Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutmin of planning brd 06/01/05 r-- Planning Board Minutes June 1,2005 05 JUN 22 AM 9: 28 Present: Tom French, Chairman; Frank Holmes, Acting Clerk; Ken Torman, John DeMassi, Walter Jenkins rlANS;- IELD Shaun P. Burke, Director of Planning and Development HAS SAC H USE T T S ~ r ", !"'I \.I r'\L.t r:. v vc oct: ICC. I ,1 .i f- ~ L ~. '....._.,M.to_.'(_. Motion: To appoint Mr. Holmes Acting Clerk 12. ~~aSSi)Allinfavor.. PASSES 1. Apri127, 2005 minutes Motion: To approve as submitted (Torman-DeMassi) All in favor. PASSES 2. May 4, 2005 minutes Motion: To approve as submitted (DeMassi-Holmes) Three in favor. Torman abstained. PASSES 3. June 1, 20051etter from John McDonough, Village at the Pointe regarding changes to the plan: changing walking path from four to seven-foot wide crushed aggregate and stone dust and to remove the "crash" gate for emergency vehicle access. Mr. Burke said the proposal doesn't deviate significantly from the intent of the special permit. He noted this site is in the Reservoir District, and part of the intent of the special permit was to limit the impervious surface on the site. He said one of the many dirt roads on the site comes from the Great Woods Office Park, and there had been ~ concern about this site being accessed from the office park, so a gate was proposed. This proposal is to eliminate that gate and replace it with landscaping and grading, which Mr. Burke said he thought would prevent a car from using the dirt path, but would still allow an emergency vehicle. Dr. Torman said he thought the board wanted the crash gate installed on old Mansfield Avenue. Mr. Burke said that was true at one point during the permitting, but the gate was changed in the approved plan, after the project was made smaller and due to Riverfront Act requirements. He said there are several hundred feet separating the main entrance from this dirt road. Mr. DeMassi said that location may become a place to dump snow, and a gate may prevent that. Mr. Burke said the proponent doesn't own the parking lot on the other property, so snow couldn't be placed there. Mr. Burke said he likes the idea of the turfstone as originally permitted. He said the proponent said they would be willing to do the work according to the original plan if the board doesn't want to make the changes. Consensus was to continue the discussion to the next meeting. 3. ZBA application for Variance - 97 Balcom Street -lot width, lot area, front, side r- and rear setbacks. Mr. Burke explained the land has 260 feet of frontage and is about 105 feet deep; the proposal is to replace the existing house with one of approximately r' the same size. He said this plan was the subject of a repetitive petition after being denied by the Zoning Board of Appeals. Mr. DeMassi asked what would happen if the variance were denied; Mr. Burke said there is an existing house, but the septic system has failed and in order to make the house habitable, the septic system must be upgraded. Mr. Burke said this application addresses the statutory questions of size, shape and topography, and suggested a positive recommendation to the ZBA. Motion: To send the ZBA a positive recommendation (Holmes-DeMassi) All in favor. PASSES 4. ZBA application for variance - 125 High Street - freestanding signs. Mr. Burke explained the application shows the location of the proposed signs, but does not show what the signs would look like. Motion: To send the ZBA a negative recommendation due to lack of information (DeMassi-Torman) All in favor. PASSES 5. Request for final release of surety - Michael Lane (South Meadow Estates) Motion: To release the remaining surety (Torman-DeMassi) All in favor. PASSES 6. May 23, 2005 memo from John Sullivan re: Stormwater Management By-Law 7. ZBA decision - 428 Elm Street - Peter DeTrolio - Granted (positive recommendation) 8. Meeting notices Attleboro, Easton, Norton, Plainville 9. TransReport newsletter 10. The Beacon 11. New England Planning newsletter 12. Planning magazine 13. Mass Housing Partnership Annual Report [Mr. Jenkins arrived at this time] r- .._....~.._..... Glenn Ofcarcik, Tilton & Associates, explained there had been an unresolved question at the last meeting about the waiver request for the number of dwelling units on the street. He said Webb Place is not an actual dead end street because a vehicle can access through the apartments. Kate Earls, applicant, said she has spoken with DPW, Police, Fire and Webb Place residents about the situation. She said trash trucks have to back up and turn around on private property. She said there are 20-25 school aged children in the neighborhood. She said a looped road would allow trucks to be able to easily leave the street without backing onto private property, which would be safer. She presented a board with an opinion from her attorney. Mr. Burke asked who wrote the opinion; Mrs. Earls said it was Attorney Steve Rosa from Wynn & Wynn. Mr. Holmes asked if school busses use the street now; Mrs. Earls said they do not. Mr. DeMassi asked if safety is part of the argument for the waiver; Mrs. Earls said it is. ~ Mr. Holmes asked if the existing 65 dwelling units have access on Webb Place; Mrs. Earls said they do, but said some may be able to get out East Street through the parking lot. Mr. Ofcarcik said Webb Place is labeled Not a Through Street, but a car can r- physically access East Street through the