Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning 10/09/2019Planning Board Minutes RECEIVED October 9, 2019 Fi)AIN CLERKS OFFICE Present: Donald Cleary, Chair; Beth Ashman -Collins, Acting Clerk, l i � U y,�Michael 1 ' McClanahan, Joseph Cerretani t�� Shaun P. Burke, Director of Planning and Development; Jennifer Davis, " t i t� t, Secretary W,,,SSACN[JSF_TTS Motion: To appoint Ms. Ashman -Collins Acting Clerk (McClanahan-Cerretani) All in favor. PASSES Kevin Barbato, 31 Oak Street Foxboro, representing the applicant, explained the proposed 16'x80' addition to the front of the building will match the front fagade. He said the existing parking lot has 48 parking spaces where 46 are required, so no additional spaces will be needed. He said they have met with the Conservation Agent about wetland issues, and they have a public hearing scheduled on October 27. He said the property encroaches on the 100-foot buffer but is outside the 25-foot buffer, and there will be no clearing done with this project. Mr. Burke said the addition triggers the site plan requirement by a small amount. He said it conforms to the parking requirements even with the addition, and it conforms to the front yard setback requirements. Mr. Barbato said they will plant shrubs at the front of the building at the request of the Conservation Commission. Board Comment Mr. Penney asked if the addition will match the front of the existing building; Mr. Barbato said it will, with slightly different sized bricks. He said they will use the same color scheme. Mr. Penney asked about fire suppression; Mr. Barbato said they will continue the existing fire suppression into the addition. Mr. Cerretani asked the reason for the addition; Mr. Barbato said the company has grown and they are using two trailers. The addition will allow them to bring everything into one building. Ms. Ashman -Collins asked about bicycle parking; Mr. Barbato said they would be happy to install a bike rack on the property. Motion: To approve the site plan in accordance with the Plan titled "Conceptual Site Plan 51 Francis Avenue Mansfield, Massachusetts," dated September 25, 2019, prepared by Zenith Consulting Engineers, LLC, with the following conditions: the materials will match the existing building; shrubs will be planted per Conservation; a bike rack will be installed. (McClanahan-Cerretani) All in favor. PASSES Planning Board October 9, 2019 Mr. Cleary apologized for having to meet on Yom Kippur, but with an early Special Town Meeting, the board had to fit in its zoning by-law public hearing. 1. May 29, 2019 minutes Motion: To approve as submitted (McClanahan-Cerretani) Four in favor. Penney abstained. PASSES 2. September 11, 2019 minutes p. 4 — last para — Mr. Cerretani said adding height to the berm could create problems p. 6 — 3d para from bottom — Mr. Cerretani said he does not think... [take out second "not"] p. 4 — last sentence — Mr. Penney said he would like to see something to keep children out of the roadway and asked Mr. Burke if the road could be widened to 24'; and asked Mr. Burke to work with the applicant to come up with a compromise on the sidewalks. Motion: To approve as amended (Penney-Cerretani) Four in favor. McClanahan abstained. PASSES 3. Draft letter to Select Board regarding tree trimming along Routes 140 and 495 at Mansfield Crossing. Mr. Cerretani said the signs at Mansfield Crossing seem short to him and asked about allowing extra height. Mr. Burke said the signs are 45 feet tall and are the signs the developer applied for. Mr. Penney said the highway signs on Route 140 are higher than the Mansfield Crossing signs; he said Mansfield Crossing will have to do tree cutting every couple of years. Mr. Burke said zoning relief would have been required for taller signs, and the Mansfield Crossing developers made a conscious decision not to do that. Mr. Penney said Mr. Flynn had been opposed to taller signs because he did not want them to be visible from the conservation land on the other side of Route 140. Mr. Burke noted this proposal is not for clear cutting, but for selective cutting. Mr. Penney said Ms. Maguire had told the board they have lost prospective tenants because of the lack of sign visibility. The developer will still have to approach the Select Board, which will make a recommendation to MassDOT, which will make the final decision. Motion: To send the letter to the Select Board supporting the selective tree trimming along Route 140/495 (Ashman-Collins-Cerretani) Four in favor. Penney opposed. PASSES 4. Public Hearing Notices — Attleboro, Easton, North Attleboro, Norton, Plainville, Sharon 5. Form J Release from Covenant — 6 Lewis Road. Mr. Burke explained the lot was inadvertently not included on the Form J Release for the subdivision. The house is 33 years old, but the seller's attorney has specifically requested a release for this lot. Motion: To approve the Form J Release (McClanahan -Penney) All in favor. PASSES w ti 10&30 Reservoir Street The plan seeks to create Lots 1, 2 and 3, as well as Parcel A, which will be given to the town for the widening of Reservoir Street for the right -turn only lane. The plan shows the lot for the hotel, the lot for the doctor's office and the lot with the other uses. The lots will have cross - easements and each will come out onto Reservoir Street. Mr. Burke recommended endorsement. Motion: To endorse the Form A plan (McClanahan -Ashman -Collins) All in favor. PASSES Planning Board October 9, 2019 The clerk read a request from the applicant's engineer to continue the public hearing to November 13, 2019. Motion: To continue the public hearing to November 13, 2019 at 7:30 p.m. (McClanahan -Ashman -Collins) All in favor. PASSES The clerk read the continued. Cleary explained how the public hearing would be Mr. Burke explained the proposed by-law amendment, which would be an addition to the existing wireless communication by-law to establish regulations for new Small Cell, or "5G," technology. 