HomeMy WebLinkAboutmin of planning brd 9/1/1999PEG °IVEO
(1 {ia rt iii �11 i 1{�>
99 SEP -9 Iie119: 2S
Planning Board Minutes
September 1, 1999 11 A v F 1IcL0
`;4 A
MA HLi 3 E T T S
Present: H. Thomas French, Jr., Chairman; Marydee Flynn, Clerk; Mark Cook;
Bernard J. Dolan; Thomas P. McShane; and Kenneth H. Torman. Scott A. Frank
arrived at 9:10 p.m. Also present was Shaun P. Burke, Director of Planning and
Development.
Meeting called to order at 7:30 p.m.
Great Waves Site -Plan Review
Mr. French advised those present that it was his hope Board members would be
able to get all their questions answered and make a recommendation to the
Building Inspector on the site plan tonight.
Ted Morine, senior hydrogeologist with D. L. Maher, addressed water concerns.
Mrs. Flynn asked if it would be advisable to test for a period of longer than five
days. Mr. Morine said that if it were the intent to pump during the driest time of
the year, it would make sense; however, testing was done earlier when actual
conditions would be reflected. He reviewed results, explaining the amount of
water that would be recharged, how much would be lost to evaporation, and how
much would be lost due to runoff.
Mrs. Flynn asked how they could be sure that the water being pumped from the
bedrock wells is not coming from the conservation land, Rumford River, or the
Norton Reservoir. Mr. Morin explained that most bedrock does not have open
pores, but the groundwater is stored by moving through fractures in the rock. He
said linear fissures, through which water can run more rapidly, are identified in
aerial photographs. They then drill at the convergence of the linear fissures and
that vertical fissures are only identified from the surface.
Mrs. Flynn asked how long it would be before there would be a change in the
groundwater in the area of the conservation land, Rumford River and Norton
Reservoir. Mr. Morine said the closer you pump to a given source, the greater the
impact there would be. He noted that only 30 gallons per minute are being
pumped on a lead/lag basis, with the three wells being rotated. Mr. French asked
how that would be done. Mr. Morine responded that it was their recommendation
the wells be rotated and explained various systems commonly in use to rotate the
wells.
I Meeting of September 1, 1999
Mr. Dolan asked if there was any way an agreement could be done stating how
( much water the Town would have to provide each year. Mr. Samuels said the
wells are the way they are mitigating the water situation; however, they need
potable water for drinking, showers, and toilets. He said DEP stipulates that the
water has to be of drinking water quality and they can't separate the lines to use a
different water source for the toilets. Mr. Burke noted it is possible to do so,
citing the on -site treatment plant constructed in conjunction with the development
of the Wrentham Premium Outlet Mall.
Mr. Samuels said they considered various mitigation plans, and have committed
to the use of well water for the attractions, filling of pools, make -up water, and
irrigation. They are buying water from the Town for the sinks, toilets, showers
and restaurant and have committed to buying water and a 60,000 gallon tank for
their other water needs.
Mr. McShane asked if they were using a solid pipe all the way down when
drilling so they know they're not picking up water from another source. Mr.
Morine said they use a 16 inch diameter pipe, 19 pounds per foot, which is sealed
in place and drilled down. The 6 inch diameter bore hold eliminates any silt. Mr.
McShane then asked if the applicant is confident there will be no impact on the
vernal pools in the area. Mr. Morine said there would be no impact with the
measures proposed.
Fred Keylor of H. W. Moore reviewed variations in groundwater elevations and
methods used to ensure that private wells are not affected. He also reviewed the
procedures to address concerns regarding the discharge of chlorinated water,
noting an independent lab must be hired to test the water and certify that it is in
strict compliance with DEP requirements.
Questions were addressed as follows:
1. Why isn't the water line being looped either back onto Route 140 or to the
Tweeter Center's main water line?
Good point, we can raise that with them.
2. Has applicant had any discussions to date with the Light Department
concerning their ability to deliver the requisite amount of uninterrupted
power?
They have requested our horsepower and voltage requirements, but we
have not met with them.
Applicant told it is imperative they meet with them. Light
Department has to know whether they have the ability to meet their
needs.
2 Meeting of September 1, 1999
3. The applicant should be required to reconcile the Fire Department's
( requirement that emergency access be "open and accessible at all times" with
the applicant's statement that traffic entering the TCPA will be using the
Great Waves entrance while Great Waves patrons are exiting the site.
Giles Hamm of Vanasse & Associates said traffic will be kept off the 10
foot wide emergency access. Mr. Keylor said it is remote from the
parking area and not part of the driveway. It is a 10 foot wide gravel area
next to the driveway and will not be blocked.
4. When does the intersection driveway come under police control; specifically,
what time of day?
Mr. Samuels said it would be under police control from noon until 7:00
p.m. Their normal hours of operation will be 9 or 9:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m.
