************************************************************
TAUNTON PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
CITY HALL, TAUNTON, MA 02780
(Meeting held at Maxham School, 141 Oak St., Taunton, Ma. )
*************************************************************
DATE : November 7, 2013
BOARD MEMBERS: Daniel Dermody, Chrmn. Anthony Abreau
Bob Campbell V.C. Arthur Lopes
Manuel Spencer, Clerk Joshua Borden
Michael Ritz
ADVISORS: Mark Slusarz, City Engineer
Kevin Scanlon, City Planner
__________________________________________________________________________
Roll Call: Borden, Campbell, Ritz, Spencer, Ritz, Spencer and Dermody. Present. Meeting opens at 5:30 pm. Also present was City Engineer Mark Slusarz.
River Pines Subdivision – Relative to the “No Cut Zone –
Clerk Spencer read an e-mail from the Building Inspector/Zoning Enforcement Officer relative to an inspection he conducted at River Pines Subdivision. Chairman Dermody stated the Board needs to clarify the “50 foot No Cut zone that was approved as part of the subdivision. Chairman Dermody stated there was a complaint about some work being conducted in the no cut zone. Bob Ventura, 13 Evergreen Drive stated he thought the No Cut Zone was a No Touch Zone. He stated they have been removing fern, vines and bushes and cleared a lot of debris. An abutter has erected a fence along the no touch zone. He asks the Board to clarify what NO CUT means. Rich Personini, 17 Evergreen was very vocal during the public hearing process and they had lengthy
discussion about the No cut zone. He thought that section was to remained untouched. He stated if trees are leaning then they could remove those. They have been raking, cutting little trees vines, etc. He thought the intent of the Planning Board was that it remain in its natural state. Chairman Dermody stated the City Planner and Building Inspector wanted the Board to clarify this. The board stated no cut means No Cut. Bob thought it meant not removing any mature trees. He thought there was a definition in the zoning ordinance. Manny stated no cut means no cutting of anything.
Motion made and seconded to send letter to owners of lot 8 clarifying the Board’s intention. Give copy to Mr. Ventura & Mr. Personini.
Public Hearing – Proposed Zoning Map Amendment – DEAN STREET (40, 44 Dean Street ) (Property I.D. 55-758, 55-756 & 55-757 submitted by Steven Koss, Koss Realty Trust. To Re-Zone the following parcels located in the Urban Residential District to be part of the Transit Oriented Development Overlay District
Roll Call: Borden, Campbell, Lopes, Ritz, Spencer, Dermody present. Hearing opens at 5:45 pm.
Clerk Spencer read public hearing notice and Department comments from City Planner, and Conservation Commission. Chairman Dermody stated that Kevin Shea, Economic Development Office is in support of TOD and abutting transportation area providing there is traffic mitigation. Chairman Dermody stated Mayor Hoye is in favor also. Atty. David Gay and Steven Koss, 40 Dean Street was invited into the enclosure. Atty.Gay stated the TOD was adopted some time ago and it surrounds this property. In planning for future railroad they want to include this parcel in the Transit Oriented Development Overlay District. Atty. Gay stated Route 44 would need some improvements and they will make it convenient for their development. The TAD allows for multiuses and mixed uses and maximum density. Atty. Gay stated this is not spot zoning, the City re-zoned across the street and this will extend the district. Atty. Gay stated the reason why these parcels were not included is because they just
re-zoned the City owned properties. Manny stated this is a bad intersection and he thinks it’s a little pre-mature and he would need to see a traffic study and some proposed improvements. There was some discussion about widening roadway for right turn onto Arlington Street. Atty. Gay stated before spending monies on traffic study they need to know what they can do. Manny pointed out there has been a lot of accidents at this intersection. Bob stated this is a nice project but premature. This would allow an increase in density where there is no rail yet. Bob suggests just developing the residential part and when the rail comes in then ask for zoning change. Atty. Gay stated they cannot continue to develop the residential portion of it because the density is different and would not be financial feasible. Atty. Gay asked the board to perhaps send a recommendation to the Council saying it’s a good
proposal but premature instead of a Negative recommendation. Mr. Koss stated he was surprised the City didn’t include this property when they changed the adjacent properties. It was stated the zoning change was limited to City owned or controlled lots.
