|
Planning Board Minutes September 19, 2005
 |
|
Planning Board Meeting
September 19, 2005
Minutes
These minutes are not verbatim
Board Members: Loring Tripp, III, Nicholas Filla, Larry Rosenblum, Malcolm MacGregor, and Paul McAlduff.
Planning Board Alternate: Timothy Grandy
Staff Members: Lee Hartmann and Valerie Massard
Recording Secretary: Eileen Hawthorne
Form A
Presentation
Natural Heritage
Thomas French and John Regosin updated the Board and the Conservation Commission on the Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program that was implemented on July 1, 2005. The Endangered Species act was adopted in 1990 with regulations enacted in 1992. Until this year, there has never been a defined process to review projects that may have an impact on endangered species. The revised regulations established a review process, a response and extension timeline, and a fee schedule. The process includes public comment and appeal periods. The regulations also define a list of exemptions. The remaining issue is clarification of who is responsible to notify Natural Heritage when a project has a potential impact on an endangered species. Natural Heritage would like to be notified by developers
early in the process, before any filings are submitted to the Town. Natural Heritage has the authority to shut down a project if necessary to protect an endangered species. They will work with the developer to negotiate a project that is sensitive to any endangered species. Currently Natural Heritage is notified if there is a MEPA filing or by Conservation Commissions during the wetland protection process if the project is in a defined area (a priority or estimated habitat). A priority habitat is based on real records, documentation of rare species, biological boundaries and can be plant or animal. An estimated habitat (under the Wetland Protection Act) is in the area surrounding a wetland and is animal only. A new mapping project is underway that will define all the species across the entire state. There are many species in one general area and each species will be mapped. The maps should be available for
distribution to Conservation Committees and other Town government offices in the Summer of 2006.
The Board suggested that when a developer comes in for a conceptual review or to submit a development plan, the map should be checked to see if the project is subject to review by Natural Heritage.
The Board and the Conservation Commission thanked Mr. French and Mr. Regosin for their presentation.
Presentation
Denis Hanks/Economic Foundation Articles for Town Meeting
Denis Hanks, presented the articles proposed by the Economic Foundation for Fall Town Meeting. Mr. Hanks stated that Article 14 (200 acre site in Cedarville) may be retracted at tomorrow nights meeting of the Board of Selectmen. Article 13 (1,000 acres adjacent to Route 25) will continue through the review process for Fall Town Meeting. Transfer of the ownership of the site from the Board of Selectmen to the Economic Foundation would allow the Foundation to pursue a commercial/industrial use for the site, which would generate tax revenue, improve infrastructure, and create employment opportunities in the Town and surrounding area. The Foundation would like to create a balance of residential, commercial, industrial and open space areas in the town. Mr. Hanks stated that some of the challenges facing the
Foundation would be to establish new sewer districts and to protect the water supply, recreational areas, wildlife and identify ownership of some of the parcels. The article has a reversion clause where the Town would regain title of the parcels if it were determined that development is not feasible. Ownership would also revert to the Town if a master plan for the site is not completed within five years and/or development has not begun within ten years. The master plan study would be funded by the Foundation if ownership of the parcel was transferred to them. The Foundation would proceed as the Larry Rosenblum was concerned with the impact of the development on the site and the Town.
Malcolm MacGregor was concerned with limiting the site to commercial/industrial development when a master plan may determine that another use or a mixed-use development may be more appropriate. Mr. MacGregor was also concerned with the appearance of the proposed Mass HighwayMr. Hanks stated that the study might determine that there is insufficient developable acreage to support a commercial/industrial use but that the Foundation needs to have title to the property before they proceed.
Nicholas Filla suggested that the Foundation contact Natural Heritage before the master plan process begins to determine what endangered species are on the property.
