Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning 10/30/1972MANSFIELD PLANNING BOARD AGENDA October 30, 1972 1. Call to order (7:30 PM) 2. Clerks report a.Minutes of October 16, 1972 b. Minutes of October 23," 1972 C. Correspondence 3. Warrant 4. Public Hearings 8:00 P.M. Mansfield Trust 8:30 P.M. Home Developers, iInc. 5. Visitors Agenda 9:00 P.M' Ralph Maloon re. Walnut Park Subdivision 9:30 P.M. John Morley re. Canoe River Acres and Richard Hallett Subdivision 10:00 P.M. Margot Jellinek 6. Old Business a. Status of Plans 1) Magna Vista II - Def. Sub.`- Lawndale Road - 11/18/72 2) Mansfield Trust - Def. Sub. - Forbes Boulevard - '11/24/72 ;3) Edward Carl - Form - School Street - 11/3/72 b. .Renaming School Street and Elm Street< c. Zoning By-law > 7. New Business a. Zoning ;Board of Appeals - Variance Applications b. Bond Estimate - Minute Man Estates c. Around the Table 8. Adjournment i MANSFIELD PLANNING BOARD MINUTES October 30, 1972 i The Mansfield Planning Board met at the Town Office Building on Monday, October 30, 1972 at 7:30 P.M. Present: Chairman Mendes, Clerk Grant Planners: Zaffini, Latham, Nelson, Wellington, MacFarlane Town Planner Maurer -1. Letters were read from the following: Memorandum from Town Planner Maurer to the Planning Board regarding bond estimate for Minute Man Estates. 'Memorandum was set aside to be discussed later in the meeting. g Planning Board to Allan Willis regarding fees for Public Hearing. Planning Board to Carl Nelson regarding fees for public Hearing. Planning Board to Walter Millette regarding retaining wall in Pine Needle Park. Planning Board ;to Carl Nelson regarding test holes dug in Capt. John Williams Estate. Planning Board toAntonino Capon Igro regarding Form A application on Gilbert Street. <, Planning Board to _Town Counsel regarding, proposed zoning provisions, Wayne Torkington to Carol Thomas regarding, arrangements for final review meeting, ; and; corrections on maps. Planning Board to Town Treasurer regarding release of performance bond for New Mansfield Estates for storm Drain and 'Sanitary sewer.' Town Treasurer to Benjamin Franklin Savings Bank regarding release of performance bond for New Mansfield Estates for storm drain and sanitary sewer. Leslie H. Ferrier to Town Manager regarding underground electrical facilities in subdivisions. Leslie H. Ferrier to Waldor Realtyregarding pole line installation in Pine Needle Park. Memorandum from the Mansfield Planning Board to Town Manager regarding the 1973-74 Planning Board budget. Planning Board to Building Inspector requesting a copy of the annual report on the status of gravel pits. Board of Selectmen from the Building Inspector regarding the inspection of gravel pits. 1 Board of Selectmen from TheresalParento ;regarding property abutting Cabot, i Cabot, and Forbes Industrial Park on West Street. E Minutes from the Board of Appeals on the application of John R. Krauth noting that "A letter from the Town Planner was read into the transcript." -Minutes October 30, 1972 Board of Appeals application of Edward J. Proteau - set aside to be discussed ( later. Board of Appeals application of Mansfield House of Pizza - set aside to be discussed: later. Board of Appeals application of ,Signcraft, Inc. - set aside to be discussed later. Notice of Meeting of Ten Mile River Basin Task Force on Thursday, October 26, 1972. Memorandum to Ten Mile River Task Force from the (Chairman regarding Project ECO - Clean-up Program for Ten Mile. Booklet on the Fiscal Year Change Conferences presented by Association of Town Finance Committees. Massachusetts Federation of Planning Boards to the Planning Board regarding meeting on Tuesday, November 14, ;1972 Memorandum to Camp, Dresser C McKee clients from Camp, presser & 'McKee regarding the "Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972." Joint Transportation Planning Group - Draft - Revised Mass Transit Project Work Program Cam, Dresser, McKee Newsletter. Harbor National Bank of Boston Proposal for Bonds- Town of Mansfield, Mass. Industrial Development Seminars notice of meetings. Article on "Study Disputes Belief that Growth Hurts Taxpayers."