Josh made motion to open public input, seconded by Mike . All in favor. No one in favor or opposed.
Josh made motion to close public input, seconded by Arthur. All in favor.
It was suggesting continuing to see what improvements would be done.
Atty. Gay requests a 2 month continuance.
Josh made motion to grant 2 month continuance. Seconded by Bob. All in favor.
CONT’D. Public Meeting – Site Plan Review – 255 Cape Highway – for the expansion of the existing business including a 2,828 sq. ft. addition, 1,166 sq. ft. cooler, a compactor, 29 new parking spaces and a secondary exit from site. Submtted by Fariborz Motamedi of Marmar Real Esate Group LLC
Lawrence Silvia, and Faribor Motamadi were invited into the enclosure. Clerk Spencer read the DIRB comments into the record which were placed on file. Mr. Silvia stated they met with the City Planner and Conservation and worked out the issues. They widened the entrance for right turn out and met with Mass. Highway. They were proposing a second entrance off Richmond Street but dropped that after meeting with departments. They have complied with the DIRB comments and updated plans. The seafood trailer will be moved to the right of the existing building. They increased the parking on the west side and re-configured it per the 25 foot no touch zone per the Conservation Commission. The end result will be a 3,600 square foot addition with a 1,300 sq. ft. cooler
and small storage and compactor /trash area. They moved the dumpster per the Conservation Commission. Manny asked the City Engineer about taking a left onto Richmond Street and Mark stated it’s difficult now and it still will be. Hopefully light will come in the future. Manny suggested putting a solid white line so if there is an accident when exiting. They will have to go thru DOT for a curb cut and they will mention that. It was thought that there is a double solid line now but Mr. Silvia will mention it to them. Arthur made note the traffic is terrible especially during summer months with people going to the Cape. Public Input, Scott Brouillard, 516 Richmond Street stated his house abuts the property in back where the dumpster will be located. He stated they used to empty dumpster at 3:50 AM on Monday and they switched it to 4:50 AM on Thursdays. He asked if they could perhaps empty it on a weekday and a little
later. He stated they used to empty it on the weekend. Mr. Fariborz stated he will call them to change that, he was under the impression they did change it. The Board suggests weekdays between 7 am - 7pm . Paul Farinha, 526 Richmond Street stated they are good neighbor and his concerns was there are a lot of children in area and he’s glad there is access from Richmond Street. He stated that Richmond Street is very narrow and an exit/entrance would be difficult and there would be no advantage to having one.
Josh made motion to close public input, seconded by Arthur. All in favor.
Josh made motion and seconded by Manny to approve the Site Plan Review to include the DIRB with the following changes…
- Revised plans thru October 31, 2013
2 . The dumpster shall be located on a concrete pad, enclosed with a 6 foot stockade fence kept closed at all times and emptied regularly BETWEEN 7:00 AM – 7:00 PM on weekdays . No Sunday or Holidays.
All in Favor.
CONT’D. - Public Meeting - SITE PLAN REVIEW - 336 Weir Street for the existing building containing 202,000 square feet – subject of a recent zoning change from Industrial District to Business District.
Cheryl Peterson, P.E. from Heritage Design Group was invited into the enclosure. Clerk Spencer read the DIRB comments which were placed on file. Ms. Peterson stated this is an existing building, the former Haskon building, with the old part built in 1890 and new part built in 1960. There are currently 4 businesses there now. The property was located in the Industrial District and the City Council just recently re-zoned it t to Business District. As a result of that a Site Plan Review was required before any more businesses could go in. She stated the parking requirement is based on the maximum use (since the building isn’t fully occupied) and the proposed uses there comply with that. There is a common bathroom with enough capacity to serve the former 300 employees of
Haskon. The 3 existing entrances still remain and will be maintained. Bob asked if the owner is on site and Ms. Peterson answers no but he has maintenance there regularly but no office. Manny asked who is responsible for sewer and Ms. Peterson answers its’ the owners responsibility when he leases space. Arthur reminded them they need to go to Viola who handles the sewer for the city. Ms. Peterson stated on the DIRB condition #5 it states submit plans showing utilities. She stated they cannot locate utilities because of it being so old. City Engineer agreed but the conditions also states the parking lot must be striped and they need to do that. He doesn’t think they should be responsible for showing utilities because they won’t be able to locate them. Arthur stated if Auto repair goes in there who is responsible for making sure all the rules are complied with and she replies its up to the individual.
