Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutmin of planning brd 01/08/03 r F':. t'.,: ~ / E~ [) Planning Board Minutes ? \ C.: [ Tom French, Chair; Bernie Dolan, C=u~:; ~~:Ie, Mark ~::Wafter(Jt~nttin~,3 Doug Annino, Fred Armstrong Shaun P. Burke, Director ofPlannin and Develo ment Mr. French welcomed Mr. Armstrong and Mr. Annino to the board. I. Minutes December 11, 2002 Motion: To approve as submitted (Achille-Cook) Annino, Armstrong, Dolan abstained. PASSES 2. December 12, 2002 letters to Mr. Annino and Mr. Armstrong re: appointment to Planning Board 3. ZBA decision - 20 Carol Road - To uphold the decision of the Building Inspector 4. ZBA decision - 389 Oakland Street (Mendlowitz) - Granted 5. Public Hearing notices - Attleboro, Easton, North Attleboro, Norton, Canoe River Aquifer Advisory Committee 6. DHCD Notice of Affordable Housing grant funding availability 7. MassDevelopment newsletter 8. TransReport newsletter 9. SPREDD Regional Review 10. The Commissioner newsletter 11. MBT A Monitor newsletter 12. The Beacon 13. Planning magazine 14. Memo from Mr. Burke to ZBA and Planning Board re: workshop to discuss Hatheway-Patterson site reuse options. Tuesday, January 28 or February 11. r Mr. Jenkins asked whether the rentaVcondominium question about the apartment building at the comer of North Main Street and Fulton Place had been resolved. Mr. Burke said he had spoken with Mr. Crugnale and his realtor; Mr. Crugnale will retain ownership of two units and the rest will be sold. The Building Inspector believes the conditions of the special permit remain enforceable, but any issues will have to go through all the owners rather than one owner. Mr. Jenkins said he was concerned about whether the special permit conditions would be made part of the condominium by-laws and whether the owners would be aware of them. Mr. Burke said that would be an issue of disclosure between the seller and buyer. Mr. Burke said in the event of a complaint, the building inspector would contact the condominium association, and take any necessary enforcement against the association. Mr. Jenkins suggested special permit conditions be made part of future approvals like this, in case the units become condominiums. Mr. French suggested sending the eventual owners copies of the special permit and advising them to comply with the conditions. r (' Mr. Annino said one of his reasons for getting back on the board was downtown development and how it is regulated. He suggested the board look at the doWntown corridor and how to create development that is consistent with the town's vision, especially in cases where the board issues a special permit. Mr. Dolan asked if the town has any regulations regarding snow removal on sidewalks and shoveling snow into the roadway. Mr. Cook said there is no by-law requiring sidewalk clearing, but there is a by-law regarding shoveling snow into the roadway. Mr. Burke presented a new work list for the board, including the recodification of the zoning by-law, Golden Triangle, downtown traffic, zoning by-law issues, an airport approach overlay zone to regulate height, and transfer of development rights. The zoning by-law has a number of conflicts, including residential uses in the 12 zone south of Route 106, which recodification would help to clear up. Mr. Burke said he would like the members to review the recodified zoning by-law and for presentation to Town Meeting. Mr. Dolan suggested the IDC be invited to the Hatheway-Patterson workshop. Mr. Jenkins said he would bring the dates to the commission. The clerk read the public hearing notice for the construction of an auto body repair shop at 389 Oakland Street in the Water Resource Protection District. r Ralph Maloon, RIM Engineering Co., Inc., presented the plan for a steel and block building. A variance has been granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals for setbacks. The site will be on town water and sewer, with entrances on Oakland and Maple Streets. The drainage system contains two basins, a drain manhole and an oil-water separator in the groundwater recharge area. There are three existing streetlights in the area, and lights over the bay doors are proposed. Most of the parking can be accommodated inside the building; there is an area for expansion shown on the plan. A landscaping plan shows both existing trees and proposed evergreen and hardwood trees and shrubbery. The site has one residential abutter to the northeast. Mr. Maloon explained the oil-water separator has a coalescent medium specifically made to remove grit and separate oil and water, and which is designed to make it easier to clean. The proposed subsurface drainage system uses rechargers; however, Mr. Maloon said that may change