apartment complex parking lot. Mr. Burke said it isn't really a street, but is a travel aisle in a parking lot. Mr. French said if the owners ofthe condo development don't want others to access through their lot, they can block it off because it is private property. Mr. Ofcarcik said an emergency vehicle could access Webb Place through that property. Mr. Burke said the reason for asking for this information is to provide a factual basis for the discussion about the waiver. He said if the plans move forward, the applicant's attorney's opinion would be forwarded to town counsel. Mr. Ofcaracik asked if there is a mechanism to get a town counsel opinion before filing a definitive plan. Mr. Jenkins asked about the length of the street. Mr. Ofcarcik explained the location of the closed end turnaround is 480 feet from South Main Street, and he feels that meets the criteria for the road to be less than 650 feet because the distance is measured to the center of the turnaround. Mr. Holmes said he has looked at the site and using that logic, if the cul-de-sac were stretched it would be close to a 650-foot roadway. Mr. Burke said the measurement should be to the center point of the cul-de-sac island. Mr. Holmes said he thought there would be more options if the existing house were moved. Mr. Burke said this is a residential zone, so the options are limited. ~ Mr. French asked what the options would be if the board doesn't grant the waiver. Mr. Ofcarcik said they would be able to do a Form A for two lots, but may need a frontage variance for the second. He said there is 140 feet of frontage on the existing lot, with 103 on one side and 25 on the other side. Mr. French said with a Form ~ there could be three lots and no turnaround, but the subdivision could have four lots and a turnaround. Mr. Jenkins suggested an alternate cul-de-sac design that would result in four lots and less pavement, but which would require razing the existing house. Mr. Ofcarcik said they had looked at that, but thought they would have setback issues. He asked if the board would consider that configuration a separate street; the board agreed it would not, and that would still leave the number of units on a dead end street question. Mr. Burke said Form A lots could be done by right and not be subject to Subdivision Control Law, so the number of existing lots wouldn't be an issue. Mr. Burke said he thinks the applicant is trying to take the proper route by discussing the issues before a plan is filed, but said he wouldn't want to offer an opinion on the proponent's attorney's opinion tonight. He said a Form A plan would take the dead end street length and number of units off the table, but said he didn't think that was the route the applicant wants to go. He said the attorney's opinion seems to be that having the turnaround would be a benefit. He said as soon as a definitive subdivision plan is filed, the Subdivision Regulations apply unless the board grants a waiver, and said the argument may be made that public interest could be served by having the cul-de-sac installed and avoiding having trucks back up. ~ ~ Mr. Jenkins said another three houses on Webb Place would be insignificant because there are already 65 units served by that roadway. Mr. Burke noted the houses would be duplexes, so there would be six additional dwelling units. Mr. Jenkins asked how the Inclusionary Housing By-Law would apply; Mr. Burke said with six units, one would have to be affordable. Mr. French asked for any new information to be submitted to the Planning Department two weeks prior to the next meeting. Mr. Holmes asked if there are other projects in town with houses in the cul-de-sac; Mr. Burke said there are some with more than one house in the cul-de-sac. Motion: To continue to June 15,2005 at 7:45 p.m. (Torman-DeMassi) All in favor. PASSES , .Rey Road ........ ~d - TIne Mr. French explained there were only four members of the board eligible to vote on thie permit present, so the board could not open the public hearing. Motion: To continue to June 29, 2005 at 8:00 p.m. (DeMassi-Torman) All in favor. PASSES r The clerk read the public hearing notice. William Whalen, WT Whalen Engineering, explained the plan for a two-lot subdivision on an extension of Atwood Street. One house is existing. He said they have requested waivers for road width and no curbing. He said there had been conditions on the preliminary decision about contacting the Conservation Commission, Water and Electric Departments, which they have done. The Water Department has said they would allow a six-inch main and a hydrant with service to the house. The water line will end between the two houses. The Electric Department agreed to allow an overhead line rather than an underground system. They have met with Conservation Commission, which closed the public hearing and approved the Order of Conditions. Mr. Whalen explained the waivers he is requesting: I8-foot wide street, 40 foot layout, no cul-de-sac, no sidewalks, no curbing. Department Head Comments The clerk read memos from the Light, Engineering and Police Departments. Mr. Whalen said he has provided the Engineering Department with drainage calculations ~ showing no additional runoff. He said the construction of one single family home and driveway is exempt from stormwater quality standards, and they have successfully been r- through the Conservation Commission hearing with the same plan. They will install a