Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutmin of planning brd 12/03/03 (' Planning Board Minutes December 3,[.JCK,t3' ,J "r.n ,: n:: Present: Tom French, Chair; Bernie Dolan, Doug Annino, Walter Jenkins, Mark Cook, Ken Torman, Fred Armstrong Shaun P. Burke, Director of PI Motion: To appoint Mr. Annino Acting Chair (Torman-Cook) All in favor. PASSES 1. Letter from Lincoln Lynch, School Department Business Manager, to remove 2,500 cubic yards of surplus material from the East Street fields, screen it, and move it back to the Jordan-Jackson School. Motion: To send the building inspector a positive recommendation with the following conditions: 1. The material removed will be used at the Jordan/Jackson School property or for other Town/School projects. 2. All loaded vehicles shall be suitably covered to prevent dust and contents leaving the vehicle and to protect abutters and other residents, and the public way from material spilled from the load. ,.-- 2. It may be necessary to have a police officer present during any hauling. Please consuh with Police Chief Arthur O'Neill as to whether or not this may be necessary and to discuss the best hauling routes. 4. East Street shall be maintained free of all mud, stones or any other conditions that may result in a public safety hazard for vehicles or pedestrians. Sweeping or cleaning must be completed daily or more :frequently as deemed necessary during the operation, as directed by Police Chief O'Neill. 5. Work will take place between the hours of 7:00 a.rn. and 5:00 p.rn. Monday through Saturday, with Saturday work only being done if absolutely necessary. (Dolan-Torman) All in favor. PASSES 2. November 12,2003 Minutes Motion: To approve as submitted (Armstrong-Dolan) All in favor. PASSES I 3.1'.... A...... Pratt Street - S1. Mary's Church. Mr. Burke explained the plan to put all the property into one parcel. The frontage remains the same and he recommended the plan be endorsed. The applicant enclosed a letter requesting the filing fee be waived. Motion: To waive the filing fee (Dolan-Cook) All in favor. PASSES ( Motion: To sign the Form A (Dolan-Armstrong) All in favor. PASSES ( [Mr. French arrived at this time.] I 2. CorrespolJdenft eoatiaued 3. Request for release of surety - Eastfield Estates - Fo1kman/Zola Builders Motion: To release $92,448.41 (Dolan-Cook) All in favor. PASSES 4. Memo from Mr. McCue re: December 11,2003 public hearing on the Wastewater Treatment Plant Comprehensive Plan 5. ZBA application for variance - 390 West Street. To reduce the required 75-foot rear yard setback where an II zone abuts an R2 zone to 20 feet. Mr. Burke explained this application was submitted and the ZBA public hearing was held between Planning Board meetings, so Mr. Burke sent the ZBA a recommendation. The ZBA has continued the hearing and asked to hear from the Planning Board. Mr. Burke explained the plan shows the existing and proposed setbacks. A 75-foot setback and a 50-foot landscape buffer are required where an industrial zone abuts a residential zone. The applicant proposes to use the extra space not used for the Shaw's building in the Home Depot building instead, and put the dumpster pad in back of the building, within the 75-foot setback. This would also relocate the parking, which would place the parking within the 50-foot landscape buffer. The application is to reduce the 75-foot setback to 23, and the 50-foot landscape buffer to 20 feet. ,,-- Mr. Dolan said he had seen part of the first ZBA meeting on television, and the board seemed confused about the bylaw. Mr. Burke said the question was whether this application meets any ofthe tests for a variance. He said none of the three tests seem to have been met. Mr. Armstrong said if there is a hardship, it appears to have been self-created. Mr. Annino said the bylaws are written to protect abutting landowners, and to come back with a proposal to lessen the standards in order to fully develop the site doesn't make any sense. He said this is an intense use with large buildings, an industrial use abutting a residential zone, so a 20- foot buffer rather than a 50-foot buffer is not enough. Mr. French said town meeting adopted the bylaws and suggested the dumpster could be moved to the end of the building nearest Shaw's, where it would be closer to the building and easier to maintain. There are alternative places for the dumpster that would not encroach into the buffer. Mr. Armstrong asked if the concrete ramps are structures; Mr. Burke said they are not. He said when this was permitted, the loading dock and dumpster were located on the Norfolk Street side to get the maximum distance from R properties for noise reduction. He asked whether the noise barrier would be relocated if the loading dock and dumpster were