Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutmin of planning brd 04/26/2006 " ,-' r TOWN ~f~EIVED Planning Board Minutes y." RKS OFF ICE April 26, 2006 06 HAY -5 AM II: 37 Present: Tom French, Chair; Fred Armstrong, Clerk; Walter Jenkins, Ken Tonnan, JOM DeMassi, Doug Annino MANSF I El 0 Shaun P. Burke, Director ofPlannin and Develo ment MASSACHUSETTS r 1. April 12, 2006 minutes Motion: To approve as submitted (Tonnan-Armstrong) All in favor. PASSES 2. March 1, 2006 minutes Motion: To approve as submitted (Armstrong-Annino) Five in favor. Tonnan abstained. PASSES 2. ZBA application for variance - 33 Jewell Street - 4.2.1 side yard setback Mr. Burke said there is no hardship shown and suggested a negative recommendation. Mr. French said the addition would have to be put where it makes sense; Mr. DeMassi said it is proposed at the back of the garage. Mr. Annstrong said there is no hardship to shape, topography or soils. Motion: To send the ZBA a negative recommendation because there is no hardship shown; the lot is not that irregularly shaped and the addition could be relocated. There is not enough information on the plan to tell where the septic system is or where the abutting houses are located. (Annstrong-DeMassi) All in favor. PASSES 3. ZBA application for variance - 134 Jewell Street - 4.2.1 front yard setback The house is on a comer lot and requires 40-foot front and side yard setbacks. Mr. Burke said there is a drainage easement on this lot, and the house has had flooding problems. Mr. Annstrong said there is no hardship shown. Mr. Jenkins said the driveway could be reconfigured to avoid the encroachment. Mr. French said there is no indication where the septic system is, or if there are any wetlands on the site. Motion: To send the ZBA a negative recommendation because there is no hardship shown (Annstrong-DeMassi) All in favor. PASSES 4. ZBA application for variance - 25 Surrey Drive - 4.2.1 rear yard setback Mr. Jenkins said the abutting properties are shown on the plan, and are far from the lot in question. Mr. Burke said the house was built awkwardly on the lot, which is very shallow. Mr. DeMassi said the addition could be reconfigured to avoid the encroachment. Motion: To send the ZBA a positive recommendation because the lot is oddly shaped, because there is plenty of buffer between this house and the houses behind it, and because the zoning has changed since the house was built. (Armstrong-Jenkins) All in favor. PASSES r The clerk read a request from the applicant to continue the public hearing to May 24, 2006 at 7:45 p.m. Motion: To continue the public hearing to May 24, 2006 at 7:45 p.m. (Tonnan-DeMassi) All in favor. PASSES Planning Board 1 ., . 't .1 The cle~kreaAa request from the applicant to continue the public hearing to May 24, 2' 1 T 2006 at'8:OO~p.Ih. Motion: To continue the public hearing to May 24, 2006 at 8:00 p.m. (Torman-DeMassi) All in favor. PASSES Dana Clow, Advanced Concepts Engineering and Randy Miller, owner, thanked the board for its positive recommendation on their variance, which allowed them to develop this plan. Mr. Clow explained this is Phase 2 of the project. Phase 1 was the installation of 20,000 square foot of pavement and a 24-foot high access door, as well as guard rails, drainage and lighting. Phase 2 will create an area for the storage of empty trailers and roll-off dumpsters. He explained these are excess units, and will not be used for storage of raw materials. The site is currently congested with trailers and dumpsters they do not have room to properly store. Mr. Clow said the way the by-law is structured, this is considered a parking lot, which would have to be paved. He said traditional pavement would be damaged by the dumpsters and trailers that will be stored in this area, so they propose to use reclaimed asphalt. This would be more stable than gravel, and can be regarded, rerolled and recompacted periodically. He said water will run off recycled asphalt, though it is pervious to a degree. To counteract the runoff potential in the area, the original Phase 1 proposal had a flat-graded water quality swale from the paved area to a catch basin to a sediment basin to the detention basin. The intent was to further slow the discharge of water from the paved surface. The difference with this plan is that the swale has been altered in a way to expand the detention facility. Mr. Clow explained the site was constructed in 1987, and the outlet from the detention basin can become submerged when Hodges Brook is running fully. The extra storage will provide a buffer in those conditions. Mr. Clow said the outlet elevation is a matter of inches; however, he said the system doesn't back up. He said with their surplus of open space, they can provide the additional buffer for the basin to get all the storage that is reasonably available. He said the basin is a vegetated wetland; they have worked with Conservation to clean out the trees growing in that area. He said the bottom of the basin is at estimated high groundwater level. Mr. DeMassi asked what would happen in the 100-year storm; Mr. Clow said they cannot control the outflow because the elevations of the pond and the basin are so similar. They can only control the storage; he said the recycled asphalt will allow more percolation than a lawn, but less than a paved surface. Planning Board 2 . , "- ~ ~ ) " r Mr. DeMassi noted this kind of material was recently used at the Acorn Manufacturing site on School Street. Mr. Clow said they would probably use a base of% inch material with a top of about 2 inches of finer material. He said they would have to experiment with the depth of the material to ensure the least amount of movement. Mr. Clow said the question is how much of the finer materials are included in each type of mix, and what will provide the firmest compaction. Mr. DeMassi asked how they would figure out exactly what to use; Mr. Clow said the asphalt plant would determine that. Mr. French asked the difference between existing and proposed in the 100-year stonn; he asked if there will be more volume than pre-development. Mr. Clow said the existing basin is 18,300 square feet; they are increasing it to 27,600 square feet. He said that would more than take care of the additional runoff from the newly paved surface. Mr. Clow said they are planning to grade toward the swale so runoff water has the maximum distance to travel before it gets back to the pond. Department Head Comments The clerk read