March 24, 2014
These minutes are not verbatim – they are the secretary’s interpretation of what took place at the meeting. - Open Meeting Law, G.L. c. 30A§22.
Board Members: Marc Garrett, Paul McAlduff, Tim Grandy, and Malcolm MacGregor
Planning Board Alternate: Ken Buechs
Staff Members: Lee Hartmann and Robin Carver
Recording Secretary: Michelle Turner
Administrative Notes:
Minutes:
The Board approved the minutes of March 17, 2014* as presented.
Form A Plans:
A4492* – Pinehills LLC, Map 77D, Lots A-40 and A-200, off Pinehills Drive – Divide to create lots 10-549, A-255 and S-211
The Board determined that A4492 was entitled to endorsement.
B437 – Pinehills - Release of Covenant*
Lots 10-549, A-255 and S-211
The Board approved and endorsed the release of Covenant for Lots 10-549, A-255 and S-211 in the Pinehills’ development
ZBA 3740 - Bertucci’s
6 Plaza Way, Map 104, Lot 14K-153
Special Permits for height and size to install a 180 sq. ft., 4 panel sign
The Board received the following documentation* for review of this case:
Staff Report
Sign Plan dated October 22, 2013
As-Built Plan dated February 6, 2007
The Board recommended approval of the signage for ZBA 3740, subject to the following condition:
The lighting for the proposed sign must comply with the Prevention of Light Pollution Section of the Bylaw (Section 205-65).
Tim Grandy moved for the Board to approve the Administrative Notes as presented: Malcolm MacGregor, second; the vote was unanimous (4-0).
Update – Pinehills LLC
Hanover at the Pinehills
The Board received the following documentation* for review of this case:
Site Plan Narrative dated March 19, 2014
Site Conceptual Layout Plan revised through February 21, 2014
Conceptual Grading, Drainage and Utility Plan dated March 19, 2014
Landscape Site Plan dated January 31, 2014
Fire Safety Exhibit revised through February 21, 2014
Building Plans 01 and 02 dated March 18, 2014
John Judge, Pinehills LLC, presented a site plan for a new 220 unit apartment neighborhood off Pinehills Drive on a 7.6 acre site. The site is located adjacent to the fire station. Parking will be located to the rear of the buildings. The Fire Department has reviewed the site plan and is supportive, but discussion with the Fire Department will continue as the buildings are constructed.
Tony Green, Pinehills LLC, stated that there is a need for apartment living as the supply is low. This commercial project is not subject to inclusionary housing, but the Pinehills’ will contribute $55,000 to the Pinehills’ Affordable Housing Trust at the completion of the project.
David Hall, Hanover Company, presented the plans detailing two apartment buildings, with associated infrastructure, parking in the rear, a courtyard with a pool and recreation areas, a 4,500 sq. ft. amenity structure with management offices, a fitness center, and movie viewing room. The buildings will be 4 stories in height, with pitched roof, façade variations, and handicap accessible walkways to connect to the grocery market. The mail boxes and dumpster will be located near the amenity structure.
Mr. Judge noted that the site, drainage, and planting plans are all consistent with the Pinehills’ Master Plan and that construction should be completed by the end of 2015.
Marc Garrett asked if the number of parking spaces proposed is necessary.
Mr. Hall replied that they meet the parking requirements, but if in the future the parking spaces are not being utilized, the areas will be converted to green space.
Malcolm MacGregor asked for clarification on bedroom counts and unit size.
Mr. Hall explained that the units would be (on average) 1044 sq. ft. with 1-2 bedrooms.
Ken Buechs asked if there were any plans for alternative sources of energy for the site.
Mr. Hall stated that they are looking into green initiatives, but not for this site.
Paul McAlduff was supportive asked if the pedestrian crossing area will have signage.
Mr. Judge stated that the crosswalk will be marked for safe passage with striping and signage.
The Board was supportive of the site plan as presented.
Public Hearing – B586 – Crescent Ave
Road Improvements
The Board received the following documentation* for review of this case:
Staff Report
Road Improvement Plan dated November 5, 2013
Paul McAlduff read the public hearing notice and opened the public hearing.
