Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutmin of planning brd 10/30/02 r Planning Board Minutes October 30, 2002 0,2 il c: 'J I 3 F:; \ I !: 0 5 H. Thomas French, Chair; Bernie Dolan, Clerk; Roger Achille, Ken Torman, Mark Cook, Walter Jenkins, Tom McShane , Lil Shaun P. Burke, Director ofPlannin and Develo ment 2i E T T S fI'<.. 1''''' ~. 5 1 _~ \'" .", I\L ;~"l 'i' t.U F"~' r" ~~4 F: Ie:: Motion: To appoint Mr. Dolan Acting Chair and Mr. Achille Acting Clerk Cook- Torman All in favor. Passes 1. Minutes October 16, 2002 Motion: To approve as submitted (Torman-Cook) All in favor. PASSES 2. Special Permit to be signed - 151 Rumford Avenue - Italo Crugnale Motion: To sign the special permit (Cook-Achille) All in favor. PASSES 3. Special Permit to be signed - 241 Francis Avenue Verizon Motion: To sign the special permit (Cook- Torman) All in favor. PASSES 4. Request for final release from surety - Holstein Road - Jack Riccio / Memo from Mike Ahern recommending the release; the road has been accepted as a public way. Motion: To release the remainder held as surety forthe Holstein Road phase of Millfarm Estates (Torman-Achille) All in favor. PASSES 5. ZBA decision - 15 Columbine Road - Granted (positive Recommendation) 6. ZBA decision - 512 South Main Street - Granted (positive Recommendation) 7. Meeting Notices: Attleboro, Easton, Foxboro, North Attleboro, SRPEDD 8. SRPEDD Regional Review r MBTAffown of Mansfield. A small triangle ofland at the comer of Mansfield Avenue and Crocker Street will be abandoned and conveyed from the town to the MBT A as part of the train station. Mr. Burke suggested endorsing the plan. Motion: To sign the Form A (Achille-Torman) All in favor. PASSES [Mr. French arrived at this time.] Ware Street - Lennon Family LLC. The ZBA has established density and frontage requirements for this parcel, for which a special permit could not be located, indicating this is a pre-existing non-conforming use. The plan will create Parcel A, encompassing parcel 34 and Lot 2, which will become one lot. The remaining lot, Lot 1, contains three apartment buildings. Mr. Burke suggested endorsing the plan. [Mr. McShane arrived at this time.] Motion: To sign the Form A (Cook- Torman) Six in favor. McShane abstained. PASSES Mr. Penney showed the board construction plans for a new fueling facility behind the Highway Garage. The board's previous comments have been incorporated and asked if the board had any additional comments. r Mr. Penney explained the new tanks would be placed adjacent to the existing tanks, and r he has shown the future location of the water treatment plant. The site will be secured all the way around by a chain link fence. Mr. Penney said an oil-water separator has been added to the plan, with two tanks end to end with the dispensers mounted on each end. There will be no underground piping so if there is a leak, it will be seen. The drains are connected to sedimentation tanks and holding tanks, with sensors to detect vapors or overflows. There will be a canopy over everything. The tanks will be tested when they are delivered, and again when they are filled. The tanks will be double walled, fire-guard tanks with electronic systems for maintenance, filling, overflow detection, etc. The hoses have breakaway valves, in case the driver forgets about the pump, which will shut off the gas from the tank. If a car were to hit the tank, there are shear valves, which cut off the supply of fuel from the tank. There is a fire suppression feature under the canopy, and the tanks have drains to prevent any materials from being flushed into the river. Mr. Penney explained there will be automatic fills on the tanks and sensors to prevent cars from being overfilled. There will be monitors in between the walls of the tanks, so if the inner tank leaks, the monitors will sense it. Runoff from the canopy goes to two leaching fields under each dispensing pad. Fuel will only be delivered during normal business hours, so the deliveries can be monitored. Mr. Dolan asked whether the system is flexible enough the be adjusted if something r unforeseen were to happen. Mr. Penney said the system would be relatively flexible. Mr. Dolan said the system looked good. Mr. Penney said the dispenser pads have been sloped away in case of a spill. The lights will be left on all the time, with motion sensors. Mr. Penney said the tanks are due November 15, concrete will be poured next week, and the site should be ready by Christmas. The clerk read the public hearing notice for the subdivision of a parcel of land located off Fruit Street into two lots. Michael Trowbridge, Hutchins-Trowbridge Associates, explained the plan for two lots in the R2 zone. The road is 280 feet long, running parallel with the sewer interceptor. The lots would be on water and sewer; the sewer connection would run from the cul-de-sac to the interceptor. Waivers have been requested for a 20-foot wide pavement, no sidewalk, no Environmental Impact Report, the retention areallot line setback and the cul-de-sac radius. The two drainage areas have been placed along the railroad tracks, which are the lowest spots. The front of the roadway drains to a drainage area at the front of the site. There is a wetland area of about 4,500 square feet, which comes under neither the local Of state bylaw. The drainage has been designed for the l00-year storm. Perc tests have been done. The subdivision is in the glide path of the airport, which requires filing with r the FAA for the house construction. Mr. Trowbridge said the plan had been a preliminary filed in 