based on the Engineering Department's comments. Department Head Comments The clerk read comments from the Fire, Electric, Police, Water, Engineering and Planning departments. Mr. Maloon said he will install stop signs, a second handicapped parking space, and a dumpster. Mr. Mendlowitz said he would rather have the dumpster outside than inside because if it were kept inside, it would have to be very small and would fill up very quickly. He said he would put it adjacent to the Masison property and --- screen it with a stockade fence; he said it would likely be a 10-yard dumpster, which would be emptied weekly. Mr. Dolan asked what goes into the dumpsters; Mr. r Mendlowitz said sheet metal, but not the paints he uses. Mr. Dolan asked if gas tanks ever have to be removed from the vehicles; Mr. Mendlowitz said that could happen, but it is rare. He said oil or antifreeze are recycled. Mr. Dolan said he is concerned about those materials or solvents getting into the ground; Mr. Mendlowitz said he has always recycled oil and antifreeze. Mr. Armstrong asked about the paint storage; Mr. Mendlowitz said the paint solvents are stored in drums, then collected for recycling. Mr. Armstrong asked if there is a collection area for spills; Mr. Mendlowitz said he has never had a spill, but he plans to install a spray booth where the drums of paint will be stored for shorter times. Mr. Armstrong said the Zoning By-Law prohibits the storage of hazardous materials unless there is adequate containment. Mr. Mendlowitz said the spray booth is vented and will be set up on a containment pedestal. Mr. Maloon said hours of operation were discussed at the Zoning Board of Appeals hearing. Mr. Mendlowitz said he is generally open from 8 am to 5 pm, but requested he be allowed the option to remain open until 6 pm. He said he normally works five days, and sometimes Saturday mornings. He asked that he not be required to keep the doors closed, especially in the summertime. Mr. Maloon said he would be getting together with the Town Engineer's office, and said he didn't believe he would have any problems complying with their comments. Public Comment (' There was no public comment. Board Comment Mr. Jenkins asked if the board were in a position to close the hearing tonight. Mr. French said he did not believe so, since there are many outstanding department head comments. Mr. Mendlowitz said he does not store hazardous materials, and the paint he does store is not considered hazardous. He said the solvent is considered hazardous, but he does not keep more than a few gallons on site at a time. He said if there were a spill, it would likely only be of a one-gallon container, and the paint mixing room will be a contained space. Mr. Jenkins said the board is concerned about the sensitivity of the area and what would happen in the event ofa spill. Mr. Cook said if the paint mixing room should have a sub-surface containment system. Mr. Annino suggested that could be part of the building design. Mr. Mendlowitz said he understood. Mr. Burke said the applicant on a similar project presented a plan detailing a management plan; Mr. Dolan said the plan should assume a spill of the maximum amount of material on site, and be able to contain that amount. Mr. French said the board would like a list of materials that will be on site. r Mr. Annino said he was concerned about the site providing a possible cut through for traffic from Maple to Oakland Street and suggested eliminating one of the cuts. Mr. Cook suggested making it a one-way; Mr. Annino suggested relocating one of the cuts. He said he thought the curb cuts are too narrow for two-way traffic, and was concerned about the location of the parking spaces outside the garage doors. Mr. Mendlowitz said r l' there will be no one parked in those spaces because the vehicles will be inside the building; Mr. French said regardless, they are shown as parking spaces. Mr. Mendlowitz said his business doesn't get much traffic in a day, and the parking spaces are shown only to be in compliance with the zoning by-law. Mr. Annino said the board has to be very careful because the site is in the water resource protection district and has residential neighbors. He was concerned that the door to the office is shown coming out into the parking area, which is not safe for pedestrian circulation. Mr. Annino asked whether, because the future parking expansion is shown on the plan, it could be constructed without an additional public hearing. Mr. Burke said the impervious surface would effect the drainage, so it should be included in the current drainage calculations. Mr. Maloon said that area was planned as employee parking and he would check on whether it is included in the calculations. Mr. Annino