- Pamphlet from Municipal Computer Service. Alexander Potter Associates announcing a merger with Camp, Dresser t; McKee, Inc.' 2. Motion: To approve the minutes of October 16, 1972. (Wellington-Zaffini, all in favor) VOTED 3. Motion: To approve the minutes of October 23, 1972. (Wellington -Grant, all in favor) VOTED 4. Motion: To approve the warrant of 'October 31, 1972 in the amount of $221.46. (Wellington -Grant, all in favor) VOTED 5. The Board reviewed the Form A Pian for two lots for Edward Carl for land on School Street. Motion: To approve the Form A Plan for Edward Carl for two lots on School Street. (Wellington -Grant, all in favor) VOTED 6. The Board discussed the renaming of Elm Street and School Street. Town Planner Maurer presented five alternatives. I Alternative #1 - from 149 Elm Street to 219 Elm Street would become Otis Street and seven houses would have to change on that section, then Elm Street would run to the Town Line. This would involve 72 houses. Alternative #2 - School Street would run down the old section of School Street and the old section of Elm Street and this would effect 17 houses. Planner Zaffini question Town Planner Maurer if he had checked to see what effect this would ;have on the deeds of the homeowners that would be changed. Town Planner Maurer informed the Board that he had not done this. Alternative #3 - Proposes that a new name be put to the old Elm Street and old School Street area. The number of houses that would be effected _would be 17. Alternative #4 - it is very much Eike number 3 except you are only effecting 4 houses. Alternative #5 - Elm Street would :be a continuation of Williams Street. It would effect the same number of houses as in Alternative #3. Planner Latham questioned who wanted this changed. Town Planner Maurer informed l the Board that the Board of Assessors had received a request several months ago and the Planning Board received a request from the Board of Selectmen about a month ago. It was the consensus of the Board that Alternative #1 would be the best, even though it would effect 72 homes. Motion: To approve alternative #1 and recommend ,this to the Board of Selectmen. (MacFarlane -Wellington, all in favor) VOTED. Town Planner Maurer questioned if the Board should recommend any procedure to the Board of Selectmen that they hold a hearing on it before they accept it. Chairman Mendes stated that he thought this was the usual procedure. 7. Public Hearing was held at 8:00 P. M. for'Mansfi.eld Trust on Forbes Boulevard. Transcript of that hearing is on file. U. Board met with Mr. Paul Dalton and Mr. Micheal Murphy from Cabot, Cabot and Forbes regarding the land within the Berkshire Road Subdivision. Mr. Dalton questioned the Board regarding a standard covenant to go by. Town Planner Maurer informed Mr. Dalton that this could be obtained from the Subdivision Rules and Regulations. 9. Chairman Mendes questioned the Board members to see if they remembered any discussion regarding the 'installment of utilities on Berkshire Road. Planner Wellington then questioned, when the plans had been submitted as they were not torfamiliary with them. Town Planner Maurer informed the Board that they had looked at the plans right after they were submitted on September 25, 1972 and then suggested that a hearing besetup at the same time as Magna Vista 11. Planner Zaffini questioned where they got permission to install the utilities. Planner Nelson stated that he did not feel it was right for them to be able to install the utilities without inspection that ,they should make them uncover it to be inspected properly. 'Town Planner Maurer pointed out to the Board that the new regulations require that they provide a 25 year storm drain and ,that they had only provided a 10 year storm drain so the pipe will be under the capacity. Planner Nelson stated that he felt this should be discussed further before the close of the meeting. _4_ Minutes October 30, 1972 10. Public Hearing was held at u:30 P.M. for Home Developers Inc, for the Preliminary Subdivision Plan for Magna Vista If located on Lawndale Road. Transcript of that hearing Is on file. t 11. Board met with Engineer Ralph Maloon and Mr. Guido Scarpellini to discuss the Walnut Park Subdivision on Walnut Street, it was noted that a note :had been put on theplplans stating that "lot 32 to, go to the State and lot 31 to be deeded to the Mansfield Conservation Commission or abutting owner". it was noted that the dimension on lot 30 was not correct. Engl.neer Maloon informed the Board that they intended to fill lots 8 and 7 with about 1 foot of fill. It was noted that the elevation at the top of the brook is 160;95 and that the brook cuts through a piece of lot :8 and then it_foliows,proposed Route 140. Engineer Maloon stated that the width of the brook is varying, at some places it is two feet wide and shallow and in some places it is narrow and deep, Chairman Mendes questioned if test holes had been dug and where they were located,'Engineer-Maloon-stated that they had been dug on every lot. Town Planner Maurer presented the report from the Board of Health.It was noted that there was water at 5 feet In almost every lot, Engineer Maloon stated that at a rate of 5 inches, per minute you are allowed to put a leaching field in at 2 feet above ground water. It was noted that there was a low spot in lot 18. The Board noted that the curb information was needed and that the elevation of the river was varying so they must have to fill the river l and this would involve a Hatch Act. The Board requested the stream elevation up where the building lots are, and recheck the dimensions of lot 30. 