PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
September 29, 2008
7:00 PM
The Planning Board for the City of Marlborough met on Monday, September 29, 2008 in Memorial Hall, 3rd floor, City Hall, Marlborough, MA 01752. Members present: Barbara Fenby, Chairperson, Steve Kerrigan, Clerk, Clyde Johnson, Philip Hodge, Edward Coveney and Sean Fay. Also present: Assistant City Engineer Richard Baldelli.
MINUTES
Meeting Minutes September 8, 2008
On a motion by Mr. Kerrigan, seconded by Mr. Coveney it was duly voted:
To accept and file the meeting minutes with the minor changes.
CHAIR’S BUSINESS
Marlborough Historical Society
Correspondence to Clifford Schorer
The Historical Society sent a plan to Mr. Schorer showing the layout of the lot that they would like to see transferred to the Marlborough Historical Society.
On a motion by Mr. Kerrigan, seconded by Mr. Coveney it was duly voted:
To accept and file the correspondence.
Proposed Modified New Car Dealership Overlay District
Legal notice from City Council
Notice was given that the City Council will hold a public hearing for the proposed New Car Dealership Overlay District for the Marlborough Zoning Ordinance and was referred to the Planning Board.
On a motion by Mr. Kerrigan, seconded by Mr. Coveney it was duly voted:
To accept and file the correspondence and to schedule a public hearing for October 27, 2008 at 7:30 pm.
Arthur Bergeron sent correspondence to the City Council a modified version of the proposed amendment to the Marlborough Zoning Ordinance. This was referred by the City Council to the Planning Board.
On a motion made by Mr. Kerrigan, seconded by Mr. Coveney it was duly voted:
To accept and file the correspondence.
APPROVAL NOT REQUIRED PLAN
Mr. Fay excused himself.
Phelps Street
ANR Approval
Correspondence from City Engineer
Mr. Collins has completed the review of the ANR for Phelps Street. The proposed plan subdivides the property at 107 Phelps Street into two lots that meet all the requirements of the Rules and Regulations for the Subdivision of Land in Marlborough, Massachusetts. The proposed subdivision of land also complies with the deed restrictions to limit the use of Parcel B as a driveway for the new lot; Lot 1 will gain access through and extension of the driveway for the existing house on Lot 2. Mr. Collins is recommending for the Planning Board to endorse the plan.
On a motion by Mr. Kerrigan, seconded by Mr. Johnson it was duly voted:
To accept and file the correspondence.
On a motion by Mr. Kerrigan, seconded by Mr. Johnson it was duly voted:
To accept and endorse a plan of land believed to be Approval Not Required of James J. & Noel Cain of 11 Bridle Path Drive, North Grafton, MA 01536. Name of Engineer: Inland Survey, Inc DBA Zanca Land Surveying 16 Gleasondale Road, Suit 1-2, Stow, MA 01775. Deed of property recorded in South Middlesex Registry of Deeds books 34318, page 424; LC 1245 page 175; Book 50728 pages 368, 370 and LC 4143 pages 497 and 498. Location and description of property: Bounded in the east by Phelps Street, Bounded in the north by Esquire Court Condominium, bounded in the west by Bonaldo and bounded in the south by Flatley, Capone, Sutherland, Moore, McDonough and Bonaldo.
Mr. Fay returned to the room.
13 Harvard Street
ANR Submittal
Mr. Fays’ Disclosure Notice
Mr. Fay disclosed to Mayor Stevens that he has a conflict of interest with the Presenting Counsel for this ANR Plan.
On a motion by Mr. Kerrigan, seconded by Mr. Johnson it was duly voted:
To accept and file the correspondence.
Attorney Christopher Flood presented the plan to the Planning Board. The current plan shows three parcels along Harvard Street. The ANR Plan will take those three parcels and subdivide leaving two conforming RB zoned parcels.
On a motion by Mr. Kerrigan, seconded by Mr. Coveney it was duly voted:
PUBLIC HEARING
7:30 PM
Proposal Amendment in Retirement Community
Public Hearing
The Planning Board of the City of Marlborough Continued the public hearing from Monday, September 8, 2008, at 7:30 p.m. in Memorial Hall, 3rd Floor, City Hall, 140 Main Street, Marlborough on the Proposal to Abolish Retirement Community Overlay District and Retirement Communities be an allowable use in all districts with a Special Permit granted by the City Council. Members present: Chairperson Barbara L. Fenby, Clerk Steven Kerrigan, Philip Hodge, Clyde Johnson, Edward Coveney and Sean Fay. Also present: Assistant City Engineer Richard Baldelli.
