TOWN OF MARION
PLANNING BOARD
February 17, 2009
MEMBERS PRESENT: Peter Winters, Vice-Chairman
Julia Deane Crowley
Thomas Magauran
Steve Gonsalves
Jay Ryder, Clerk
Patricia McArdle
MEMBERS ABSENT: Joseph Napoli, Chairman
BOARD SECRETARY: Debra Paiva
ALSO PRESENT: Belmiro Barros
Albin Johnson
Ricky Pursley
Ron Barros
Paul Kohout
Leo Scarry
Fernando Sardinha
Jack O’Leary
Ruth Nicolacci
Carol Sanz
John Sweeney
Commencement – Vice-Chairman Winters called the meeting to order at 5:05 p.m. and explained meeting procedure.
A moment of silence was held in memory of Mr. Franklin Winters.
Moved by Member Magauran and seconded by Member Ryder to open the public hearing on Dunkin Donuts for the amendment to their Special Permit and for the Site Plan Review for property located at 450 Wareham Street. VOTE: 6-0-0
Public Hearing – Modification to Special Permit/Site Plan Review - 450 Wareham Street – Sardinha Family Trust, c/o Merrill Associates
The public hearing notice was read into the record. The applicant has provided a written request that the public hearing be continued to the March 16 meeting.
Moved by Member Magauran and seconded by Member Ryder to continue the public hearing to March 16, 2009 at 7:20 p.m. VOTE: 6-0-0
Old/New Business
Discussion – Dunkin Donuts
Mr. O’Leary said he wanted to discuss some potential changes to the site plan. Vice-Chairman Winters stated that this discussion is informal and not part of the public hearing; any comments will be recorded in the minutes but will not be considered part of the record of the public hearing. He said questions should be limited to clarification on what the plan submitted does as opposed to comments stating whether the commenter likes or dislikes the plan.
Mr. O’Leary compared the plan containing the potential changes to the plan that had been submitted previously. Member Magauran and the applicant met recently to discuss some changes he had suggested at the February 2 meeting; Mr. O’Leary wanted to get feedback from the other Board members before pursuing the revisions any further. The revisions include:
· A landscaped island in the parking area
· Pushing the proposed building and associated parking toward the north of the site
· Reduction (approximately 6’) of the proposed easement to the abutting pizza restaurant
· Reduction of the drive through lane to a width of 12’ and pushing the proposed building closer to the street
· Addition of trash receptacles on the site
· A rumble strip to reduce traffic speed
· A concrete sidewalk along the frontage of the site
· A sliding gate and signage to funnel traffic through the outer perimeter of the site; this would prevent traffic from cutting through the parking area to access the drive through line
Mr. O’Leary is waiting for feedback on the revisions prior to making change to the drainage.
Paul Kohout asked if the plan provides adequate room to remove and store snow. He also asked if a fence will be installed to prohibit travel access from Spring Street. Mr. O’Leary said there are areas on the site to stockpile snow; any remaining snow would have to be taken off the site. He explained that the landscaping on the site would block and discourage pedestrian access from Spring Street.
Belmiro Barros said he did not understand the purpose of the gate. He voiced concern that the proposed landscaped island and reduction in width of the drive through line would interfere with snow removal. Mr. O’Leary explained that the concern is for customers avoiding the drive up lane and cutting through the parking area to access the window. The gate can be opened to allow access to the dumpsters and emergency access. Mr. Barros voiced concern that the lane might be blocked, causing traffic to back out into Route 6. He asked why trees are proposed at the sidewalk and was told they’re part of the design guidelines. Mr. O’Leary explained that the trees have narrow trunks and do not interfere with sight distance. Member Gonsalves explained that they have deep
roots and will not cause damage to the sidewalk. Mr. Barros said he did not see a reason for the landscaped island or for the gate.
Vice-Chairman Winters said he thought the revised plan is a move in the right direction. He was uncertain about the gate but suggested the issue be left open for now with a provision that it be revisited a year after the site opens. He also suggested moving the ordering microphone to the south; Mr. O’Leary said that might be too far from the building.
Mr. Gonsalves suggested an island in the where the gate is proposed; Mr. O’Leary said the applicant wanted to leave that area open to allow access for emergency vehicles and delivery trucks.