memos from the Health Agent, Police Department, Conservation and Engineering. Mr. Clow submitted a memo addressing the Engineering Department's comments. He said a number of Mr. Alves's comments were about things that were constructed during Phase 1. He said he has met with Mr. Sullivan about penneability testing; they had done testing for the swale last year. New testing was done and the numbers were provided to Engineering today. He said the penneability testing doesn't have a lot of significance when the site is right next to a water body. Mr. Clow asked that r the board consider making its final decision an administrative action once Mr. Sullivan's concerns have been satisfied. Mr. Burke said he has spoken with Mr. Sullivan, who expects to have an answer by the beginning of next week. Mr. Clow said they have addressed the Conservation Agent's concerns. Mr. DeMassi asked how many parking spaces there would be. Mr. Clow said there are 17 spaces at 10'x30' and 18 spaces at lO'x45'. He said the neighboring site also has trailer storage. Mr. Burke said this is what he had anticipated when the board during the Phase 1 review of this project. He suggested that if the only outstanding items are Mr. Sullivan's final comments, the board could deal with its recommendation as a correspondence item when the engineering review is completed. He said this is a site where, because it isn't live parking, the recycled asphalt would be a good material to use. He said this site isn't in a Zone II or a Water Resource Protection District. Mr. DeMassi asked about lighting; Mr. Clow said they have 36-foot poles with 400 watt high pressure sodium lighting, as well as roof mounted lighting. Motion: To send the Building Inspector of positive recommendation contingent upon Mr. Sullivan's final approval (Tonnan-Annino) All in favor. PASSES r Planning Board 3 ZBA application for variance - 49 Otis Street - 4.2.1 side yard setback ~ The site is a comer lot and needs 30-foot front and side yard setbacks; the leaching field is in the middle of the back yard. Mr. Burke said a pool is not the same as a garage or a pennanent addition to a house and noted the backyard is lower than the grade of the sidewalk. Mr. Burke said the proposed pool is 22 feet off the street. Motion: To send the ZBA a positive recommendation Tonnan-Jenkins) Five in favor. DeMassi opposed. PASSES 7. ZBA application for variance and special permit - 1 Foundry Street Mr. Burke explained this is the fonner Clemmey Tank site. He said there is commuter parking with around 100 spaces on a portion of the site; this application seeks to expand it an additional 100 spaces and for relief from paving, striping, lighting and landscaping. It is also for a special permit to expand or alter the pre- existing, non-confonning use. The application states that parking had been a by-right use and was changed to a special permit use. The town leased this land for commuter parking until a few years ago, establishing the commercial parking lot use. Mr. DeMassi said the site is not currently being used for commuter parking; Mr. Burke said a portion of that site is being used for commuter parking. Mr. Burke said this situation is similar to the Old Colony Dodge variance, which was granted for land across from the main location, that had been used as a parking lot; the owners made the argument that they had always been conducting a sales operation there and were granted a variance. He said it is also similar to the variance granted to the Tweeter Center when they bought a new parcel for a parking expansion and called ~ it a pre-existing, non-conforming use. Mr. DeMassi asked how much of the lot would have had to have been parking to make this a pre-existing, non-confonning use. Mr. Annstrong said he doesn't have a problem with the idea of not paving or landscaping, but said that relief would have to be granted with pennanent vehicles like variances and special permits, which last forever and run with the land. Mr. Annino said this would double the intensity of the use. Mr. Burke said the ZBA would have to consider whether the change would be substantially more detrimental than the existing situation. Motion: To send the ZBA a negative recommendation because this would double the intensity of the pre-existing, non-confonning use; the variances and special pennits would run with the property forever and could be carried over to subsequent uses; derogating from the intent of the by-law for landscaping, lighting and drainage will be a detriment to the abutters, citizens and commuters and sets a dangerous precedent for redevelopment. While the board agrees with the need for additional parking in this area, it is concerned about this potentially pennanent solution to what may be a short- term issue. (Annino-Armstrong) -, Planning Board 4 r r r .' '.... Mr. Annstrong asked whether a special permit could be made temporary or renewable. Mr. DeMassi asked if a new parking lot would have to be permitted by the Board of Selectmen; Mr. Burke said the board would issue a commercial parking lot license. All in favor. PASSES 8. SPREDD Delegation Appointment Fonn Motion: To reappoint Mr. Flynn as the board's representative (DeMassi- Tonnan) All in favor. PASSES 9. April 26, 2006 letter from John Rendall, CH2MHill re: removal of 500 cubic yards of surplus material-751 North Main Street Mr. Burke explained this old industrial site is near the Foxboro town line and abuts a residential neighborhood. Recently, some of the buildings were being renovated and others demolished. A number of years ago, the site was dug up for a parking lot and the dirt stockpiled on site; during the recent site work, the soil was found to be polluted and the owners want to remove it from the site. They have filed an application with the Conservation Commission. Motion: To send the Building Inspector a positive recommendation on the removal of approximately 500 cubic yards of surplus material with the standard conditions regarding hours and days of operation, covered loads, possible police detail, street sweeping. (Annstrong-Tonnan) All in favor. PASSES Mr. Burke told the board he has met with Home Depot representatives, who told him they would be completing the remaining improvements on the site because they want a pennanent certificate of occupancy. Motion: To adjourn at 9:45 p.m. (Tonnan-DeMassi) All in favor. PASSES Next meeting: Wednesday, May 3, 2006 at 7:30 p.m. Si~~~rJ11 J-- ~/110b Date of Approval Planning Board 5 ~ ~ )