Mr. Tripp expressed his reservations regarding the proposal. Mr. Tripp suggested that the Foundation review the RKG report further. The RKG report questioned the viability of the entire property for a commercial/industrial site, majority of the land should be residential, the State may not invest in an interchange access for a private industrial park, Wareham has already rezoned an area for an industrial park and is pursuing an interchange for that site, and this project would have an enormous environmental impact. Other issues include the increased demand on infrastructure, public safety, increased population, etc. Mr. Tripp felt that the benefits of a commercial development are short term, while a residential development similar to the Pinehills would have a long term benefit.
Mr. Filla stated that one of the suggestions from the Advisory and Finance Committee was that in place of a direct transfer the Board of Selectmen would be authorized to negotiate a development package, including a master plan.
Kenneth Tavares, Board of Selectmen (BOS) Chair, stated that they consider this an important article because businesses are looking to locate in Plymouth and the Town needs to have the acreage to support them. The BOS supports the FoundationPaul McAlduff agreed with the Board of Selectmen.
Mr. Rosenblum suggested that the Foundation begin with a feasibility study and then enter into a guidelines development process prior to drafting a master plan. After the master plan is done, the zoning and permitting process begins.
Paul McAlduff moved to recommend support of Article 13 provided the following additional condition is added and the Board of Selectmen follow the general process and criteria for land transfer noted below.
Additional Condition for Town Meeting
Beyond the ten-year construction requirement, a condition should be added that before any additional Town actions, within 5-years, the Foundation present to various Town agencies and Boards a site master plan that includes:
1. Regional Context
2. Existing Conditions
3. Regional Transportation Issues (including access to Route 25/3/195)
4. Local Transportation Issues (including local road conditions and interconnectivity between roads)
5. Open Space and Buffers
6. Environmental Protection
7. Zoning and Overlay Districts Issues
8. Siting and Design
9. Wastewater
10. Water
11. Development Phasing
12. Fiscal Impacts (municipal costs, employment and tax benefits)
13. Renewable Energy Sources
Board of Selectmen Property Transfer Process
The language of the article gives the Board of Selectmen the authority to establish terms and conditions including restrictions on future use. The Planning Board recommends that following be addressed and included within a final binding transfer agreement. The goal of the agreement will be to establish triggers for proceeding and a general chronological progression of events. The transfer agreement should detail the following:
Each of the 13 points noted above should be refined and further detailed and incorporated into the final agreement.
· An initial feasibility study should be conducted, which establishes initial triggers for proceeding or not proceeding. Initial triggers include determining the feasibility of the construction of a new interchange, environmental issues, and delineation of clear land title.
· A requirement that the Foundation conduct a community goals setting process that establishes the general community goals for development and preservation, specific site goals and establishes a relationship between the community goals and the site development goals. This should include input from abutting towns and regional planning agencies.
· Conduct the master plan noted above which focuses on the established goals.
· Zoning amendments and permitting process.
· Final awarding of development rights and land transfers.
In addition, the Planning Board emphasizes the need to engage MassHighway and the Massachusetts Natural Heritage Program early in the feasibility process. The Foundation should consult with MassHighway relative to the feasibility of constructing a new Route 25 interchange and the Natural Heritage Program regarding priority wildlife habitat.
The Board asked staff to incorporate the BoardThe vote was unanimous (5-0).
The Board took a five-minute recess.
BOA 3322 Goddard Ln/SP to waive front setback and enlarge a nonconforming structure
Valerie Massard presented the application for a special permit to enlarge a non-conforming structure and to waive the front setback requirements in order to construct an attached 6Paul McAlduff moved to recommend approval to the Zoning Board of Appeals; the vote was (4-0) as Mr. Rosenblum was not in the room during the presentation.
Site Plan Review
Cedarhill Park/Medical Building
Andrew Chagnon, Pare Engineering, presented the site plan to construct a medical office building (five offices and MRI facilities with associated parking and utilities on Lot 37A-5 on Map 55. The site would have 37 parking space, a concrete pad for a mobile MRI unit and a 6,000 sq. ft. office building. The site has water and drainage already installed and the septic plan is currently under review by the Board of Health. A landscape plan was also presented. Screening will be provided for the electrical transformer. The project will also require a special permit from the Zoning Board of Appeals.