5G is a data rich type of wireless transmission requiring antennas to be much closer than traditional wireless towers. The antennae are installed on telephone poles and typically have equipment cabinets. They could have extensions as much as 10 feet above the top of the telephone pole. The 5G signal doesn't carry very far and doesn't penetrate buildings very well, and can be mounted on or hard wired through buildings. Large venues like stadiums have 5G in place already. Mr. Burke explained he has attended seminars with the MMED on the technology. MMED has put together a thorough set of technical regulations, and the original draft Zoning By -Law included a lot of that information. Town counsel reviewed the by-law and said it does not need to repeat what MMED already has in place, but should be more concerned with aesthetics on the poles MMED does not own. Mr. Penney asked if the town can regulate aesthetics; Mr. Burke said FCC regulations allow towns to regulate aesthetics on wireless technology. Mr. Penney said it would make sense to regulate based on safety; Mr. Burke said the MMED technical regulations regulate issues related to the safety of its workers. Mr. Burke said the Zoning By -Law would give the Planning Board the ability to regulate thinks like the location of the equipment and signage. Mr. Penney said there are no telephone poles downtown because the wires were all installed underground; Mr. Burke said applicants may want to install the antennae on light poles or traffic lights. He said there are several buildings in town with small wireless arrays, but they are not 5G. Mr. Cerretani asked Verizon has to install its poles according to MMED's standards; Mr. Burke said they do. Ms. Ashman -Collins asked if the by-law would preclude the technology from being installed on buildings; Mr. Burke said town counsel has reviewed the by-law, but not that particular issue. Ms. Ashman -Collins said mounting things on building facades might be preferable in some cases than on poles. Mr. Cleary said regardless of who owns the equipment, all applications should refer to MMED's technical standards. Mr. Burke said the technical standards would not apply to wall -mounted Planning Board October 9, 2019 installations. He said MMED standards are specific to poles because it is intended to get the 5G installation above where MMED might be working. The board discussed combining paragraphs B and C, but decided to leave them as two separate paragraphs: (b) to require all small wireless facilities to conform with MMED standards; and (c) to require owner permission for wireless facility applications on poles not owned by MMED. Adrian LeSaint, 125 Highland Avenue asked about the board's intention about installations on things other than poles. Mr. Penney said there could be equipment installed on a building, on a pole owned by the town, or on a pole owned by others. Mr. Penney suggested requiring an image with two views of what the equipment will look like on the actual pole, using language similar to that in the Site Plan section of the Zoning By -Law. Mr. Cleary asked whether the board should be setting the fee; Mr. Burke said Town Meeting will have to vote to set the original fee. Mr. Burke said he will check the FCC's fees. Mr. Penney said an applicant will probably have multiple locations; Mr. Burke said the fee would be a flat application fee plus a fee per installation. Mr. Cleary noted the by-law proposes to allow the use in business and industrial zones Mr. Burke said when cell towers were first permitted, they started along the highways, then the industrial park, business zone, and only then in residential neighborhoods. Mr. Penney asked how 5G service would get to the areas of town where it is allowed, when it may have to go through areas where it is not allowed. Mr. Cleary said there would be small microwave connections pointing to the next facility. Mr. Cerretani asked if different companies would all want their own equipment or if they can co - locate. Mr. Penney asked if the technology is a continuous transmission; Mr. Burke said it is. Mr. LeSaint said the higher the frequency, the more easily the signal is obstructed. Mr. Penney asked how the signal will get to an area where it is allowed if it has to go through an area where it is not allowed. Mr. Burke said he will make the changes and send the revised article to town counsel. Motion: To close the public hearing (McClanahan -Penney) All in favor. PASSES Motion: To support the article at Special Town Meeting pending changes by town counsel (McClanahan-Cerretani) All in favor. PASSES Mr. Burke said a citizens' petition zoning article to allow billboards has been submitted and asked if the board wants to hold the public hearing before the Master Plan meeting on October 30. Consensus was to hold that public hearing on October 30 at 6:30 p.m. Planning Board October 9, 2019 Mr. Penney asked how the board members are doing with their IPads. Mr. Cleary suggested using a Drop Box for Planning Board materials and said he would talk to MIS about how board members can access their email using other devices. Ms. Ashman -Collins said the Fall Festival on Fulton's Pond was a great event and highlighted the recent improvements to downtown. Mr. Cleary said the special permit for ReLeaf Alternative is scheduled for October 23. Mr. Burke said he has spoken with their traffic engineer about the site. Mr. Burke said the Eco Site wireless tower on the Branch Street solar farm has been withdrawn, and another firm, Bay Communications, is working on a lease agreement with Cable Access for a tower on their Branch Street land. Mr. Burke said the East Street dog day care is working on an out -of -court settlement. Mr. Cleary said the Master Plan open house will be Saturday, October 19 from loam-lpm at the High School and will be an opportunity for the public to participate in activities and share their thoughts with the consultants. Motion: To adjourn at 8:45p.m. (McClanahan- ) All in favor. PASSES Master Plan Public Forum: Saturday, October 19, 2019 loam-lpm, MHS Cafeteria Next Planning Board Meeting: October 23, 2019 at 7:00 p.m. ML 4, Signature of Clerk Date of Approval Planning Board October 9, 2019