Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutmin of planning brd 04/12/2006 , /' .- (... ~...."... l(\ r" \ ":\:~. \ ': I r r Planning Board Minutes April 12, 2006 06 rlPR 27 PM 2: 4 , Present: Tom Fren~h, Chair; Fred Armstrong, Clerk; Walter Jen1cing,'.~~~J~~tp, John DeMassl, Doug ~no. ',j i\:';:::i, "~PUSETTS Shaun P. Burke, Dll'ector of Plannm and Develo ment I In ,j '.. . \ l j r 1. March 1, 2006 minutes Motion: To approve as submitted (DeMassi-Armstrong) All in favor. PASSES 2. March 1, 2006 letter from David O'Sullivan, Village Landing LLC re: footprint changes to accommodate elevators. Elevation plans showing the addition of elevators have been submitted. Mr. Jenkins asked if the berm at the front of the site was done in accordance with the plan. Mr. Burke said there has been some discussion about altering the approved landscaping plan and said staff is going to request a new landscaping plan for the site. Mr. Burke said the Light Department has been directing developers not to plant within ten feet of a transformer, which will require changes to the landscaping plan. The project's new landscape architect has concerns about whether the species originally proposed will be able to survive. New plans showing the elevators have also been submitted, with the buildings being squared off, so the elevators are inside the buildings. Mr. Annino asked how the elevator shafts would be vented. Mr. Burke said the developer would have to submit landscape and foundation as-built plans. Mr. DeMassi said he would like to see a detail of the plans for the elevator ventilation. He said he was concerned that with the elevators being squared off, the buildings would be even closer together. Mr. French said it looked like the area for the elevators were being taken from the porches. Mr. Burke said the porches were always there; all they have done is reduce the depth of that space to accommodate the elevator shaft. Mr. Burke said the footprint of the porch area doesn't go out any further than originally proposed. 3. March building permit summary 4. The Beacon Jennifer Drive - VB Realty Trust. A variance has been granted for insufficient frontage for two lots off Jennifer Drive. The remaining land will be donated to the town. Motion: To endorse the Form A (Armstrong-DeMassi) All in favor. PASSES The clerk read the public hearing notice. Mr. French explained the board will be asked to make a report to Town Meeting with a recommendation on each article. FAR in Industrial 3 Dr. Torman asked if some of these articles were brought to Town Meeting last year. Mr. Karl Clemmey said there was an article for change in FAR at last year's Town Meeting, r but this one is different. Mr. French examined the two articles and found three of the Planning Board 1 ., , -, ratios are the same, two are different. Mr. Clemmey said if the board supports the article, it can return to Town Meeting, even if it is the same. He said he has plans ready to build "'"\ a storage facility on his Foundry LLC land. ) Mr. William Clemmey said they had come to the board a year ago, and at the time were asked to hold off until the TOD project was complete. He said that plan is to provide higher density development in the area of the train station; he said they are asking to do that without waiting for the TOD plan to be developed at some time in the future. He said the Cecil Group's calculation is for 182,000 square feet, and a higher density development would be more tax revenue. He said Phase I of Cecil's plan includes mostly housing with 250-300 homes, 250-500 cars, 250-500 more children. He said it makes sense to use the land for mixed commercial uses and said they would be willing to work with the town to develop the land. Mr. Karl Clemmey noted Franklin is doing a lot of work around the train station and Foxboro is doing a lot of development around the area of the stadium. Public Comment Sandra Levine, 20 Walnut Street, said Mr. Clemmey is going on the premise that building will happen at a greater density. She said density should fit the whole community, not just the one area Mr. Clemmey owns. She said that density change would apply to any 13 land in town. She said Mr. Clemmey's petitions always seem to be asking to change the zone to meet his ideas, and changes like this shouldn't be made piecemeal, but should be considered town-wide. Mr. French asked where the other 13 zones are. Mr. Dan Clemmey said there would be setback and landscaping requirements for any 13 parcels. Mr. Armstrong asked what is allowed in R3; Mr. Burke said business is not allowed, and the highest density is a residential duplex. Mr. Burke explained FARis a zoning tool that means with a 10,000 square foot lot and a .25 FAR, 2,500 square feet of building would be allowed. He said with 1.0 FAR, the density is quadrupled, so there could be 10,000 square feet of building on the same sized lot. He said there would still be 35% open space, parking areas and height restrictions. Mr. DeMassi asked if you can get a variance on open space; Mr. Burke said if you want to do a different landscape design, you could get a special permit. If you want to do less than 35% open space, you could seek dimensional relief with a variance. Dr. Torman said without the zoning change, a variance is still possible. Mr. French said the proposal is to change the Zoning By-Law so that standard becomes the norm. Mr. DeMassi said there has been no agreement to the proposals by the Cecil Group, so that may not be what is implemented. He said he has attended those meetings and he doesn't necessarily agree with the consultant's density numbers. Mr. Dan Clemmey said the B2 zone has a 2.0 FAR with no setbacks; Mr. Burke said there is a big difference between those two zones. Mr. Burke said Mr. Clemmey mentioned the Cecil Group has cost the taxpayers $100,000; he said that is not true because the study has been funded under grants. He Planning Board 2 ~ ~ said the Cecil Group's proposals are presenting densities needed to make