These minutes are not verbatim – they are the secretary’s interpretation of what took place at the meeting. – Open Meeting Law – Section III.
Board Members: Marc Garrett, Malcolm MacGregor, Paul McAlduff, Larry Rosenblum, and Bill Wennerberg
Planning Board Alternate: Timothy Grandy
Staff Members: Lee Hartmann
Recording Secretary: Eileen Hawthorne
Administrative Notes:
Bill Wennerberg recused himself from voting on the Administrative Notes.
Form A’s:
A4342 – Erin Burns and John & Yoko Lebekas, Drew Road, Map 88, Lots 9E (64157 sf) and 10A (40,000 sf) – Lot line adjustment to create lots 9F (64,157 sf) and 10B (40,000 sf)
B437 – Pinehills LLC – Endorsement of Penick Knoll, Five Lanterns and Ridgeview Plans
Paul McAlduff moved to approve the Administrative Notes as presented; the vote was unanimous (4-0-1) with Bill Wennerberg in abstention.
Site Plan Review Tech Etch
Mark Flaherty, Flaherty and Stefani, Inc., presented the site plan review for a proposed 38,697 sq. ft. addition to the existing Tech Etch building. The rear parking lot will be extended 80 ft. in order to maintain adequate parking; a new 8 ft. water line with hydrant will be installed; the addition will be sprinkled; and a new septic system is proposed. There is existing emergency access and ample drainage. Previous additions were done in 1997 and 2006.
Dick Jones, R.A.D. Jones Architects, Inc, reviewed the architecture of the proposed addition which will consist of concrete masonry with split face architectural block. The proposed addition will maximize the usage of the site. The landscaping on the site is maintained and supplemented annually. Any landscaping disturbed during construction will be reused on the site. Lighting will consist of 16 ft. standard poles with directional heads.
Lee Hartmann noted that the site is attractive and well maintained. The staff recommendation includes conditions that the addition must comply with ADA regulations, the Town’s light pollution control bylaw and the work must be certified by an engineer prior to occupancy. Mr. Hartmann suggested that a condition could be added that the landscaping must be consistent with the existing landscaping.
Paul McAlduff moved for the Board to notify the Building Commissioner that the plans will comply with the Zoning Bylaw once the following issues are addressed:
Compliance with Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements must be documented.
Compliance with the Prevention of Light Pollution Zoning Bylaw must be documented. A lighting plan should be submitted for proper review. Light poles should not exceed twelve feet in height.
Prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit a registered professional engineer must certify the drainage system, drive ways, curbing and parking area have been installed; and a registered landscape architect or other qualified licensed professional must certify the required landscaping has been installed; all according to accepted practices and in compliance with the Zoning Bylaw and the approved site plan.
Landscaping associated with the proposed improvements shall be consistent in size, quantity and species as the landscaping already installed on the site.
The vote was unanimous (5-0).
Discussion
AD Makepeace – TDR Boy Scout land
Judy Kohn, AD Makepeace, presented the request to create 151 Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) certificates from land known as Camp Squanto, belonging to the Old Colony Council Boy Scouts of America to be transferred at a later date to the River Run Development. The issuance of these TDR certificates will preserve 434 acres of land.
Paul McAlduff moved for the Board to issue the 151 TDR certificates subject to the following conditions:
The applicant shall provide a phased plan for the order in which the Development Rights will be taken from this property, prior to the Development Rights being conveyed to another party or ‘landed,’ for approval by the Planning Board.
Before the TDR Certificates subject to this approval are ‘landed’, the required conservation restrictions on the sending area(s) shall be subject to review by Town Counsel and final approval by the Planning Board and then recorded at the Plymouth County Registry of Deeds.
The vote was unanimous (5-0).
Conceptual Review
MFN off Shallow Pond
Lee Hartmann stated that the Shallow Pond Homeowners Association was invited to attend this conceptual review.
Atty. Edward Angley noted that he was not involved in any of the previous reviews of the project, but that Brad Bertolo has met with Valerie Massard to draft an alternative plan to the original plans that were presented on March 2, 2009.
The original plans included a by right subdivision with 13 residential lots on a 500-600 ft., 40 ft. road layout plus the existing dwelling; a different lot configuration with 10 residential lots plus the existing dwelling with emergency egress; and a plan similar to the 10 lot layout with an extra lot for an affordable housing unit.
Brad Bertollo, JC Engineering, presented two revised plans as follows: a “by right” plan showing a 50 ft. wide, 500-600 ft long road layout with 12 residential lots plus the existing dwelling and emergency egress and an 11 lot configuration with vegetative buffers and an affordable housing lot that would require a special permit for waivers of frontage and depth. Mr. Bertollo has met with Bruce Arons to draft an MOU for an affordable housing unit. The property was originally owned by the Second Congregational Church which placed a deed restriction on the property to limit development to two residential units. The current petitioner has entered into an agreement with the Church to lift that deed restriction. Waivers that will be requested include reducing the width of the road to 20 ft and the
length of a dead end road. Conservation Commission approval will be needed for construction near the vegetated wetland. On the current option, a 20 ft. wide access and utility easement is shown that would provide future access to the Town owned property adjacent to this site. Mr. Bertollo also suggested that a pedestrian access for the Shallow Pond Estates neighborhood and this neighborhood could be provided through this site to the Town owned property. The houses would be similar to those in Shallow Pond Estates. A VOSD plan was considered, but the house sizes on smaller lots would disturb more of the natural vegetation on the site. Drainage options have yet to be presented to the Planning and Engineering departments.
