Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutmin of planning brd 03/12/03 r"'.r""'" "",. ~"'~ C ;'~l . .i ( Planning Board Minutes March 12, 2003 n; ~" --,' ^ 7 Fit 2: 01 Tom French, Chair; Bernie Dolan, Clerk; Roger Achille, Mark CooK: D<>ug Annino, Walter Jenkins, Fred Armstrong :) Shaun P. Burke, Director ofPlannin and Develo ment ~,. r ~ f.~E. Regarding the 389 Oakland Street special permit, Mr. Dolan said he had spoken with Lt. Towne, who said the Fire Department would like to be informed about the flammable materials being stored, but as far as inspections are concerned, his department sometimes requires the owners to hire someone to do the annual inspections because of manpower and time constraints. Mr. Burke said he has spoken with the Building Department, which inspects at the time of the grant of the certificate of occupancy, and that office and the Board of Health do inspections if they receive a complaint. Mr. Dolan said because this site is in the water protection district, there should be a way to ensure inspections are done regularly. Mr. Jenkins said other towns issue special permits with time limits, and the issues in the permit can be reconsidered and reissued if there are no problems. However, he said if the site changes hands or there are problems, the special permit issues can be reconsidered. Mr. Burke said the board hasn't issued time sensitive special permits, but has issued ownership sensitive permits. Mr. Jenkins said the concerns are often about enforcement, and after the board approves a special permit, enforcement is up to other departments. Peter DeTrolio said the storage of flammable materials is regulated by insurance companies. r Mr. French suggested amending the 389 Oakland Street special permit draft to require the owner to file an annual inventory in January of each year of all chemicals and quantities being stored in the facility to the Building Inspector and Fire Department. Motion: To require the owner to file an annual inventory in January of each year of all chemica1-s and quantities being stored in the facility to the Building Inspector and Fire Department. (Dolan-Achille) Six in favor. Armstrong Abstained. PASSES Mr. Cook said the list provided by the applicant is part of the special permit, and those materials are much less than what is allowed by EPA or DEP, but the Fire Department has to be concerned about what they will find during an emergency, and the Planning Board is concerned about water protection issues. Mr. Dolan said he had understood the Fire Department is the inspection authority, which Lt. Towne said is not the case. 1. Minutes February 26,2003 Motion: To approve as submittedo(Dolan-Jenkins) Six in favor. Armstrong abstained. PASSES 2. Letter from John D' Agostino to David Lederer, EP A re: Hatheway-Patterson 3. February Building Permit Summary r 4. Public Hearing notices - Canoe River Aquifer Advisory Committee; Attleboro, r Foxboro, North Attleboro, Norton, Sharon, JTPG 5. The Beacon 6. New England Planning newsletter The clerk read the public hearing notice on the petition of Richard Devine regarding Zoning By-Law amendments to be considered at the Spring Annual Town Meeting. The amendment to amend Section 6.2.2C, Variances, as follows: 6.2.2C.a: Special permits may be issued for attached Garages and/or Additions to Single Family Dwellings only (section 3.3.1) from the terms of this By-Law, when such Garages and/or Additions violate the Minimum Lot Frontage (ft) and/or Minimmn Setbacks (ft) requirements of Section 4.2.1. To grant a Special Permit the Zoning Boan:l of Appeals must determine that the benefits of the proposed project outweigh its detrimental effects on the neighborhood after consideration of all appropriate criteria and without regard to where, owing to conditions relating to the soil conditions, shape of the lot or topography. Mr. French explained the proposed change to the Zoning By-Law will be presented to Town Meeting, which will ask the board for a recommendation. r Richard Devine explained he submitted the petition because a lot of things come before the ZBA that don't make sense because in order to get a variance, a lot has to have unique conditions like its shape or water. He said there have been applications that were denied because the lot was not "screwed up" enough. He said issues like safety concerns do not meet the hardship requirement for a variance. He said unattached garages can be five feet from the property line, but an application for an attached garage may not be granted a variance to be that close unless there is a hardship. He said another option would be for the Planning Board to consider reducing the sideyard setbacks to what they were before the last zoning change, and said is circulating a petition