Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutmin of planning brd 06/21/2006 .1 RECEl'IEO -, "~,!if SL ~pKS Off ICE. Planning Board Minutes June 21, 2006 06 JUl \ 4 M\": 3 0 Present: Tom French, Chairman; Fred Armstrong, Clerk; Ken Torman, Walt~!}~n!9ns, John DeMassi, Frank Holmes HAf4:JfU l\EESLlEOTTS MASSACH r 1. June 14, 2006 minutes Motion: To approve as submitted (Torman-Armstrong) All in favor. PASSES 2. June 19, 2006 letter from Pam Whitely, Mary Smith Associates re: Heron Crest foundation plantings. Mr. Burke explained there is a new engineer and a new landscape architect for the development. r Mr. DeMassi asked if the new landscape plan is a significant enough change to reopen the special permit. Mr. Burke said he did not think so because only the foundation plantings will change, while the perimeter plantings remain the same. He said the number and value of the plantings on the new plan exceed the original plan. Mr. Burke said if the number ofplantings had decreased with the new plan, that might be a reason to reopen the special permit. He said he had several meetings with the landscape architect and he thinks the revised plan is a better one. Motion: To approve as a field modification (Torman-Armstrong) Mr. Armstrong asked about the berm at the front of the site. Mr. Burke said this plan does not address that issue, but he said he told the site contractor to submit a stamped as-built before the landscaping is finished. Mr. Jenkins said the board had been assured the garage doors wouldn't be visible from the street after the site was finished; he said the existing berm isn't nearly tall enough to do that. All in favor. PASSES The board discussed whether it is time to start updating the Master Plan. Mr. Jenkins asked about the completion of Route 106, which still has no lights, no striping and no signage. Mr. Burke said he has spoken with Mr. Sullivan, who was told in May that the lights were imminent. Mr. Jenkins said the pole in front of Bristol Plaza has been removed, and suggested some grading and striping would go a long way to help that area. Mr. French suggested sending a letter to the Board of Selectmen, Mass Highway and the Police Department. Mr. Burke said part of the problem may be funding through Mass Highway; Mr. Jenkins said he understood that, but said if the work couldn't r be completed, it should have been stopped at a point that would have left the intersection safer. Planning Board 1 6/A/2006 '\. Mr. Holmes asked about a traffic study for TOD. Mr. Burke said the town could ask SRPEDD to start doing traffic counts, which it will be doing for possible Route 106 reconstruction detours. Dr. Torman asked when there would be a TOD package; Mr. . Burke said there is a draft report from the consultant, and he is working on a zoning package. Mr. Armstrong suggested scheduling a time to discuss the draft report. ~ Mr. Jenkins asked to have the Conservation Agent look at the Patriot's Way no-touch zones before the July 12 public hearing to amend that special permit. The clerk read the public hearing notice. Mr. French explained how the public hearing would be conducted. Ralph Maloon, RIM Engineering, explained the plan for a 16-lot subdivision with 12 lots in Mansfield and four in Norton. The Norton portion is a conventional subdivision, the Mansfield portion a cluster and would be a public way. A sidewalk is proposed along one side of the new roadway. Mr. Maloon explained the existing water main on Essex Street would be extended to the new roadway, through the subdivision and would connect to the water main on Emerson Circle. The Mansfield lots will be on sewer, with a trunk line into Norton. There will be a landscaped cul-de-sac island. There will be three hydrants; at the entrance, at the intersection and at the circle. Drainage will go from the center portion of the site to a groundwater recharge area, with a second recharge area near the intersection ofFeck Way and DeMascio. Drainage on the Norton side will go to a detention area. ---- Mr. Maloon explained the cul-de-sac island will be landscaped and as many existing trees saved as possible. Rhodedendron, burning bush and a flowering cherry or Bradford pear will be added to the island. Mr. Maloon presented the board with pictures of the existing site. He explained the entrance would have grassed with a masonry entrance wall and a flowering area. Mr. Maloon said there are no trees within Essex Street to be removed, but a portion of the stone wall will be removed and rebuilt along the roadway radius. Mr. Maloon explained the cluster lots in Mansfield show building envelopes, the size of which vary from lot to lot. There is a proposed 50-foot buffer for the Hallett Crossing abutters. Mr. Maloon explained there are two open space areas, a large portion to the right of the roadway and a smaller portion to the left. He said the open space is adjacent to existing town-owned conservation land, so they will probably donate this open space land to the Conservation Commission. Mr. DeMascio said they have not been to Conservation yet; Mr. French said the board would want to know the disposition of the open space before its final decision. ----\ Planning Board 2 1,.