2001, at which time the waivers were discussed, including the ( pavement width, sidewalk, and cul-de-sac radius. [Mr. Jenkins left the meeting at this time] Board Comment Mr. Cook asked about the drainage location waiver and whether this would effect the bike path. Mr. Burke said the way the bike path lays out, the paved portion is on that side of the right-of-way, and the stone dust path is on the other side. Mr. Cook asked about runoff from the bike path; Mr. Burke said that would be pitched away from this site. Department Head Comments The clerk read comments from the following department heads: *Mr. D' Ambra regarding the relocation of a pole and the need for fees to be paid before stock is released. *Mr. Gaffney regarding the water connection policy, an 8-inch water main must be looped, a fire hydrant must be installed at the furthest location of the 8-inch water main, three 12-inch water gates and two 8-inch water gates must be installed in Fruit Street. Mr. Trowbridge said he had no problems with these items. *Patrolman Lawson regarding the pavement width, saying he does not recommend less than 12- foot travel lanes without a sidewalk because of pedestrian safety issues, sight r distance appears to be adequate but cannot locate 0+0, install stop sign at the end of the street. Mr. French asked if the existing houses would be brought into this subdivision or whether they would continue to go out to Fruit Street; Mr. Trowbridge said one could come out on the new roadway. Mr. French said the plan does not indicate two water lines; Mr. Trowbridge said he would amend the plans based on the department head comments. Mr. Trowbridge said there would be no problem with the stop sign, and the sight distance exceeds the requirement and will be added to the plan. Mr. Dolan said he didn't have a problem with a 20-foot roadway to service two houses. Mr. Trowbridge said he didn't believe sidewalks would be brought down Fruit Street, so it wouldn't make sense to install sidewalks on this roadway. *Mr. Lewis's comments suggest the roadway be made even more narrow, 16 or 18 feet. Mr. Burke said he tended to agree, because the traffic to these two houses will not be substantial. Mr. McShane said he agreed there is no need for two 12-foot travel lanes and a sidewalk, but asked if Mr. Burke believed there was no need for either. Mr. Burke said this had originally come in as a variance for three Form A lots, which was denied, and which would not have included a road at all. Mr. McShane asked if Mr. Burke believed two 10-foot travel lanes and no sidewalk would be safe; Mr. Burke said he believed it would be. Mr. Cook said from a maintenance point-of-view, a more narrow roadway is better. He said there are a lot of roads in town less than 20-feet wide, and there have been no problems. Mr. Burke said there is a big difference between a narrow road serving two lots and a road like Gilbert Street, which is narrower with more traffic. r Motion: To grant the waiver for the 20-foot roadway width r (Dolan-Achille) Motion withdrawn Mr. Lewis's memo said the wetlands may be larger than 5,000 square feet and would come under the commission's jurisdiction. Mr. Trowbridge said he would get a letter from him saying it is an isolated wetland under 5,000 square feet. Mr. Field's comments said the drainage system design is unacceptable, with the basins at groundwater level. Mr. Trowbridge said he will meet with the Engineering Department. Mr. Trowbridge said if the board were going to lean toward an 18-foot private roadway, as suggested by Mr. Lewis, he would need to know that so the plan could be redesigned. Mr. French asked who would maintain the roadway in that case; Mr. Trowbridge said a homeowner's association would have to be formed. Mr. Trowbridge said another option would be for the applicant to go to the ZBA for a frontage variance for two lots on Fruit Street, which would eliminate the roadway, water and sewer main, and disturb less area. Each lot would have approximately 50 feet of frontage on Fruit Street, with a 50-foot deed restriction along the bike path. Mr. Burke said this has been done before, and would be a two-step process beginning with a variance to create two lots with less than the required frontage, then coming back under Subdivision Control and asking the board to waive the frontage requirement. Mr. McShane said he wouldn't expect the applicant to go to that length based on the r comments of one department head; however, he said if the applicant feels he won't be able to satisfy the Engineering comments with the subdivision plan, this may be an option. Mr. Trowbridge said he believed he could satisfy the Engineering comments. Public Comment Howard Fiske, 73 Spring Street, representing the Airport Commission, said the commission would like a Deed Declaration about the houses being in the flight path. There are also height requirements, mandated by FAA and MAC. He said the electrical service should be underground, since the Fruit Street services will be put underground soon. Mr. Trowbridge said they plan to put the service underground, and he has no problem with the deed. Mr. Fiske asked if there would be an archaeological study; Mr. Trowbridge said that is usually required with a MEP A study, which is not being done on this site. Mr. Burke said there is a pre-historic site listed in Mass Historic documents, which has not been found. [Mr. Jenkins returned at this time] Dave Dineen, airport manager, explained the FAA height regulations. Mr. McShane asked if two-story houses would be a problem. Mr. Fiske said he believed