Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning 05/09/2018Planning Board Minutes May 9, 2018 Present: Tom French, Chair; Don Cleary, Clerk; Beth Ashman -Collins, Michael McClanahan, Ralph Penney, Mike Feck, Rich LeBlanc; Alternates Joe Cerretani and Sharon Friedman Shaun P. Burke, Director of Planning and Development; Jennifer Davis, Administrative Secretary 1. Minutes April 25, 2018 Motion: To approve as submitted (Friedman-Cerretani) Five in favor. One abstention. PASSES 2. Public Hearing notices — Attleboro, Easton, Norton, North Attleboro / Sr ' �i Site T'lan :t60 Norm �1'Iain �i~xee# -� )2v#arUOutt>oor�at�v �enrie#� and ��%onne r )ITe�'azrt► '- � y Craig Cvgawnoski. RIM Engineering: Richard Peterson. Annino Associates: Trattoria della Norma owners Kenneth and Yvonne DeFazio; Lou Guarino, building owner Mr. Cygawnoski explained the existing restaurant is at 160 North Main Street and 150 is next door; both lots are owned by Mr. Guarino, who he said plans to combine the lots into single ownership. Mr. Cygawnoski explained the existing building at 150 is being renovated for a retail use and patio seating for the restaurant with a gate in front of 150 North Main Street. He said the patio would be fenced and used for the restaurant, not for the new retail use. There is an existing ramp and the handicapped parking space will be at the back of the building. Mr. Peterson explained the building's elevation from the North Main Street side, including the porch, which will fit in with the period of the building. Correspondence The clerk read memos from Mr. Burke and Mr. Alves. Mr. Peterson explained the he has spoken with someone at the Architectural Access Board, who told him the ramp from the back of the parking lot, where the handicapped parking space is located, is not long enough to make the grade change; he said the chair lift would not require a variance from the AAB, but would have to be reviewed by the building inspector. Mr. French said the board could add a condition the chair lift would have to conform to architectural standards and be reviewed by the building inspector. Mr. Peterson noted the AAB does not require handicapped parking spaces for lots with less than 15 cars, but the Americans with Disabilities Act does. ADA required one handicapped van Planning Board 5/9/18 parking space at least eight feet wide with an eight -foot aisle. He said they could make that work if the other spaces were all compact. Ms. Friedman asked if the chair lift will need a roof; Mr. Peterson said it is designed to be outside and would not need a roof. Ms. Friedman said if the retail space is going to be year- round, the lift may need protection from the elements. Ms. DeFazio said they would have to maintain the chair lift and the area around it. Mr. Cygawnoski explained the location of the lift and walkway. Mr. French asked why the handicapped space is at the back of the building; Mr. Cygawnoski said that was placed at the suggestion of the building inspector. He said the walkway from that parking space to the lift is flat. Mr. Cygawnoski said to use a ramp, they would need a 30 -foot run with a five-foot leveling area. Mr. Peterson said they originally designed the ramp with the idea of customers coming from North Main Street; they then decided to put the handicapped parking space at the back. Mr. French asked if there would be room to get beyond the back handicapped space, pass the ramp and then go back up it. Mr. Peterson said he would have to double-check that. Fie said there had been a question about the lots being separate but having the equipment for one building on the other property, in case the lots are ever sold separately. Mr. Cygawnoski said there could be an easement. Mr. French asked about parking for the second floor residential units. Mr. Cygawnoski said the two apartments will require three parking spaces, which they have. The retail space will be 940 square feet, which will require one parking space and the additional 20 restaurant seats will require three parking spaces. Mr. Cygawnoski said if the spaces at the rear of the building were all compact, they could gain three feet. He said they would have to install bollards near the stairway to second floor. Mr. Burke suggested allowing compact spaces, putting the parking on the left side of the building and protecting the stairs with bollards. Mr. LeBlanc suggested making the first parking space the van accessible space; Mr. Cygawnoski