Valerie Massard informed the Board that the project is located in the newly approved Cedarhill Park, which is in a village center. In the village center the maximum front yard setback is 60 feet and due to the topography of the site, the manueverability for the mobile MRI unit and the parking, this project would require a special permit to locate the structure with a 100 foot front yard setback.
Loring Tripp suggested adding a fence to screen the mobile MRI pad.
Joan Hall, New England Medical Design, reviewed the architectural design for the two story structure with a basement. The basement would house the mechanicals and storage. The first floor façade would be brick with the second floor façade a stucco-like material. The structure would have a metal roof and lighting will be designed to compy with the dark sky bylaw.
Loring Tripp moved that the Board to notify the Building Commissioner that the proposed building is acceptable and that the site plan complies with the minimum requirements of the zoning bylaw if the below conditions are satisfied:
The site plans indicate a footprint of 3,960 SF, but also a total area of 6,000 SF, with a detail on Sheet BH1 that indicates 6,000 SF Gross Floor Area. The Building Inspector is requested to carefully evaluate whether the building will exceed the 4,000 SF ground floor area and the 6,000 SF total floor area threshold, which is the maximum allowed in Cedarville without a special permit per Section 205-49C.
The project appears to need a special permit to vary the front yard setback in Cedarville GC per Section 205-49F(3), which is set at a maximum of 60 feet (the plans depict 100 feet). The proponent indicates that the mobile MRI unit needs to be located at this position for maneuverability within the site, and is willing to pursue the special permit, for which the Planning Board voted support at the meeting.
Landscaping: The transformer pad should have landscape screening added to the plans. In addition, the MRI pad depicted on the south side of the building should be fenced and/or screened not less than six (6) feet tall adjacent to the parking and around the corner on the walkway, with at least one section of fencing.
Compliance with the Prevention of Light Pollution Zoning Bylaw must be documented. Lighting details should be submitted.
Prior to issuance of an occupancy permit: a Registered Professional Engineer must certify that the drainage system, drive ways, curbing and parking areas have been installed; and a Registered Landscape Architect or other qualified licensed professional must certify that the required landscaping has been installed; all according to accepted practices and in compliance with the Zoning By-law and the approved site plan.
Compliance with ADA requirements must be documented.
The Town Engineer must approve the proposed drainage design and calculations.
Conservation Commission permits are required for work under its purview.
The vote was unanimous (5-0).
BOA 3320 Cushman St/SP elderly housing
Nicholas Filla recused himself and left the room.
Atty. Edward Angley, presented the application for a special permit in order to create five age restricted units. The existing single family dwelling would be renovated to house 3 units (approximately 1600 sq. ft. each) and the carriage house would be demolished in order to construct two new units.
Richard Serkey, a neighbor spoke in favor of the project.
Loring Tripp asked if the petitioner would consider designating one unit as affordable housing.
Atty. Angley stated that he would discuss it with his client.
Loring Tripp moved to recommend approval of the petition to the Zoning Board of Appeals subject to the following conditions:
All drainage shall be contained on site to meet the requirements of the Building Inspector and Town Engineer.
If a trash receptacle is used on the site, it is to be located and screened from the public view.
A maintenance plan for the site, including drainage, common drives and associated improvements, septic systems and landscaping will be provided.
All plantings shall be subject to a 2-year performance requirement after installation (which shall re-instate if replacement plantings are installed), and the Petitioner shall be responsible for any replacements needed in that 2-year time period.
A Condominium Association shall be created and incorporate annual assessment for roadway maintenance, snow plowing, landscaping, drainage, wastewater treatment and other areas of common interest and concern. The Homeowners/Condominium Agreement shall also incorporate provisions regarding the ownership and maintenance of the common landscaped/natural areas.
Prior to issuance of an Occupancy Permit, a Registered Landscape Architect or other qualified licensed professional must certify to the Building Inspector that the required landscaping has been properly installed in accordance with the approved site plan, the Zoning Bylaw and acceptable landscape practices.