the area (' attractive to businesses. Mr. Burke said the town tried to set up a meeting this week with the landowners in the train station area, but was unsuccessful. Mr. Clemmey said staff meetings with the Cecil Group have cost the town money in staff time. Mr. Burke said at this point, there are no zoning proposals from the Cecil Group. The town will be able to accept the consultant's report, accept a portion of it or reject it. He said at the last meeting, there was less than unanimous support for the Cecil Group's idea. Mr. Dan Clemmy said they submitted a TOD proposal to the board a year ago; Mr. Burke said the zoning proposals that came out of that were for a study that never happened. He said there was no public planning process for the Clemmey's in-house study. Mr. Dan Clemmey said they could build at allowed density now. Mr. Bill Clemmey said they are frustrated because the Cecil Group hasn't met with the Planning Board. Mr. DeMassi said the original plan was to have a few members of several boards meet with the Cecil Group before coming back to the whole board. Mr. Clemmey said the FAR change in the land around the train station area, encompassing 3- 4 landowners, would mean an increase in taxes. Mr. Clemmey said with increased FAR, taxes will increase at the same ratio. He said the 17 acres generates around $770,000 in revenues, and with four times more density, there would be four times more tax revenue. r Mr. DeMassi asked what could be done with an increased FAR that cannot be done at the current FAR. Mr. Bill Clemmey said if they build at current FAR and leave the rest of the land vacant for future plans under TOD, they are running the risk of not being able to develop that additional land. He said he thinks mixed-use development in the train station area would be the best use. Mr. Dan Clemmey said if they build storage buildings now, each floor would be counted toward the .25 FAR. Mr. Armstrong said he agrees that some increase in FAR makes sense, but doesn't know what that number should be. He said he didn't think he wanted to see a 30-foot tall storage building. Mr. Bill Clemmey said they would build the storage units in a corner of the lot, so there will be some left for when the TOD study is done. Mr. Bill Clemmey presented a preliminary plan showing possible development of the Foundry site. Mrs. Levine asked if the FAR increases four times, wouldn't the amount of public service be increased by four times? Mr. Bill Clemmey said it would, but they are not proposing all residential. Mrs. Levine said even with business uses, water, electric and sewer would increase. Mrs. Levine said self storage would be very inexpensive to build and would only require a minimum of those services; she suggested the self storage could be built now at what is currently allowed, then demolished to make room for what will eventually be done under TOD. Mr. French asked the board if they want to vote on this. Mr. Burke said the board typically votes at a public meeting prior to Town Meeting. r Planning Board 3 Mr. DeMassi asked if. 75 would be better than 1.0. Mr. Bill Clemmey said that might be a compromise. Mr. DeMassi said he would be more inclined to support .75. ') SS and Over Residential Development 10 acres to 6 acres Mr. Karl Clemmey said he would like to be able to use the land behind Shaw's and Staples for an Over 55 development. That use currently requires 10 acres, but they have around six. Mr. Bill Clemmey said the article asks for the minimum land area necessary for this use, which is a special permit in B3 and R2, to be reduced. He said there are currently only two B3 parcels left in town, both of which are wet. He said he thinks this would be a good use for the parcels between the retail uses and the single family residential uses. He said there would be 2-3 buildings with several units in each. He said he didn't think anyone would want apartments or a 40B development on that land. He said 55 and over developments do not put a strain on services. Public Comment Celeste Jones, 60 South Walnut Street, said the citizens' petition says there are 5.8 acres on those parcels. Mr. Bill Clememy said the rezoning article does not include all of the land on those parcels. Mrs. Jones asked the difference between the amount of housing that could be built with 6 or 10 acres. Mr. Burke explained the 55 and Over provision allows about 10 units per acre, so on a dry, 10-acre site, there could be 100 units. On a 6-acre site, there could be about 60 units on the site. He said the density doesn't change, the minimum area requirement does. Mrs. Jones asked how the 60 units could be built; Mr. Burke said they would likely be built in a few buildings. Mrs. Levine asked if the units would be smaller. ") Mr. Burke said that would be a design issue, but they would likely be built to meet market demand. Mr. DeMassi asked about the open space requirement; Mr. Burke said that would remain as currently required, and none of the other dimensional requirements would change. Mr. Karl Clemmey said they would have 32-38 units on their site. Mrs. Jones asked where the access would be; Mr. Clemmey said it would be West Street. Mr. DeMassi noted this change would affect every six-acre parcel in R2 and B3. Mr. Burke said one of the reasons for the 10 acre minimum was that the site had to be big enough to get the density required for developers, and to prevent developers from shoehorning multi-family developments into residential areas. Mr. Bill Clemmey noted this would still be a special permit use. Mr. French asked if the two lots, 11-28 and 29, were put together, there would be more than 10 acres. Mr. Clemmey said they would not be. Mr. Karl Clemmey said currently, they could develop the land as two residential clusters. Bob Kilroy, 25 Walnut Street, said there are going to be apartments at Parente's farm, and with this proposal, there would be more traffic and public safety issues. ..