to see what other residents feel about this issue. Public Comment Peter DeTrolio, Elm Street, said when Mr. Devine was on the Zoning Board of Appeals he always asked what the hardship to the land was. Mr. DeTrolio said he thought it was odd, since Mr. Devine was so concerned about having the hardship explained, that he would propose this article. He said he disagreed with the proposal. Mr. Jenkins said this proposal is to change the standard to a benefits vs. detriments one, rather than a hardship standard. .r- Mr. Burke said he didn't think the statutory ability exists to grant a variance under the special permit process; in Chapter 40A, special permits exist for use and density, but there is no reference to the grant of a special permit from a dimensional regulation. He said if the issue is that the setbacks are too much, the appropriate method to address that would be to change it at Town Meeting. He said setbacks provide distance between buildings for public safety purposes, as well as regulating the sense of density within a neighborhood. He said he didn't believe this was the appropriate way to deal with concerns about setbacks. r Mr. Annino said a sideyard addition isn't necessarily the best choice, and while the setbacks may restrain some development, they also encourage a variety of building styles, which is good for a community. He said he would urge the ZBA to consider the impact to the community as a whole, not just the neighborhood. Mr. Devine asked how to address the fact that a lot may not be crooked and cannot get a variance, but a lot across the street, which is crooked or has a topography problem, can get a variance. Mr. French said the shape of the lot is directly related to a homeowner being able to fit an addition on the land or not. Mr. Burke said the law applies to everyone in a zone, and if a building permit is denied, and the hardship conditions are met, the recourse is to petition the ZBA for relief. Mr. Devine said the town could ban Chapter 40A and he would have an attorney address whether it is legal. Mr. Achille asked how many applications like this have been denied. Mr. Devine said anyone with a lot that doesn't have a topography problem will be denied. Mr. Jenkins said when the board makes recommendations, Mr. Burke lets them know when the house was built, and under what requirements, and the board weighs those issues against the hardship question. In older homes, the board often makes positive recommendations; however, in newer subdivisions that were built under the current r regulations, the board usually makes negative recommendations. Motion: To close public hearing (Annino-Dolan) All in favor. PASSES [Mr. Cook left the table at this time.] The clerk read the public hearing notice for the petition of Karl D. Clemmey regarding Zoning By-Law amendments to be considered at the 2003 Annual Town Meeting. The amendments to be as follows: *To amend Section 5.5, Special Permit, by adding paragraph 5.5.7.1 allowing the Board of Selectmen to appoint two associate members to the Planning Board; and *To amend Section 4.2.2 Density and Dimensional Regulations, Business and Industrial District to decrease the minimmn open space (%) required in the 1-1 District from 35% to 30010; and *To rezone the property at South Walnut Street and 396 West Street (Assessor's Map 11, Parcels 28 and 29) from Residential 2 to Industrial 1; and *To rezone the property at 383 West Street (Assessor's Map 20, Parcel 3); 375 West Street (Assessor's Map 20, Parcels 4 and 5); 395 West Street (Assessor's Map 20, Parcel 192) from Residential 2 to Industrial 1; and r- *To rezone the properties at 115 Walnut Street (Assessor's Map 20, Lot 147); 376 Chauncy Street (Assessor's Map 20, Lot 148); 372 Chauncy Street (Assessor's Map 20, Lot 198); 364 Chauncy Street r (Assessor's Map 20, Lot 197); 360 Chauncy Street (Assessor's Map 20, Lots 149 and 150) from Residential 2 to Industrial 1. Mr. French eXplained the Planning Board will be asked to make a recommendation to Town Meeting on each of these issues, and would vote tonight or at sometime prior to Town Meeting. Mr. Armstrong said the applicant has expressed concerns about his participation in this public hearing because he represents the Mansfield Music and Arts Society. Mr. Armstrong said he does not feel he has a conflict with these issues, but he would be happy to seek an opinion from the Ethics Commission on the issue prior to the vote, or if the vote is tonight, he would abstain. 1. To amend Section 5.5, Special Permit, by adding paragraph 5.5.7.1 aI/owing the Board oj Selectmen to appoint two associate members to the Planning Board .