Larry Rosenblum asked Mr. Bertollo to speak to the issue of access from Shallow Pond Lane which is a private road.
Mr. Bertollo stated that there is adequate width on the existing private roads and the developer has agreed to repair the entrance to Shallow Pond Estates.
Mr. Rosenblum asked about the petitioner’s right to travel over these private roads.
Lee Hartmann stated that the developer has been asked to document the rights to use the private roads.
Mr. Rosenblum stated that the rights should be established prior to a formal filing.
Mr. Bertollo stated that his client has purchased the rights over the private roads.
Atty. Angley stated that the original developers retained the rights to the road and those rights have been deeded to the applicant.
Lee Hartmann noted that the project is subject to a special permit for adequate facilities to address issues of water pressure and supply. Lower density would minimize the impact on the neighborhood. The balance between the unit count and the off-site improvements will depend upon the level of support of the existing neighborhood.
Paul McAlduff asked where parking for Town residents would be if the emergency access was used to create a pedestrian path to the adjacent Town owned land.
Mr. Bertollo stated that he could look at placing a parking area on the Town owned land.
John Joseph asked where the utilities would come from. Mr. Joseph noted that the Homeowners Association does not own the roads, but each property owner owns a portion of the road. He was concerned that the roads would be torn up and not repaired and with the water pressure for the existing homes being affected.
Mr. Bertollo stated that the underground utilities would come through a stub in the existing access way and information regarding the water pressure would be submitted as part of the formal filing process.
Gerald Ouellette stated that currently during the early morning hours when people are getting ready for work and school there is a significant drop in water pressure.
Peter Stearns noted that Indian Brook Road provides access to the Town owned land and that when the development was built, public access to Shallow Pond was not provided on purpose. He also noted that a Town well may be proposed to the north of the site.
Malcolm MacGregor stated that a buffer around Shallow Pond was created as part of the Shallow Pond Estates subdivision. Mr. MacGregor also expressed his concerns with adequate access water pressure.
Mr. Bertollo stated that there is no public access proposed for the pond. It is proposed as a pedestrian access to paths in the Town owned land. There is a vegetated buffer around the site to prohibit access to the pond. He noted that a homeowners association could be created or the residents could join the existing homeowners association. He also stated that improvements would be made to Kathleen Drive at the entrance of the development.
Paul McAlduff was also concerned with adequate water pressure.
Larry Rosenblum asked if there is an existing homeowners association.
Robert McTurner, President of Shallow Pond Association, stated that they have no objections to the proposed development and are supportive of the proposed improvements to Kathleen Drive.
Tim Grandy asked if the Town would be asked to plow the new road and whether there would be Town sewer. He suggested using low nitrogen loading septic systems if private sewerage is to be installed.
Brad Bertollo noted that sewerage would be private.
Marc Garrett noted that issues were raised that would have to be addressed and submitted as part of a formal filing. The issues include documentation of adequate access and water pressure.
Malcolm MacGregor commented that ground water flow and nitrogen loading in the area of the pond should be documented.
The Board took a five-minute break.
Site Plan Guidelines Follow Up
Historic District Guidelines Overview
Lee Hartmann presented an overview of the completed Historic District Guidelines (HDG). A consultant was hired to create the document. Mr. Hartmann noted that the HDG were adopted in 2008 and there are no grandfathering provisions. Every property is subject to the guidelines. The HDG defines what can happen on the exterior of a building and anything visible from a public way; and what can and cannot be demolished. Alterations and changes must be harmonious with the character in the area. Examples of acceptable architectural features are detailed for both residential and commercial buildings. There are three distinct areas in the Historic District: Waterfront; Main St./Court St., and residential and mixed use side streets.
The draft design guidelines that the Board has for review, will compliment the HDG document.
Mr. Hartmann asked for the Board’s input for the draft guideline document.
Larry Rosenblum felt it was a good start. He felt that the HDG needed to be augmented to address future changes in the downtown area.
Marc Garrett noted that the HDG are great for the designated district, but the draft design guidelines have to go beyond that district to common areas in town. They have to address how the Board would like to see village center and other common areas developed. He felt the document should be tied into the Zoning Bylaw.
Malcolm MacGregor moved to adjourn at 8:50 p.m.; the vote was unanimous (5-0).
Respectfully Submitted,
Eileen M. Hawthorne Approved: September 21, 2009
Administrative Assistant
| 