~ Planning Board 4 Board Comment r- Mr. Jenkins asked if the acres required could be changed at Town Meeting; he said Mr. Clemmey had indicated his proposal would be around 30 units, which is less than the allowed density on six acres. Mr. Burke said changing the density for this proposal would be beyond the scope of this public hearing and would require a new advertisement. Mr. DeMassi said last year, when Mr. Clemmey was before the board with some zoning amendments, the board had suggested he get together with the neighbors. He said a use like a 55 and Over development might be a good transitional use between the retail and residential. Mr. Karl Clemmey noted he has not sold any of his land to 40B developers and he has no intention to do that. He said with a 40B, over 100 units could be built. Mr. French asked if the neighbors thought this use would be a good use for that area. Mrs. Jones said she though it could be, especially without an access on Walnut Street. Kristen Riondo, 8 South Walnut Street, said she was concerned about another access from West Street because of the existing curb cuts along that stretch. Mr. French said that would have to be worked out. Mike Riondo, 8 South Walnut Street, asked if this would settle the question of Mr. Clemmey rezoning the land to 11. r Mrs. Levine said there is an existing curb cut on West Street, which she said could be used as an entrance. Mr. Karl Clemmey said he has a deal with Shaw's that when this land is developed, the existing driveway would be used and expanded. Mr. Armstrong said it may make sense to reduce the amount of land area required because the town is getting less dense; he noted the state minimum is five acres. Mr. Burke said the town made a conscious decision to make it 10 acres. West Street Rezoning from R2 to II Mr. Bill Clemmey explained they had discussed this change last year with the neighbors, who were not in favor of it. He said their purpose in submitting the article was to get everyone together to discuss the best use of the land. He said they have always considered additional retail uses for this land. Mr. Karl Clemmey said they have no way to say they are going to do the article or not do the article. He said if the neighbors want houses they will get houses. He said he would withdraw the article again, but he cannot sit on the land forever. He said it would make more sense to build more retail than more houses. He said last year the Shaw's development brought in more taxes than expected, as well as with jobs. Public Comment Mrs. Levine said the piece of property between Jones and Maccione is not described in the article. She said that piece cannot be used to get to the industrial uses. Mr. Bill r Planning Board 5 Clemmey said the description goes straight across that tail of land and does not include it; it would remain residential. ') Mike Riondo, 8 South Walnut Street, said he would be interested in an Over 55 use. He said he is opposed to rezoning the land to industrial. Mr. DeMassi said it would be possible for either, both or neither of these articles to be approved at Town Meeting. Mrs. Jones said she has been opposed to rezoning that parcel to industrial for years. She said to have additional reWl development on those parcels would bring it even closer to the residential homes. She said the neighbors understand the land will be used, and said she would rather see the Over 55 use than Industrial! uses. Richard Gordon, 407 West Street, said this change would effect all R2 parcels, and while lowering the acre requirement might be good for this site, but may not be good allover town. Mrs. Jones asked how many parcels remain in town that would fit into this; Mr. Burke said there are a number of R2 parcels where this could go. He said land uses change over time, and as values go up, we see tear-downs. He said if that continues, it would be possible for buildings to be torn down and parcels combined. Mr. Jenkins said 55 and Over does not place a burden on the school system, and does not place as much burden on public safety as an assisted living facility, while bringing in tax revenues. He said the development will be market-driven. Mrs. Levine said every neighborhood with an impending development has to remain -, alert, and even with the possibility of 55 and Over for this parcel, it may not actually happen because there could be other R2 allowed uses on that parcel. Mr. French said the only thing this hearing is talking about changing is the lot size for a 55 and Over development; the other R2 uses could be done there now. Mr. Karl Clemmey said he could sell that property for a 40B development tomorrow and there wouldn't be anything the neighborhood or the board could do about it. Motion: To close the public hearing (Armstrong-DeMassi) All in favor. PASSES Dr. Torman asked when the trees would be replaced at Erin's Centre; Mr. Burke said he has met with the Home Depot representatives, who will be planting their trees soon because they want a full certificate of occupancy. He said that leaves Shaw's and Staples not in conformance. Mr. Dan Clemmey said the landscaper was under contract to Shaws; the landscaping has failed. He said Shaw's has begun the process to recover that landscaping and have started to replace the trees and curbing. He said there will be plans submitted in the near future for the vacant pad. Mr. DeMassi asked about the Village at the Pointe; Mr. Burke said they are planning to complete the remaining items according to plan. ~ Planning Board 6 ,( .. .. Mr. DeMassi asked about George's Cleaners; Mr. Burke said since the variances were r- denied, nothing new has been submitted. Dr. Torman asked how many trucks were permitted at the Clemmey site on South Main Street; Mr. Burke said the ZBA gave him a variance not to pave it, but said he didn't remember the board assigning a number. Motion: To adjourn at 10:00 p.m. (Torman-Armstrong) All in favor. PASSES Next meeting: Wednesday, April 26, 2006 at 7:30 p.m. dt!t / Signa/ Of~f7~ 1111-19 /O&; Date of Approval r r Planning Board 7 . .. " . ) ') )