( Mr. Clemmey said Mr. Armstrong has a conflict because he is involved in litigation with him, and noted Mr. Cook has left the table. He said with two members not participating, that leaves five voting members, as an example of what can happen if members abstain from special permit public hearings. He said he has polled other towns about whether they have alternate members, which he thought the board should have done. He said the Master Plan has not been updated, and the last time it was done the committee was made up of just the Planning Board. Mr. Clemmey said North Attleboro has five Planning Board members and is are doing a Master Plan update. He said the special permit process in Mansfield is more difficult than in other towns. Mr. French asked what this had to do with alternate members. Mr. Clemmey said he didn't want to discuss it anymore. He said Franklin and Foxboro have alternate members only for special permit hearings. Board Comment Mr. Dolan said the Master Plan was last done in 1995-96. He said he was not opposed to associate members, but said those members would not get to vote unless a regular member was out. Mr. Annino said the board had asked Mr. Clemmey to find out whether other boards use alternate members in order to find out what other towns do. He said it wasn't a bad idea, especially during sensitive hearings. He said he took issue with Mr. Clemmey saying the board should have done the research because this isn't the board's petition, and said he didn't believe the special permit process in Mansfield is more difficult than in any other community in the area. Mr. Clemmey said Franklin's special permit process is very different than Mansfield's, and that town got a $30,000 grant. He said Mansfield's last Master Plan was never voted on at Town Meeting and was done by the Planning Board. Mr. Achille said he wasn't opposed to alternate members because getting more people involved in town government is a good thing. Mr. Jenkins asked if the associate members in other towns attend every meeting~ Mr. Clemmey said they are only used during special permits, but attend from the beginning of .r- the public hearing. r Bill Clemmey, 9 Deer Path Circle, asked when the board would vote. Mr. French explained the board would complete the public hearing before deciding whether to vote tonight or not. 2. To amend Section 4.2.2 Density and Dimensional Regulations, Business and Industrial District to decrease the minimum open space (%) required in the I-I District from 35% to 30%. Mr. Clemmey explained it would make sense to lower this requirement considering the current economic situation. He said on a seven-acre parcel, 300A. open space would be 2 acres rather than 2 Y2 acres. He said open space in the industrial park is currently 20-22 percent. Public Comment Richard Gordon, 407 West Street, said he was on the Master Plan committee that adopted the 35% standard, and he did not believe it should be changed. r Sandra Levine, 20 Walnut Street, said today's economic conditions shouldn't necessarily be the deciding factor on this issue, and the town should do long-term planning. She said with the Erin's Centre project, there would be 518,000 square feet of open space at 35%, and 75,000 square feet fewer at 300A. open space. She said that would be enough for an additional building on the site, and would have an effect on both the neighborhood and the community as a whole. Mr. Annino said he saw the town losing more than it would gain with a reduction in open space; he said aesthetics, buffers, and views from the street would not be improved. Mr. Clemmey said Erin's Center was 34 acres; with 35%, it would have 12.25 acres of open space, and at 30%, 10.2 acres, a difference of2 acres. He said they had to have a 75 foot setback from the state highway, and with the open space requirement, the roadway had to be further away from the highway. He said most lots are not square and buildings cannot simply be placed in the middle. He said the parking is very close to the building, and with that additional two acres, it could have been moved. Mr. Annino asked how the aesthetics of the community would be effected. Mr. Clemmey suggested the open space should be flexible within a zone. (" Mr. Annino asked whether the Master Plan addressed this issue. Mr. Burke said the 1989 Master Plan did a lot of work on open space, and the calculation was based on what was in the park at the time. He said there was a sense that 35% came about as a result of owners of the industrial park's desire for an attractive park, and was not required in the park under the town's zoning. He said over the years, lowering that requirement has been discussed, but the board has not been comfortable with doing that. Mr. Annino said he is concerned about what will happen to remaining undeveloped land in town. Mr. Burke said he thought it was good to consider the requirement