Mr. Hamm noted that with people just making a right turn into the lot in
the morning, it was felt there would not be a need for an officer until
lunch time, when some patrons may start leaving the site.
Applicant was requested to have an officer at the intersection
driveway from half an hour before opening until one hour after
closing.
5. How many hours per week and season will an officer be needed? What is the
approximate cost per season?
• Seven days per week for ten weeks.
6. Is there or will there be a proposal for a different means of controlling this
intersection other than through a police officer?
Stop sign or police officer will be used. Working with MassHighway for
curb cut approval.
7. Although an early closure of Great Waves for a sell -out event at TCPA has
been stated by the applicant, it is unclear to me who determines what a sell-
out event is and when that determination of a sold out event is made.
Tweeter Center has advance ticket sales, so sell -out events are determined
by ticket sales or historical information. They will know prior to the event
and the early closing time will be put on the taped message at Great
Waves and posted going into the site. 85% of the sell -out events can be
predicted in April.
8. What will happen at the Great Waves facility during those numerous
occasions throughout the season when the Tweeter Center does all day
events?
Many of the all day events are not sell -outs and many of them are held in
May, prior to the season opening of Great Waves. The agreement calls for
( us to turn over parking to Tweeter by 4 o'clock.
3 Meeting of September 1, 1999
No additional information was provided for how other events
during the Great Waves season will be handled.
9. How will the applicant prevent queuing on the on -site access road in order to
maintain the "open and accessible at all times" emergency access demand?
There will be staff control.
10. What is the amount of vegetation in acres to be cleared on this site and does
that amount trigger the need for EPA permits?
• Nineteen acres will be cleared, representing 20% of the total site area.
11. Will the applicant agree to establish a definitive occupancy limit?
Occupancy is limited on buildings such as the gift shop, administrative
building and snack bar. The parking area is not under occupancy
requirements. If occupancy was limited, it would contribute to traffic
problems with people being turned away. Occupancy is limited by the
number of cars they can park, and the parking turnover rate allows for the
improved flow of traffic.
12. Will the applicant agree to limit ticket sales equal to the occupancy limit?
• No
13. Will the applicant agree in writing to limit hours of operation to specific
times?
Absolutely. Mr. Samuels said he likes to host civic events for the
community, but would agree not to have a "chemical -free night" where
the park is in operation throughout the night. There are other things he
can do for the community during regular operating hours.
14. Will the applicant supply a list of other communities that use a multiplier
factor in calculating parking spaces?
Mr. Hamm said they operate on a 1.4 turnover ratio in Portsmouth;
however, other communities don't specify how to determine parking for
water parks. The ratio is derived from arrival and departure data. A
lengthy discussion ensued, with various methods of determining parking
requirements being discussed and comparison being made to other uses
where there is a turnover in parking throughout the day. Procedures for
emergency evacuation of the facility were discussed, with Mr. Samuel
detailing the method employed during storm emergencies. He estimated
that, in the event of a catastrophe situation, it would take 10 -15 minutes
for patrons to walk to their cars and about 30 minutes longer to empty the
parking lot.
Consensus was not reached
( Island at entrance is required by Town
4 Meeting of September 1, 1999
Three deadend aisles on plan to be opened up
Applicant was requested to identify spaces as compact, full -size,
handicapped, handicapped van and employee parking
15. When will changes to the site plan as a result of public, staff, and Planning
Board comments be made?
Changes will be made after the Building Inspector tells them what
changes are to be made.
16. According to the H. W. Moore report, 30% of filtered backwash from the
units goes to the Town system. Does it contain sand and diatamatious earth?
Are they allowed to discharge this material into the sewer? Can it be
recharged on -site?
The backwater wash usually contains hair, which is biodegradable. They
do not use diatamatious earth and no sand is lost. The backwash goes into
a tank with a small filter, with about 70 percent of it going back to the
pool after being filtered. The remainder is direct pressure discharged into
the sewer. Mark Cook asked if the sewer is metered and how they're
going to pay for sewer if it isn't.
Flow meter needs to be installed and shown on plan to measure
amount of water being discharged into the sewer
17. Review limits of fencing in and on perimeter of site. Plans unclear regarding
where fencing is.
Mr. Cecil reviewed areas of fencing, showing how the fence separates
public access from service access, and how it follows the vegetation line.
Fence needs to be added along the walkway adjacent to the rip -rap
area.
Following a brief recess, Mr. French advised the Board that it is necessary to
make a determination on parking and formulate a recommendation to the
Building Inspector.
18. DO 'they have cut and fill volumes for site work or do they have to bring
material from off -site?
They are close to existing grade; will know once the attractions are built.
19. Review how busses operate. Where do they drop off passengers?
They will utilize a "loop," bringing passengers to the front to drop them
off at the group entrance, then going back to park. The loop will be used
again to pick up passengers and exit the park.