Prior to issuance of an Occupancy Permit, a Registered Professional Engineer must certify that the drainage system, driveways, curbing, and parking areas have been installed according to accepted practices and in compliance with the Zoning Bylaw.
Malcolm MacGregor suggested that the vote be tabled until next week in order for the petitioner to consider the affordable housing unit request.
Mr. Filla rejoined the meeting.
BOA 3321 Harborlight Dr/ SP elderly housing
Jon Henson presented a revised proposal for 25 unit age restricted development, off Haborlight Drive known as Valerie Massard stated that the petitioner has submitted a traffic study even though it is not required. They would like to have as much peer review completed prior to the Zoning Board of Appeals hearing. The applicant was unaware that they needed to appear before the Plymouth Center Steering Committee (PCSC). Ms. Massard asked if the petitioner had any further contact with the Correctional Facility.
Mr. Henson replied that they have contacted PCSC, but have not had any further discussion with correctional facility. The concern of the Correctional Facility was with a potential link for an open space feature, but the applicant has eliminated the trail segment and maintained existing vegetation in that area of the site. An electrical line that is crossing the site will be removed. Mr. Henson informed the Board that each unit would have a two-car garage with an additional two parking spaces and that lights on photo sensitive timers would be installed at driveway curb cuts. The water line main and a hydrant would be brought in through Nixon Ave with a booster station installed to address water pressure issues.
Loring Tripp suggested adding recreational amenities such as picnic areas, benches, bocci courts or a club house.
Mr. Henson stated that there is a common area in the center of the site that the homeowners association could utilize for a picnic area or other recreational uses. A walking path has been designed for the site.
Malcolm MacGregor was concerned that the pavement on Harborlight Drive was constructed to the old subdivision standards and is thinner than what is now required. Mr. MacGregor asked if the petitioner would consider contributing funds for maintenance of the road.
Larry Rosenblum was concerned with the noise issue. He suggested a concrete wall.
Mr. Henson stated that the developer would provide mitigations to address the noise issues if deemed necessary by the residents, but that fencing would be preferable.
Loring Tripp moved to recommend approval to the Zoning Board of Appeals subject to the following conditions:
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT:
The petitioner has agreed that comment from the DPW, peer review recommendations (if any) with respect to the traffic study, and comment from the Plymouth Center Steering Committee with respect to the design of the project shall be incorporated into the project, subject to additional review by the Planning Board and final approval by the Board of Appeals.
The petitioner shall document the proposed bedroom count and demonstrate adequate parking to the satisfaction of the Building Inspector.
The petitioner shall demonstrate rights to use Harborlight Drive as access to the proposed project.
The petitioner has shown a booster station to improve water pressure. The petitioner has agreed to loop the water main to the un-constructed limit of Nixon Road with a fire hydrant termination as requested by the Director of Utilities. This will allow the Town to connect to the water at a future date when adequate pressure is available in the Town water system; the Town does not wish to acquire responsibility for the booster station.
On-site wastewater treatment is proposed, and is required to meet the requirements of the Town of Plymouth Board of Health.
Light poles shall not exceed twelve (12) feet in height, and are to be in accordance with the Dark Skies component of the Bylaw. The petitioner has agreed that the plans shall incorporate photosensitive lamp-posts at driveway curb cuts within 25 feet of the common driveway in lieu of street lamps on the common drive.
The petitioner has agreed to provide a detailed full-sized landscaping plan similar to the 11(a) Buffer plantings and landscaping to screen noise and visibility from the highway. The Planning Board requested that an audio consultant be brought in to evaluate the noise component; however, the petitioner did not yet comment on this possibility; and
(b) Common area(s) with some benches, and two bocci courts( or the equivalent) within the project; and
(c) A visual buffer from the County property as requested by the County; and
(d) Constructed ADA-accessible walkways.
All drainage shall be contained on site to meet the requirements of the Building Inspector and Town Engineer.
The petitioner shall be consistent with the requirements of the Fire Department for adequate emergency vehicle maneuverability.