said that was possible. Mr. Burke said the distance would be about the same and the pavement could be striped to the right. Consensus was to move the handicapped space from the back of the building to Parking Space #I and to strip the pavement. Public Comment None Mr. Cygawnoski said Officer Kinahan had suggested installing steel bollards behind the sidewalk between the patio railings. He said it is shown on the plan, but they would like to remove it. Mr. Cygawnoski said there is an existing granite curb. Consensus was not to require the bollards. Planning Board 5/9/18 Board Comment Ms. Friedman suggested consideration be given to installing a roof over the chair lift. Mr. LeBlanc agreed and suggested extending the roofline. Ms. DeFazio said they could install an awning. Mr. LeBlanc said that would offer protection for patrons and the equipment, which will lower maintenance. Mr. Cleary asked if the site would meet ABCC requirements; Ms. DeFazio said it would. Ms. Ashman -Collins said she is pleased to see outdoor seating on North Main Street. Mr. Burke recommended approving the site plan. Motion: To approve the site plan with the following conditions: the outstanding department head comments are addressed prior issuance of building permits; handicapped space to be relocated to space #1 shown on plan; weather covering over chair lift; all parking spaces will be standard sized spaces; bollards will be eliminated (McClanahan -Cleary) All in favor. PASSES May 1, 2018 letter from Robert Palmer, The Chocolate Factory, proposing to change eight of the approved residential units to affordable units; seven at 80% AMI and one at 110% AMI. Mr. Palmer explained they have obtained some financing from MassHousing and one of the conditions is for some of the units to be changed from market -rate to affordable units, or "workforce" units. He said the total number of units will not change and it is not their intention to make this a 40B development. The Chocolate Factory special permit approved 49 one -bedroom units, 60 two-bedroom units and two loft units for a total of 130; 111 were approved as market rate, 19 were affordable. The revised breakdown would be 103 market rate and 27 affordable units. Motion: To allow the change of eight one -bedroom units from market rate to affordable because of the need for senior residents to have access to one -bedroom units (McClanahan - Ms. Friedman suggested allowing some two bedroom units for elderly couples who need two bedrooms because of health issues. Ms. Friedman asked whether, with the "workforce" units, the residents of the units actually have to be working. Mr. Burke said that is not required; the word "workforce" is an income definition. [Mr. Penney arrived at 7:18 p.m.] Mr. French asked about the construction schedule; Mr. Palmer said they expect to start construction in a few months with WDG Contracting, who he said have worked on other mill redevelopment projects. Planning Board 5/9/18 Mr. LeBlanc asked about distribution of the units; Mr. Palmer said they will be dispersed throughout the development. -Friedman) Six in favor. Penney abstained. PASSES Mr. French asked about the outbuildings; Mr. Palmer said they are trying to get a brewpub for Building E and offices for Building C. [Mr. Burke left the meeting at 7:20] The clerk read the public hearing notice. Mr. French explained how the public hearing would be conducted, and explained the board would make a recommendation to Town Meeting on Tuesday, May 15. Article 46 — Auto Service Station in B4 William Clemmey, 55 Fowler Street, explained Town Meeting changed the Copeland Drive corridor to B4 to differentiate it from the B3 zone, which includes outlying businesses. Mr. Clemmey explained the proposal to allow auto service station in the B4 zone, which he said would be for a Cumberland Farms -type convenience store/gas station, rather than a Firestone - type service station. He noted there are two existing gas stations in the B4 zone. Mr. Clemmey said another full-service gas would be an opportunity for the B4 zone to generate revenue for the town. He noted this would affect the entire B4 zone, but a gas station would be a special permit use and would have to meet queueing requirements. Mr. Clemmey said getting a retail building in the B4 area now is difficult because retail is not growing. He said he has talked to a lot of retailers, who want to be where they get the most exposure. Mr. Clemmey said