20. What other approvals do they need from this Town? Are there any annual
approvals or licenses necessary?
5 Meeting of September 1, 1999
Common Victualar's for food; milk and pool licenses from the Board of
Health
Mrs. Flynn offered comments on the following sections of the Zoning By -Law:
Section 3.1 and 3.1.1 of the Zoning By -Law prohibits in any district any use
which is not specifically permitted. She does not believe that a 60 foot high
water slide and other water attractions constitute a swimming facility.
4.3.2.A Buffer: tree lined roadways at front of lot. She would like to see the
buffer zone closer to the street and more trees on the street. Mr. Cecil
discussed the placement of trees, noting they also have to maintain sight
distances for people in vehicles.
5.3.1 and 5.3.6.4 No building or parking shall be established except in
conformity with site plan endorsed by the Building Inspector following review
by the Planning Board. I can only review it with respect to our regulations
which refer me to parking requirements part of the by -law. The applicant has
chosen to use four people per parking space. (as in "....place of public
assembly." When the exact figure for attendance is determined, it will be
simple to figure out parking spaces required. She does not agree with the
explanation regarding parking and turnover rate
5.3.4 How do you integrate this development into the existing Great Woods
and how will you screen the slides and rides from neighbors? She doesn't
believe the applicant has done a good job, noting the equipment and buildings
are visible from the conservation land in the photographs shown. She would
like to see additional screening..
Applicant is not protecting adjoining (conservation land) premises against
detrimental use for sight and sound buffers. Boy Scout and Girl Scout
camping experiences will be negatively impacted. Certainly anyone seeking
peace and solitude in the Great Woods will be affected. There has been
conflicting information presented regarding the ability of trees to provide a
noise buffer. Residents of West Mansfield know that natural woods do next
to nothing to muffle Tweeter Center music. The abutting residential homes
and streets off Route 140, South Main Street, will be detrimentally affected by
sound and sight and traffic. Mr. Cecil noted they have worked very hard to
use all natural materials as a buffer, noting there are no camping areas right
next to their property as it is wetlands.
5.3.6.3 The proximity of all the new driveway openings in relation to
adjacent streets and to each other has not been considered by the developer.
Does he comply with Section 4.4.4.9 A and C?
6 Meeting of September 1, 1999
( 21. Is the road for Great Waves also the emergency access road for Tweeter? If
so, is that not a problem if Great Waves has a problem on their access road?
It's the same road. The access area is a 10 foot wide gravel lane running
along it and separate from the paved driveway.
22. What is the community benefits package you are offering the Town?
Mr. Samuels said they have special programs for DARE and disabled
children, as well as supporting community fundraisers. There are no
proposals being considered. Eugene Boyle, Mr. Samuel's attorney,
pointed out that due to ongoing litigation, discussion of such benefit
packages has been curtailed. He noted they are, however, ready to listen.
23. In the past we have been promised one thing and had something else delivered
in dealing with Mr. Samuels' partners. How can we be assured that what you
are promising us will in fact be what we all live with in the future?
Mr. Samuels said he is not part of the "history" and he stands on his track
record.
24. There is concern throughout the community about the devaluation of property
and harming the image of Mansfield due to the "honky -tonk" character of
most amusement facilities. What have you done to ensure this devaluation
does not happen and will not spill over into the surrounding neighborhoods?
Mr. Samuels said he has a good reputation and provides good first jobs for
young people in middle management. He offers a great learning
experience and has received high marks in his community. He suggested
that the noise generated by Route 495 is greater than what will be heard
from his facility, and doesn't understand why property would be devalued
as the result of his development.
25. What design plans have you incorporated into your project and what
discussions have you had with the other owners of area attractions within
close proximity regarding a network of safe pedestrian access between the
various recreational facilities so we can avoid tragic accidents on Route 140
and across Route 495?
Mr. Samuels noted his facility is a "destination point" with people
spending 3 %: to 4 '/2 hours there and then leaving. They would walk along
the emergency lane if they were coming from another facility in the area.
Discussions have taken place with MassHighway about sidewalks from
the Clemmey lot and Tweeter Center driveway to Great Waves, but not
from any other attraction in the area.
7 Meeting of September 1, 1999
26. What screening and buffering plans are proposed to preserve and protect the
conservation lands from the impacts of the project and what studies have been
done regarding noise impacts?
• Mr. Cecil reviewed landscaping and buffering plans;
27. What studies have you done in terms of decibel levels? What are you
proposing?
The plantings will provide some buffer but, by far the greatest buffer is
distance. The nearest abutter is 1/3 to 'h mile away from the facility. You
will not be able hear any mechanical noise. You may be able to hear
people, but not a roar of the crowd. There is also the possibility of hearing
some background noise from the PA system, but all speakers are pointed
in towards the park.