Seated: Paul McAlduff, Marc Garrett, Malcolm MacGregor, and Tim Grandy
Atty. Robert Betters reviewed the history of the project. Originally the two lots were held in common ownership (49-98 with frontage on State Road and 49-100 with frontage on Crescent Ave). In 2012 a building permit was issued for a new dwelling on Crescent Ave with the driveway off State Road. An ANR plan that relocated the rear lot line to create two lots 98-1 and 100-1 with adequate area was endorsed by the Board in 2012. The new dwelling on Lot 100-1 was conveyed and Jeneve Corp. obtained a building permit for a new dwelling on lot 98-1 and installed a foundation. An issue was raised regarding the zoning validity for the house on 100-1 because Crescent Ave. did not meet minimum access requirements. In order to provide adequate access to the dwelling on Crescent Ave, Jeneve Corp. has agreed to make road
improvements to Crescent Ave.
Joseph Webby explained that the gravel road will be widened to 16 ft. and paved for approximately 145 ft. from State Road before transitioning to gravel. There will be a rain garden along the northern side of the road to capture drainage. There will be no work on the southern side of the existing roadway.
Robin Carver noted that the plan has exceeded the minimum requirements of the bylaw which only calls for gravel and the Engineering Dept. comments will be incorporated into the conditions.
Malcolm MacGregor asked for an explanation of the drainage on the slope to State Road and whether any vegetation would need to be removed.
Mr. Webby explained that the existing drainage would not change. They cannot increase the flow to the existing catch basins and the curb cut will remain the same. The vegetation removal will be minor.
Tim Grandy asked if the proposed improvements would correct the amount of silt running into the catch basins.
Mr. Webby replied that the improvements would correct the amount of silt reaching the catch basins.
Marc Garrett asked for clarification on the location of the rain garden.
Mr. Webby explained that the rain garden would be outside the 16 ft. wide roadway.
Public Comment:
Brian Richmond and Joshua Bows spoke in support of the proposed improvements.
Tim Grandy moved to close the public hearing; Marc Garrett, second; the vote was unanimous (4-0).
Marc Garrett moved for the Board to approve the proposed improvements for Crescent Avenue subject to the following conditions:
The applicant must improve the roadway the full width 50’ feet past Lot 49-100-1 as required by the Planning Board. Currently only 21 feet is provided.
There is no Benchmark or Elevation Datum shown on plan. Please add.
The applicant is proposing to stabilize a slope with wood chips. This type of stabilization is only a temporary solution. The applicant must provide permanent slope stabilization solution. A detail needs to be provided as well.
The applicant to revise the labeling error on the plan shown on the north side of Crescent Avenue, changing the P91 and P92 contour labels to P92 and P94 respectively.
The applicant should show the proposed contours on the plan for the roadway showing the proposed “roadway crown” on the paved section and the proposed super-elevation on the gravel section which are depicted on the provided details.
The applicant must show the existing water main and existing water service/water gate to the house at 3 Crescent Ave to prevent the existing water gate from getting paved over.
The applicant must revise the note regarding the transition from pavement to gravel. The applicant must dive the pavement under the gravel section to prevent pavement being disturbed during snow plowing or roadway grading. The applicant needs to provide a detail on the plan.
The applicant needs to include a watershed sheet with the provided drainage calculations in order for DPW to review the calculations. The watershed sheet must show watershed areas, flow paths and design points.
The applicant must provide a detail for the proposed grass swale. The applicant must also perform soil testing in this area in order to determine the depth to suitable material. The applicant should also add notes about the removal/replacement of unsuitable material, loam and seeding.
The applicant will have to provide erosion control measures during construction to prevent sediment from entering State Road and its existing drainage system. Please add location and details to the plan.
The applicant must revise the pavement detail to provide a minimum of 4 inches of asphalt. 2 ½” inches Binder and 1 ½” inches Top.
A report must be submitted to the Planning Board by a Registered Professional Engineer, certifying that the drainage system, drive ways, curbing, and parking areas according to accepted practices and in compliance with the Zoning Bylaw and approved site plan.
Tim Grandy, second; the vote was unanimous (4-0).
