutmin of planning brd 05/05/02 (' r ."'-- t" r" \' n: n t, t.." I.' U "r' \ \.,.,' - ....-C It r.. ? t:'~,' ~. ~. i ;~- r j ~, Planning Board :Minutes June 5, 2002 f'" 1\ n 21 Mi\ 9~ 35 Tom French, Chair; Ken Torman, Mark Cook, Tom McShane, Walter Jenkins u.: ,;t.. '. Shaun P. Burke, Director of Planning and Development "" .... i \rJJ) 1[::!.~[[:!!~!~[E#~~#:~.~gpr~~r:#.~~7;~'::w~:....~..~~.~~~:.~'.~::~[::'....:.[..::\:....::..:..::\:\[:.::::\....:::..:::.:\..:..::..:.:::..:\:[..::~~~$$~~t~r ..\ USE 11 S Motion: To appoint Mr, MGShane AGting Clerk (Cook- Torman) All in favor, PASSES 1::il..:[:q~mm4~~:::::....::}::[::[:::::[:::.::........:..:::::[[::::::::::.:....::..:..[:[..:::.:::t::::..:[[..::::.:....::::...:....::..:..:[.:::..:..::::::::..\:::..::..::....:..::...:..:::, 1. May 22, 2002 Minutes Motion: To approve as submitted (Torman-McShane) Three in favor. Cook abstained. PASSES 2. Vincent Tighe Subdivision (Benefit Street) plans to be signed. The 20-day appeal period has passed and the Town Clerk has signed the plans. :Motion: To sign the de:frnitive subdivision plans for the 2-10t subdivision on Benefit Street (Torman-Jenkins) All in favor. PASSES 3. ZBA Decision - 620 Ware Street - Granted (Negative recommendation) 4. ZBA Decision - 9 Linden Street - Granted (Positive recommendation) 5. May Building Permit summary 6. Meeting Notices: Attleboro, Easton, Foxboro, North Attleboro, Plainville, Sharon, Canoe River Aquifer Advisory Committee 7. Transreport newsletter 8. Mass Interchange newsletter 9. The Beacon ,............................................................................................. .................................:.....................................1 bt~..::Jt4rm..i..(~).f)ij~..:::..:..:......:....:....:....::::::....:::::..:::::.:.:::.::::::::::::.:::......:::...::..:....::::::.:..::::::..:..::.U..:.......:....:..........:............................:.. Currivan - North Side of Route 106. This plan had previously been denied, which was denied. The board has been ordered by the court to sign it; it does have sufficient frontage on Copeland Drive. This will preserve the land's pre-zoning change rights. .Motion: To sign the Form A as ordered by the court (Torman-Cook) All in favor. PASSES Coffey - Mill Street. The plan is to remove two small parcels, A and B, from Lot 1, the existing lot, and place them into Lot 2, the new lot. Variances have been granted for frontage and lot width on Lot 2. Both lots conform to area requirements. Mr. Burke recommended the plan warrants endorsement. Motion: To sign the Form A (Cook- Torman) All in favor. PASSES 1..4j.......$~:~00i!.R~~w.g:f.j'~rt.~:~iHmtij~$t9f~.x~r~g[~$:nnti.trt.:_li.........:::.::........:1 Brad Malo, Coastal Engineering, representing the Electric Department, explained the plans for a storage yard. An existing paved drive fWlS to the substation; the proposal is to add two more paved areas for storage. The project will be done in two phases. A stormwater runoff system will handle up to the lOO-year stonn with no additional post- construction runoff than currently exists. A bituminous berm will be instaiied along the northeast side of the paved surface, which will be sloped to one side. There \vill be two catch basins connected to deep sump drainage manholes and hooded structures, then to an extended detention basin and into an existing wooded area to the north of the property. ,r Part of this work will be within the buffer area; an application will be fIled with the Conservation Commission. The new storage area in Phase I, at the front of the site, will require some regrading and approximately four feet of cut at the deepest point; the majority will be two feet of cut or fill. Phase IT will require approximately 1.5 feet of cut or flit. Additional directional lighting will be mounted on existing poles; the lighting will face into the site and will only be on as needed. Board Comment J\..1r. J\..1cShane asked whether the detention basin is proposed or existing; I\..1r. J\..1alo said it is proposed. Mr. McShane asked about hazardous material; Mr. D' Ambra said there would be none stored on site. Mr. McShane asked what is currently around the site; Mr. D' Arobra said nothing currently exists, but there could be residential development in the future that would abut this site. [Mr. Jenkins arrived at this time] ,r Mr. D' Ambra said in his comments regarding residential developments, he makes it clear that the light department yard is an existing use. :Mr. :t\.1alo explained the buffer on the property; the northern portion of the site is heavily wooded and will remain so; at the closest point on the northwest side, there will be a ten-foot buffer at the property line. !vIr. D' Atiibra said that area is thickly wooded. Because of an existing wetland, there has to be a long, thin drive between the Phase I and Phase II areas. Under this plan, they are able to maintain at least