12. Board met with Engineer Robert Libby regarding the Form A Plan for Janet L. Sullivan signed on October 16, 1972. Engineer Libby informed the Board that the Town of Easton would not give them a building permit on lots that had rear land inQ-Nw-Nw ntil the Pian: was signed by both Towns. Motion: To resign the Form A Plan for Janet L. Sullivan for land on East Street. (Nelson -Latham, all in favor) VOTED, 13. Board met with attorney John Morley, Mr. Douglas A. King,; and Engineer Robert Booth to discuss the Definitive Subdivision Plan for Canoe River Acres. 'Att. Morley stated that, in response to the Planning Boards letter of October 4, 1972, he felt that the Board could; not do what they were trying to do, and, If they could, they were putting Mr. King in an impossible position. Att. c Morley stated that they could not get a bank loan under the conditions of having to ;put the entire underdrain system in before begining construction. Att. Morley stated that he would like a conditional approval from the Planning -G Board as he had received a conditional approval from the Board of Health. Att. Morley stated that they would like to develop 1/2 of the subdivision and, if it worked properly, then go on with the other 1/2 of the subdivision and do It with a bond. Engineer Booth stated that lots 9-14 the water table is 9 feet, which is 'below - any point necessary. Town Planner Maurer stated that in ;the Spring he had seen the water at 2 feet. Engineer Booth stated that :this was before the ditch had been put in. Town Planner Maurer stated that back in August the ground water was ;9 feet. Engineer Booth stated that in August when it was done that Charles k Jones was present and was satisified and perhaps the drain could go under a bond along with the road. Town Planner Maurer pointed out that Mr. King had been advised by Haley and Aldrich to install the sub -drains. Att. Morley again raised the question if it was possible to install part of the drains and build if they worked alright. Town Planner Maurer stated that the intent was that the whole area be drained and not go on a piece by piece basis as they may get 1 or 2 lots okay and then run into problems. Chairman Mendes stated that if they allowed to -5 - Minutes October 30, 1972 do 1/2 of the area and the Pest did not work they would end up ,with a long dead end road. f" Attorney Morley stated that if the road was built under a<covenant then they could not sell any lots until everything was completed. He also stated that he did not :feel that this was up to the Planning Board but should be up to the ' Board of 'Health. Town Planner Maurer informed ,him that under the Mansfield Subdivision By-law they are responsible for the whole drainage system. Town Planner Maurer brought it to the Boards attention that the Haley and Aldrich report stated that the only way the drainage system could work properly is if it is installed correctly and that this was the point that the Board was trying to make in their letter is that they want to see that it is installed properly and working before they allow them to continue. Chairman'; Mendes pointed out to Attorney Morley that their own consulting engineers report it states "we believe" and "it appears" but they ';never actually say "it will work." If, they cannot say it will work how can the Board believe it will. Chairman Mendes stated that he felt, from the Town's point of view, that the letter is the solution and if Mr. King would like to make :proposals or re- commendations the Board would be glad to listen and try and find another solution to it. Engineer Booth then questioned if it was legal to require this andChairmanMendes informed him that Town Counsel ,agreed that it was legal. 14. Board met with Mrs. Margot Jellinek regarding the second Hatch Act Hearing for Joao Periera for land on Willow Street`. Mrs. Jellinek questioned if Town Planner or the Board had seen the revised plans. Town Planner Maurer informed her that he had seen the plans and had sent them to Washington to see if it would disqualify the Town from the flood plain insurance. Mrs. Jellinek stated that she felt this was wrong, that the Board should have seen the plans. 