periodically; he said while the park has 35% open space, developments in areas like Route 106 have very little. He said in a large area with large buildings, open space is more noticeable. He said there is an intrinsic value in open space that may outweigh the market value of land. He said there is r a lot of remaining land that will eventually be developed, and he didn't think reducing open space would result in any dividend. Mr. Burke said the fact that Erin's Centre was pushed back 75 feet from the state highway was a decision made by the Building Inspector, and is a different issue than the open space requirement. Mr. Annino asked what the density is on Route 1 in North Attleboro, and said that is exactly what the town doesn't want to have happen. Mr. Burke said during the 1989 Master Plan, the examples about what Mansfield didn't want to see were in Dedham or Norwood; now that kind of development has come to Route 1. He said those buildings have no real open space or landscaping. Mr. Jenkins asked if this was the first time this issue has arisen since the PBD was adopted. Mr. Burke said it was. Mr. Jenkins said he viewed the business park as an enclosed area with some Industrial 1 parcels around it; he said he would be more in favor oflooking at reducing the open space in the PBD, which is what the industrial park is currently zoned. He said the setbacks are different when industrial abuts industrial than when industrial abuts residential, and the park generates revenue for the town. Mr. Burke said building height and floor area ratio were changed with the adoption of the PBD zone; that decision recognized the need for flexibility but didn't want to hurt the look of the park. Mr. Jenkins said if the height is increased, there might be additional parking needed, which may not be possible with the open space as required. f Mr. Clemmey said the Zoning By-Law requires 35% in the PBD and industrial zones, but none in Business zones. He said Sherry Clancy told him the park is currently at 27 percent open space. Nancy Norton, 64 South Walnut Street, said this could set a precedent for the entire town. She said as business encroaches on residential areas, the Planning Board should try to keep Mansfield's neighborhoods residential. Celeste Jones asked what Mr. Jenkins' opinion is of the proposal in question. Mr. Jenkins said he isn't necessarily in favor of reducing the open space requirements in the existing industrial districts. Bill Clemmey said this article would have no impact on Erin's Centre. He said over the last 10 years, changes have been made in parking lots and there are other issues to consider besides aesthetics. Mrs. Gordon said Mr. Clemmey removes all the buffers from his properties, leaving the neighbors with nothing. 4. To rezone the property at South Walnut Street and 396 West Street (Assessor's Map J J, Parcels 28 and 29) from Residential 2 to lndustrial J. r Mr. Clemmey said he was opposed to Mr. Armstrong participating in the hearing because r he is involved with litigation on another matter. Mr. Armstrong said he is not in litigation, he simply presented the MMAS special permit to the Board of Selectmen. Mr. Clemmey said the lots in question abut existing Industrial 1 land. He said he would be making a buffer 15 or 16 feet high on the back of that industrial site out to West Street, with a six or seven foot fence and pine trees from the back corner of the industrial site. He said the by-law states a 50-foot setback is necessary, but to go 15 feet high for the layout and slopes of the buffer, it would be 73 feet from the back of the residential areas. He said he would not install a new driveway because his agreement with Shaw's and Home Depot allows him to use those roadways. Mr. Clemmey said he would be willing to consider rezoning it to Business instead of Industrial. Mr. French asked if the strip between the residential lots on Walnut Street is included. Mr. Clemmey said it is not. Mr. French said that portion is described in the petition. Mr. Clemmey said he would amend that at Town Meeting. Mr. French suggested it should say "a portion of Parcel 28." Public Comment Mr. Gordon presented a petition signed by 60 residents opposing all of the rezoning petitions. r I Mrs. Jones said since the discussion about the buffering for Erin's Centre, Mr. Clemmey has removed all the trees and there is no buffer left between their lots and Shaw's. She said the strip between the residential parcels is a road and cannot be rezoned. She said their street is 15 ~ feet wide, and the neighbors are concerned about industrial traffic using the residential roadway. She said their houses are much higher than the industrial land, so a berm will not be enough for the neighborhood to be screened. Kristin Riondo, 8 