moved. ~ Mr. Annino said he was concerned about variances being requested after the grant of a special permit. Mr. Burke said the board would likely have sent a negative f recommendation on the Shaw's site plan if this was the plan originally submitted. He said he was unsure whether the reconfiguration of the roadway behind the buildings conformed with the intent of the special permit, when the board and neighbors were very concerned about speed and turning radius. Mr. Jenkins said there have been town meeting articles to change the zoning ofthat abutting residential property, which has not happened. He said that is a further indication not to grant a variance - if town meeting had been inclined to agree with the zoning change, he would be more likely to consider this variance. Mr. French said if the dumpster were moved to the other side of the building, the 75- foot zone would be left intact, and there would be no need for a variance. He suggested the receiving area could go on the side of the building rather than the back by reconfiguring the parking on the Shaw's side of the site. He suggested sliding the building northerly to make up for the space taken from the Shaw's building, reconfigure the parking and the end island and put the service area on that side of the building. Motion: To send the ZBA a negative recommendation on the Variance and the Special Permit with the above suggestions, which appear to the Planning Board to be valid, appropriate ways to solve the problem, neither of which involve a variance. The plans do not meet the hardship tests. (Dolan-Annino) ,,-- An abutter asked if there were any plans to relocate the fence behind Shaw's. Mr. Burke said he had not seen any plans for that. He said he was concerned that the access road at the back of the buildings are supposed to be one-way from West to Norfolk, but are being used as two-way. Mr. French asked ifthat is shown as one- way on the approved plan. Mr. Burke said it is, but there were no one-way signs installed the last time he was on the site. He said he was told they would be installed shortly. He said it is private property, so the town cannot enforce the one-way. Six in favor. Cook abstained. PASSES 5. November Building Permit summary 6. Meeting notices Easton, North Attleboro 7. New England Planning newsletter 8. Access New England newsletter 9. Mass Audubon Report 10. Planning magazine 11. The Beacon ,f 5. PreI__..., S.Wiv...P1a8 eoatie... -EastlE.....StreetlI SDZaIl.e-Mary nevdot Ralph Maloon, RIM Engineering, presented a revised preliminary plan showing six lots off East Street, with none off Eastman Street. The original preliminary showed two lots off East Street and four lots off Eastman Street; Mr. Maloon had also submitted two residential compound plans, one of which was contrary to zoning and the other the board r didn't like. Mr. Maloon explained he has been through the Conservation Commission with a few minor changes t the wetland line. The new plan, Plan D, is a six-lot cluster subdivision off East Street. The Rl/R2 zone line runs through the site. The lots would be on sewer, with 18 actes of common open space, including a woodland along Eastman Street. Mr. French suggested the road could be curved; Mr. Maloon said the road would only be 380 feet to the center of the cul-de-sac. The site is in the water protection district, which allows groundwater recharge. Soil testing has been done and Mr. Maloon said he is confident all the water can be put into the ground. He said he would request a waiver for the cul-de-sac radius from 80 to 60 feet. Mr. Dolan said he would be comfortable with 60 feet if the Fire Department approved it. Mr. Maloon said he would also ask for a waiver for 20 feet of pavement. He said there is an existing concrete sidewalk on East Street. Mr. Jenkins said there are some puddling problems on East Street that should be addressed. Mr. Cook said the town would be fixing that problern. Mr. Maloon said they would propose landscaping along the property lines of Harris and Steele, since that area is less heavily treed than the side abutting the Split property. Mr. Maloon said the soil tests resuhed in good material! 