Motion made and seconded to open public input, No one in favor or opposed.
Motion made and seconded to close public input,. All in favor.
Ms. Peterson had question about condition #10 and due to the age of the building it would be an unncessary expense to submit As-Builts. She also questions condition #11, relative to information on Deed. Bob was concerned with the large building being fully occupied and no one on site to maintain and oversee it. He would like an office for the manager of the property. Ms. Peterson stated it would be unfair to force the owner to be on site at all times. She stated if there is an issue they can call him and he will come right down.
Bob thought it is necessary to have someone on-site once fully occupied.
Bob made motion, seconded by Arthur, to approve the Site Plan Review to include the DIRB comments and the following MODIFICATIONS:
Condition #5) Two sets of As-builts shall be submitted upon completion of all work on site and shall include certification notes and stamps by a Design Engineer (PE) and Land Surveyor (PLS) stating that the development has been built according to the approved plans. Plans shall show at least all of the information shown on the proposed plans referenced in condition #1 above and all utility as-builts. If a unit is to be occupied and its dumpster pad and enclosure are in place, but some of the other dumpster facilities are not yet completed, two certified as-built for the work completed can be submitted, but additional certified as-builts would still be required covering all of the work on the approved Site Plan.
Condition #9) An oil/water separator is required on the floor drains and must be shown on the plans and properly connected to the sewer system unless all floor drains are capped and the capping is inspected and approved by the City’s Plumbing Inspector or his designee.
Condition #15) A 100 square foot (minimum) office space must be designed within the building for owner/maintenance staff use. Once the building is 80% occupied that office shall be staffed during normal operating hours
Public Meeting - Modification – Site Plan Review – 30 Mozzone Blvd. – proposed modification is for a change in truck circulation resulting in a decrease in the amount of impervious surface, and the relocation of the proposed outdoor scale.
Roll Call: Borden, Lopes, Campbell, Spencer, Dermody present. Ritz excused.
Bob Field, P.E. representing WeCare was invited into the enclosure. Josh disclosed that he did work for abutter but has no conflict of interest so he can vote on this. Clerk Spencer read the DIRB comments into the record which was placed on file. They changed the scale location and re-used the door which results less impervious area. There is a slight difference in the on-site circulation.
Public Input opened. No one in favor or opposed. Public input closed.
Josh made motion, seconded by Bob, to approve the Site Plan Review to include the DIRB comments. All in favor.
Letter from Atty. Gay – relative to Sabbatia Landing Condos – Bay St. Certificate of Final Action – Condition #5 – Landscaping
Letter withdrawn at the request of Atty. David Gay.
Myles Standish Ind. Park Pbase IV – Segment B – Pioneer Way – E-5 circulated – completion of subdivision – release of all surety
Russ Burke representing Mass. Development was invited into the enclosure. Dept. comments were read from the City Planner, Water Dept., Conservation Commission and the City Engineer stated he’s all set.
Josh made motion to release all surety and send a positive recommendation to the City Council for street acceptance. Russ stated the As-Builts won’t be done until later and the Board voted to follow the same procedure as Colton Road regarding the Mylar Deposit.
Chairman Dermody asked Bob Field update on the streets located in the Industrial Park. He stated they have done overlay of John Hancock Road and crack sealing and they have striping and As-Builts to do. They are moving along. Mark reminded the Board the entire length won’t be accepted.
Manny brought up the Briggs Street approval and wanted an update if all the conditions have been met.
Meeting to adjourn at 7:30 pm.
| 