\ 6/*/2006 . . r Mr. DeMassi asked about the conventional test plan; Mr. Burke said that plan showed the same number of lots as the cluster. Mr. Feck said he has spoken with the Building Inspector about a condition that nothing would be allowed outside the building envelopes. Mr. Jenkins asked if the building envelopes for the lots in Mansfield would be entirely within Mansfield. Mr. Feck said they would be. Mr. Maloon said he would be making some changes to the plan for the next meeting and would bring the test plan. Mr. Maloon explained there are vernal pools on the Norton side of the development. Mr. Feck said they will file with Mansfield Conservation next week. Mr. Maloon said the big issue would be the retention area, which is within 100 feet of a property line. Mr. Maloon said the Mansfield wetland line has been accepted, but the Norton line has not been reviewed. Mr. French asked the width of the roadway; Mr. Maloon said it is a 50-foot layout with 22 feet of pavement. He said he would be asking for waivers for pavement width, sloped granite curbing rather than vertical, and a sidewalk on one side of the road. Mr. DeMassi asked if 24 feet of pavement was possible; Mr. Maloon said it was. Mr. Maloon said he may have to add a waiver for the retention area within 100 feet of a property line, which he said is actually the street. Mr. Feck said if the Norton roadway width is different, they would try to blend the different pavement widths as much as possible at the intersection. r Mr. Jenkins asked about the plan for the entrance in Norton; Mr. Feck said they aren't planning anything there. Mr. Jenkins said it would be nice to have a similar entrance. Mr. Feck said the subdivision is mostly in Mansfield, with only one or two lots entering from the Norton side. Mr. Jenkins said he is concerned about the drainage area so close to the entrance to the development. Mr. Feck said a lot of the drainage area is underground; Mr. DeMascio said he lives on that comer, so he will be looking at it more than anyone. Mr. Jenkins asked what that will look like. Mr. Feck said the original plan had a totally underground system with a leaching field. Mr. Maloon said based on soil tests, they are thinking about wetland retention, which would look more natural. Mr. Holmes said that type of retention can be done nicely and would look better than a stone drainage basin. Mr. Maloon said the site has very porous material with very high groundwater. Mr. Jenkins said he is concerned that whatever conditions are set regarding the trees and wetland areas are conveyed to the homeowners. Mr. Feck said they would be very strict about passing the building envelope information along to the buyers. Mr. Holmes asked if the area beyond the building envelopes will be no touch zones. Mr. Jenkins asked how the subdivision being in two towns will be treated. Mr. Burke explained they would have to post surety with both Norton and with Mansfield. Mr. Jenkins asked what would happen if the work in one town is completed but not in the other. Mr. Burke explained there could be a development agreement, which would be a contract. He said he is concerned about what would happen if the Norton side is not r approved, because then the cul-de-sac roadway in Mansfield will be longer than allowed. Mr. Burke noted Beaumont's Pond is in two towns and because of the differences Planning Board 3 6/~/2006 between the two town's roadway regulations, it is very obvious where the town line is; Mr. Jenkins said he doesn't want this subdivision to look like that. ~ Mr. DeMassi asked if the special permit could be conditional upon the approval of the Norton side. Mr. Burke said it would have to be done that way; Mr. Maloon said without the signatures of both boards, the plans could not be recorded. Mr. Burke said Norton would have to approve its end of the roadway first. Mr. DeMascio said Norton has said its decision would be contingent upon Mansfield's approval. Mr. French noted that if the Norton road isn't approved, the dead-end street will be too long. Mr. DeMascio said he would have no objection to their release from covenant being conditioned on the Norton roadway being built to the same level of passability as the Mansfield side. Mr. Feck suggested the revised plan show Phase 1 and Phase 2. Department Head Comments The clerk read memos from the Water, Electric and Engineering Departments. Mr. Armstrong asked if Norton requires underground utilities. Mr. Maloon said it does. Mr. Maloon said he didn't have a problem addressing any of the comments, but would have to work on the front retention area. Public Comment Albert Colter, 12 Emerson Circle, asked if water and gas would both be taken from Emerson. Mr. Feck said the water would be, but gas was unlikely. Mr. Colter asked the path of the water connection. Mr. Maloon explained the water main would be in a six- foot deep trench; he explained the area they will go through is a retention area for Emerson Circle, which Mr. Feck and Mr. DeMascio have purchased. He noted there is also a Shell Oil pipe in that area, which they will have to work around. Mr. Colter asked if the water main would go below the water in the retention area; Mr. Maloon said it would have to be installed underground. Mr. French asked if the retention area is a wetland; Mr. Feck said he has spoken with the Conservation Agent, who has determined it is not a wetland. ~ Mr. Colter said the wetland areas have been increasing and asked if this development would make that worse. Mr. French said the Conservation Commission would be holding a public hearing on wetland issues. Mr. Colter