ORLEANS PLANNING BOARD
March 13, 2007 – Minutes
A meeting of the Orleans Planning Board was called to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Nauset Meeting Room at the Orleans Town Hall. Present: Chairman: Sims McGrath; Clerk: Seth Wilkinson; Associates: Paul O’Connor; Gary Guzzeau. Planning Department: George Meservey; Secretary: Karen Sharpless. Also Present: Board of Selectmen Liaison: Jon Fuller. Absent: Vice-Chairman: John Fallender; Kenneth McKusick.
In the absence of two regular members, Chairman McGrath asked Paul O'Connor and Gary Guzzeau to vote as regular members at this meeting.
7:00 P.M. - PUBLIC HEARING - PROPOSED ZONING BYLAW AMENDMENT -
§164-31 APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT
Wilkinson read the legal ad into the record. There were 26 audience members for this public hearing. McGrath stated that the purpose of this public hearing is to gain input from the public on a proposed zoning bylaw amendment for §164-31, “Apartment Development” that is a change from the previously proposed zoning bylaw amendment regarding apartment density in the Rural Business District. McGrath noted that this is a modification of density required rather than a total prohibition of a use and noted that the Planning Board has taken previous comments on this issue into consideration and has now proposed a compromise on the level of density currently allowed vs. a total prohibition of the use.
Public Comments
David Maloney gave a history of the Kavanaugh property at 212, 214 & 216 Main Street in East Orleans and stated that there are presently no plans to further develop the properties and stated his opinion that restricting apartment development in the Rural Business District is not fair and equitable for property owners.
McGrath stated that the intent of the proposed bylaw amendments on apartment development is to maintain the Rural Business District character by limiting apartment development as requested in comments made by numerous residents. Meservey noted that up to 75 multi-family units could be added in the two existing Rural Business Districts under the current regulations.
Pete Butcher presented a petition with 150 signatures in opposition to the proposed bylaw amendment limiting apartment development in the Rural Business Districts.
Attorney Henry Shepherd stated his representation of the Kavanaugh property and indicated that it is important that a middle ground be reached on this issue which would meet the best interests of the town.
McGrath noted that this proposed bylaw amendment is not meant for a particular piece of property and the question of density in the Rural Business District is a response to portions of the Orleans Comprehensive Plan which states that the intent is to find ways to continue the use and character of neighborhoods and the town as a whole.
Jeff Karlson noted that some of the Rural Business District parcels are located in the Zone 2 district and questioned how they would be affected.
Steve Simon questioned whether the Planning Board needs to amend the definition of a Rural Business District.
Sims McGrath responded that the Planning Board has been asked through the public hearing process to find a middle ground for the apartment density issue in the Rural Business District.
George Webbere noted that he was originally in favor of prohibiting multi-family apartments in the Rural Business District due to the proliferation of apartment complexes recently created in East Orleans, but now Webbere stated that he would be willing to listen to hear a compromise and commended the Planning Board for putting the proposals in front of Town Meeting.
Marie Kavanaugh stated that the intent is to retain the Kavanaugh property on Main Street in East Orleans within the family.
Brooks Woods questioned why the Rural Business District should have the same multi-family apartment density as other districts in town and noted that a petition with 111 signatures was presented to the Planning Board at a previous public hearing supporting the prohibition of multi-family housing development in the Rural Business Districts.
Jim Trainor noted that parts of town were rezoned a few years ago loosening the zoning restrictions to help stop the loss of businesses in town.
David Maloney stated that restricting zoning will result in a reduction of property values by 50% which is unfair to property owners.
George Webbere noted that businesses will be more likely to come into town if property values (based on multi-family housing) go down.
John Hinckley (speaking as a resident) noted the value of the many public comments that have been received on this issue and noted that his previous comments from other public hearings indicate his opinion that the character of the neighborhood should be maintained and stated that the previous unsightly motel buildings have been replaced with better looking buildings and the landscaping will eventually make the area much more attractive.
Paul Brian noted that it is difficult for businesses to succeed in town and there is a need for housing for older people as they become unable to care for homes and stated that limiting the zoning decreases the value of properties.
Steve Simon noted that the unsightly motels are gone and encouraged the Planning Board to consider the consequences of limiting district uses which would restrict businesses.
John Bonscher noted the importance of projecting what will happen to the town in 10 years as the town will always be undergoing change and stated that this is a good compromise by the Planning Board.
James Hadawar noted that compromising will be a win/win for the town.
Will Joy questioned the Rural Business District proposals affect on South Orleans and stated his hope that South Orleans will be maintained.
Kathi Lewis stated her opposition to the proposal limiting multi-family dwelling units in the Rural Business District as it limit the options on her property if the Barley Neck Inn should fail and noted that multi-family dwellings could eventually replace the inn.
Jeff Karlson stated that the Rural Business District in East Orleans must be allowed to remain a viable business district, not an extension of the Village Center.
Pete Butcher noted that the present multi-family apartment units are a better sight than the previously rundown motels and provides a nice transition from the Rural Business District to Beach Road and strongly urged the Planning Board to withdraw the apartment development proposals from consideration.
Brooks Woods suggested that the proposed bylaw amendment should proceed to town meeting so that the character of the Rural Business District can be maintained, or it could be turned back into residential.
