Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutmin of planning brd 01/11/06 Planning Board Minutes ,- January 11 2006 C'i~ I (1 ~" I!' [1 ') r "j t,.. ,U ,,~' r ,1 ."t .::.. Present: Tom French, Chair; Fred Armstrong, Clerk; Ken Torman, Walter Jenkins, John De MasSI', F"ank Holmes L.. i..i &1 bi t. ~:,: Shaun P. Burke, Director of Planning and Development I 11'\ '.} U::, t: r T S r- r- 1.1.......11-.,...........7:.,.... I> ,.q.....PP.... 1. December 14, 2005 Minutes Motion: To approve as submitted (Torman-Armstrong) Five in favor. Jenkins abstained. PASSES 2. ZBA application for Variance - 43 Park Street - Lot Width Mr. Burke explained the application is to create a second lot without adequate lot width. The lot has frontage and area. In addition, a Form A plan will have to be filed to separate the lots. Mr. Burke recommended sending the ZBA a negative recommendation because the application seeks to create a non-conforming lot. Motion: To send the ZBA a negative recommendation because the application seeks to create a non-conforming lot (Jenkins-DeMassi) All in favor. PASSES 3. ZBA application for Variance -73 Plymouth Street - Miller Recycling - 4.4.4.5 Materials. The application seeks a waiver to use recycled asphalt rather than the 2 ~ inch pavement required. Mr. Burke explained the material is solid material, but does not go down hot like new pavement. He said it would not be like a dirt road and the trucks wouldn't drag dirt onto Plymouth Street. He said several lots in town that have used a similar material. This material will be more porous than regular asphalt and the site is not within the water protection district. This plan will still have to go before the Conservation Commission and go through site plan review. Motion: To send the ZBA a positive recommendation (Armstrong-Holmes) All in favor. PASSES 4. Form I Covenant and subdivision plans to be signed - Gilbert Park Motion: To accept the Form I Covenant and sign the subdivision plans (DeMassi- Torman) All in favor. PASSES 6. Marshall Avenue As-Built Plans to be signed Motion: To endorse the plans (Holmes-Armstrong) All in favor. PASSES 7. TransReport newsletter 8. Mass Development Annual Report 9. Architecture Boston 10. The Beacon 11. Old Colony Habitat for Humanity newsletter 12. Public Hearing notices: Easton I~.--~,,(-- 912 East Street - Paul Split and Keith Signoriello. The plan seeks to separate a portion of the back of Mr. Split's lot, which will be sold to Mr. Signoriello and be joined with one of the lots in Suzanne Estates. Mr. Jenkins said he was concerned having one of the lots within the cluster significantly larger than the rest would change the intent of the special Planning Board 1 permit. Mr. Maloon said this was not anticipated at the time of permitting, and said the r- existing barn would be coming down. Mr. Armstrong said with an ANR Plan, the board can only consider whether the lots have sufficient frontage and area. Mr. Jenkins said he would be concerned about what else could be done there; Mr. Burke said that lot has no frontage on the private way, and in order to make that a separate lot they would have to come in for another special permit. He said this plan warrants endorsement. Mr. Armstrong noted the new lot is labeled non-conforming. Mr. DeMassi asked if this would leave the door open for another application, like a variance. Mr. Burke said with an ANR Plan, the board has an obligation to endorse the plan if the lot either has frontage and area or is labeled a non-conforming lot. Motion: To endorse the Form A (Armstrong-Torman) Dr. Torman asked what would happen if the board didn't endorse the plan. Mr. Burke said the Town Clerk would sign it after 21 days. All in favor. PASSES 1......~...9.~.~.'t"...............~..............,..,_ Ralph Maloon, RIM Engineering, explained the plan has been revised since the conceptual discussion. The new plan includes the same number oflots with less roadway. Mr. Maloon said an additional piece of land has been acquired to add to the open space. Mr. Feck explained the open space and building envelopes. Mr. Maloon explained one of the lots will be split between Norton and Mansfield, but the building envelope will be in Norton. r- Mr. Feck explained this is the alternative arrived at after the original, conceptual discussion. He said the original plan included a very long roadway with 12 lots in Mansfield, but the road exceeded the dead end regulation. Mr. Maloon showed the board the traditional subdivision plan and said they don't believe they need waivers to build the cluster, but the Town Engineer may recommend a waiver. Department Head Comments The clerk read comments from the Light, Police, Engineering, Water and Fire Departments. Mr. Feck said they would be able