Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutmin of planning brd 06/15/05 ~. Planning Board Minutes '" June 15 2005 O~ JUN 30 PH 3: 54 Present: Tom French, Fred Armstrong, Clerk; Frank Holmes, Doug~<p, ~e~ Torman, John DeMassi, Walter Jenkins MAS,~.l~,' lcLO Shaun P. Burke, Director of Planning and Development SAl.JdtJSETTS P?Er;:I"I'~ 1t\.....'J.i..., j..;'::':l!;": ('1 rr')t.,,;......." ... '" " -" 1)/', r- 1('\ '" '^' r iL'[ Motion: To reappoint Mr. French Chairman (Torman-DeMassi) All in favor. PASSES Motion: To reappoint Mr. Armstrong Clerk (Torman-DeMassi) All in favor. PASSES ,'--" 1. May 17, 2005 minutes Motion: To approve as submitted (Armstrong-Holmes) Six in favor. Jenkins abstained. PASSES 2. June 1,2005 Motion: To approve as submitted (DeMassi-Holmes) Five in favor. Armstrong, Annino abstained. PASSES 3. ZBA application for Variance - 19 Benefit Street - Rear yard setback for a deck between the house and the existing above-ground pool. Mr. Burke said when the pool, deck and house are connected, they become one structure and would have to conform to the 30-foot rear yard setback. He said the application addresses all three issues required by statute and suggested that if the board sends a positive recommendation, it should include a condition that if the variance is granted, it be a deck only and not converted to a habitable space in the future. Mr. Annino agreed. Mr. DeMassi asked if the portion of the deck that is outside the setback could be Changed to something like a 3-season room. Mr. Burke said that would be possible as long as that construction is outside the setback. Mr. Annino said the plan should show stairs and fencing around the pool. Motion: To send the ZBA a positive recommendation with the suggestions that the deck not be converted to habitable space in the future, and that the fence and stairs be shown (Annino-Armstrong) All in favor. PASSES 4. June 1, 2005 letter from John McDonough, Abbott Real Estate Development re: The Village at the Pointe. Mr. McDonough and William Sarro, homeowner's Association, were in the audience. Mr. Burke said the developer has requested two modifications; one to eliminate the emergency access gate from the secondary access near the Great Woods Office Park parking lot and the second to ~ow a stone dust walkway rather than turfstone along one of the access drives. The board would have to decide if it supports either change and if it does, whether the change can be done as a field modification or requires a modification to the special permit. r' Mr. Sarro said the association would prefer the path be stone dust. Mr. Annino said there is a significant difference in price between turf stone and stone dust. Mr. McDonough explained during construction, people were parking on the pathway, which was about four feet wide on the original plan. He said there was a concern ~ about the path being blocked, so it was widened. He said they have used turf stone in other projects, and found it to be a poor walking surface. Mr. Sarro said the residents are very happy with the stone dust. Mr. Annino asked how much the developer saved by using the stone dust; Mr. McDonough said he didn't think he saved a large amount. He said during the permitting process, he had proposed the turfstone, but have found it isn't a good walking surface. Mr. Annino said he would like to see some of the savings put back into the project; Mr. Sarro said the homeowner's association would receive that difference, to be put toward a sprinkler system. Mr. Annino said that would be a good trade-off. Mr. Sarro said he has a letter stating the developer's intention to contribute the difference, about $6,000, to the association. Mr. Armstrong asked about turf stone; Mr. French explained turf stone it is a hollow concrete block, through which grass can grow. Dr. Totman asked if the association has a landscaping service; Mr. Sarro said there is, and this money would be put toward the system to water the landscaping. Mr. Annino asked if this would increase the impervious surface; Mr. Burke said it would not. He said stone dust is less impervious than grass, but more impervious than concrete. r" George Dentino, Gladiola Terrace, said a developer should not be aIlowed to make a change to the plans under a special permit and then ask for permission. He said the stone dust will add more impervious surface. He asked if the new walkway will abut a parking area; Mr. Burke said the original design called for the walkway to be adjacent to the paved surface. Mr. Dentino said if the four-foot walk is replaced with eight feet, the stone dust must abut the parking area. Mr. Sarro said there are two feet between the detention area and the driveway. Mr. Burke said on that portion of the site, that is the case. Mr. Dentino said the developer's photographs show cars