'Chairman Mendes stated that Town Planner Maurer was the Hatch Act Agent for the Town and he had the right to do this. Mrs. Jellinek then stated that she was not talking about the insurance now but about the Camp, Dresser & McKee flood plain. She questioned if the Board still felt the same way as they did when they ',sent a letter to the first hearing and, if so, why they had not sent a letter to the second hearing. Mrs. Jellinek asked the Board members to sign a petition to send to the 'Department of Natural Resources advising them to take action on this and refuse the building in that area. Chairman Mendes stated that if the Conservation Commission failed to act within the '21 days they are allowed he would be the first one to sign the petition, as an individual. ;He did not believe the signing of petitions is a Planning Board function. 15. Mrs, Jellinek questioned if the Board's meeting next week was a work session or a regular business meeting as she would like to be put on the agenda. The Board informed her that this would be discussed Eater. 16. The Board again discussed the renaming of Elm Street and School, Street. It was noted that the Board had voted on Alternative #1 and the Board questioned if they should send a procedure to be followed by the Board of 'Selectmen. -Chairman Mendes stated that he thought it was required that they hold a public hearing. Planner Nelson stated that they should ,go over all the streets that are like this and rename them. Chairman Mendes stated that action had been requested on this particular problem. Planner Nelson felt that some reasons should be submitted with the alternative, and point out that the sooner it is done the less ,people it will effect. r 17. It was the consensus of the Board that next Monday be a regular business meeting and the following week be a work session. Mrs. Jellinek requested Minutes October 30, 1972 to be put on the agenda for next week to discuss the land of Joseph Rezza. 18. Board discussed the Board of Appeals application of Signcraft, Inc, of E. Braintree for a VARIANCE to allow the installation of two signs on the property of fysie Realty Trust located on ,the corner of North Main and Church Streets which `would be larger than allowed in a Business "B" Zone. Town Planner Maurer noted that the setback did not conform with regulations and they .were not asking for a VARIANCE on this. It was noted that the sign 'would be is feet wide and 15 feet high. It was noted, that they were going ;to erect more signs on the :building than is allowed besides the free standing sign. Planner Wellington felt it should be pointed out that they are allowed 12 sq, feet per occupant and they are already proposing 22 sq, feet per occupant. Motion: That it be pointed out that there are 12 sq, feet per occupand allowed and they are proposing 22 sq, feet per occupant. (Wellington- Grant, all in favor) VOTED. Motion: To reccommend that the VARIANCE be granted provided that the size of the sign conforms to the proposed sign regulations and that a copy of the proposed regulations be forwarded to the Board of Appeals, and that for this particular building the sign size should be 12 sq. I ft, per occupant. (MacFarlane-Zaffini,all In favor) VOTED 19. Board discussed the Board of Appeals application :of the Mansfield House of Pizza for <a VARIANCE to allow the installation of two signs at 141 North Main l Street which would be larger than allowed in a,Business "B" Zone, It was noted that the were asking for permission to hang a sign 31x6' and permission to keep up the wall sign on the front of :the building. Motion: To recommend that the VARIANCE ,be granted provided that the size conforms to the proposed sign regulations. (Grant -Wellington, all in favor) VOTED 20. Board discussed the Board of Appeals application of Edward J. Proteau of 509 West Street for a VARIANCE to erect a 4' by 12' sign with a 4' by 6' section of :replaceable letters on ,Copeland Drive which is non -conforming in a Business "B" Zone. ;It was noted that he would erect a sign 41x121ron the top that would $ say "Copeland Professional Building" and underneath a 41x6' sign to list the occupants of the building. Motion: To 'recommend that the VARIANCE be granted provided that the size conforms to the proposed sign regulations. (Wellington -Grant, all in favor) VOTED. 