28. Will you be required by DEP to do any noise monitoring?
• Not aware of any requirements to do so.
29. How will trash be handled?
There will be a dumpster behind the main snack bar that will be
completely screened by plantings and fencing. There will be no public
access to it.
( 30. Explain how the design of the project meets the requirements to assess the
relationship of the project with the natural landscape and what other
community assets in the area did you assess impacts on?
Retaining 60 eastern pines and planting an addition 435 more trees and
3,000 shrubs, varying from wetland to upland species.
31. What is the amount of tree canopy that will be removed due to the full project
buildout?
Haven't done the calculation. Will be in compliance with DEP wetland
policy regarding the amount of canopy that can be destroyed.
32. H6W do you respond to Weston & Sampson's assertions regarding Sections
4.3.9 (building landscaping); 4.4.1 (off - street parking; 4.4.4.8 (site lighting);
4.4.4.9 (entranceway); 4.4.4.10 (compact parking spaces); 5.3.6.2 (buffers and
preservation of environmental assets); and 5.3.6.6 (impact on natural
landscape and community assets); all of which they found deficient?
A landscape buffer has been provided around all public buildings. Open
areas are where access is needed for service or entrance. The shrub
specifications say "either /or" regarding height and width. The
requirement is met for nearly all the plantings. There are six shrubs that
we don't meet the requirements of height and width because they are not
8 Meeting of September 1, 1999
available in the specified size. It seems preferable in this situation to use
native species.
33. Is compensatory landscaping provided somewhere else for the landscaping not
done in the service areas?
• We comply to the regulations.
34. Will you provide landscape buffers in place of the jersey barriers along the
entrance road?
We can't do much. The property line is right along the edge. It would
make the site look better and screen the other site.
35. Do you have a rendering of what the internal signage and entranceway signs
will look like and a signage plan? Will the entranceway sign be illuminated?
Signs are not going to be illuminated. We have spotlights for Water
Country, but we haven't turned them on for four or five years. Will
commit to no illumination and within the size allowed by the Zoning
By -Law.
36. Do you have a conflict resolution proposal, or would you agree to abide by
one proposed by the Town, for dealing with conflicts that arise due to
conflicting schedules of events at the Tweeter Center?
We're bound by the terms of the agreement.
Mr. French reminded the Board that it is required to establish the number of
parking spaces and formulate a recommendation to the Building Inspector.
Mr. Burke laid out the process as follows. Acknowledge or find that the use is a
use allowed in our Zoning By -Law, but not identified specifically in the Schedule
of Parking Requirements. Then you further have to find that an adequate number
of spaces is being provided for the site. The Building Inspector has rendered his
decision on this issue and filed it with the Town Clerk. There were no appeals
filed. The question is analogous to the Special Permit of Motorola where the
assuitiption was the decision of the Zoning Board of Appeals was valid. From
there go back to the uses in the Parking Table and decide what is the adequate
number of spaces to provide for parking and loading. He suggested that the
closest uses, in his opinion, would be theater, gymnasium or auditorium. From
there the decision would be if you think the use is a good enough fit or if you
want to go with a multiplier.
Mr. Frank said the problem he was having was determining what number to
divide by four. He stated he did not think there would be 7,000 patrons at any
given time, but also doesn't believe we should use a turnover multiplier of 1.4
because it doesn't take into account peak times at the middle of the day. Mr.
9 Meeting of September 1, 1999
Burke noted the original number used was 10,500. The proponent dropped the
number to 7,000 when the project was scaled back to do only Phase I at this time,
but no evidence was provided to support the theory that 3,500 patrons would stay
away because there were three fewer attractions. He noted that the Board needs
to plan for the worst -case scenario and hope for the best.
Mr. French said it believes the number of parking spaces will cap attendance, but
suggested we don't reduce the number of passenger vehicle spaces by providing a
number of bus spaces on the assumption that 780 patrons will arrive by bus. It
was noted that if a few motor homes arrive, there will then be no bus spaces
available.
Dr. Torman stated he thinks 7,000 is a number pulled out of the air, noting there
is a bigger metropolitan area to draw from in Mansfield than there is in
Portsmouth. Mr. Burke suggested that there's not much of a disparity, noting
population numbers alone can't be used. He said vacationers in either area will
contribute greatly to the number of patrons visiting a water park.
At this point Mr. Samuels suggested that due to the lateness of the hour, he would
rather continue the review process to another night when a decision can be made
with clearer minds. Mr. Burke suggested September 15a'.
Motion: To continue the site plan review to September 15, 1999 at 7:30 p.m.
(Dolan -Cook) 7 -0 PASSES
Motion: To adjourn at 11:59 p.m.
(Dolan -Cook) 7 -0 PASSES
Signatitre of Clerk
Date of Approval
Next Meeting - September 8,1999
10 Meeting of September 1, 1999