to address most of the department head comments in the definitive design. He said the new plan moves the road away from the vernal pools mentioned in Mr. Sullivan's memo. Mr. DiMascio said the vernal pools have not been certified; Mr. Maloon said they walked the site in the fal~ which was not a good time to determine the vernal pools. Mr. DiMascio said one of the pools would fall within an existing wetland and the other would be in the open space. He said they would work with the Conservation Commission to protect the vernal pools. Board Comment Mr. Armstrong asked about lot width issues on Lot 4. Mr. Burke said with cluster developments, the frontage is reduced, so the width would be reduced accordingly. Mr. Maloon said at its narrowest, that lot is 40 feet, which Mr. DiMascio said would be the driveway. Mr. Maloon said there are two lots behind one another in that area, but there would be a couple of hundred feet between the houses. r Planning Board 2 Public Comment r Richard Detsch, 20 Nathan Road, said the plan notes access can be obtained from Emerson Circle. Mr. DiMascio said that is intended as common area and the "access" would be for walking. He said they have no intention to use it for paved surface, although they may put water service through that area. Mr. Feck said the cluster will provide more protection for the abutters because once a special permit is approved, any changes would require starting the process again. Mr. Detsch asked about setbacks; Mr. DiMascio said the plan is to have the setbacks exceed the requirements in the underlying district, so they have 50-foot front and rear setbacks. The traditional subdivision would require 40 feet. Mr. Detsch asked if the front yard setback could be 40 feet so the rear yard, adjacent to his property, could be 60 feet. Mr. Maloon explained the final plan would include building envelopes, which doesn't mean the entire envelope will be built in. Mr. DiMascio said the new homeowners wouldn't want to see the existing houses anymore than those abutters would want to see the new houses. Mr. Detsch said he objects the least to this plan out of the ones submitted. He asked where the developers intend to place the homes; Mr. DiMascio said it would be on a case-by-case basis. Mr. Detsch said he can see flags from his back yard and they seem very close; Mr. Maloon said those might be survey flags, not flags to indicate the house locations. Mr. Detsch asked about the existing trees shown on the plan; Mr. Burke said the existing conditions plan will have to show large trees, boulders, etc. He added Essex Street is a scenic road, so any trees within the right-of-way over 2 ~ inches have to be shown. r- Mr. Detsch noted the groundwater in the area is very high and said he is concerned about making that condition worse. Mr. Burke said one of the Town Engineer's comments was about that issue and said Mr. Sullivan's office would witness the test holes. Based on that, the design engineer will have to figure out how to put that water in the ground while maintaining separation between the detention basin and the high groundwater level. He noted the Town Engineer requires a significant overdesign, so an event larger than a 100. year event will be contained. Mr. Maloon said whatever they do on this site shouldn't have an effect on the properties behind it because this site doesn't shed to that land, and that land doesn't shed onto this property. Mr. Burke asked about the detention area on Jefferson Road; Mr. Maloon said the drainage goes north, then comes back down to go under Essex Street. Mr. Maloon said the wetlands on the Norton portion of the site flow toward Norton. Mr. Jenkins noted Lot 11 is partly in Norton in the conventional plan. He said the cluster plan shows that lot with its upland area in Mansfield and building envelope in Norton. He said he isn't convinced there are 12 lots in Mansfield with a traditional subdivision. Mr. Burke said lots can straddle town lines; he said a substantial portion has to be within the town in which the building permit is granted, but he said building inspectors interpret that differently. Mr. DiMascio said they couldn't gain any lots with the cluster, so they put that building envelope in Norton. r Planning Board 3 .. T r Mr. Jenkins asked if the developers intend to provide the affordable housing on site. Mr. DiMascio said they hadn't decided that yet. Mr. Burke said there are several options to accomplish that. Mr. Jenkins said the lots clustered at the end of the cul-de-sac look very close together. Mr. Maloon said the cul-de-sac will be 180 feet, which is the standard size. Mr. Jenkins said six houses clustered around a standard cul-de-sac will be crowded. Mr. Feck said compared to many other clusters, their lots