they would like to break up the parcel with residential buffer buildings on one part and a gas station/convenience store on another. Public Comment - None Board Comment Ms. Friedman asked who bought the Benny's property; Mr. Clemmey said a developer from Rhode Island bought that parcel. Ms. Friedman asked if that retail use can continue; Mr. French said it can. Mr. French said the required setbacks in B4 would be 30 feet in the front, 40 feet in the rear, 20 feet on the sides; there would also be a 20' landscaped buffer strip required on the sides and rear. Mr. Cleary said he thinks this would make sense. Mr. Penney said a gas station would have underground storage tanks, which would be regulated by DEP regulations and the Fire Department. He noted none of the B4 zone is in the Zone II. Planning Board 5/9/18 He asked if this would allow retail auto sales and service; Mr. Clemmey said car wash and car dealer uses are already allowed in the B4. Motion: To support Article 46 (McClanahan -Cleary) Eight in favor. Friedman opposed. PASSES Mr. Clemmey asked about the alternates voting. Mr. French said the alternate members are full members of the board and he thinks they should vote on the zoning articles. Article 47 — TOD Density Mr. Clemmey said the question is how many units per acre the density should be for residential in the train station area. He said this article is for a change in density, but said there has to be a second access in the area to address the traffic issues, which he said the town is working on. He said the BETA Study looked at what a TOD area would look like. He said the by-law currently allows 10 residential units per acre, and up to 20 per acre with density bonuses. He said this proposal is to allow 20 per acre, with up to 30 units per acre with density bonuses. He said the residential units could be any type of housing style. Mr. Clemmey said 1 Mansfield Avenue has 82 units and most downtown buildings have high density. He said he has talked to 20 developers about the TOD and said multi -family development cannot work with a low density. He said he thinks this is a reasonable increase. Mr. Clemmey said this will help promote the train station for development, and once the second access road goes in, it will be a huge boom for the town. He said it will bring more business and more jobs. He said this would put the density around the train station closer to the surrounding area, but not be as high as abutting developments. He said he thinks it is time to move forward and not limit growth in the area. Public Comment A resident asked what is on properties in the area now. Mr. French said there is train station parking and car storage. Mr. Clemmey said the proposal is not for a particular parcel, and TOD is an overlay zone. He said there are a lot of different owners in those zones. He said TOD development would have to be done as part of an overall plan. A resident asked if commuter parking would be lost. Mr. Clemmey said the Board of Selectmen's position is not to lose resident parking with new development. Mr. Cleary said any development would require a special permit. Mr. Clemmey said the Mansfield lot south of Route 106 is in the TOD zone. Board Comment Mr. Feck said he is concerned that without the second access being there, no traffic study about how this kind of development would impact traffic could be legitimate. Ms. Friedman asked about the benefits of higher density mixed-use and the retail that goes with it. Mr. Clemmey said a TOD development would look different than the existing multi -use developments, and may include whole buildings with retail and different kinds of housing. He Planning Board 5/9/18 said the proposed density would be half of what is allowed on nearby properties. Mr. French said the North Main Street side of the tracks is B 1 and B2, which are different zones and a different overlay district. The "COD overlay district is in the Industrial 3 zone, which would allow around the same density as TOD. Mr. Clemmey said when TOD happens, it will be a big development. He said there would have to be traffic plans and input from the MBTA Mr. Cerretani said any development would have to be sensitive to the neighborhood, and the second access is unknown at this point, so the traffic would have to be studied. Mr. LeBlanc said he likes the options of bonuses. He said he thinks the underlying I3 zone is opposed to the concept of TOD. He said he understands rezoning