South Walnut Street, said there is no longer a buffer between their properties and the industrial land, and this would be right up against their property. She asked who owns the land being rezoned. Mr. Clemmey said his family owns the land. Mrs. Norton asked ifthe Planning Board supported Mr. Clemmey clearing his property. Mr. Burke said any landowner can clear his land. He said there is some enforcement activity with the Conservation Commission on that parcel under the local wetland by-law. Mrs. Jones said it is very difficult to get out of their street now, and additional industrial traffic will make it worse. Mr. Jones asked that the board consider this seriously. Arlene Maccione, 46 Walnut Street, said she is totally opposed to the rezoning, as are her neighbors. r Kevin Norton, 364 Walnut Street, said they had been told there would be an eight-foot fence on top of the berm and asked if Mr. Clemmey would be held to that. Mr. Burke said the landscaping and buffering on the Erin's Centre plan was required under both site r plan and the special permit, and that plan is enforceable through the Building Inspector's office. However, he said this proposal for planting on the berm, unless it becomes part of a project later on, will be between the landowner and the neighbors. Mr. Clemmey said the Shaw's and Home Depot plan will be followed "to the t." He said the berm, fence and trees are between that site and the neighbors. Board Comment Mr. Annino said the neighbors are already dealing with a tremendous hardship, and this would further aggravate their situation. Mr. Clemmey said with the work he is doing on Erin's Centre now, this would be the best thing for the workers. Mr. Annino asked why all the trees had been cut down; Mr. Clemmey said that was not under discussion. Mr. Clemmey said there are four 40B projects that will create the need for new schools, and asked who would pay for that. Mr. Annino asked what the orange parcels shown on Mr. Clemmey's plan are~ Mr. Clemmey said he owns them and will leave them the way they are, as undeveloped land. He said now is the time to develop the parcels he is proposing to rezone. Public Comment Jane Wilson, 67 South Walnut Street, asked who would maintain the plantings Mr. Clemmey is proposing. Mr. Clemmey said he hoped his neighbors would put up a fence so he couldn't look over. He said the plantings are all in the special permit. Mrs. Wilson asked ifhe would take care of the trees. Mr. Clemmey said he assumed Erin's Centre r will have someone to take care of the landscaping. Mrs. Jones said the neighbors have nothing in writing about Mr. Clemmey's plan for plantings. She said she had spoken with Mr. Brian Leahy, who had the area cleaned up. She said Mrs. Wilson's question was whether the trees proposed for the berm will be maintained, but Mr. Clemmey's response was about the landscaping in Erin's Centre. Mr. Clemmey said his family cleaned up the fence, not Mr. Leahy, and said he would send Dan Clemmey to Mrs. Jones's house tomorrow. Mrs. Jones said when she spoke with Mr. Leahy, he told her he would have it taken care of Mrs. Riondo asked what could be put on that land if it is rezoned. Mr. Burke said the setback from the residential areas would be 75 feet to any building. Mrs. Riondo asked if tractor trailer trucks could be parked within the setback; Mr. Burke said the setback itself is for the building, so trucks could probably be parked there. Mr. Clemmey said Mr. Burke "is wrong as usual." Mr. Burke said there is a difference between the landscape buffer, where nothing can go, and the 75-foot setback. The landscaping section requires a minimum 50-foot buffer in industrial districts. Therefore, there are two buffers, one of 75 feet for the building and a 50 feet landscaped buffer. Mrs. Riondo asked if a house could be put there under the current zoning. Mr. Burke said a road would have to be built, and the setbacks would be different for a residential use. Mr. French said there would be room for a building on the parcel if it were industrial, but it could not go within the 75-foot buffer. r Mr. Clemmey asked if Mr. Burke would explain Section 5.5.6 if the parcel were to be r rezoned. Mr. Burke said if there were a special permit use proposed for that site, it would have to meet the requirements of the special permit by-law. He explained under the Zoning By-Law, uses are either prohibited, allowed, or allowed by special permit. Mrs. Levine asked if this remained R2, which the neighborhood was asking the board to recommend, how many housing units could be built there. She asked if tenements or a 40B project could go there. Mr. French said 40B projects can go anywhere because they are not regulated by local zoning. Mrs. Levine said Mr. Clemmey threatens the neighbors with a 40B project regularly. Mr. Burke eXplained under zoning, only single family uses would be allowed at 22,500 square feet per lot, so there could be 14 or fewer single family units. Mrs. Levine asked if there is room for access and egress into that property; Mr. Burke said it looks as though roads could come in from West Street and South Walnut Street. Mr. Burke said 40B is not governed by the Zoning Act, so there is no way to tell how many units could be built there. 