are probably much larger. Mr. DiMascio said one of the ideas of the cluster is to gather the houses together and leave open spaces. Mr. Maloon said the frontages on the cul-de-sac are generally 80 feet; Mr. Jenkins said he was concerned about that reduction from 200 feet required in RI to 80 feet. Mr. French asked if common driveways could be used to reduce the number of curb cuts. Mr. Burke said the cul-de-sac has to be a certain diameter for emergency vehicles and school busses. Mr. DiMascio said the houses wouldn't all be put the same distance from the roadway, they would be staggered and varied. Mr. Burke said he likes the cluster better than the traditional design. He said the developers may want to speak with the Norton and Mansfield building inspectors and getting written responses before filing the definitive plan to find out how much land has to be in each town before a building permit is issued. Mr. French said by statute, there cannot be more lots approved on a cluster than on a conventional plan. He said the lot partly in Norton and in Mansfield will not have a building envelope on the Mansfield portion of the lot, eliminating the chance of that becoming an additional Mansfield lot. r- Mr. DiMascio said they planned to permit in Mansfield first. Mr. Detsch noted that without the Norton portion of the roadway, the dead end would be over 650 feet. Mr. French said that is true, so the permit would have to be contingent on the Norton portion. Mr. French asked what Mr. Sullivan's waiver suggestion will be. Mr. DiMascio said Mr. Sullivan has a concern about a comer of the new roadway being partly in Norton, so they might need a comer rounding easement waiver. He said they believe they will be able to get an easement to shift that intersection into Mansfield, provided the board will grant the waiver. Mr. Burke said if the Town Engineer has suggested that waiver, he thinks the board will consider it. He noted the portion in Norton isn't within the paved surface of the proposed new road. Mr. French asked how wide the road would be. Mr. Peck said the regulations call for 24 feet wide, and asked if 22 would be better. Mr. DiMascio asked about the sidewalk requirement and said they planned to build a sidewalk on both sides of part of the street and asked about one side further up. Mr. DiMascio asked about curbing; Mr. French said the board prefers sloped granite curbing. Mr. DiMascio said Norton may not allow a 22- foot road, so if the Mansfield portion is 22 feet, it could be blended in at the intersection of the Mansfield and Norton intersection. Mr. French said he wouldn't be opposed to a narrower road, sloped granite or sidewalks on one side. Mr. Burke said there are no existing sidewalks on Essex Street. Mr. DeMassi said the sidewalks would have to be r brought out to Essex Street. Planning Board 4 . . r Mr. Holmes asked about the comer rounding easement waiver; Mr. Burke explained the regulations require the radius be the property line; if that intersection were shifted, the radius wouldn't be a property line, so there would have to be an easement. Mr. Feck and Mr. DiMascio said their intent would be to make this a public way. Mr. Burke explained the town would take the comer rounding easement when the street is accepted. Mr. DeMassi asked how much of the open space is wet. Mr. DiMascio explained the wetland line. Motion: To approve the preliminary cluster subdivision plan based on the revised plan showing a cluster, not a traditional subdivision; with the department head comments addressed and encouraging the developers to move ahead with a definitive cluster special permit. Suggest the developer explore the waivers best suited to the site and get written responses from both the Mansfield and Norton building inspectors before filing the definitive plan to find out how much land has to be in each town before a building permit is issued. (Armstrong-Holmes) Five in favor. Jenkins opposed. PASSES 5. . ..PeJwit PwbIIc ...... - AmeJd-' e,..utia Aadeay ParldDa .... ....,. ... ' .. AnoId - 253 ~lIMd Street The clerk read the public hearing notice. Mr. French explained the public hearing process. r Michael Trowbridge, Hutchins-Trowbridge Associates, explained the plan had originally been submitted showing the parking lot coming from the existing academy onto Oakland Street. The revised plans have the same traffic flow pattern but have eliminated the curb cut. Mr. Trowbridge explained test holes have been done with the Engineering Department. Stormwater will go under the parking lot and has been designed for the IOO-year storm with an oil-water separator. Cape Cod berm will be installed around the edge of the parking lot and along the entrance and exit. They are proposing 6-7 foot arbor vitaes along