said he was concerned about groundwater seeping into basements. Mr. Maloon said the water from this site sheds to wetlands on either side of the site, and they are putting more water back into the ground that what goes in now. He noted their runoffwill be balanced with retention; he said there would be the same amount of water in any rainstorm pre- and post-development. Mr. DeMassi said without this project, the water goes someplace; with the project, it will go somewhere else. He said he doesn't want to minimize the neighbor's concerns that it might be going toward them. Mr. DeMascio said the Town Engineer reviews the -.., calculations to make sure that doesn't happen. Mr. Maloon said the Norton portion sheds Planning Board 4 '\;\ 6/./2006 r to the same wetland areas the Mansfield portion. He said the Emerson detention area drops to the same wetland this site would use. Mr. Maloon said the site is in the ACEC and they would treat the runoff for the first inch in the above-ground basin. Mr. Colter asked who owns the portion of land that connects Emerson with this site. Mr. DeMascio said they do. Mike Lambert, 15 Nathan Road, asked how the no-cut zone would be enforced. Mr. Feck said it would be in the deeds. Mr. Burke said it would also be a condition of the special permit, which is enforced by the building inspector. Richard Detch, 20 Nathan Road, asked if the water line coming through Emerson to this site is necessary for the project. Mr. Feck said they own the property and it is part of the proposal. Mr. French said the Water Department's memo indicated that connection would be a positive thing because it would eliminate two dead-end lines. Mr. Detch said the water line is very close to his property line and asked how much land would be cleared for the construction. Mr. French asked if there is an easement for the water main; Mr. DeMascio said there is. Mr. Detch asked how a problem in the water line would be fixed; Mr. DeMascio said the town would have an access easement from Feck Way to Emerson and would access the line in whatever way is easiest. Mr. Detch asked if the line has to be so close to his property; Mr. Maloon said that line might be moved over, but said he put it where it is to stay away from the wetland. Mr. DeMassi asked if r that would be a buildable lot in the future; Mr. Maloon said it would not be. Mr. Detch said he was concerned about the easement area being cleared and becoming attractive to children. Mr. Holmes asked how often that area is wet; Mr. Detch said it is wet all the time. Mr. Holmes said when the line is installed and replanted, it will be wet again and won't be any more attractive to children than it is now. Mr. Feck said the detention will have to function the way it does now. Mr. Detch said he was concerned the line is very close to his house and asked if it could be moved. Mr. Detch thanked the developers for adding the 50-foot no touch zone as a buffer for the neighbors. Mr. Feck said they would add that to the plans. Dave Rullo, 19 Emerson Circle, said he doesn't think there is enough room between his property and the basin to put the water line underground. Mr. French said it has to go underground; Mr. Feck said it would be within the easement. Mr. Rullo asked if there would be street drainage going into the Emerson detention pond; Mr. DeMascio said there would not. Tom Crowell, 31 Longwood, asked how much water would be displaced for the water line and where it would go. Mr. Feck said a plan would have to be designed for the Conservation hearing, and added the Town Engineer would have to review all the drainage plans. Mr. Maloon said the water line would be 65-70 feet from the wetland, so r- they will have to go to the Conservation Commission. Planning Board 5 1\ 6/m/2006 Board Comment ~ Dr. Torman noted one of the waiver requests is for sidewalks on one side and asked about putting the money from the unbuilt portion into the town's sidewalk fund. Mr. Feck noted the board had previously brought up the issue of the sidewalk on one side because there are no houses on the other side of the road. Mr. Burke said that is something that will get done during the process. Mr. Feck suggested the sidewalk fund money be used for new sidewalks, rather than reconstructing existing ones. Mr. Burke noted the giver can tell the Board of Selectmen what the gift is for. Mr. DeMassi asked about Lot 4, which looks like a pork chop lot. Mr. Burke said it is oddly shaped, but has the required frontage. Mr. DeMassi said he is concerned about having a house behind another house; Mr. French said it looked like it would be several hundred feet from the other house. Mr. Jenkins suggested shrinking the building envelope on Lot 4 away from the existing abutters. Mr. DeMassi asked if Mr. DeMascio's existing house would become part of the new roadway. Mr. DeMascio said it would stay on Essex Street. Mr. DeMascio asked about the utility easements; Mr. Feck explained those are for the forebay drainage areas. Mr. DeMascio said the town would have an easement for maintenance of the drainage areas. Mr. Maloon said the Town Engineer has asked for that wording on all easements. ~ Mr. DeMassi asked if Lot N4 would have a driveway onto Essex Street or the new road; Mr. Feck said its access would be onto the new road. An abutter asked about the scenic road process. Mr. Burke explained the removal of trees or stone walls within the town owned right-of-way requires a public hearing. An abutter asked if the houses would be on sewer; Mr. DeMascio said the Mansfield houses would be on sewer. Mr. DeMassi asked to see the roadway cross-sections and a temporary construction entrance on the plans. Mr. DeMassi asked if there would be a crosswalk; Mr. Burke said it would not be required. Mr. DeMassi asked if the street trees shown on the landscape plan are the ones that will be planted; Mr. Maloon said they are. Mr. Jenkins asked for a detail of the street lights. Mr. Burke said this will be a public way, so the lights will have to come from MMED. Mr. Jenkins said he would like to see a detailed landscape plan. .