asked about the lighting plan and suggested lights not be installed on the building. He asked whether downspouts would be added around the building; Mr. Maloon said they would be directed into the drain pipes, through the oil-water separator, and to the recharge system. Mr. Annino asked if the location of the fire hydrant would be a problem for vehicles entering and exiting the site; Mr. Maloon said the entrance could be moved away from the hydrant. Mr. Annino said the landscaping plan would need a stamp and needed to be worked on; he suggested more grass. Mr. Maloon said he placed evergreens along the residential lot line and he would get in touch with a landscape architect. Mr. Mendlowitz said he was concerned about adding grass to the site in the event of watering bans; Mr. Annino said the landscape architect would be able to suggest hearty species that would require less watering. Mr. Achille said he was concerned about the hazardous materials, but hoped that issue would be addressed through the department head comments. Mr. Mendlowitz asked what he should bring to a landscape architect; Mr. French said consideration should be given to watering and residential abutter considerations. Mr. Dolan asked if the board could direct the applicant as to what type of landscaping to use and where it should be located; Mr. Burke said a landscape architect would put together a plan taking both the applicant's concerns and the by-law into consideration. Mr. Jenkins asked if the special permit is needed simply because the site is in the water resource protection district; Mr. Burke said the use also requires a special permit. Mr. Dolan said he wanted the applicant to understand the board's concerns and address as many as possible before coming back, especially public safety and water issues. Motion: To continue the public hearing to February 5, 2003 at 9:00 p.m. (Dolan-Achille) All in favor. PASSES (Mr. Cook left the meeting at this time.] Mr. French explained this is a discussion regarding a recommendation to be sent to the r- Zoning Board of Appeals on a sign variance. r Mr. Armstrong told the board he works for Tedesci Realty, which owns the Stop & Shop in town, and which also does work for Shaw's. Mr. French told the board he works for Daylor Consulting, which has in the past done work for both supermarkets. Both said they would participate unless the applicant objects. Mr. Bliss said he did not. Attorney Michael Bliss, Conors and Bliss, introduced Brian Leahy, Rob Woodland from McMahon Associates, and Roz Holderfield from the sign company. Ms. Holderfield presented the board with plans for the signs. The first is pylon sign # I at the comer of Route 140 and Norfolk Street, proposed to be 65 feet in height. The second pylon sign, #2, is at Route 140 and West Street, proposed to be 30 feet. Two directional signs are proposed, one at the West Street entrance for Shaws and one for Home Depot off Norfolk Street. Mr. Jenkins asked about lighting. Ms. Holderfield said the directional signs will not be illuminated, and the pylon signs will be internally illuminated during store hours. She said there will be no reader boards or flashing signs. Mr. Bliss said the directional signs do not require variances, but the pylon signs do. He said one free-standing sign is allowed per building, and since they have five buildings, they should be allowed five signs. Ms. Holderfield said the point of the directional signs is to give drivers an indication of where to turn onto the site. They will be placed on the r shopping center property. Mr. Annino said this would be a destination center, and the large signs on 140 and small signs for directions could be a safety issue. Mr. French asked Ms. Holderfield to explain how the signs compare to what is allowed under zoning. She said pylon signs are allowed to be 30 square feet per side and 15 feet high from grade; she said the size of directional signs are not specified in the by-law. Mr. Bliss said the directional signs fit into the by-law requirements for free-standing signs. Mr. Achille said Section 4.7.2.1 says the height requirement for a free-standing sign is 15 feet; Mr. Bliss said he read that to mean the maximum is 15 feet. Mr. Woodland explained why they are requesting a 65-foot high pylon sign at Norfolk Street and the type size for the signs to be readable from Route 140. He showed the board a roadway profile of Route 140 traveling northward from School Street to the proposed new traffic signal at Norfolk Street. He said there is a significant sight line issue to be overcome. The proposed Erin's Centre sign is located on the plan, along with the base elevation on Route 140 (the shopping center is below grade), to the top of the sign elevation, 