Oakland Street and the Certuse property. There is an existing IS-foot buffer for the Certuse property. Mr. Trowbridge said they had a discussion earlier in the evening with Marc Antine, the Certuse's attorney, about traffic flow; Mr. Trowbridge said they would be amenable to a one-way in and one-way out pattern. Mr. French said the reason this is a special permit is because the site is in the water protection district, so the special permit is not for the use. Mr. Trowbridge said that is correct. He said the lot will be paved with a catch basin, oiVwater separator and have a shared paved driveway. (' Planning Board 5 r Department Head Comments The clerk read comments from Engineering, Electric, Police and Water Departments, as well as Mr. Burke. Board Comment Mr. DeMassi asked if the existing academy, the new lot and the existing house are all on one lot. Mr. Trowbridge said they are two lots owned by the Arnolds. He said they would be opposed to merging the lots into one because it is Land Court land, and would not be a simple Form A. Mr. Burke said his intent was not that the house should be combined with the academy; but the parking lot and the academy should be on one lot. Mr. Trowbridge said the Zoning By-Law allows off-site parking within 200 feet of the primary use. He said they wouldn't have a problem with the stipulation that the parking area only be used for the gymnastics academy and not train station parking or any other use. Mr. DeMassi asked what would happen if the lot were sold in the future. Mr. Trowbridge said there would have to be an easement for the parking. Mr. French asked if the parking proposal is based on need rather than the Zoning By- Law. Mr. Trowbridge said it that is the case. Mr. DeMassi said the plan shows the new exit 24 feet wide; Mr. Trowbridge said it was drawn that way because it was originally two-way traffic. He said it could be narrowed to 16 feet, which might allow one more parking space. r Mr. French asked about the traffic circulation issue. Mr. Antine explained Mr. Al Certuse has spoken with Mr. Trowbridge and he does not object to the parking area. Their concerns are mainly traffic and how traffic coming in and out of the gym will affect their property. Mr. Trowbridge noted that the accessory parking lot curb cut has been moved further from the Certuse house. He introduced James Noise, traffic engineer with Greenman-Pedersen. Mr. Antine said his client would like there to be no curb cut for the accessory parking lot, but if it is approved, they are more satisfied with it as shown in the revised plan. Mr. Noise presented the board with a letter regarding the project. He said he didn't believe the parking area would generate additional traffic, but would simply accommodate existing parking. He said the reason for the second driveway is for traffic flow, but will not benefit the town or the abutters. He said if the board feels granting the second driveway is a good idea, he suggested making the existing driveway one-way in, and the proposed driveway one-way out. He said that would limit the number of turning movements at each curb cut. He suggested the new driveway be 14 feet wide and the existing driveway be left as is. Mr. DeMassi asked if emergency vehicles would be able to make the turning radius at 14 feet; Mr. Trowbridge said they would. Mr. Jenkins said an additional space could be added with the narrower driveway. Mr. Trowbridge said the Arnolds are wiling to go along with the one-way traffic circulation and with narrowing the driveway to 14 feet. Mr. Burke said he thinks this is ( a good idea. Planning Board 6 r Mr. Holmes asked about the radius; Mr. Trowbridge said he would hold to the wider radius, which will push the driveway further from the Certuses. Mr. Certuse said he doesn't object to the parking lot and said it would be a great improvement over what is there now. He said his son Brett has purchased that house and will be living there. He said there isn't a lot of screening and requested the board ensure the property is buffered. Mr. Trowbridge said he would look at what is there now; Mrs. Arnold said she is willing to add plantings, but said there is a steep slope, so they would have to be tall plantings. Brett Certuse, 259 Oakland Street, said he thinks the parking lot will be an improvement but is concerned about two-way traffic. He said the lighting in the new parking lot will be shielded and shouldn't shine into his yard; however, the site is on a slope and there are some building lights that shine into his yard. Mrs. Arnold said those lights turn off at 9:00 p.m. Mr. Trowbridge said they could hood the lights in the parking lot. Mr. Jenkins asked if there would be a way to relocate the lights to they shine into the parking lot but