Vice-Chairman Winters asked if the parking easement could be extended to the rear of the site and was told yes. He suggested that the outside seating area be used for snow storage.
Mr. Kohout asked the height of the proposed fence at the abutting property and was told 6’. Mr. O’Leary said no significant fill is proposed at the fence.
Mr. O’Leary said the reduction in the parking easement would result in the need for angled parking for the pizza restaurant. Member MacArdle said she did not believe that any property owner should have to provide an easement in projects such as this one but this applicant was offering one that alleviated the problem and the fact that it might be reduced sets the situation back. She said the Board should not be that quick to let the easement go.
Member MacArdle said she believed that the gate would eventually be left open and become an eyesore.
Attorney Witten said he would be remiss if he did not remind the Board that the easement for Santoro’s was part of the stipulation of the Board of Appeals settlement and any change to it would require a new negotiation with the Board of Appeals.
Member Magauran said the Board should be under the premise that however this comes out they need to be in synch beforehand with the Board of Appeals. He will be discussing these suggestions with the Board of Appeals at their meeting this week. Vice-Chairman Winters suggested having members of the Board of Appeals present at the public hearing on March 16.
Discussion – Neighborhood Overlay District
Vice-Chairman Winters announced that a parcel had been left out of the legal ad for the proposed Neighborhood Overlay District; at a previous meeting it had been agreed to include Mr. Laycock’s property in the overlay. The public hearing is advertised to open on March 2; Attorney Witten said the hearing should be rescheduled and readvertised.
Albin Johnson said he had a problem with the overlay last year because a parcel was omitted; the property is between the Captain Hadley House and Saltonstall Architects. Member Magauran said the Board recently endorsed an ANR plan for the property. Vice-Chairman Winters said the two lots could be included in the advertisement.
Moved by Member Magauran and seconded by Member Ryder to readvertise subject to an affirmative vote by the Board in the past. VOTE: 6-0-0
Discussion – Master Plan Update
Vice-Chairman Winters said he will be sending a final version of the RFT to Attorney Witten this week.
Discussion – Revisions to FEMA map and impact to sewer policy
Attorney Witten explained the authority of the Board of Selectmen within the sewer policy to deal with any excess capacity. He recommended that the FEMA maps not be the decisive ingredient for a sewer expansion; that should be decided by the Town based on growth, growth dynamics, and the Comprehensive Wastewater Management Plan. Member Magauran asked if the new FEMA maps will cause some buildable areas in town to become unbuildable and was told maybe. The current local policy relative to expansion of existing structures was discussed.
Vice-Chairman Winters asked Attorney Witten to prepare a report stating what the issue is and offering some possible suggestions; the Board could then meet with the Board of Selectmen and Board of Health to discuss the issue and resolve it before the new FEMA maps go into effect.
Member Ryder asked how much capacity remains and was told there are approximately 330 remaining unallocated connections of flow.
Discussion – Ocean Initiative
Attorney Witten said the Ocean Initiative is an act that still is in the preliminary phase. A trust fund was established but the funding source has not been determined. The policy had support from coastal communities and the intent was to allow cities and towns to detail plans for ocean management. This is a not a new concept with the exception of the trust fund, which is similar to an Affordable Housing Trust fund or Community Preservation Committee trust fund. The policy does not take power away from the town and does not give any additional power to the town.
Discussion – Baldwin Brothers
Attorney Witten discussed his memorandum in support of a motion for summary judgment filed by Baldwin Brothers.
Discussion – Dunkin Donuts
Member Magauran said he still wanted to see a path to Spring Street from the Dunkin Donuts site. When he met with the applicants their concern was that the project might get appealed on the basis that a walking path would be constituted as an extension of the commercial use from which it was coming from through a residential area. Member Magauran said he has been told by Town Counsel that that level of use would not rise to the level of a commercial use in a residential zone.
Approval of Minutes
Moved by Member Ryder and seconded by Member Crowley to approve the minutes of the February 2, 2009 meeting as amended. VOTE: 6-0-0
Moved by Member Ryder and seconded by Member MacArdle to adjourn at 6:50 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Jay Ryder, Clerk
| 