the I3 zone would be difficult because people would see it as taking away their rights. He said he understands the TOD principals would make the zone more attractive to a developer. Mr. Feck said residential uses are allowed by right in the I3 zone, and the TOD overlay requires a special permit, so the board would have more input into the development. Mr. LeBlanc said the proposed density is a good balance. Mr. Cleary said he likes the idea, but doubling the density concerns him. However, he said if that is enough to encourage development, he is ok with it. Ms. Ashman -Collins said the town is due for a Master Plan update and said she would like to have public participation about the possible changes. She said public comment from the neighbors during the TOD planning was important. Mr. McClanahan said he thinks the existing TOD density is too low. Mr. Penney said during TOD meetings, Mr. Clemmey had suggested a density. Mr. Clemmey said he had suggested 29-40 units per acre. He said developers may want even higher than he has proposed, but he thinks this is a good balance. Mr. Penney asked if the old Clemmey Tank site were redeveloped as TOD, would there be a los: in public parking? Mr. Clemmey said they would probably still accommodate some level of commuter parking; he said he wouldn't want to shut out the commuters. He said he would work with the town to make sure that number works. Mr. LeBlanc said the commuter parking is up to the Board of Selectmen; Mr. Clemmey said they have an annual license for commercial parking, approved by the Board of Selectmen. Mr. Penney said there would probably be more value with a building on that land than with parking spaces. Mr. Clemmey agreed. Mr. Penney asked if the TOD has helped or hurt development; Mr. Clemmey said developers he has talked to want 50-60 units per acre. Mr. McClanahan said he thinks the density should be increased. 6 Planning Board 5/9/18 Ms. Friedman asked what would happen to the commuter parking spaces if TOD is developed. Mr. French said there are MBTA, town and private parking lots, and land that is developed would lose parking. Mr. LeBlanc noted the land could be developed anytime under the underlying zoning. Mr. French said what happens over there has to be a town -developer partnership. Ms. Ashman - Collins said she likes the idea of building residential units within walking distance of the train station. Mr. French said on -grade parking is probably not the highest and best use of that land. Ms. Friedman said the TOD's future should be beneficial to the town. Mr. Cleary noted it would be a special permit use. Mr. K Clemmey said they are trying to work with the town and they do not want to be in the parking business. He said they are meeting with the Town Manager next week about additional parking. Mr. LeBlanc said TOD is a way to introduce a more walkable community, so residents would be able to walk to the train. Motion: To support Article 47 (McClanahan -Cleary) All in favor PASSES Article 48 — Rezone 398 West Street Mr. Clemmey explained the proposal to rezone the residential parcel from Residential 2 to Industrial 1. He said the abutting six -acre parcel was rezoned two years ago and should have been included in that rezoning. He said he has had discussions with family recreation/entertainment oriented tenants. He said he would like to be able to push the driveway toward South Walnut Street, away from the Shaw's entrance. He said the lot has little value as residential because it abuts industrial land. Public Comment Celeste Jones, South Walnut Street, asked which lot this is. Mr. Clemmey explained the location. Mrs. Jones said she doesn't have, a problem with the proposal. Board Comment Mr. Penney said in 2014, Mr. Clemmey had been talking about apartments on this parcel. Mr. Clemmey said it is zoned R2, which would have allowed 55 and over and would have had a setback of 30 feet. He said the industrial zone would require a 75 -foot buffer to residential. He said he would not preclude using the existing Shaw's entrance for a new use, but this lot would allow an easier option for a second means of access from West Street. Motion: To support Article 48 (McClanahan -Cleary) Seven in favor. Friedman, Ashman - Collins opposed. PASSES Mr. K Clemmey said the setback would be 75 feet with the industrial use. 7 Planning Board 5/9/t8 Article 49 — Rezone [20/3,4,5,191,192] West Street Mr. Clemmey explained the location, across