not onto the adjacent property. Mr. Trowbridge said he would look into repositioning the lights. Mr. Holmes said the parking lot is very flat and asked about puddling and freezing. Mr. Trowbridge said they didn't want to raise that because of runoff concerns to the Certuse property. Mr. Holmes said the Certuse property is higher than the parking lot and asked r about a drain to avoid the water collecting in a low spot between the properties. Mr. Trowbridge said the site sheds toward the back toward the gym building, so water shouldn't be trapped between the lots. Mr. French said with one-way circulation, the parking lot could be narrower and angled parking could be used. Mr. Burke said he is pleased to see the one-way pattern. He said if the lights are coming off the building and added to the parking lot, they need cutoffs. He suggested an evergreen buffer between the Certuse property. Mr. French suggested Austrian pines. Mr. Trowbridge said there are existing trees there now. Mrs. Arnold said the existing lights are at the front of the building. She said she would be happy to plant trees, but doesn't know how much room there will be for new plantings. Mr. Certuse said he would be happy with that. Mr. DeMassi asked what kind of lights are proposed; he said the board would like to see metal halide lights. Mr. Jenkins asked how many trees are going to be planted. Mr. Trowbridge said there will be 32 six to seven foot high trees planted. Mr. Burke said he thinks the special permit can be approved and encouraged the board to r- add the following conditions: one-way traffic pattern, I4-foot driveway width, additional Planning Board 7 r- plantings, relocating lights if necessary, 15 parking spaces only, the new parking area to be used strictly as accessory parking to the business use, the Best Management Practice Plan for drainage system be incorporated into the special permit. Motion: To approve the special permit with the following conditions: 1. The site shall be designed per the plan dated September 1, 2005 and revised November 17, 2005 and December 5, 2005 to include a one-way traffic pattern 2. The new driveway shall be 14 feet wide 3. Additional plantings shall be added to buffer the Certuse property 4. Building lighting be relocated to the parking lot if necessary 5. The new parking lot will have 15 parking spaces only 6. The new parking area to be used strictly as accessory parking to the business use 7. The Best Management Practice Maintenance Schedule for drainage system shall be incorporated into the special permit. (Torman-Armstrong) Torman - In favor. The project's benefits outweigh detriments DeMassi - In favor. With the addition of the one-way traffic pattern, this becomes a safer situation on a busy street. The additional parking is much needed and I like the fact there has been good faith and conversation with the neighbors. Jenkins - In favor. The engineer has done a good job taking into consideration the water r- protection district and it is good to have the cooperation of the abutters. I appreciate the owners making parking easier for their customers, not just providing what is ~uired by the Zoning By-Law. I'm glad the business is doing well, and that's good for the town. Armstrong - In favor. This is a good project. The environmental issues have been addressed, the stormwater management system will protect the groundwater and the benefits outweigh the detriments. Holmes - In favor. The benefits outweigh the detriments French - In favor. The approval of Town Engineer on groundwater protection district issues will protect the interest of the by-law, and the improvements in traffic circulation make it a better plan. All in favor. PASSES Motion: To close the public hearing (Torman-DeMassi) All in favor. PASSES I~i_j,;"",~ East Street - Heron Crest (permitted as Village Landing). This plan seeks to convey the open space to the town. Motion: To endorse the Form A (Armstrong-DeMassi) All in favor. PASSES r Planning Board 8 r r (" 16!'~""_ The board discussed the George's Cleaner's project. Mr. Burke said the applicants have submitted a new application to the Zoning Board of Appeals, which the Planning Board will see at its next meeting. Dr. Torman asked about the landscaping at Erin's Centre. Mr. Burke explained Shaw's has hired a third party landscape architect because of a conflict among Shaw's, the landowner and the contractor. Dr. Torman asked if the building inspector could shut down the site; Mr. Burke said he could because they are on a temporary certificate of occupancy. 17.....~. 1.8....~~ Motion: To adjourn at 10:15 p.m. (Torman-DeMassi) All in favor. PASSES Next meeting: Wednesday, January 25, 2005 at 7:30 p.m. $~cntc, / /2JI(J~ Si;::Of Clerk / Date of Approval Planning Board 9