0 feet down at the beginning of the roadway, and 9 feet at the cul-de-sac. - ( Mr. French said the board had been concerned about access from Route 106, so from a traffic safety perspective, this is a better plan. Mr. Maloon said the plan shows around 50-foot front and rear yard setbacks, and 25-foot sideyard setbacks. Mr. Burke said the board can determine the setbacks under the special permit, however, if specific setbacks are not established in the permit, the setbacks would be those required in the underlying district. Mr. Jenkins said he wouldn't want to make the setbacks any smaller than already required. The board discussed 30 foot setbacks off East Street, as well as the character of the existing neighborhood. Mr. Jenkins said this is a much more desirable plan than any of the others. Mr. Dolan agreed. Mr. French suggested a more curvelinear roadway. Mr. Jenkins said he would be concerned about the road being too close to the abutting properties. Mr. Maloon said the Steeles have expressed interest in having their driveway on the new roadway, so he would look into redesigning it. He said there would be plenty of sight distance in that direction, as well. Motion: To support the preliminary plan showing a six-lot cluster residential special permit, with access off East Street and no access off Eastman Street, with 30-foot setbacks off East Street and a curvelinear roadway. ,- (Dolan-Cook) All in favor. PASSES r 6. Special Pennit. Public. Hearirc - Town otMa...riekl- Water Treatment Plant _ 500. East ~ I The clerk read the public hearing notice. Mr. Cook explained he works for the Town of Mansfield, but not for the Water Department. Lee Azinheira, DPW Director, explained this plan goes back to 2000, when a new administrative building was proposed off Maple Street. At the time, the Board of Selectmen suggested this be incorporated into a Master Plan to someday include a town complex on East Street. The garage area, administration building and treatment plan went to town meeting in 2002. The DPW no longer washes vehicles there, and mr. Azinheira said he submitted a proposal to the Capital Improvement Committee for a temporary truck wash facility, which was rejected. It was suggested that become part of the DPW complex plan, and will be an alternate in the bid documents. This plan includes drainage for the whole site, with the fire station where the DPW garage is now and the DPW garage to the left of that. The wash bay will include a sand trough, an oversized deep sump catch basin to an oiVwater separator before going into the sewer. It will be a fully enclosed system, with nothing discharging to the ground. Mr. Dolan asked if the water would be recycled. Mr. Azinheira said it would not be. Bob Chappe~ Woodard & Curran, explained the building would be at the back of the site, about 400 feet from Route 106, abutted by town-owned land. The building will be 160 r' feet x 60 feet, with the main entrance into the administration area and the garage to the left with 3 garage bay doors. The truck wash would be to the left if it is added. Access to the site will be from the existing drive past the DPW building. Deliveries and loading would be at the back of the building. Landscaping includes maples, crabapples, bayberries and junipers. Parking will be at the side of the building. There will be two lights in the parking area and one at the back of the building along the drive; lighting will be installed on the building. The lights in the parking area will be pole-mounted, 18-foot tall, 250-watt, halite lights. Mr. Annino asked for a footcandle analysis. Mr. Burke explained the plan is a special permit because of the addition of impervious surface in the groundwater protection district, not for the use. There will be 14 parking spaces, with one handicapped space. Mr. French asked if that met zoning; Mr. Burke said zoning requires one space per employee on the largest shift and one space per 200 feet of floor area. However, he said this is a municipal use and there could be a rmding on the number of spaces required. Mr. Cook asked how much of the site is being considered for parking. Mr. Chappel said this application is for parking for the water treatment facility, but there are existing ,,- spaces on the site. Mr. French said he was comfortable there is enough parking. r- Mr. Dolan said lighting shouldn't be a big concern because the site is so far off the street; Mr. French said he didn't think landscaping would be, either, for the same reason. Mr. Gaffney said the landscaping was originally to be done after the whole complex was built. Mr. Dolan said even though this is far off the street, it should still be landscaped. Mr. Armstrong asked about stormwater runoff. Mr. Chapelle explained the pavement is curved, with a retention pond at the back of the site. The building is at elevation 135 and the land pitches back with a series of deep sump catch basins and storm drains to an infiltration basin at the back of the site. That basin is sized for the 100-year storm and for the balance ofthe site, when it is constructed. The top of the basin is at elevation 129, the bottom at 134. Roof drains go to the parking lot and into drainage system. The front of the site currently drains to Route 106. Mr. Chapelle said the plan has been through the Conservation Commission. Mr. Chapelle explained the existing water department