on the stone dust path, which he said has created a parking area where there was originally grass and pavers. He said the stone dust being compacted will be impervious and increase the amount of water flowing into the drainage area, which was not designed for that flow. Mr. DeMassi said the board had discussed whether this should be a field modification or a modification to the special permit. Mr. Dentino asked how there could be a field modification to the special permit. Mr. Burke said changes to special permits are made after approval on many sites and the plans modified, which is the reason for as- built plans. He said the board can decide whether the proposed changes are significant enough to require a new special permit public hearing. He said stone dust does in fact allow water to permeate where an asphalt pavement does not. Mr. Dentino said he did not say stone dust is impervious. r Mr. French said applicants should not make changes and return to the board later, but r' it happens frequently, at the developer's own peril. He said the board has to weigh the fact that there are now residents in the development, who have to live with the changes everyday. He said there were originally some guest spaces designed into the plan along that walkway, in addition to the garages for the residents. He said he understands that despite the design, drivers may not follow the plan in practice. He said with a four foot walkway, whatever the material, people will likely park on it. Mr. DeMassi asked what the board's options are. Mr. Burke said the board could simply tell the developer to build what is on the approved plan. He said special permits are sought for different reasons; in this case, it was because of the site's proximity to the reservoir. Mr. DeMassi asked there would be problem with the drainage if the stone dust runs off into the detention system. Mr. Burke said it may require more frequent cleaning of the drainage system. He said there are no outfalls emptying into the reservoir on this site, and the system was designed for the 100-year storm, and if it maintained properly, the system should work properly. Mr. Annino said stone dust will require more maintenance; Mr. Sarro said the association is aware of the additional maintenance the stone dust will require. f' Mr. DeMassi said the board could request the Operations and Management Plan be updated to reflect the presence of the stone dust and the possibility that the system will have to be cleaned more often. Mr. Sarro said the Fire Department moved the fire hydrant without consulting the board, and the original plan required bark mulch, and the Conservation Commission required grass instead and didn't come back to the board. He said now that they have grass, they need to be able to water it. He noted that following a recent heavy rain, there was no stone dust in the roadway. Mr. Holmes asked if it was strictly for walking or was also intended for parking. Mr. Burke noted it was both; a four-foot turfstone surface with typical parking spaces. He said that area was designed for visitor parking rather than having to build a visitor parking lot. Mr. Holmes said the walk would have been interrupted by the parking, but now that the walk is eight feet wide, there will be more room for walking even when cars are parked there. Mr. Annino said he understood the benefit of the wider stone dust path, but said he would like the homeowner's association to receive a fair amount of money for the sprinkler. ;--. Mr. Dentino asked about the oil and gas that would now be entering the drainage system. Mr. Burke said there was a system designed with the special permit and approved by the board. Mr. French said there are designated visitor parking areas, and the parking along the walkway was designed for overflow visitor parking, so there will not be cars parked there all the time. Mr. Sarro noted some of the units have single and some have double garages. ,~ Mr. French said if the association is happy with the $6,000 the developer is willing to put toward the sprinkler system, the board should make a decision based on the plan. Mr. Annino said he is frustrated because the developer has changed the plan and is using a cheaper solution. Mr. Sarro asked if the board would be happy ifhe negotiated for the homeowner's association to receive $8,000 or $9,000; Mr. Annino said he would be. Mr. Jenkins said he would abstain from the vote because his company has dealings with the development company. Motion: To allow the substitution of8-foot wide stone dust edging along the driveway in place ofthe four-foot wide turfstone provided there is an $8,000 credit granted to the homeowner's association for a sprinkler system as a field modificaiton (Annino-Armstrong) Mr. Armstrong said he doesn't think the change is significant enough to warrant