Public Hearing – B582 – Island Pond Estates VOSD
(Cont. from 2/10/14 and 3/3/14)
29 Residential lots with open space off Raymond Road
Seated:
Definitive Subdivision: Marc Garrett, Tim Grandy, Paul McAlduff and Malcolm MacGregor
Special Permits: Marc Garrett, Tim Grandy, Paul McAlduff, Malcolm MacGregor and Ken Buechs
The Board received the following documentation* for review of this case:
Staff Report dated March 19, 2014
Beals & Thomas Comments dated February 4, 2014
Fire Department Comments dated January 9, 2014
Engineering Department Comments January 24, 2014
Environmental Notification Certificate dated January 28, 2014
Project Narrative dated December 30, 2013
Requested Waivers
Environmental Impact Statement dated December 19, 2013
DEP review dated January 9, 2013 with Conservation Management Plan dated June, 2013
Definitive VOSD Subdivision Plans for Island Pond Estates dated December 18, 2013
Handouts:
Area of land and Deed Book 35820, Page 91-96
Comment Letters from Flaherty and Stefani dated February 25, 2014 and March 19 & 20, 2014
Lighting Detail dated March 20, 2014
Fire Truck Turning Templates (3) dated March 20, 2014
Mark Flaherty and Scott Rogers, Flaherty and Stefani, Inc., presented a plan for development of a 63.0 acre site located off Raymond Road. The plan detailed 29 residential lots (17, 000 to 33,000 sq. ft.) with 2 open space lots (43.0 acres held under a conservation restriction). Three affordable housing units are required. The plan has been reviewed by Natural Heritage and has been designed to provide areas of protection for endangered species (moth habitat). The open space will have a conservation restriction and may be conveyed to the Conservation Commission with a per lot stipend to be used for future maintenance. The project would be developed in three phases. Sidewalks would be provided on one side of the proposed roadways and utilities would include onsite septic systems with private wells.
Light posts would be installed at the roadway end of each driveway and drainage would be subsurface. Mr. Flaherty noted that the applicants have met with abutting neighbors and addressed many of their concerns.
Lee Hartmann stated that there are a number of technical issues to be considered. A number of abutters have voiced concerns with the proposed emergency access. The Fire Department does not track emergency access points and rarely use on them. Staff recommends that the construction of the emergency access to Livingston Drive be eliminated, but an easement could be created for future use. The second issue is addressing the affordable housing requirements. The applicant is proposing a “payment in lieu of” constructing the affordable housing on site which will go toward providing affordable housing in an area where it is needed.
Robin Carver informed the Board that the Cedarville Steering Committee is supportive of the project. Ms. Carver outlined several questions that the proponent should address including; documentation of the right to access through Ponds at Plymouth, road width, emergency access, proposed walking trail through open space is not shown on plan, traffic calming measures at entrance on Raymond Road, Island Pond access, option of water from Plymouth Water Company, and low impact design.
Mr. Hartmann noted that there is a civil matter regarding pond access that should be discussed.
Public Comment:
In Favor:
Nathan Buckley, Fred Karbott, Andrea Nedley, Cedarville Steering Committee, spoke in favor of the proposed development.
In Opposition:
Atty. Richard Serkey, representing Bob and Liz Spiegel, noted that existing deeds define that only one lot created in a previous division of land shall have frontage and access to Island Pond. Atty. Serkey requested that the open space area closest to Island Pond be cut back so it would not become a common area for the entire subdivision. Mr. Flaherty has shown pond access for one lot on the revised plan, but the open space still reaches to the pond.
Malcolm MacGregor stated that the nature of the open space is to protect moth habitats.
Lee Hartmann noted that the Conservation Commission and Natural Heritage could allow a beach to be created.
Eric Eastman, Gary James, John Aborn, Dave Hager, Liz Spiegel, Cathy Hinksman and Bob Spiegel expressed their concerns with access to Island Pond, the name of the development encouraging access to Island Pond and the proposed emergency access onto Livingston Dr. which is a private way,
Rory Kelleher stated that the name on the subdivision could be changed. He noted that the configuration of the open space was a result of negotiations with Natural Heritage and they are looking into whether Natural Heritage would support a plan change.
Seamus Kelleher stated that the emergency access may not be required and they are supportive of eliminating the proposed emergency access.
Marc Garrett suggested adding a condition that would prohibit certain lots within the subdivision access over the Spiegel’s driveway. Mr. Garrett commented that an easement should be put in place for the emergency access, but the access should not be constructed. He also was supportive of a subdivision name change and noted that the frontage on the pond is not the sensitive area and hoped that Natural Heritage would support a change.