they would be. r Matt Gay, 358 Fruit Street, said he would be interested in a curb cut on the new street. Mr. Burke said that should be added to the plan, and the existing curb cut onto Fruit Street should be eliminated. Mr. Gay said that was what he was hoping to do. r Mr. Burke asked if rather than a sidewalk on either side, would it make more sense to install one on one side through the interceptor to the bike path. Mr. McShane said the issues he would like to see addressed are: what is expected in terms of depths of standing water in the isolated wetland areas; Mr. Trowbridge said his calculations were done based on the l00-year storm. He said the maximum elevation is at 125, and there is normally two feet of standing water in the wetland during a wet season. He said there would be 1 ~ feet during the loo-year storm. Mr. McShane said it was noted there are no school bus stops in the area, but with two new houses there may be a need. Mr. Trowbridge said ifnecessary, a stop would likely be at the end of the street. Mr. McShane said he would like to get a sense of what the site would look like from the bike path. He said the number of waivers is significant and that he would be looking for something significant in exchange, such as buffering and landscaping for the bike path. Mr. French asked about the elevation of the bike path; Mr. Burke said it would be a few feet at least. Mr. Trowbridge said he would get a copy of the bike path plans and overlay it, so everyone would be able to see how it will fit in. He said he would be willing to look at ways to enhance the bike path project. Motion: To continue to Dec 11,2002 at 8 p.m. (Dolan-Torman) All in favor. PASSES E The chair re-opened the public hearing. Mr. McShane and Mr. Jenkins were not present for the opening of the public hearing and will not be participating. [Mr. Jenkins left the meeting at this time.] Paul Robinson, land surveyor, representing the applicant, explained the plan for a two-lot residential compound with an open space parcel to be deeded to the town. The plans have been revised to address the comments from the last meeting, including the the drainage system within the easement; the 25-foot wide vegetated no-disturb area adjacent to the Simons property; the leaching galley proximity to the McDougall cesspool and house. These items have been located on the plan and the drainage galleys have been moved to be partially under the driveway and at least 100 feet from that cesspool. Mr. Cook asked about the location of the galleys to the septic system on the property next door; Mr. Robinson said it is at least 100 feet away and downgradient from this site. Mr. Robinson said he has spoken with Mr. Gaffney about his request an 8-inch looped pipe and they have agreed to a 6-inch pipe and a hydrant at the driveway. Mr. Gaffney agreed it does not have to be looped. Mr. Cook asked how many feet of water line would be required for the hydrant; Mr. Robinson said about 350 feet. There are two proposed 16-inch valves shown on the plan. New Correspondence r The clerk read memos from Mr. Sullivan indicating his comments have been addressed but suggesting a note be added to the plan and the permit that the town will not be asked (' to accept the roadway or drainage, and a stamped plan of the culvert must be submitted. The clerk read a new deed from Attorney Mulcahy regarding the buffer adjacent to the Simons property. r Motion: To approve the above-referenced plan and issue the Special Permit in accordance with the Zoning Act and Subdivision Control Law with the following conditions: 1. All department head comments shall be fully and satisfactorily addressed within the 20- day appeal period. 2. The Quitclaim Deeds for Lot A and Lot B, dated August 22, 2002 and revised October 9,2002, shall be recorded with the special permit. Specifically, the deed for Lot A shall include paragraph 7, "the hemlock trees to be planted on the southwest side of the residential compound next to property now owned by Simons shall be maintained and there will be no cutting or removal by the owners to insure that the present agricultural use on the neighboring property is protected." 3. A design plan for the concrete culvert, stamped by a Massachusetts Structural Engineer, shall be submitted within the 20-day appeal period; 4. The roadway and drainage system and structures shall remain private and the Town of Mansfield will not be asked to accept or maintain the way or the drainage system or structures; 5. The vegetation within the open common space shall not be cut, altered or disturbed in any way; 6. All improvements shall be constructed in accordance with the approved plans; 7. The homeowner's association shall be responsible for trash removal and snow plowing; 8. The homeowner's association shall own the open space and the homeowner's documents shall be recorded with the special permit; 9. The drainage area shall be cleaned twice a year by the homeowner's association and reports shall be submitted to the Town Engineer; 10. There shall be a sign installed stating that Karen's Way is a private way and listing the house numbers on the private way; 11. That portion of the plan to be recorded shall contain the following note: "Any and all conditions of approval contained in this special permit written decision shall apply to any and all subsequent owners, in whole or in part." 12. That portion of the plan to be recorded shall contain a note referencing the recorded special permit decision and where said decision may be found. 