a Modification to the special permit, especially if the residents are in favor. Six in favor. Jenkins abstained. PASSES [Mr. Jenkins left the room at this time.] f"" Mr. McDonough said they would prefer not to install the emergency gate and would rather plant low-level landscaping to deter traffic from using that entrance. Mr. French asked if there is a crash gate at the South Main Street end; Mr. McDonough said there is not. Mr. Sarro said the residents are in favor of the plantings rather than the gate. Mr. Dentino asked whose requirement the gate was. Mr. Burke said it was something Mr. Dolan requested during the public hearing process. Mr. French asked if that second access was a public safety issue; Mr. Burke said there had been the sense the site needed two points of access, but said he didn't remember whether the request came from public safety or the board. Mr. Dentino said the board should go back into the file to find out where that recommendation came from. Mr. DeMassi said the issue isn't whether the access is removed, it is whether the gate is removed. Mr. Burke said there had been a dirt path there; he said the access is still there and was never supposed to be a paved road. Mr. Dentino said an emergency path isn't supposed to have plantings on it. Mr. Burke said the original plan shows that path as an open area with white pines. Mr. French asked if the Fire Department should be asked about their opinion on the access having plantings. ,,-.. Mr. Annino asked why arbor vitae were planted rather than the white pines as ,~ shown on the plan. Mr. Burke said he didn't know why that change was made, but said with the abutter, the Great Woods Office Park, the intent was likely to prevent headlight spillover. Mr. Burke said the Building Inspector has asked for a landscaping as-built plan. Mr. French asked to have Police and Fire comment on the plantings in that access. Mr. Armstrong said the plantings weren't proposed in the original plan, so public safety couldn't have commented on them at the time of the permitting. Dr. Torman asked about the reason for the gate in the first place; Mr. French said it was to prevent people from using it as a regular means of access, while allowing emergency vehicle access. Mr. French said most emergency access areas are placed on paved areas, but are gated to prevent regular use. He said he didn't think people would be likely to drive over the proposed landscaping on this path to exit the site. Mr. Annino asked if the town has as-builts of the roadways and buildings; Mr. Burke said it does not because this is a private way. He said today, there would be a digital as-built required for the town's GIS system. Mr. Annino said he would like to see the landscape as-built. r". Mr. Holmes said there is a parking space on the office park side, and said a car parked there could be a problem for emergency vehicles. Mr. Burke said he could talk to the office park owners about removing that space. He said that portion of the parking lot is rarely full, so it may not be a big issue. Mr. Sarro said emergency vehicles can access the site anyplace along that strip, and does not have to use the path if it is blocked. He said a gate could be installed at another location along the strip; Mr. French said that strip is supposed to be landscaped with white pines, which would not allow a fire truck access. Mr. DeMassi said he has visited the site and said it doesn't appear the landscaping being done is what is shown on the plan. [Mr. Jenkins returned at this time] 6. Meeting notices Easton, North Artleboro 7. New England Planning newsletter 8. Planning magazine 9. SPREDD Annual Report 10. Mass Development Solutions newsletter 11. Village at Gilbert Street subdivision plans to be signed Motion: To sign the subdivision plans (Jenkins- Torman) Six in favor. Holmes abstained. PASSES The clerk read a letter from Glen Ofcarcik, Tilton Associates, requesting the discussion be continued. Mr. Burke explained the applicant was supposed to have submitted a r r signed copy of the draft attorney's letter presented at the last meeting, which was to have been sent to town counsel for review. That letter has not been submitted. The preliminary subdivision review will be rescheduled to July 27, 2005 at 8:30 p.m. .,..........'.....ri Mr. Clemmey was not present. Mr. Annino went to the first and second floors and did not find him or any representatives. Mr. French said he was disappointed Mr. Clemmey did not come to the meeting or inform the board he would be unable to attend. 