a 50-foot buffer from the wetland. J\..1r. D' Ambra said there is some area built into the plan to allow for growth of the substation itself. Mr. J\..1alo said the paved area of Phase IT is about 170 x 120 feet, which will provide sufficient turning radius for large trucks. Mr. D' Ambra said they are not planning to fence the yard, but said if there are residential abutters in the future, they would be willing to install a fence. The proposed detention area will be fenced. Mr. Jenkins asked where the wetland line went off the site onto the abutting land, saying that might determine how close a new house could be built to the paved surface. Dr. Torman asked about the coating of the light poles; Mr. D' Ambra said pole storage does not require any specific treatment, and they are no longer coated with creosote. r Department Head Comments The clerk read memos from the Police, Fire and Health Departments with no comments. Mr. Sullivan's comments involved the submission of calculations showing what outlet control is neeced from the detention basin and raising the rip rap overllow to above the 100-year storm event; :t\1r. Malo said he has spoken with Mr. Sullivan and the new design r addresses those concems. .Mr. Bw'ke's memo asked about the use of the area and whether screening and buffering would be added to reduce the potential for future complaints. Mr. Malo has addressed those concerns. !-Ar. French asked whether there was a sidewalk shown; ~1r. Malo explained that area is a drainage swale around the existing building, which goes under the new pavement and surface discharges into the ground. The existing area is not paved, but rather stone, so runoff goes underground. Mr. McShane asked about the lighting; Mr. D' Ambra said there is existing lighting in the substation; more lights will be added to the existing towers and will face into the yard. Mr. Jenkins was concerned with lighting flowing over the property lines onto future residential abutters; Mr. D' Ambra said he believes the light would dissipate before getting to the property line. He added there are only infrequent visits to this site at night. Mr. French asked what the requirement is for landscaping and buffering. Mr. Burke explained there is no municipal exemption for this; buffer strips along side and rear lot lines where Industrial abuts Residential must be a minimum of 50 feet. Mr. D' Ambra said he was told by the Building Inspector this project is exempt from that requirement; Mr. Burke said that may be because they are a utility. Mr. Malo said the southerly side of the site, which was approved under another site plan review, is less than 50 feet :from the property line. Mr. D' Ambra said even if they are exempt, he would be willing to do extra (' plantings if the board thinks that would prevent problems with future residential abutters. :Nlr. Burke said the conceptual plan for the abutting land showed huge lots, SO houses may not come anywhere near this lot line. Mr. Burke said if this plan had to go to the Zoning Board of Appeals, it would be for a special permit rather than a variance. He suggested a positive recommendation with the changes to the drainage calculations requested by the Town Engineer, and suggested bringing the buffer question to Mr. Cook's attention. George Dentino asked if the board could specifY when a fence should be installed. Mr. McShane said he thought perhaps the responsibility of installing a fence should be put on a new residential use. Motion: To send the ZBA a positive recommendation, and point out to Mr. Cook the following concerns: 1) question was raised as to the applicability of the landscape buffer regulations and how that issue can be most easily resolved; 2) the applicant has stated there will be no storage of oil or hazardous materials in this area; 3) although no fence is proposed at this time, if at some point the Light Department determines a public safety issue has arisen as a result of encroaching development, it will install a fence; 4) Mr. Sullivan's concerns about drainage calculations for outlet controls and raising the rip rap overflow will be resolved; 5) lighting will be manual only (McShane-Cook) All in favor. PASSES r r ::'iiiIr6'.II~~~~I~m~~]I~~~i~~1~~I~iil~~8i~~I~iiii~I~~ill;iii~i!!!llil John Royston, Associate Director of Community Care Services, explained his organization runs an adult day care program. When the plans were originally drawn, there were no specifications for parking spaces for this type of program. However, they have found they use a lot parking spaces for volunteers. They also have 3,000 square feet of unused space which will be used for either another program, like a day care, or for office space. Ted Trowbridge, RIM Engineering, explained the plan for expanded parking. Nrne parking spaces will be added to each side of the site with a drainage area, which has been approved by ~1r. Sullivan. Everything