-..., Planning Board 6 6/i/2006 r r- r- > , Mr. DeMassi asked if the street trees would continue into Norton; Mr. Maloon said Norton has the same regulations, so the street trees will be consistent. Mr. Jenkins asked iflooping the water main is the best solution, considering all the work that has to be done and the wet areas that have to be crossed. Mr. DeMascio said that wasn't their first choice, but the loop was what the Water Department wanted. Mr. DeMascio said the dead-end water main and the looped water main would cost around the same. Mr. Feck said it wouldn't make much difference to them, but said he thought the Water Department wouldn't allow the dead-end. Mr. Jenkins asked for the size of the building envelopes to be included on the plans. Mr. DeMascio asked if a list on the side of the plan, rather than on each lot, would be acceptable. The board said that would be acceptable. Mr. Holmes said there had been an issue about the road coming onto Essex Street and asked if that had been resolved. Mr. Maloon said the road has been moved to the north, with an easement from the abutting lot. Mr. Holmes asked about the drainage area near Essex Street and about existing drainage. Mr. Maloon said there are virtually no drainage structures in Essex Street now. Mr. Holmes said there will be a lot of water going to the new drainage area and the area has a high water table, and asked if Essex Street would flood if the new system doesn't work properly. Mr. Maloon said the perc rates were all under two minutes; he said the new system would hold the 100-year storm without effecting basements or Essex Street. Mr. Holmes noted there is a IS-foot crushed stone area shown at the drainage basin; Mr. DeMascio said that would be for overflow. Mr. Holmes suggested landscaping that area. Mr. Maloon said that isn't for overflow, it is an inlet. Mr. Holmes said Mr. Sullivan mentioned a force main for the sewer. Mr. Maloon said the sewer line comes close to the surface near the cul-de-sac, so the lots off the cul-de-sac will need a sewer manhole and grinder pumps. Mr. Maloon noted the pumps would be owned by the homeowners and there will be no lift station. Mr. Holmes said one of the abutters mentioned a low point between the cul-de-sac and one of the abutters on the western edge. He asked if there would have to be filling for those lots. Mr. DeMascio said the roof runoff would go into the ground. Mr. Maloon said there would be filling for the houses with a swale to take the runoff to the wetland. Mr. Burke suggested running a swale along the property line to take that water away. Mr. Burke suggested the two entrances to the subdivision be as similar as possible. Mr. DeMascio said the Norton Conservation Agent has objected to the plantings proposed for the Mansfield entrance. Mr. Burke suggested different types of plantings. Planning Board 6/.\2006 7 , , Mr. Burke said he supports the sidewalk waiver because there are no houses on the other side of the street. He suggested the developers think about a donation to the town's sidewalk account. Mr. Burke asked for better information about the topography of the abutting properties and location of the houses. Mr. DeMassi said he was most concerned about the abutters off the back of the cul-de-sac. Mr. Holmes asked if there are houses across Essex Street from the entrance; Mr. DeMascio said there are open fields. Mr. DeMassi asked if there are any sidewalks on Essex Street; Mr. DeMascio said there are none. Motion: To continue the public hearing to August 9, 2006 at 8:00 p.m. (Torman-DeMassi) All in favor. PASSES Dr. Torman asked about the landscaping at Erin's Centre. Mr. Burke said he has spoken with representatives of Home Depot, but there appears to be some litigation among the parties. Dr. Torman asked if the Building Inspector could set a drop-dead date. Mr. Burke said he doubted a court would allow the town to pull a store's certificate of occupancy because the landscaping is incomplete. Mr. French suggested writing a letter to the Building Inspector expressing the board's frustration and ask him to establish a reasonable time frame for the applicant to come into compliance or be prepared to take enforcement action. Mr. Burke said he would contact Home Depot. Dr. Torman suggested Mr. Burke take the strongest stand he feels comfortable with. Dr. Torman asked what is happening with the empty pad at Erin's Centre. Mr. Burke said they are removing stumps. Mr. Holmes said the excavation holes there are being left open overnight, which is unsafe. Motion: To adjourn at 11: 15 p.m. (Torman-DeMassi) All in favor. PASSES Next meeting: Wednes y, July 12,2006 at 7:30 p.m. '/12/0& Date of Approval Planning Board 8 'v 6/'I/J./2006 T I > . ~ ~ ~