West Street from Shaw's, and includes five lots on the corner of West Street/Route 140. He said he thinks it would best serve the town as Industrial Iwith a retail use; something like a 15,000 square -foot building like Walgreens or CVS. He said they are not proposing an industrial use on the property; he said it will be retail. He said four years ago, the building inspector supported this. Mr. Clemmey said the I1 zone would require a 75 -foot setback. He said they would have to meet the special permit requirements for landscaping and buffering to keep the lights, noise and activities from the abutters. He said he lives 100 feet away from Wendy's and it isn't bad, and is closer to residential uses than this would be. He said this would generate more in taxes than the current residential use and would create an area to promote business. Public Comment The clerk read a letter from Cindy and Brian Bisciotti, 30 Casa Drive. Mrs. Jones asked if retail is allowed in the I1 zone; Mr. French said retail is allowed in I1 by special permit. Mrs. Jones said she is concerned about all the possible uses allowed in the I1 zone. Mr. French said the board has discretion on special permits and has to decide if the benefits outweigh the detriments on each application. He said there are other allowed uses that would require a site plan rather than a special permit. Mr. Clemmey said there are industrial uses that could be allowed on that property now, but there isn't enough land to realistically do an industrial use. He said he has had calls from pharmacies about the property. Brian Nilson, North Main Street, asked where this is. Mr. Clemmey explained the location on the corner of West Street and Route 140. Cindy Bisciotti, 30 Casa Drive, said she is concerned about there being no retail around their neighborhood now and if the property is rezoned industrial, their property values will suffer. Brian Bisciotti, 30 Casa Drive, said the lights and noise from Shaw's is constant and right in their back yard. He said if the area is rezoned, any industrial use could be built there. Mrs. Bisciotti said there are already several vacant industrial areas and asked why new industrial areas are needed. Mrs. Bisciotti said none of the town's plans have supported zone creep. She asked the board to support the neighborhood. Mr. Clemmey said it is conjecture whether the property values would go down if the land is rezoned. Mr. K. Clemmey said there is a sewer line to West Street through this property that connects the Casa Drive houses. He said they are close to signing a kindergarten. He said they put up a wall and spent $80,000 and the town gets a lot of revenue from Shaw's. Janice Kaufman, 14 Casa Drive, said she takes offense to Mr. Clemmey saying property values will not go down. She said they are asking the board to support the neighbors. Planning Board 5/9/18 Wayne Lampron, 27 Casa Drive, said he has been in the neighborhood 21 years. He said the encroachment into their neighborhood by changing the zoning would ruin the neighborhood. He asked the board to consider the neighborhood. Mike Healy, 18 Casa Drive, said this has been presented to and voted down by Town Meeting several times. Kevin Burke, 90 Walnut Street said he would be concerned about increased traffic on Walnut Street. Mr. McClanahan said the board has seen this several times over the years. He said he feels for the neighbors, but said with a special permit, the board could control the buffer. Mr. Penney said the neighbors come in every time this comes up and he understands their concerns about zone creep and is sympathetic to their concerns about noise and light. He said he had thought this might be a good tradeoff for the loss of industrial land at the Chocolate Factory, but after listening to the neighbors' concerns, he said he would not support this change. Mr. Cleary asked if Mr. Clemmey would do a development agreement, similar to the Chocolate Factory did. Mr. Clemmey said they would be very open to that. Mr. LeBlanc said Mr. Cleary's idea is good. Mr. Cerretani said he feels for the neighbors. He said industrial may not be the right use for that area and doesn't support it. Mr. Clemmey said he doesn't want industrial uses on the property either, but that is the only rezoning option they have. Ms. Friedman said she cannot support this proposal. Mr. Feck said the highest and best use for the property is retail, but without the support of the neighbors, he