The Chair introduced all of the members of the board including the City Engineer and the Planning Board Secretary. She advised the audience that everyone should direct questions to her and she will direct the questions to the proponent or others.
Mr. Kerrigan read the public hearing notice into record.
LEGAL NOTICE
Notice is hereby given that the Planning Board of the City of Marlborough will hold a PUBLIC HEARING on Monday, September 8, 2008 at 7:30 PM in the Memorial Hall, 3rd floor, City Hall, 140 Main Street, Marlborough Massachusetts for Proposal to Abolish Retirement Community Overlay District and that Retirement Communities be an Allowable Use in all Districts with a Special Permit.
Be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Marlborough that the Code of the City of Marlborough, Chapter 200 as amended be further amended by deleting the words "aged fifty-five or older" as part of the definition in ARTICLE II Definitions and Severability Section 200-05 Definitions; Word Usage. B. RETIREMENT COMMUNITY and inserting in place thereof the following words: "fifty-five (55) years of age or over or sixty-two (62) years of age or over"; and
That the Code of the City of Marlborough, Chapter 200 as amended be further amended by adding to ARTICLE V Permitted Uses Section 200-14 Use Regulations Applicable in All Districts the following:
"C. A Retirement Community, as defined in Article II Section 200-05 B hereof, shall be allowed only by grant of a Special Permit by the City Council in accordance with Article VI Section 200-22. Retirement Community"; and
That the Code of the City of Marlborough Chapter 200 Section 200-17 Table of Uses Single family and Single family, attached be amended by adding to each a foot note numbered "(41)"; and
That the Code of the City of Marlborough Chapter 200 Section 200-18 Conditions for Use as Noted in the Table of Uses, be amended by adding the foot note numbered "(41)" which states as follows: "(41) Except as provided for in a Retirement Community under the provisions Sections 200-14 and 200-22."; and
That the Code of the City of Marlborough Chapter 200 Section 200-17 Table of Uses Retirement Community Overlay (Sec. 200-22) as amended be further amended by deleting the word "Overlay" and the symbol "N" under the Zoning District Abbreviations RR, Al, A2, A3, RB, RC, RCR, B and CA and inserting in place thereof for each deleted symbol the symbol "SP"; and
That the Code of the City of Marlborough Chapter 200 as amended be further amended by deleting from Article VI Special Districts, Overlay and Special Requirements, all of Section 200-22 Retirement Community Overlay Districts and inserting in place thereof the following:
200-22 Retirement Community
Purpose. The purpose of a Retirement Community shall be to advance the public health, safety and welfare of persons fifty-five (55) years of age or over or sixty-two (62) years of age or over by providing housing in a structure or structures constructed expressly for use as housing for persons fifty-five (55) years of age or over or sixty-two (62) years of age or over on a parcel or on contiguous parcels of land, totaling at least five (5) acres in size, in areas appropriate for residential use.
Location. A Retirement Community may be located in all zoning districts with a Special Permit of the City Council granted under the provisions of Section 200-59 hereof
Permitted Uses. A Retirement Community must comply with the appropriate provisions of Article Y and Article VII, except as otherwise specified herein and consistent with the following provisions:
(1) Height of buildings in a Retirement Community shall not be higher than that which is allowed in the zoning district in which the Retirement Community is located and as provided in Section 200-41.
The provisions of Section 200-49 shall apply to the location and construction of the driveways and private ways within the Retirement Community development. All ways and/or driveways in a Retirement Community shall be private and maintained by the Retirement Community. To ensure adequate access for traffic and emergency vehicles within the Retirement Community, and to provide increased public safety for vehicles and pedestrians within the development, the City Council may modify the provisions of Section 200-49.
Each building in a Retirement Community shall face either upon an existing private or public way or on a private way or driveway constructed within said Retirement Community. Each building shall have a minimum front yard of no less than twenty (20) feet from the edge of the paved way to the closest point of the structure, and a side yard of not less than ten (10) feet from the edge of the paved way to the closest point of the structure. Each building, whether principal or accessory, shall be at least ten (10) feet distant from any other building by air line distance between the nearest points of the buildings.
No dwelling in a Retirement Community shall contain less than one thousand (1,000) square feet of living area or more than two thousand eight hundred (2,800) square feet of living area. At least fifty (50%) percent of the living area shall be on the first
The number of dwelling units allowed within a Retirement Community shall be determined by dividing the total square foot area of the development site by the minimum lot area square footage as provided in Section 200-41 for the zoning district in which the development site is located. The number resulting from said division shall be the number of units allowed in the Retirement Community. If the number results in a whole number plus a part of a number the number shall be rounded to the next higher number.