MOTION TO CLOSE EVIDENTIARY PORTION OF PUBLIC HEARING
MOTION: On a motion by Seth Wilkinson, seconded by Paul O'Connor, the Board voted to close the evidentiary portion of the public hearing.
VOTE: 4-0-0 The motion passed unanimously.
The Planning Board discussion and vote on the proposed zoning bylaw amendment §164-31 “Apartment Development” was taken up later in the meeting.
7:30 P.M. - MODIFICATION TO A DEFINITIVE SUBDIVISION - THOMAS & PATRICIA KENNEDY – TOM’S HOLLOW ROAD
Seth Wilkinson recused himself as a trustee of the Orleans Conservation Trust which is an abutter to this property.
Meservey stated that a letter has been received from Attorney Jack McCormick requesting that the public hearing on Tom’s Hollow Road be continued to March 27, 2007.
MOTION TO CONTINUE TOM’S HOLLOW ROAD PUBLIC HEARING TO MARCH 27, 2007: On a motion by Paul O'Connor, seconded by Gary Guzzeau, the Board voted to continue the Modification to a Definitive Subdivision for Thomas & Patricia Kennedy on Tom’s Hollow Road to March 27, 2007 at 7:00 p.m.
VOTE: 3-0-0 The motion passed unanimously.
MYLAR ENDORSEMENT - DEFINITIVE SUBDIVISION - THOMAS R. HEATON - 66 & 68 PORTANIMICUT ROAD
Phillip Scholomiti (Ryder & Wilcox) requested that the Planning Board endorse the mylar for the Definitive Subdivision plan approved on September 26, 2006 for Thomas R. Heaton for property located at 6 & 68 Portanimicut Road. A copy of the Covenant and Water Easement have been provided for town records and will be recorded in the Barnstable Registry of Deeds. There have been no appeals on this subdivision and the Mylar has been signed by the Town Clerk. The required Board of Health septic inspection (Title 5) was done on February 13, 2007 and meets all Board of Health requirements. Meservey stated that there will be a common driveway for all three of the lots and all requirements have been met.
MOTION: On a motion by Seth Wilkinson, seconded by Gary Guzzeau, the Board voted to authorize Planning Board chairman to endorse the mylar for a Definitive Subdivision Plan for Thomas R. Heaton for property located at 66 & 68 Portanimicut Road.
VOTE: 4-0-0 The motion passed unanimously
WAIVER FOR ADVANCED NOTIFICATION OF BYLAW CHANGE - TOWN OF BREWSTER
Meservey reported that the Town of Brewster passed zoning amendments at their November 13, 2006 town meeting but made a procedural error by not giving the required advance notice to the Town of Orleans (as an abutting town), and the Attorney General’s office is requiring that they notify the Town of Orleans and obtain a signed Waiver for Advanced Notification of Bylaw Change from Orleans officials.
Consensus: There was a consensus of the Planning Board that the request to sign a Waiver for Advanced Notification of Bylaw Change from the Town of Brewster be continued to a future Planning Board meeting and input be gained from George Meservey on the possible impacts of any of the zoning changes approved in Brewster on the Town of Orleans.
NEW BUSINESS
Affordable Housing Needs Study
Meservey reported that a request has been received for input from the Planning Board on an Affordable Housing Needs Study.
Consensus: There was a consensus of the Planning Board to continue the discussion on the Affordable Housing Needs Study to March 27, 2007 and input from Planning Board members will be gathered at that meeting.
PROPOSED ZONING BYLAW AMENDMENT DISCUSSION - §164-31 APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT
Planning Board Discussion:
The Planning Board discussed public comments that have been received and noted that major concerns centered around encouraging business development and compromising on apartment development density. Mixed use dwellings should be encouraged for workers and other residents with logical restrictions on an intensification of use. McGrath noted that workforce housing (2 dwelling units in commercial buildings) will continue to be allowed, but the proposal addressed the situation of a business owner closing shop, tearing down the building and rebuilding purely residential structures. McGrath noted that the Orleans Comprehensive Plan suggests that business development be centered into nodes such as the Rural Business District and should be protected from being overrun with overwhelming residential development. A density of six units on one acre is contradictory to the idea of a Rural Business District
MOTION TO FORWARD §164-31, APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT” TO THE WARRANT
MOTION: On a motion by Seth Wilkinson, seconded by Paul O'Connor, the Board voted to forward the proposed bylaw amendment regarding Section §164-31 “Apartment Development” to the Board of Selectmen for their review and inclusion on the Annual Town Meeting warrant in May 2007.
VOTE: 4-0-0 The motion passed unanimously.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: February 13, 2007
MOTION: On a motion by Gary Guzzeau, seconded by Paul O'Connor, the Board voted to approve the minutes of February 13, 2007.
VOTE: 4-0-0 The motion passed unanimously.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: February 27, 2007
MOTION: On a motion by Seth Wilkinson, seconded by Gary Guzzeau, the Board voted to approve the minutes of February 27, 2007.
VOTE: 4-0-0 The motion passed unanimously.
ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: On a motion by Paul O'Connor, seconded by Seth Wilkinson, the Board voted to adjourn at 8:56 p.m.
VOTE: 4-0-0 The motion passed unanimously.
SIGNED: ______________________________ DATE: _______________________
(Seth Wilkinson, Clerk)
| 