4. To rezone the property at 383 West Street (Assessor's Map 20, Parcel 3); 375 West Street (Assessor's Map 20, Parcels 4 and 5); 395 West Street (Assessor's Map 20, Parcel 192) from Residential 2 to Industrial 1. Mr. Clemmey said he has been approached by 40B developers and has refused to sell his land to them. r Mr. Clemmey said the parcel in question is 124,916 square feet, or 2.87 acres. Lot 191 is an existing home which he owns, and will be left there as a buffer. He said Lot 192 has a building on it. He said he would be willing to consider a business zone rather than industrial. He said he would leave the required buffer for the neighbor in the back. He said the two houses there would come down. Public Comment Carol Gordon, 407 West Street, said West Street is very narrow and to add additional traffic would be very dangerous. She said she realizes traffic is heavy now because School Street is closed, but said Mr. Clemmey is asking too much of the neighborhood. She said the rezoning would hurt the value of their homes. Brian Bichardi, 212 Casa Drive, said he agreed with the comments made by the South Walnut Street residents. He said the existing buffers are not enough to protect the residents from the Erin's Centre development, and because Mr. Clemmey will have no legal obligation to install the buffers, he is concerned they won't be installed. r Board Comment Mr. Annino asked if this would be considered spot zoning. Mr. Burke said there is Industrial 1 across the street, but is separated from the residential area by a heavily traveled street, so that case could be made. He said this is the creeping of industrial into a residential zone and is an inappropriate way to look at land use and its effect on a neighborhood. He said the area should be rezoned either in its entirety or not at all. r Mr. Dolan said he doesn't feel this is spot zoning since there is industrial land across the street. However, he said it is too much encroachment on the residential neighborhood. Mr. French said the board has a good idea about the feeling of the neighborhood. He explained the board does not change zoning, but only makes a recommendation to Town Meeting. 5. To rezone the properties at 115 Walnut Street (Assessor's Map 20, Lot 147); 376 Chauncy Street (Assessor's Map 20, Lot 148); 372 Chauncy Street (Assessor's Map 20, Lot 198); 364 Chauncy Street (Assessor's Map 20, Lot 197); 360 Chauncy Street (Assessor's Map 20, Lots 149 and 150) from Residential 2 to IndustrialJ. Mr. Clemmey said he "left his camera at home tonight, because this is history." He said this parcel is 2.18 acres across from Stop and Shop. He owns Lots 140 and 150, the others are owned by Lester Epstein. He said Mr. Epstein had tried to rezone this previously, and Mr. Clemmey said he would be in favor of this being rezoned business rather than industrial. He said the town could pick up some extra tax dollars with an industrial use. He said he had bought the land from the state to use as open space. Public Comment Mrs. Jones asked what the frontage and area requirements are in the Industrial 1 zone; r Mr. Clemmey said 200 frontage and 40,000 square feet of area are required. Mrs. Jones said Mr. Clemmey's parcels do not meet those requirements and they would be non- conforming. Mr. Clemmey said the area of all the lots together is 94,792 square feet, 2.18 acres. Kim Foley, 25 Casa Drive, asked how Mr. Clemmey can rezone land he doesn't own. Mr. Clemmey said you don't have to own land to petition it for rezoning. Mrs. Levine said she had spoken with an attorney, who told her you do have to own land to rezone it. She said the citizen's petition does not include Mr. Epstein's signature. Mr. Clemmey said Mr. Epstein will be at town meeting, and he is in favor of the rezoning. Mr. Dolan said the town rezones land without owning it; Mrs. Levine said that is done as a municipality. Mr. Dolan said Mr. Epstein's proposal was to rezone as Business, which he said would have been spot zoning. Mrs. Levine said a boundary between industrial and residential is formed by Route 106 and by Walnut Street. She said Lot 147 has a house on it, and there is no other industrial or business land abutting this proposal. Mr. Clemmey said during the Erin's Centre project, he was required to leave a 75-foot buffer