No part of any building in a Retirement Community shall be less than twenty-five (25) feet from any exterior lot line.
A town house style dwelling unit in a Retirement Community shall have its own attached yard area.
Each dwelling unit shall have two parking spaces dedicated to its use, of which at least one space shall be in a garage attached to the unit. The other space shall be adjacent to the building or within close proximity thereof as approved by the City Council. The City Council may, as a condition of the Special Permit, require additional parking areas to be used in common by dwelling unit owners and their invitees.
The City Council may, as a condition of the Special Permit, require adoption of legally enforceable condominium by-laws or other similar regulations to limit or prohibit the presence in a. Retirement Community, either entirely or in designated locations, of boats, boat trailers, campers, or other recreational vehicles.
The maximum combined lot coverage in a Retirement Community shall be as provided for in the provision of Section 200-41 hereof for the zoning district in which the development site is located.
Each lot or contiguous lots upon which a Retirement Community is located shall have total frontage on an existing public way of at least seventy five (75) feet.
The City Council shall, as a Permit condition, require that deed covenants, proposed condominium by-laws, or similar community regulations prohibit the ownership or residential use of a dwelling unit by a person or persons of less than fifty five (55) years of age or less than sixty-two 62 years of age. Failure to enforce said provisions shall be a violation of the Special Permit.
The City Council shall, as a Permit condition, require that a proposed Retirement Community be constructed entirely on one lot or contiguous lots, and that, from and after the date of issuance of a building permit for said community or any portion thereof, no subdivision of said lot or lots shall be allowed without the express approval of the City Council; provided, however, that the recording of a condominium master deed and the conveyance of condominium units with the lot covered by the master deed shall be allowed.
(14) No unit in a Retirement Community shall have more than three (3) bedrooms.
Per order of the City Council
#08-1001939
Attorney David Gadbois presented to the Board with the suggestions in changes to the ordinance which were:
· A. Article II Definitions and Severability Section 200-05 Definitions shall read as follows:
Retirement Community: A community consisting of a structure or s structures constructed or re-constructed expressly for use as housing for persons over fifty-five (55) years of age or over or over sixty-two (62) years of age or over on one parcel contiguous parcels of lands, totaling at least five (5) acres of land; which land has been submitted to the provisions of Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 183A, thereby creating a condominium through the execution and recording of a master deed; and which community complies with the provisions of Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 151 B Section 4.7.
· The following provisions of Section 200-22 Retirement Community C. Shall read as follows:
(5) a. In the Rural Residence RR, Residence A-1, Residence A-2, Residence A-3, Residence B and Residence C zoning districts the number of dwelling units allowed within a Retirement Community shall be determined by dividing the total square got of the development site by the minimum lot area square footage as provided in Section 200-41 for the zoning district in which the development site is located. The number resulting from said division shall be the number of units allowed in the Retirement Community.
b. In the Business B, the Commercial and Automotive CA, the Limited Industrial Lim and Industrial I districts the number of dwelling units allowed within the development site will be determined by dividing the total square footage as provided in Section 200-41 for a Residence C district.
c. With approval of the City Council, a Retirement Community located within a quarter of a mile of public transportation terminal or stop, may receive a bonus number of dwelling units allowed of up to a twenty percent (20%) increase in the number of units, which would otherwise be allowed.
(14) No unit in a Retirement Community shall have more then a three (3) bedrooms of which at least one (1) bedroom shall be located on the first floor.
(15) The Retirement Community shall have a sidewalk adjacent to the common driveway on one side, or in the alternative a meandering walkway within the Community, which provides for the safe passageway for the residence and guests to the other units within the community.
In Favor
No one spoke in favor.
In Opposition
No one spoke in opposition.
In General
Mr. Hodge stated that he still did not have enough clarification from Attorney Gadbois on the Age qualifying issue. If one person is 65 and the other person is 45, something happens to the age qualified person, would the other person have to move because they do not qualify with their age? Mr. Gadbois stated he would have research that further and return with the standard for the national guidelines.
Mr. Johnson stated that he believes all retirement communities belong in residential districts and not in any commercial, business or industrial districts. He stated that the residents should not have to look at the businesses around the community.
Mr. Hodge believes that constructing these communities near business districts benefits all patrons, both business and the residential community.
Mr. Fay stated that the Ordinance should be for those who wish to “age in one place”. He also stated that since the proposed ordinance does state that one bedroom must be on the first floor that should also include a bathroom. He also posed the question that would the residential communities be located next to subdivisions like Blackhorse Farms or Mauro Farm? Mr. Gadbois stated the proposed ordinance is designed where it would be less impact of space then you normal subdivision with less impervious areas and more open space.