All plantings shall be subject to a 2-year performance requirement after installation (which shall re-instate if replacement plantings are installed), and the Petitioner shall be responsible for any replacements needed in that 2-year time period.
The roadway network, including drainage structures, located within the proposed project shall remain private, and this shall be noted on the plans.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF AN OCCUPANCY PERMIT:
The petitioner has agreed to contribute to the Town of Plymouth the sum of $1,000.00 per unit for each of the twenty five (25) new units, payable prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for each individual unit, for the purpose of maintenance of Harborlight Drive.
A Condominium Association shall be created and incorporate annual assessment for roadway maintenance, snow plowing, landscaping, drainage, wastewater treatment and other areas of common interest and concern. The Condominium documents shall also incorporate provisions regarding the ownership and maintenance of the common landscaped/natural areas.
The petitioner has agreed to periodic inspections of infrastructure construction, including driveways, parking areas, sidewalks, water mains and sewer connections (if any), to be funded through the contingency account for the project with the Board of Appeals.
Prior to issuance of an Occupancy Permit, a Registered Landscape Architect or other qualified licensed professional must certify to the Building Inspector that the required landscaping has been properly installed in accordance with the approved site plan, the Zoning Bylaw and acceptable landscape practices.
Prior to issuance of an Occupancy Permit, a Registered Professional Engineer must certify that the drainage system, driveways, curbing, and parking areas have been installed according to accepted practices and in compliance with the Zoning Bylaw.
The vote was unanimous (5-0).
BOA 3319 Nicks Rock Rd/Modify SP to expand asphalt plant
Atty. Edward Angley presented the request for a modification of a special permit (#2594) for am addition to the existing asphalt plant.
Valerie Massard did a Power Point presentation to show the Board the existing facilities located off Commerce Way and Cherry Street. The presentation also detailed the process of creating asphalt.
Greg Keelan stated that the additions would increase production by 25 % and would allow for installation of the best available environmental controls and technological advances. They could increase production by up to 50 %, but the market would not bear that large an increase. With the addition, the plant will also be able to make different varieties of asphalt.
Loring Tripp questioned whether PA Landers applied for permits to put the company logo on the units and whether they would continue with the agreement to pave tennis courts and basketball courts around town.
Mr. Keelan was not sure about the signs, but would look into it. Mr. Keelan stated that the agreement was to provide the materials to pave one court a year and that if the Town identified a specific need, they would work with the Town to address the need.
Paul McAlduff moved to recommend approval of the modification of the special permit to the Zoning Board of Appeals subject to all prior conditions in full force and effect; the vote was unanimous (5-0).
Informal Review
CVS Manomet/State Rd near Beaver Dam Rd
Atty. Edward Angley presented plans for the proposed CVS on Map 45, Lot 70F.
Jon Stephenson, Vanasse,Hangen Brustlin, Inc. (VHB), reviewed the site plan. The existing Whispering Oaks Motel would be demolished to construct a 1108 sq. ft. structure with 60 parking spaces. The site will require a new septic system and water will be accessed off Beaver Dam Road. There will be an underground retention drainage system on the site. The plan shows one curb cut on State Road and one on Beaver Dam Road. Nicholas Filla was not in favor of the location of the compactor and dumpster on State Road.
Lee Hartmann stated that for this type of change the Town would need to review the traffic circulation, the intersection, street lights, sidewalks, benches, amenities, etc. The traffic circulation also needs to peer review. The applicant should present the plans to the Manomet Steering Committee as soon as possible.
Malcolm MacGregor suggested that the design of the building should be similar to the CVS in Sandwich.
Loring Tripp was concerned with adequate buffering for the abutter on the west of the site. Mr. Tripp suggested a dedicated right turn only lane, the inappropriate location of the dumpster and compactor, the safety issues at the intersection of State and Beaver Dam Road, and adequate pedestrian access
Neighbors were concerned with public safety, increased traffic, and the aesthetics of the structure.
Larry Rosenblum felt that the proposed plan is an overutilization of the site. He would like to see a less intense use at this location.