cannot support the rezoning. He said he likes Mr. Cleary's idea about a development agreement. Mr. K. Clemmey suggested they draw up an agreement with the board and neighbors that they will bring their proposal to the neighbors, and if they don't accept it, they will not move forward. He said he would be willing to pay for the attorneys. He said they are going forward with the kindergarten. Motion: To support Article 49 (McClanahan -Cleary) Two in favor. French, Ashman -Collins, Penney, Feck, LeBlanc, Cerretani, Friedman opposed. FAILS Motion: To not support Article 49 (Feck-Cerretani) Seven in favor. McClanahan -Cleary opposed. PASSES Motion: To close the public hearing (Cleary -LeBlanc) All in favor. PASSES 9 Planning Board 5/9/18 The Planning Board discussed its own articles. Article 27 [Signs] Motion: To support Article 27 (Ashman -Collins -McClanahan) All in favor. PASSES Article 28 [Parking] Ms. Ashman -Collins said the Downtown Committee supports the idea of parking parity with restaurant and retail, but she was concerned about this proposal doubling the required parking for retail. Mr. Feck said he doesn't think the article can be amended on the floor to make it less restrictive. He said he had thought about a parking bonus for mixed residential/restaurant use. Mr. Penney said he was uncomfortable changing from the current per seat parking requirement to a square foot requirement. He said he understands the idea of parity for restaurant and retail uses, but is uncomfortable with the approach. Ms. Ashman -Collins said parking in the evening is not as much of a problem because commuter parking is mostly over by then. She said with a walkable downtown, businesses may be overparked. Mr. Feck agreed, but said if there are many restaurants downtown and they are all underparked, that may hurt business. Motion: To withdraw Article 28 (Penney-Feck) Seven in favor. Cleary, LeBlanc opposed. PASSES Article 29 [Cultivation] Motion: To support Article 29 (McClanahan -Penney) All in favor. PASSES Article 30 [Retail] Motion: To support Article 30 (McClanahan-Cerretani) All in favor. PASSES Article 31 [Local Option Tax] Motion: To support Article 31 (McClanahan -Cleary) All in favor. PASSES Article 32 [Willow Street Reconfiguration] Motion: To support Article 32 (McClanahan -LeBlanc) All in favor. PASSES Article 33 [Wayside Drive land gift] Motion: To Article 33 (McClanahan-Feck) All in favor PASSES Article 43 [Zoning By -Law recreational marijuana ban] Motion: Not to support Article 43 (McClanahan - Motion: To support Article 43 (Feck-Cerretani) Seven in favor. McClanahan opposed. Penney abstained. PASSES Article 44 [General By -Law recreational marijuana ban] Motion: To support Article 44 (Cleary -LeBlanc) Seven in favor. McClanahan opposed. Penney abstained. PASSES Article 50 [Forest Heights Drive] Motion: To support Article 50 if all the punch list items are complete (McClanahan -LeBlanc) All in favor. PASSES 10 Planning Board 5/9/18 Ms. Friedman will present Article 27, Signs. Mr. Penney and Mr. French will present Articles 29 and 30, recreational marijuana retail and cultivation. Mr. Cleary said he will present the board's recommendations on the citizens' petitions. Mr. French said the board's report to Town Meeting on recreational marijuana was reviewed by town counsel; he asked if the board wants to present it to Town Meeting. Consensus was to present the report to Town Meeting as a handout. Ms. Friedman said it provides background and lays out the issues in a careful and succinct way. Mr. William Clemmey noted the board voted to support the citizens' petition to ban marijuana, but also submitted articles to allow cultivation, retail and the local option tax. Mr. Penney explained the board felt the uses should be zoned, in the event the ban fails. Ms. Friedman said she was concerned about the Town Manager's email about the open meeting law. Mr. Cleary said the board members simply cannot discuss issues via email; information should be routed through the Planning Department and discussed during a meeting. Mr. Cleary said mailings can be very expensive and suggested the board get tablets. Mr. French said the board will reorganize at the Planning Board meeting after Town Meeting, and said it is time for another member to be chair. Motion: To adjourn at 9:45 p.m. (McClanahan- ) All in favor. PASSES Next Planning Board Meeting: May 23, 2018 at 7:00 p.m. 23 Date of Approv 1 11 Planning Board 5/9/18