Mr. Hodge and Ms. Fenby would like them to reconsider for the safety of the residents to have sidewalks on both sides of the street. Mr. Gadbois stated that the roadways would all be privately owned.
Mr. Kerrigan asked what the logic was to have 50% of the total living area on the first floor? Mr. Gadbois stated that the current ordinance must have 66% of total living area on the first floor. By making it only 50%, it would balance out the layout designs. Mr. Hodge recommended to have the percentage removed from the language.
The public hearing was closed at 8:00 pm.
On a motion by Mr. Kerrigan, seconded by Mr. Coveney it was duly voted:
To place the Proposed Amendment on the October 6, 2008 agenda.
SUBDIVISION PROGRESS REPORTS
Update from City Engineer
At this time there is no new update.
Forest Trail (Mosher Lane)
Correspondence from Code Enforcement Officer
20 Mosher Lane
Pamela Wilderman, The City Code Enforcement Officer, sent correspondence to the Planning Board asking them to intervene between the developer and the current homeowner on the drainage easements. She is asking for the Planning Board to cease all work with the drainage easements and have both the developer and Mr. Welch to attend the October 6, 2008 meeting to discuss the easement further with the Board and the City Engineer.
On a motion by Mr. Kerrigan, seconded by Mr. Johnson it was duly voted:
To accept and file correspondence; ask the developer to cease all drainage easement work; to have the City Engineer review all easements on this property and to send correspondence to the Developer, Mr. Welch and Avidia Banks Attorney asking them all to be in attendance on October 6, 2008.
Pembroke Street
Engineering Correspondence
Re-signing of Definitive Plans
Mr. Tim Collins of the Engineering Department has reviewed the plans for 26 Pembroke Street. He stated all language and the Developer has received a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals (case # 1374-2008) and has made a favorable recommendation to the Planning Board to endorse the plans.
On a motion by Mr. Kerrigan, seconded by Mr. Johnson it was duly voted:
To re-endorse the Definitive Plan of a Subdivision known as 26 Pembroke Street with plans of a revised date of Sept. 8, 2008. Name of owner: William P. Wyskoczka, 26 Pembroke Street, Marlborough, MA 01752. Engineer: Jarvis Land Survey, 29 Grafton Circle, Shrewsbury, MA 01545.
PENDING SUBDIVISION PLANS: Updates and Discussion
PRELIMINARY/ OPEN SPACE SUBDIVISION SUBMITTALS/ LDS SUBMITTALS
LDS Submittal
214 Wilson Street
The appeal period for this LDS has not expired.
On a motion by Mr. Kerrigan, seconded by Mr. Coveney it is duly voted:
To endorse plans after the appeal period.
DEFINITIVE SUBDIVISION SUBMISSIONS
Marlborough Elms
Correspondence for Extension Request
Sean McCarthy, Civil Engineer for the Developer, is asking the Planning Board to consider a 30 day extension for the proposed Definitive Subdivision.
On a motion by Mr. Kerrigan, seconded by Mr. Johnson it was duly voted:
To accept and file the correspondence from Sean McCarthy regarding granting an extension for plan review and to extend the time for consideration of this plan until October 29, 2008.
SCENIC ROADS
SIGNS
Batteries Plus
Sign Variance request
Mr. Stan Healy is asking relief from the Sign Ordinance Chapter 163 (C) (2) from the Planning Board. Their new sign for the new location at 197N Boston Post Road West is 48 Square Feet and they are allowed according to the sign ordinance is 42 Square Feet. They are seeking a variance to keep the already manufactured sign of 50 Square feet. The Planning Board has asked the Mr. Healy to see if he or his sign company to can come back with another design that would meet the requirements.
INFORMAL DISCUSSION
Mr. Kerrigan has complied a few draft changes to the Subdivision Rules and Regulations. He has asked the Board if they all agreed to make the minor changes to the current subdivision rules and regulations. He has also asked the City Solicitor how to go about the changes. In a separate email, Mr. Rider explained that the changes would have to go through the City Council as well as a public hearing would be warranted. The Board unilaterally agreed that Mr. Kerrigan should go through and draft the changes and discuss at a later date.
COMMUNICATIONS/CORRESPONDENCE
On a motion by Mr. Kerrigan, seconded by Mr. Johnson, it was duly voted:
To accept all of the items listed under communications and/or correspondence.
On a motion by Mr. Johnson, seconded by Mr. Kerrigan, it was duly voted:
To adjourn at 8:30 p.m.
A TRUE COPY
ATTEST: _____________________________
Steven Kerrigan, Clerk
| 