228 feet. He explained a car parked at School Street looking over the crest of the hill on Route 140 would be able to see from the middle portion of the sign as proposed. He said there are safety issues involving the need to inform drivers they are ,,- approaching the site, so they will have time to change lanes and get into the left turn lane. He explained the manual he uses details the height of letters necessary for drivers to read r signs, and said at the design speed of Route 150 (50 mph) the distance needed for that driver to have time to make the lane changes necessary is 800 feet. He explained drivers will need to see the sign from School Street and see where the turn must be made, and the distance to that sign is 2,074 feet. From that distance, the required height of the letters would be 52 inches. However, the height of the letters proposed for these signs is shorter than 52 inches. The Home Depot letters will be 41 inches; the Shaw's letters will be 27 inches, and the Staples letters will be 32 inches. Mr. Woodland showed the board a three-dimensional rendering of the view from School Street looking toward Norfolk Street, where only the "H" in Home will be visible. He said while the sign is 65 feet above the grade, only part of it will be visible from School Street. He said the sign location and height would also encourage the traffic to use the Norfolk Street entrance, which will reduce traffic on West Street. Mr. Burke asked how long a driver would need to make the turning decision; Mr. Woodland said it would take 800 feet. Mr. Burke said this would assume the driver has not visited the site before, but said that during the permitting process, Mr. Woodland explained 75% of the users would be repeat customers. r Mr. Annino said many drivers wouldn't know where the road to Home Depot is located, so they wouldn't know to get in the left lane. Mr. Woodland explained there would be signage indicating there will be a left-turn lane ahead. Mr. Annino asked if that were the case, why is the large sign needed? Mr. Woodland said it was needed to indicate the Home Depot. He said the sign would be visible in time for motorists to make the decision to turn left safely. Mr. Woodland presented a rendering of Route 140 at the point of the railroad crossing; he said the assumed height used for the rendering was 5.5 feet, which is higher than a car. He said he didn't believe the sign would be out of scale with the development. Mr. Woodland presented the view from the West Street side of Route 140; the second pylon sign at this location is 30 feet overall height. The letters on this sign are smaller than on the other pylon sign. ( Board Comment Mr. Jenkins said the applicant's variance application stated other signs in the area have been granted sign variances, and asked which ones. Mr. Bliss said the Red Roof Inn had received a variance; Mr. Burke said that variance was granted for the sign to be no more than 30 feet above grade. Mr. Jenkins asked how many customers would be repeat. Mr. Leahy said they wanted to keep trucks off West Street and encourage them to use Norfolk Street, and to encourage traffic from Route 495 to use the stores. Mr. Bliss said from a safety point-of-view, the site should be designed for those drivers who have not been to the site previously. Mr. Jenkins said he was concerned about what the signs would look like from within the shopping center. He said he appreciated the desire to encourage the use of Norfolk Street, but said if a driver misses that street, they can use West Street at the next set of lights. Mr. Jenkins asked what the discussion was relative to signage during the special permit process. Mr. Leahy said everything they submitted to the board r was scrutinized by an abutter who was filing appeals. He said he believes the signs are in scope with the site. Mr. Jenkins said he agreed that while the sign is 65 feet high, it will not appear to be that tall from the roadway. However, he said 45 feet from the roadway grade is still a large sign. Ms. Holderfield said the size of the sign is relative to the number of tenants in the shopping center. Mr. Annino said the buildings will also have signs attached. Mr. Woodland agreed, but said they would be below the grade of Route 140. Mr. Bliss said if this were a strip mall, each tenant could have a free-standing sign. Mr. Jenkins asked if the applicant had investigated all the options for these signs. Mr. Leahy said they had approached the state to request a small sign on state land to indicate "shopping center ahead" but were denied. Mr. Burke said there are already three oversized sign variances running with this land; on West Street, Route 140, and Norfolk Street. He said these variances do