row of hay bales. Mr. DeMassi asked about the drainage calculations and storm water quality standards. Mr. Whalen said the roadway extension is considered a driveway and will not be a public road, although he has provided the layout for Atwood Street. He said they are adding 185 square feet of pavement. Mr. DeMassi asked if there are existing stormwater controls; Mr. Whalen said there are catch basins at the Fox Street end of Atwood Street. He said the lawn will act as a water quality measure, with a grassy swale to take the water from the end of the street, through an easement and to the river. This would infiltrate the water over a larger area. Mr. Holmes said the Engineering Department is recommending an infiltration basin to take the sediment out ofthe water. Mr. Whalen said they would be willing to put downspouts on the house to take the roof water. Mr. Holmes said there will have to be an increase because there will be a second house and a new driveway. He said the Subdivision Regulations require the volume to be mitigated as well as the rate. Mr. Whalen said if they add in infiltration units or swales they will have to go back to Conservation. Mr. Burke said that would be necessary only if the units were placed within the area over which Conservation has jurisdiction. He said a deep sump catch basin with infiltration and an overflow could be kept away from the 200-foot riverfront area. Mr. Whalen said they could place a catch basin with oil/water separator to a leaching pit within the roadway itself. r-.. Mr. DeMassi asked the difference in elevation between Atwood Street and the edge of the stream. Mr. Whalen said the stream is 162 and Atwood Street is 170. The run would be about 200 feet, so the pipe would have to be five feet down. He said if they used a dry well with an overflow, the overflow would run overland. Mr. Holmes said the end of the roadway is within the 200 feet, so a change would have to go back to Conservation. Mr. Jenkins said the Engineering Department's comments are substantive. Mr. Whalen said he has gone forward with the plans based on previous discussions with the board. Mr. Jenkins asked if there is existing curbing; Mr. Whalen said there is not. Mr. Burke said the board has discussed roadway and right-of-way width, and said he is concerned about the drainage. He said while this may be a single-family house it still needs approval under Subdivision Control Law. Mr. Holmes asked if two catch basins would be needed if Cape Cod berm is used. Mr. Whalen said in other cases, the road is crowned and flattened at one end with the catch basin and leaching pit at one corner. He said he could also create a grassy swale with an easement to the river. Mr. Holmes said the grading of the driveway would have to be considered carefully to be sure that pavement flows toward the catch basin. ~ The board discussed requiring a catch basin with a leaching pit and an oil/water separator and Cape Cod berm. Mr. Whalen said with those changes, the road would have to be dropped down lower so the surrounding lawns will be at the level of the top of the berm and the driveways will pitch to the road. ,r- Mr. French asked for 12-inch high, 3-inch wide Cape Cod berm. He asked about the width of the road; Mr. Whalen said it is 18 feet. Mr. French suggested the road be 16 feet wide plus the berm, which should start where the existing layout ends. Motion: To continue to June 29, 2005 at 8:30 p.m. (Torman-DeMassi) All in favor. PASSES 17.....i..... Mr. DeMassi asked about George's Cleaner's. Mr. Burke said there has been no activity; they have two years to take substantial use of the special permit. Mr. Burke said the board typically reorganizes after Town Meeting, but may want to wait until a full board is present. Mr. Burke said he has put together a list of possible sites to visit, including Patriot's Way, Kal's Way, Heron Crest, Suzanne Estates, Williams Street bridge. Mr. Jenkins asked about the Route 106 reconstruction; Mr. Burke explained the whole road would be resurfaced and several intersections redesigned. Mr. French thanked the bo'ard for their work at Town Meeting. r- Dr. Torman asked about setting a time to discuss the site plan proposal for the next Town Meeting. Mr. Burke said there would be two Hatheway-Patterson meetings in June; one with EPA and a conclusion to the town's Hatheway-Patterson study. There will also be a downtown meeting in June. Mr. French suggested discussing site plan on July 13. Mr. DeMassi asked about looking at the Master Plan. He said there may be sections that should be updated, but didn't think the entire plan needs to be rewritten. Mr. French said the downtown area has received a lot of attention over the last two years. Mr. Burke said it's a good idea to keep the Master Plan up to date, and the update done in 1996 was a new plan. He said the most important thing with a Master Plan is to implement the recommendations, which Mansfield has done to a great extent. Mr. French explained the last update included the entire Planning Board, along with representatives of other boards and several citizens at large. Dr. Torman said even though the Master Plan is 10 years old, it is still being used, which is an indication of how useful the document is. 1..I.i~~~_' Motion: To adjourn at 10:30 p.rn. (Holmes-Torman) All in favor. PASSES ~ Next meeting: Thursday, June 9, 2005 at 7:30 p.rn. s:tf~~ (Mansfield Crossing) bjlJ7VJ Date of Approval