1. The Board discussed the Memorandum from Town Planner Maurer for the Bond Estimate in Minute Man Estates. Town Planner Maurer noted that it was 're- quested by Leon Grant to get a bond estimate for work to be done. Leon Grant then addressed the Board and stated that he was in the process of getting a lbankbook for $7,500. He informed the Board that he had the loam that had been removed off some of the propery so he would hot have that cost. He also pointed out that he would have the road completed and the binder coat on within the next two weeks. Chairman Mendes pointed out that if Mr. Grant - defaulted that the Town would not be able to use his loam and would have to buy it. Town Planner Maurer pointed out that the catchbasins had not been l completed there and Mr. Grant informed the Board that this would only take a day. Mr. Grant stated that all he wanted was the Board's permission for Town Planner Maurer to say the road is acceptable and if he does that the Board i FA Minutes October, 30, 1972 will accept a bond in the amount of $7,500. Chiarman Mendes informed him that , these were two items that the Board could not delegate to an agent, that the Board would have to vote for the release of the covenant before he could ob- tain building permits. Motion: To accept the bond of $7,500 upon completion of the binder coat of the entire lenght of Heritage Lane in the Minute Man Estates Subdivision. (Nelson -MacFarlane, all in favor) VOTED. 22. Planner _Latham discussed the Flowmeters with the Board. He pointed out that the flowmeters should be level control rather than measuring cubic feet. A recorder will be installed withan up to date mechanism clocking 0-50 inches marked by a box pen. If there is not much fluxuation the pen will last for a week. The Flowmeter proposed is one manufactured by the Foxboro Company in the 3100 series Float and Cable instruments. The estimated cost is $680.00. It was the consensus of the Board that this should be padalocked. Motion: To approve the design of the Flowmeter as presented and send it to Cabot, Cabot and Forbes to proceed forthwith. (Wellington -Latham, all in favor) VOTED. It was noted that they should use a yard ,stick reading until the system comes to determine how high the water gets during the winter. 23. Planner Zaffini questioned what was going to be done about Cabot, Cabot and Forbes building the road and putting the utilities in before getting permission. Town Planner Maurer noted that he had talked to .Mr. Murphy and Mr. Murphy stated that he had explained to the Board that they would have to go ahead with the building and It was agreed. The Board could not remember ever having a discussion of this nature, Town Planner Maurer noted that they had put a 15 `,inch ,pipe for the storm drain and it should be an 18 inch pipe. Motion: To require Cabot, Cabot and Forbes to remove the storm drainage pipes and replace them with 18 inch pipe. (Latham-Zaffini, ,all in favor) VOTED Chairman Mendes then questioned if the rest of the utilities had been covered before they were inspected. Town-Planner'Maurer informed the Board that it had been completed without any inspection. Chairman Mendes felt that they should be required to uncover the road so that all utilities can be checked. It .was noted that the parking lots and the roofs would be draining into the street drainage so the street drainage would be taking care of 52- to 6 acres of land. It was noted that they had put in 300 feet of drainage as required. Planner Zaffini noted that he had seen them putting the valve on the water main but it was not done in the same location as it is shown on the plan. Motion: To require them to remove the cover at the necessary points for the purpose of providing inspectiion and that no further work be conducted on Berkshire Road until the plan has been approved. (Zaffini-Nelson, all in favor) VOTED. 24. Planner Nelson questioned what the requirements were for Cabot, Cabot and Forbes for road construction, especially concerning the size of the stones. It was noted that the stones were to be no larger than 4 inches in diameter. Planner Nelson stated that on Hampshire Street he had noted that they were using extra large size stones and he thought something should be done about this. He also noted that near School Street they were just covering the muck over and not removing it. The Board noted that the size of the stone -8- Minutes October 30, 1972 on Hampshire Street had already been questioned with Cabot, Cabot and Forbes and they had agreed to bring in the receipts for ;gravel upon request from the Board. The Board felt that they should consider doing something about the fact that muck might be just covered over instead of removed. Motion: That test holes should be dug near School Street to determine the base of the road. (MacFarlane-Nelson, all in favor), VOTED 25. Town Planner Maurer informed the 'Board that last week they thought they had ',covered all the; zoning, but there area couple of areas that :the Board still has to go over. 26. Meeting adjourned 11:50. A.M. Clerk /%✓fir; (r , /,2 12 Da tem 1 4