not expire, and if there are two or three more variances granted, they would be outstanding regardless of the tenants. Mr. Burke said he was concerned about the precedent that could be set; during the public hearing process, there was no mention of the need for sign variances. He said if it was the applicant's intent to construct these signs, they should have been part of the special permit application; however, the signs shown on the approved plan conform to zoning. It was indicated during the public hearing process that no variances would be requested. He said because the special permit plans show the signs and they are referenced in the special permit, the ZBA may not be able to grant relief to modify the plans. He said if the variances are granted, the applicant would still have to come back to r the Planning Board to modify the special permit. He said he believed 65 feet is a much different sign in character and scale from the signs along the Route 140 corridor. He said development would continue along the Route 140 corridor and was concerned about the precedent this could set. Mr. Burke said he believes drivers will be able to find this site whether there are pylon signs or not, and if they miss the Norfolk Street entrance, they can take the West Street entrance. Mr. Bliss said there was no intent to construct these signs during the public hearing process, and the sign plan was not finalized until later. He said the Home Depot special permit was for the use and said the special permit does not mention that changes to signage would require a modification. Mr. Leahy said he didn't believe a precedent would be set with a posItIve recommendation because there is a demonstrated hardship on this site with the low point and the grade of the roadway. Mr. Annino said regardless of the low point the sign will be in, a sign that tall is not necessary. He said the signs are out of context with the corridor. He said he doesn't agree with the contention that the signs have to be visible from School Street, and said the bigger problem will be directing traffic into the site safely. He said the board has the opportunity to set positive policy as this corridor begins to be developed. ,,-.. Motion: To vote individually on each sign. (Achille-Dolan) All in favor. PASSES I Mr. Armstrong said he believed the standard Shaw's pylon is 24 feet; the sign at West Street appears to be about 30 feet, so he doesn't have a problem with it. However, he said he felt the Norfolk Street sign is too large, even at 4S feet above grade. Mr. Woodland said the idea behind the engineering of the signs was to try to encourage a traffic pattern, and the solutions arrived at are specific to this site. He said if the sign were any lower than proposed, it would not be visible from School Street, which could result in unsafe driving maneuvers. Mr. Dolan explained the board would only be sending a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals on these variances. He thanked Mr. Woodland for his presentation and said he understood his engineering concerns. Mr. Achille said he believed the applicant needs a variance because I5-foot signs would not be adequate. He said this is the area where business should be going, and there will be no pedestrian activity on Route 140. Motion: To send the ZBA a positive recommendation on the variance for pylon sign #2 (at West Street/Route 140) at a height of30 feet (Achille-Dolan) All in favor. PASSES Mr. Dolan said he thought 65 feet sounds huge, but looking at Mr. Woodland's rendering, the sign doesn't look that big. Mr. Annino said that may be because there is no scale r shown with which to compare it. Mr. Jenkins said he was concerned about the perception of the size of that sign as drivers get closer to it. Mr. Dolan said he was very supportive of the opening of Norfolk Street because it will alleviate the traffic problems on West Street. Mr. Armstrong said even if drivers miss the Norfolk Street entrance, they have another opportunity to turn into the site at West Street. Mr. Achille said a IS-foot sign wouldn't be appropriate for this location and suggested a variance may be appropriate, but not for a 65-foot high sign. Motion: To send the ZBA a negative recommendation on the variance for pylon sign #1 (at Norfolk Street/Route 140) at a height of 6S feet because the scale is too big for the area, but rather to support a 45-foot high (from a base elevation of 163.5) by IO-foot wide sign (Annino-Dolan) Ms. Holderfield said she would prefer to keep the sign 17 feet wide. All in favor. PASSES ,- Motion: To adjourn at 10:45 p.m. (Achille-Annino) All in favor. PASSES Date of next meeting: January 22,2003 at 7:30 p.m. ~QV-4-. 2.-S-{J] ignature of Clerk Date of Approval