Malcolm MacGregor was concerned with the proposed construction only 10 feet from a wetland area.
Mr. Stephenson stated that all requirements by the Conservation Commission and the State would have to be met in regards to the wetlands and drainage.
Paul McAlduff and Loring Tripp were concerned with the traffic on site for the drive-thru window.
Mr. Hartmann suggested that a condition of the special permit could be to eliminate the drive-thru.
Mr. Filla suggested that the applicant take the suggestions made by the Board and the concerns of the neighbors under advisement.
Conceptual Review Beaver Dam Rd
Loring Tripp recused himself and left the room.
Mark Flaherty, Flaherty & Stefani, Inc., presented the conceptual review for Crane View Place, located on Map 76, Lot 28A-2 through 28A-4, Minuteman Lane and Beaver Dam Road. The site has three existing duplex structures and the plan would add six duplex units for a total of eighteen units. Six of the units would be designated as affordable housing.
Atty. Edward Angley explained that the applicant has a site on Brook Road under agreement and would like to construct one unit on that site and transfer the remaining development rights to this site. This site already has two failed septic systems and the proposed development would lower the number of curb cuts on Minuteman Lane and Beaver Dam Road. Laura Schaefer, Redevelopment, is in support of this project.
Mr. Flaherty felt that it is an appropriate site for this multi-family use.
Malcolm MacGregor stated that it seems like a good idea at some level. He suggested adding some character to the existing structures.
Atty. Angley agreed that the structures needed some added features. The site also needs landscaping, a sprinkler system, and the applicant would try to give it a village look.
Nicholas Filla suggested looking at attached buildings or an attached roof system to make it more interesting. He requested that the applicant return with a revised site plan and additional architectural drawings.
Town Meeting Articles:
Wind Energy
Lee Hartmann presented the language requested by the Board at the last meeting. The public hearing was closed and the Board wanted the review the language prior to voting. Mr. Hartmann reviewed the language with Town Counsel and added a need and justification section to the proposed bylaw change.
Paul McAlduff moved to recommend approval of Article 22 the proposed bylaw for wind energy facilities to Town Meeting.
Loring Tripp and Larry Rosenblum felt the article was not ready to be presented to Town Meeting. Mr. Rosenblum suggested that further study of the issue was needed.
The vote was (2-2-0) with Malcolm MacGregor and Paul McAlduff in favor, Loring Tripp and Larry Rosenblum in opposition and Nicholas Filla in abstention.
Mr. Filla suggested that the language should be amended to add tables, define the visual impact, and add a range of sizes allowed.
Mr. Hartmann reminded the Board that the article could still go forward to Town Meeting.
Mr. Filla moved to reconsider; the vote was unanimous (5-0).
Paul McAlduff moved to recommend approval of Article 22 to Town Meeting; the vote was (2-3), with Paul McAlduff and Malcolm MacGregor in favor and Nicholas Filla, Larry Rosenblum and Loring Tripp in opposition.
Loring Tripp moved to recommend denial of Article 22 to Town Meeting; the vote was (3-2) with Nicholas Filla, Larry Rosenblum and Loring Tripp in favor and Paul McAlduff and Malcolm MacGregor in opposition.
Nicholas Filla stated that both sides would have an opportunity to present their views at Town Meeting.
Jim Sweeney requested that the Board schedule a workshop.
April 2006 Article Discussion
This discussion was postponed to the next meeting.
Other Discussion:
Minutes:
September 12, 2005
Loring Tripp moved to approve the minutes of September 12, 2005 as presented; the vote was unanimous (5-0).
Loring Tripp moved for the Board to support the Community Preservation Committees efforts to place a conservation restriction on the County Farm; the vote was (4-1) with Paul McAlduff in opposition.
Loring Tripp moved to adjourn at 12:05 p.m.; the vote was unanimous (5-0).
Respectfully Submitted,
Eileen M. Hawthorne
Administrative Assistant Approved on:October 11, 2005
| |
|
|