1".;~~I.IiI(.y Mr. Dentino said the board recently did a site plan review on 905 South Main Street. He said he had inquired about a valid curb cut permit from Mass Highway and asked if that has been investigated. Mr. Burke said he has not checked with the district. Mr. Dentino asked if there is a requirement for a site to have a Mass Highway permit prior to construction. Mr. Burke said the town has no control over Mass Highway permits; he said the existing building had a curb cut, and whether the owner failed to renew it or not, he did not know. Mr. Dentino said the second building would require its own curb cut permit. Mr. French said Mass Highway permits used to be valid forever, but it now requires any modification to the site to have a new curb cut permit. Mr. French said that sounds like an enforcement issue and suggested a letter to the Building Inspector asking if it requires a curb cut permit, and asking him to investigate and confirm whether there is a valid curb cut permit. Mr. Dentino said there is an expired curb cut permit for the first r building on the site, which he said expired because the work has not been completed. Mr. Dentino asked ifa Notice ofIntent was filed for the project at 905 South Main Street. Mr. French said he did not know. $~;~I;; '. Mr. Holmes said the new wine store at Erin's Centre has no bollards at the travel lane, and the sidewalk there is very narrow. Mr. Burke said there were supposed to have been raised pedestrian walkways in front of Shaw's and Home Depot to slow traffic. He said there has been a request for a final certificate of occupancy for the Staples building, and some issues have been raised about whether the site conforms to ADA. He said he and the Building Inspector have visited the site, and Home Depot has speed bumps, but nothing has been done at Shaw's. Mr. French asked if the wine store is a fourth building; Mr. Burke said it is part of the Staples building, which was reconfigured from the Shaw's building when that store was constructed smaller than originally intended. Mr. Holmes asked ifa speed bump should be required in front of the wine store; Mr. Burke said there would be no certificate of occupancy granted until the speed bumps shown on the plan are installed. He said the board can ask for another speed bump in front of the wine store, but cautioned the board about requiring something outside of the special permit. Mr. ,DeMassi asked about changing the plan due to safety concerns; Mr. Burke said it is difficult with an existing site that has a traffic issue occurring after the plan is approved. Mr. Burke said the speed bumps were added during the permitting process because of ,- safety issues in other retail shopping areas. Mr. DeMassi said it might help to have a second speed bump in front of Staples. . , . r Dr. Torman asked about the trees that were to have been replaced at Erin's Centre; Mr. Burke said they have not been replaced. He said the Building Inspector has spoken with the land owner about that and will be compiling a letter including all the remaining items. Dr. Torman asked about the No Left Turn sign at the Chauncy Street exit at CVS; Mr. Burke said the board had requested that sign, it was installed and has since come down. He said he doesn't think the board has the ability to enforce it, but will send a letter. Mr. Armstrong said he was disappointed that Mr. Clemmey did not come to the meeting or call to postpone the discussion. He said Mr. Clemmey had been concerned that the board hasn't had time for him, and tonight's meeting was scheduled primarily as a discussion with him. Mr. Jenkins said the Village at the Pointe discussion went longer than anticipated, but said he would have suggested the board shorten that if there had been someone waiting. ~, Mr. Burke reminded the board about the Hatheway-Patterson redevelopment public meeting on June 16,2005 at 7:00pm. He said there is a 30-day comment period, so if members have comments, they can be forwarded to the EP A. He said the proposal is to remove some material and bury some. Mr. Armstrong asked if there is a timeframe for doing the work; Mr. Burke said there are a couple of cleanup options, but the plan does not include a timeline for each. He said the timeframe will be contingent on the town's comments about the proposed cleanup plan. Mr. French asked the members to think about a date for a site visit. Mr. Burke noted the board is scheduled for a discussion on June 29 about a possible 55+ facility at the corner of SchooV140 where the day care center is now. He said the applicant would like to talk to the board before filing anything. He said he has asked the applicant to provide plans and narrative prior to that meeting. Mr. French said he thought from a traffic point-of-view, that use may be better than the day care center at that intersection. Dr. Torman asked about the site plan discussion. At this time, that discussion is scheduled for August 24. Motion: To adjourn at 9:30 p.m. (Torman-Armstrong) All in favor. PASSES Next meeting: Thursday, June 29, 2005 at 7:30 p.m. s:Z!~h~ h /,2 ~ /D.1- Date of Approval ~,