else on site is existing. Department Head Comments The clerk read a memo fi'om :Mr. Sullivan saying his comments have been addressed by the revised site plan and drainage calculations. He also read comments regarding the original submission from the Fire Department (parking spaces have been moved away from the building, the dumpster has been moved, and the sprinkler connection has been shown on the plan), Mr. Burke (the vacant space will be filled by either office space or day care; there is no parking category for day care, but if it were to be used for office space, 40 spaces would be required - 36 are shown on this plan) and Officer Lawson, with no comments. r Board Comments Mr. McShane asked what is there now. Mr. Royston said the area that will be paved is currently grassed; his programs end by 3:30 or 4:00 p.m., so no additional lighting is proposed. :Mr. Trowbridge explained there are two existing lights in the parking areas. :Mr. McShane asked if there are other things on this site that are not working, specifically the traffic flow. :Mr. Royston said the traffic pattern has worked well because everyone does not arrive and leave at the same time; even when office staff is moved to the unused part of the building, they also have flexible hours and are often out of the office for most of the day. :Mr. Jenkins asked how the building is configured now. :Mr. Royston explained most of the space is used for the elder day care program, which will remain. He said that program has not grown as they anticipated; capacity is 90 people per day, but they are at about half that. :Mr. Jenkins said the board needed to consider other possible uses if this one were to move out. :Mr. Royston said they have been in business over 50 years, and when they have to close programs, they try to replace them with other human service programs. He said they have spoken preliminarily with Mansfield Cable Access about the unused space. :Mr. French said as long as changes are only made to the inside of the building, there would be no reason to come back to the board. Mr. Burke suggested a positive recommendation be sent to the Building Inspector. ,r- :Motion: To send Ole Building Inspector a positive recommendation on the revised site r Plan, with the condition that all department head comments be addressed, especially the Fire Department (McShane-Cook) All in favor. PASSES '1:~~?~.~.~$.~ml.);t@'.ij.:e~fb.lii~ni~rlijiiH~4W~'(ft;t~riij:Mi~:$i&itM:$.$RUmt.A.irtiji'bt:..:.'1 1.:::::::..:~~tM~#m:t:~f9J:~t;,#:~.::::...:..!:..::!..:::::..:::..:!..::.:::\;..[:....::::~.:::::..!~.:!:~:!....:..::!:..!!!:::::..:!:....:..!::....::::..:....:~..::..!..:::~..:..:!..:I The clerk read the public hearing notice for a six-unit apartment building at 24-26 North Main Street. Because Mr. Jenkins is on the Board of Directors of the ~.fethodist Church across the street and he will be unable to participate in this public hearing, only four members are present and the public hearing must be postponed. Thc clerk rcad an agrccment from thc applicant to continuc thc public. Motion: To continue the public hearing to June 19, 2002 at 9:00 p.m. (McShane-Cook) All in favor. PASSES 1..7...[.$~.~~.R~~wE~.~~!~~.~m.~~~@.fWJ~u.im:{qy'iHfI:...[.....[:....r.r.[.[..:...::...I..1 The applicant has requested this review be postponed to June 19,2002 at 8:30 p.m. Motion: To reschedule the site plan re'view for 905 South ~1ain Street to June 19, 2002 at 8:30 p.m. (Cook-Torman) All in favor. PASSES r 1::~...!Arnmiij.JtW..I~~~.:..!:!..!:!!......:!:!:!.:..!....!!!:[[r.........!..!:!!!:!..::!!!:!:.:!::!!..!::::....:!:..!..!:........:!:.......:.....:.:.::..::.::;.....:::...:::....:.::::~...:~::~..!!I Mr. Burke told the board Attorney Mark Bobrowski has been reviewing the Zoning By- Law and has presented some suggested changes, most of which are simply restructuring, not substantive. The changes will have to go to Town Meeting. Mr. McShane asked about the previous meeting's traffic discussion; Mr. Burke explained Mr. D' Agostino has sent a letter to SRPEDD regarding a corridor study for Route 106/140 under the town's municipal assistance time. Mr. McShane asked about the building permit cap, saying the number is very high because of the town's buildout. He asked if the number should be lowered, since it is no longer effective. Mr. Burke agreed the cap no longer has any effect because there is so little land left available; he said the number could be lowered, although he said he did not know what that number would be. The cap has a "sunset provision" of 10 years from its date of adoption, at which point it either expires or must be reaffirmed. l:'~" AdJ9~rH.jW~f:' .; ,..... . ::'..:': : :.:-=: '. ':, ..: " ". :. '. . . :'.: 'u" nm.....~I~In~..~......rn.~1 Motion: To adjourn at 9:40 p.m. (Torman-Cook) All in favor. PASSES Date of next meeting: July 10, 2002 at 7:30 p.m. ~b~~' )fl..,Lh 'yL- Signature 0 "Clerk ~~ ltlJ1- r