Tim Grandy stated that he would like to hear from the Fire Department that the emergency access is not required. Mr. Grandy stated that he prefers constructing the three affordable housing units on site and would like to hear from Bruce Arons, Community Development Director as to why the “payment in lieu of” would be a better option. He suggested that signage at the Raymond Road intersection should be installed as a traffic calming measure. Mr. Grandy asked if low nitrogen loading septic systems would be installed for the two retreat lots and asked for clarification on the walking trails.
Marc Garrett suggested providing one affordable housing unit on site with “payment in lieu of” for two affordable housing units.
Mr. MacGregor stated that he was supportive of not constructing the emergency access, but would like to see a bike/walking trail over that area. The trail could link to the existing trail near the retreat lots where benches could be installed. He suggested that if the bike/walking trail is constructed sharrows (indicating share the road with bikes) could be added to the subdivision roadway.
Ken Buechs stated that he would prefer to see the affordable units constructed on site and that a “Private Property” sign should be installed at the entrance area.
Paul McAlduff stated that he agreed that Livingston Drive was in disrepair and that the emergency access should not be constructed but an easement should be drafted.
Marc Garrett moved to continue the public hearing to April 14, 2014 at 7:45 p.m. in order to allow the applicant to consider changes to the plan and to provide information requested; Malcolm MacGregor, second; the vote was unanimous.
ZBA 3741 – 7 Russell Street LLC
7 Russell Street, Map 17, Lots 64B, 64C, & 65
Special Permits for greater than an 8 unit multi-family dwelling; inclusionary housing, if required; waive off street parking; waive setback requirements in order to convert the former Registry of Deeds building into a 3-story, 21 condominium unit structure
The Board received the following documentation* for review of this case:
Staff Report
Fire Department Comments dated March 20, 2014
Site Plan dated March 6, 2014
Architectural Plans dated March 12, 2014
Landscape Plans dated March 13, 2014
Atty. Robert Betters began the presentation for two special permits in order to convert the former Registry of Deed building into a 21 unit condominium complex. Atty. Betters stated that two affordable housing units would be constructed on site and are outlined in an MOU with the Town. He noted that the conditions in the staff report are acceptable to the applicant.
Mark Flaherty presented the site plans for the project which includes 18 one-bedroom units and 3 two-bedroom units. Forty-three parking spaces will be provided with a covered carport for 17 of the spaces and 4 parallel spaces and handicap parking spaces will be located near the elevator. There is not enough room for a full turnaround for emergency vehicles on site, therefore a new fire hydrant will be installed and the building will have fire suppression systems. A new water and sewer connection will provide utilities for the site. A dumpster would be located to the rear of the site; a retaining wall will be rebuilt, and drainage will be installed on site.
Jon Henson, Landscape Architect, presented a landscape plan that included removal of some existing scrub vegetation at the rear of the site, islands with planted beds, shade trees, fern plantings on the shady side of the building, and evergreens in front of the building.
Jeff Metcalfe presented the architecture which included an addition for an elevator on the north east side of the existing building. The existing handicap access at the front of the building will be removed. A roof deck will be constructed and some units on the east side of the building will have wrought iron balconies.
Malcolm MacGregor asked for information on the size of the units.
Rick Vayo replied that the units would range in size from 700 ft. to 1200-1300 sq. ft.
Tim Grandy was concerned with vehicles backing into the proposed storage areas and suggested installing bollards.
Marc Garrett asked if the parking is sufficient or could it be downgraded.
Mr. Vayo stated that he wanted to contain all the parking on site.
Marc Garrett moved for the Board to recommend approval to the Zoning Board of Appeals of case no. 3747 subject to the following conditions:
Prior to the issuance of a Zoning Permit, the Petitioner shall satisfy the requirements of Section 205-71 with respect to Inclusionary Housing by agreeing to construct two (2) affordable units on site as part of the Project, per the MOU with the Office of Community Development of the Town of Plymouth, which shall be approved by the Board of Appeals and which shall be presented to the Building Commissioner.
The Petitioner shall file a complete (as deemed by the state) LIP application with the Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD). By filing a completed LIP application, the Petitioner shall satisfy Section 205-71.
