Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Brd Min_6181996`.l PLANNING BOARD MINUTES June 18, 1996 rG JU 27 All 8� 1 S PRESENT: Chairman French, Clerk Sullivan PLANNERS: Dolan, Flynn, McShane, Penney, $,ter d o Shaun P. Burke, Director of Planning and Development 1. Meeting called to order at 7:30 P.M. 2. Form A (ANR) Plans School Street - The parcel has received an Order of Conditions from the Conservation Commission to access Lot 1, which has sufficient frontage and upland area to conform. Planner Sullivan said he would like to see the Order of Conditions and the distance and bearings for the side of Lot 2 near the railroad. Motion: To request the engineer add the bearings and distances to Lot 2 and get a copy of the Order of Conditions for the June 19, 1996 meeting. (Sullivan - Dolan) All in favor. PASSES 3. Correspondence 1. Letter from Wading River Realty Trust requesting an extension for completion of improvements at Carlton Estates until November 30, 1996. Mr. Burke explained the subdivision has a mid - August completion date and there have been no problems with the developers or complaints from the residents, however, Mr. Burke said he would be more comfortable with a mid - October completion date. Planner Dolan suggested an end of October completion date rather than the end of November. Motion: To grant an extension for the completion of Carlton Estates to October 31, 1996 (Dolan - Bonda) All in favor. PASSES 2. Memo from Mr. Clifford RE: Partial Release - Stearns Hill Estates Phase II Motion: To release $32,270.43 (Flynn- Sullivan) Six in favor. One abstention. PASSES 3. Memo from Bill Williams RE: Special Town Meeting 4. Memo to Board of Selectmen RE: Special Town Meeting 5. Memo to John Buckley RE: Potentially Productive Aquifers 6. Memo to Board of Selectmen RE: Downtown Parking 7. Letter from Mass Highway to Fleet Bank RE: Land on South Main Street 8. Letter from Mr. Williams RE: Growth 9. Memo from Mr. Burke RE: Eastleigh settlement 10. Letter from Attorney Mangiaratti RE: Eastleigh Estates 11. Memo from Mr. Burke RE: Massapoag Estates Mr. Burke informed the board that the Massapoag Estates developers had come as close as possible to meeting the schedule for completion, and as of today had completed all the required work in this phase. 4. Drainage Workshop Planner Flynn said she was concerned that as marginal land is developed, it is becoming more necessary to deal with drainage issues, especially retention and detention basins. She noted the Megamanual Mr. Burke had distributed said basins required moderate to high maintenance and careful planning, which she was concerned were not being done. She encouraged the board to consider deleting basins from the subdivision regulations, as she does not have much confidence in the engineers who design the basins or the town's ability to maintain them. Clerk Sullivan said the post - development rate of runoff cannot be increased from the pre - development rate, and a way to do that is to catch some of the water before it goes off site. He also said post - development runoff cannot flood properties downstream, so even if more water is let offsite, if it flows at the same, pre - development, rate, they will not be flooded. Mr. Burke noted non -point source pollution is also a concern. Clerk Sullivan suggested catching the first of the rainfall, which washes away the oil and grease from the roadway. Planner Penney asked how it would be possible to make the basins more attractive. Clerk Sullivan said a natural pond would be best, but they would be dumping contaminated water right into the groundwater. He said DEP would be more receptive to increasing the rate as long as the water is cleaned up first. ( Planner Sullivan suggested alternatives such as grass swales or reducing the amount of impervious surface with less roadway and sidewalk. Planner McShane stated he did not want to get hung up on DEP regulations, since there is nothing in the Wetlands Act saying towns have to allow basins, and if Mansfield does not, developers will have to come up with some other way of handling drainage. Mr. Burke explained Subdivision Control does not deal with density, the zoning by -law does, while Subdivision Control deals with how to get a plan of land on record. Density is set by the zoning by -law, he explained, and performance standards for the construction of the ways and amenities come under Subdivision Control, and the two cannot be substituted one for the other. There cannot be anything in the subdivision regulations to regulate density as is done in the zoning by -law. He said when developers and their engineers look at a piece of land, they figure out how large it is, how large the lots have to be, and how much roadway they need, then arrive at the number of lots they can build. Planner McShane said they also look at wetlands on the site. He