13. All conditions accompanying the approval of this special permit shall be written on that portion of the plan to be recorded at the Registry of Deeds. 14. That portion of the plan to be recorded shall contain the following note: "This subdivision, in part or in whole, shall not be resubdivided in a way which will create additional buildable lots beyond the two (2) lots approved in this permit." 15. This residential compound is approved by both this special permit in accordance with the Zoning Act and this Planning Board Certificate of Action under Subdivision Control Law. r r 16. Prior to the application for issuance of occupancy permits for any dwelling having its frontage on the private way, the following items must be complete. a. The entire roadway within the residential compound shall be constructed up to and including the binder course of bituminous concrete and satisfactorily inspected. b. All street drainage shall be fully complete and functioning with all grates and castings set to grade. c. The stormwater drainage area shall be operational, fully constructed and completed according to plan. d. Street lights shall be installed and operational. 17. All plan revisions required after the close of the public hearing shall be completed and reviewed prior to the Planning Board signing the special permit. (Dolan-Cook) Dr. Torman - In favor. This is a good use for the area and will provide additional open space. Mr. Cook - In favor. The benefits outweigh the detriments and the plan provides open space. Mr. Achille - In favor. The benefits outweigh the detriments and the plan provides open space. Mr. Dolan - In favor. The benefits outweigh the detriments and the plan provides open space. Mr. French - In favor. The benefits outweigh the detriments and the plan provides open r- space. Vote: 5 in favor. 0 opposed. Motion: PASSES Motion: To close the public hearing (Dolan-Cook) All in favor. PASSES Mr. Dolan said the business breakfast organized by Mr. Jenkins at Town Hall was very well attended and well presented. He said he asked Sherry Clancy of National Development what could be done to make Mansfield's permitting process easier; she said it should not be changed for industrial projects. Mr. McShane said the turnout was impressive, and for a large number of years, the Cabot park has been listed in the Boston Real Estate Journal as one of the largest industrial parks in the area. Lately, it has also been listed as one of the largest business parks. One of the other issues brought up at the breakfast was that Mansfield's business park has a much lower vacancy rate than parks on the north shore. Mr. McShane said the changes the board has made in things like increased building height are working to attract more business uses. Dr. Torman said he was still concerned about the loss of Motorola; Mr. Dolan said those buildings have been purchased and will not remain vacant for long. Mr. Burke said Berkley Investments have submitted one site plan for a 100,000 square foot office building, and will be submitting another for a 150,000 square foot building. Mr. Burke said there may be a buyer for the Ames warehouse building. r r- Mr. McShane asked that the Verizon motion should have included a mailing through the IDe to the park in the motion, but was not. He said Town Meeting appropriated money for the mailing, which was really unnecessary because Verizon had committed to funding that. Mr. Burke said he would contact Verizon to reiterate this. Mr. McShane asked about the train station. He had suggested the Route 106 overpass be made more attractive with plantings, but that has apparently been eliminated due to budget cuts. Mr. McShane said the Sharon train station improvements include the roadway going over the tracks, resulting in a bridge effect with a cobblestone facade, which is very attractive. He said it was the same funding source and the same kind of project, and there is no reason why Mansfield couldn't insist on a similar f~ade. Mr. Cook said it was likely that the Route 106 and North Main Street bridges would both have to be replaced very soon because they are both so deteriorated. Mr. Burke said he had spoken with Joe Doran from Doranco, who said he was concerned about the change to Rl density as a use by right, and said he would have been more comfortable with a special permit use. Karl Clemmey asked about the two buildings proposed for the Motorola campus and asked if they would require any waivers. Mr. Burke said he didn't believe they would. Mr. Clemmey said he had attended the business breakfast and said he thought Ms. r Clancy's main concern was about open space and landscaping. He said he thought those requirements were excessive. Mr. Dolan said he has never heard any complaints about the landscaping requirements from any tenants of the park. Mr. Clemmey said he had asked businesses in the park to help out with the Norfolk Street lights, but was refused. He said the IDe and businesses should have better communication. He suggested inviting Richard Shaeffer, economic development director of Taunton, to a meeting to hear what is happening in that city. He said a similar department could be created at town meeting, and the town would be eligible for grant money. He said he was concerned the vacant space in the industrial park and in other office buildings in town are not going to be filled, for example the office space on South Main Street, which has been empty for months. Motion: To adjourn at 10:30 p.m. (Torman-Dolan) All in favor. PASSES Date of next meeting: November 6, 2002 at 7:30 p.m. ~. -e'~ gnature of Clerk /j-- ~ '""' tJ ) Date of Approval r