Prior to issuance of a Building Permit:
A Zoning Permit must be issued;
Evidence of payment of any back taxes owed to the Town, if any, in the form of a Municipal Lien Certificate, shall be provided to the Building Commissioner;
Evidence of recording of this Special Permit at the Plymouth County Registry of Deeds shall be presented to the Building Inspector;
Construction plans must be submitted to the Plymouth DPW for final review and approval of proposed connections to public water. Construction plans must show adequate detail on the size and material of the proposed water mains and fire service lines, including valves, fittings, hydrants, post indicator valves and other related appurtenances. Locations of existing mains and services must be shown on the plans;
Construction plans shall include a submittal of wastewater flow calculations to the Plymouth DPW for review and approval, and construction plans must be submitted to the Plymouth DPW for final review and approval of the proposed public sewer connection. Construction plans must show adequate detail on the size and material of the proposed sewers, including service laterals, cleanouts and manholes. Locations of existing mains and services must be shown on the plans;
The plans shall demonstrate adequate clearance for an emergency vehicle throughout the main access drives (fourteen (14’) feet of tree clearance, adequate room for equipment overhang), using the Town’s emergency vehicle overlay templates as the standard;
A Street Opening Permit from DPW is required for all projects involving a street opening, whether or not Town utilities are involved in the reason for the street opening;
Adequate static pressure and fire flow testing results for the project (as performed through the DPW Water Division or its designee), or a written confirmation that the test is not needed from the Water Division, shall be submitted to the Building Commissioner;
The location of a fire hydrant, if required, and other requirements of the Fire Chief must be satisfied;
The location and height of light poles, if any, shall be indicated on the final plans;
The plans will show that the trash receptacle shall be appropriately screened from public ways;
The plans will show wheel stops, bollards, or other measure of stopping vehicles from driving into the storage units of the carport structure.
The Petitioner shall submit documentation demonstrating conformance with Section 205-65 of the Bylaw, Prevention of Light Pollution, shall be submitted to the satisfaction of the Building Inspector;
Evidence of recording an easement for access and maintenance, or an agreement for the same in a format acceptable to the Department of Public Works, for the existing public sidewalk on Russell Street on the Petitioner’s land shall be presented to the satisfaction of the Building Commissioner.
Minor modifications to the design and location of buildings, parking, landscaping and other site elements may be allowed by the Building Commissioner (aka Director of Inspectional Services) to accommodate reasonable and/or necessary field conditions which modifications do not amount to a substantial modification of the plans. Such changes as substituting a particular plant material or number of shrubs or trees where it is impractical to do something, or move a building in a manner which does not materially change the project, or slightly reconfigure a drainage area or parking space may be allowed.
Prior to issuance of a Final Occupancy Permit:
A Registered Landscape Architect or other qualified licensed professional must certify to the Building Commissioner that the required landscaping has been installed substantially in accordance with the approved site plan and Zoning Bylaw;
A report must be submitted to the Building Commissioner by a Registered Professional Engineer, certifying that the drainage system, drive ways, curbing, and parking areas according to accepted practices and in compliance with the Zoning Bylaw and approved site plan;
Satisfactory completion of any curb cut improvements constructed by the Petitioner, including repair of any damaged monuments or benchmarks as noted on the plans if located in the vicinity of the proposed work, shall be performed by the Petitioner.
Off-site drainage or roadway improvements, if any, as shown on the approved plans, shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works and the Building Commissioner;
All requirements of the Town Water Department with respect to water connections shall be satisfied; and
All requirements of the Town Sewer Department with respect to sewer connections shall be satisfied.
If after a period of two (2) growing seasons any of the installed landscaping has failed to thrive, the Petitioner shall replace said failing landscaping materials to the satisfaction of the Building Commissioner.
Malcolm MacGregor, second; the vote was unanimous (4-0).
Other Business:
“Topics not reasonably anticipated by the Chair 48 hours in advance of the meeting.”
Lee Hartmann presented a plan prepared by the Town Engineer clarifying the layout of Carver Road.
1820 Courthouse Update
Marc Garrett noted that the presentation will be made at Town Meeting on April 5, 2014.
Correspondence:
None
Tim Grandy moved to adjourn at 10:03 p.m.; Malcolm MacGregor, second; the vote was unanimous (4-0).
*On file with the Office of Planning and Development in project case files.
Respectfully Submitted:
Eileen Hawthorne Approved: April 28, 2014
Administrative Assistant
| 