asked if it would be feasible to change the engineer's thinking in terms of density and drainage design. Mr. Burke said he liked Holliston's regulation, which requires the developer to balance rate and the amount of flow. He did not think not allowing basins at all was a realistic solution, and suggested the development community needs an enlightened developer, like Harry Blackey, to lead the way. Planner Flynn said the Planning Board should be setting the guidelines. Mr. Burke explained the Subdivision Regulations are not a performance by -law, and said developers tend not to be very site - sensitive. He suggested adding a requirement to balance rate and volume of flow in the Subdivision Regulations. Clerk Sullivan said developers used to use wetlands, if there were any on site, for drainage. Planner Penney said he would not want grass swales along the side of the road and suggested encouraging better grading and drainage plans and the use of natural wetlands. Clerk Sullivan was not sure if that would be allowed, but suggested the formation of new wetland areas. Planner Penney suggested creating marshes in a remote area of the subdivision, or putting the drainage area at an existing low spot, so it is already near groundwater. Planner Dolan asked if there would be any way to make developers be more site sensitive. He said he agreed with Planner Flynn, but saw the need to have something to contain stormwater. He suggested making basins the last resort, if nothing else works. Planner McShane noted the regulation already says every effort has to be made to do that, and asked how far the Planning Board could go with regulating. Mr. Burke said if the board did not require infiltration, and limits the amount of permitted runoff, developers will create larger basins. He suggested requiring the maximum amount of infiltration, and minimizing runoff by using narrower roads and fewer sidewalks. Chairman French suggested if they can't do underground recharge, the board could require developers to somehow store the water underground. Clerk Sullivan said problems with underground systems cannot be easily detected. Planner Penney suggested getting the suspended solids out before the water goes underground was a priority. Clerk Sullivan said that could be done with an oil - water separator. Mr. Burke said he would rather developers be required to do a little bit of everything, but recognized that on some sites, everything would not be possible, then the board could waive that item, if deemed appropriate. Planner Bonda said in that case, perhaps that site should not be developed at all. Mr. Burke suggested that may not be the most defensible position and suggested asking town counsel for an opinion on the board's defensibility. Clerk Sullivan and Planner McShane agreed they would like to encourage ponds. Motion: To send Attorney Mangiaratti a letter asking him if it is within the board's rights to delete retention /detention basins due to its concerns about maintenance, public safety, long -term cost to the town, mosquitoes, and attractive nuisance issues. The board wants to encourage ground water recharge. Ask if the board can tell developers they cannot increase flow off site without basins, if the board can tell developers they cannot increase both flow and volume off site, if the board can require a certain percentage of water be recharged to the ground, if the board can encourage natural ponds, and if there is a way to make developers try all other alternatives before resorting to basins. (Sullivan - Flynn) All in favor. PASSES Planner McShane asked about inviting the Conservation Commission and Jay Brolin from the EPA. Planner Penney suggested inviting them when the board has a better focus. Planner McShane suggested getting together with the Conservation Commission soon. Planners Penney and Bonda left the meeting at this point. Motion: To send the Conservation Commission a memo asking them for a meeting date to discuss drainage options. (Flynn - Dolan) All in favor. PASSES 5. Around the Table Planner McShane distributed copies of information regarding potentially useful aquifers, told the board the maps are at SRPEDD, and said DEP is willing to do training sessions. Planner Flynn asked if Mr. Burke had received the case regarding radio towers. Mr. Burke said he had not, and Planner McShane suggested he contact Attorney Mike Ernst. Planner Dolan asked about the Board of Selectmen's position on the train station. Mr. Burke said representatives from the MBTA had met with the Board of Selectmen and the Town Manager, and said they would not be going forward with West Mansfield and would be issuing an RFP for downtown only. 6. Adjournment Motion: To adjourn at 10:00 P.M. (Dolan - Sullivan) All in favor. PASSES Date of next meeting: �Wednesday, June 19, 1996 at 7:30 P.M..' Signature of Clerk Date of Approval