offices are at the Cate Springs well, which is in the Zone I; this proposal in the Zone II. Mr. French asked if there should be an oiVwater separator because of the location of this site. f Chemical deliveries will be at the back of the building. Mr. Jenkins asked about the types of chemicals stored on site; Mr. Chapelle said there would be potassium hydroxide, sodium hydrochloride, potassium promanganate and sodium fluoride. Mr. Jenkins asked how long a tank of chemicals lasts; Mr. Chapelle said DEP requires a 30-day supply on site, assuming the plant runs 24-hours a day, which this does not. Mr. Jenkins asked how much trouble would be caused in the event of a release from this facility. Mr. Chapelle said each chemical has its own containment area, providing 115% oftotal volume. He explained that the activities involving the chemicals occur now at three different well sites. There is a sump in each containment area with a float switch that would be activated in the event of a leak. There are no floor drains in the containment areas, and the floor drains in the rest of the building are tied into the oiVwater separator and to the sewer. There are acid neutralizers in the building. Jim Vaughn, abutter, asked about the volume of chemicals and potential for spillage during delivery. Mr. Chapelle said there is a connection on the outside of the building, so the delivery driver can connect directly and quickly. The lines are flushed with air to prevent any leakage from the hose. The Koh tank holds 5,400 gallons, hypochorlide 5,400 gallons, sodium 50 gallons, promanganate 100 gallons. Mr. Annino asked about landscaping under the drip edge of the roof, and suggested it be crushed stone. Mr. Chapelle said the plan shows bayberries at that location. Mr. Dolan said crushed stone would help with water permeability. Mr. Dolan asked about the timeframe. Mr. Chapelle said construction would begin in March and take one year. f I Mr. Annino asked about heating and cooling; Mr. Azinheira explained it would be internal, with in-floor radiant heating in the truck areas, with hydronic units. There will ,~ be a gas-fired backup generator. There will be an air conditioning system in the administration building; Mr. Azinheira said the noise was taken into consideration. The administration area will be 72 feet x 60 feet. Mr. Annino asked about trash; Mr. Chapelle said they would use the existing DPW dumpster. Mr. Annino said the handicapped space has to be van accessible. Board Comments Mr. Armstrong said the plan looks good, but said the board was concerned about the oiVwater separator. Mr. Burke said he has met with the applicants at length, and he is comfortable with the proposal. He said it makes sense to put these facilities under one roof. He said the DEP and EP A regulations have been met with this plan. Public Comment An abutter asked what would happen in the event of a spill inside the building. Mr. Chapelle said the building's ventilation system meets the standards for air exchange, and everything inside is liquid. There are no volatile gasses inside the building. (' Motion: To grant the special permit with the following conditions: 1. an oiVwater separator shall be installed; 2. crushed stone shall be added under the roof overhangs in the landscaped areas; 3. lighting shall be shielded and downward facing; 4. wall packs on the building shall have cutoff shields; 5. storage tanks shall be constructed with 115% containment; 6. erosion control shall be installed; 7. any external mechanical units shall be screened; (Annino-Dolan) Torman - In favor. The applicant has addressed the issues to meet the criteria of the surface and ground water protection area. Jenkins - In favor. The applicant has addressed the issues to meet the criteria ofthe surface and ground water protection area. Armstrong - In favor. The applicant has addressed the issues to meet the criteria of the surface and ground water protection area. Annino - In favor. The applicant has addressed the issues to meet the criteria of the surface and ground water protection area. Dolan - In favor. The applicant has addressed the issues to meet the criteria of the surface and ground water protection area. f Cook - Abstain. f ,,-. I r French - The applicant has addressed the issues to meet the criteria of the surface and ground water protection area. Think design and improvements will protect the groundwater. All in favor. PASSES Motion: To close the public hearing (Dolan-Torman) All in favor. PASSES I 7. AdjolU"8_. Motion: To adjourn at 10: 15 p.rn. (Torman-Armstrong) All in favor. PASSES Date of next meeting: December 10, 2003 at 7:30 p.m. Downtown Workshop. Update parking, begin discussion of zoning issues ~~~t-7~.~ Csi'gnature of Clerk- ) "2--)) -t1-~1 Date of Approval