because of the residential land across Route 140. Mr. Gordon said he was concerned about this being piecemeal zoning and said the area should be left residential. He said he was concerned the rezoning wouldn't stop if this were allowed. r Mr. Annino said the area is an island of residential development, and he doesn't agree the r parcels should be rezoned at all. Mrs. Foley suggested the landowners might sell their properties to someone who would take care of it as residential land. Mr. Clemmey said he was insulted by that comment because his properties are well cared for. Mrs. Jones asked if the board would vote on this tonight. Mr. French said he didn't believe the board would vote tonight. Mrs. Jones asked about Mr. Achille's opinions on the rezoing. Mr. Achille said these are substantial changes, and he has listened to the comments. He said when the vote takes place, the board will discuss the issues, and the abutters will be invited back. Janet Coffey, Casa Drive, asked the board to consider the neighbors and said the residents take good care of their properties. Motion: To close the public hearing (Dolan-Annino) All in favor. PASSES Mr. Burke said by charter, town meeting is April 8. It may be postponed, but that has not been discussed yet. He suggested scheduling this vote on April 2 in case town meeting does take place that early. The board agreed to April 2 at 7:30 p.m. r [Mr. Cook returned to the meeting.] Casa Drive - Bear Hill Realty Trust. Mr. Burke explained the plan shows a division of Lot 1, which was originally seen in a Form A showing three lots. The landowner bought the land from the state, after it was not used for Route 140 as originally planned. The lot has hundreds of feet of frontage, but there is a portion of a house on Lot 1 at the northern end ofCasa Drive, clouding the title. The plan seeks to create a 3,500 square foot lot, covey it to Healey, and remove the cloud from the title. There is a note on the plan saying it is not a buildable lot and will be conveyed. Mr. Burke suggested the plan conforms and the board could endorse the plan. Mr. Clemmey said before Route 140 was built, the owner received a variance for the lots. He said the town could have gotten the land for nothing by writing a letter to the state, but it did not. Mr. French explained that if the plan conforms for frontage and access, the board is obligated to sign the plan, but that signing the plan does not condone the use or guarantee the applicant a building permit. Motion: To endorse the Form A (Dolan-Annino) All in favor. PASSES 7. ZBA application for Variance - 14 Jennifer Drive - Sideyard Setback Mr. Burke suggested the garage could be shortened 2 feet and be within the setback. r Motion: To send the ZBA a negative recommendation because there is no apparently ( hardship to the land and suggest the garage be made narrower to conform with zoning. (Cook-Annino) All in favor. PASSES 8. Draft Special Permit Decision - 389 Oakland Street Auto Body Shop The board reviewed the draft special permit with the amendment to condition 12, to require the owner to file an annual inventory in January of each year of all chemicals and quantities being stored in the facility to the Building Inspector and Fire Department. Motion: To sign the special permit with the above amendment to condition 12. (Annino-Dolan) Six in favor. Armstrong abstained. PASSES Mr. Dolan asked the issue of special permit length of time and ownership, along with responsibility for inspections of hazardous materials, be added to the work list. Mr. Annino told the board he had attended the Housing Grant Rehab Committee meeting; the grant funds housing repairs for elderly residents. Mr. Burke said the budget situation is very uncertain at the moment, and most of the remaining department budget has been encumbered. Mr. Dolan asked when Shaw's would be completed. Mr. Clemmey said June I. jr- Mr. Clemmey said the town should work on a new Master Plan. He said Franklin got a grant for its update, so there is money available. He said Mr. Burke hadn't called him about the rezoning proposals; Mr. Burke said he hadn't called anyone about the proposals, but he had received calls from the neighbors. Mr. Clemmey asked for copies of the plans shown at tonight's meeting. Mr. Clemmey said he would be bringing a plan for South Main Street to the board soon. Mr. Jenkins asked if that strip between the two residential parcels on Walnut Street isn't rezoned, can it still be used? Mr. Clemmey said he wouldn't include that in the rezoning and said he would say it wouldn't be used until they get a buyer. Motion: To adjourn at 11:00 p.m. (Dolan-Achille) All in favor. PASSES Date of next meeting: March 26,2003 at 7:30 p.m. ~~,D~ . ture ofCler . . - 3-~(P~(}3 Date of Approval r-