Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-11-13 Planning Board Minutes Planning Board Meeting November 13,2001 Members Present: John Simons, Chairman r Alberto Angles, Vice Chairman Richard Nardella, Clerk (7:15) Felipe Schwarz, Associate Member(7:10) Staff'Present: Heidi Griffin, Director Community Development & Services Jacki Byerley, Interim Assistant Town Planner Discussions: Executive Quarters-Bond Release Ms. Griffin performed a site visit and the Planning Department has received the as-built. Mr. Angles motioned to RELEASE all remaining bond money held for Executive Quarters-Site Plan Special Permit, 2' by Mr. Schwarz, voted 3-0 in favor of the motion. 100 Belmont Street-Chaotic Wrestliniz Inc. Mr. Jaime Jamitkowski representative for chaotic wrestling stated that they would like to locate to 100 Belmont Street. In 1996 the Planning Board had issued a site plan waiver for a gymnastics studio. Presently a dance studio is located on the second floor. Mr. Jamitkowski informed the Planning Board that the wrestling classes would have fewer students than the gymnastics classes and that the hours of operation would be similar. Mr. Angles questioned whether state certification was necessary for wrestling? Mr. Jamitkowski stated that in Massachusetts there was no board certification but they were certified in New Hampshire and Maine. Mr. Nardella motioned to WAIVE Site Plan Review for Chaotic Wrestling Inc as the use is similar to what was previously located at 100 Belmont Street, 2"d by Mr. Angles, voted 4-0 in favor of the motion. Warrant Article—Street Acceptance Sterling Lane Ms. Griffin informed the Planning board that DPW had recommended favorable action. Ms. Griffin had met with Town Counsel and reviewed the documentation presented. The open space parcel taxes have been paid and are ready to be deeded to the town. Mr. Nardella motioned to recommend FAVORABLE action for warrant article- street acceptance Sterling Lane, 2'd by Mr. Angles, voted 4-0 in favor of the motion. j 1 f �U Warrant Article-Street Acceptance Christian Way Extension Ms. Griffin informed the Planning Board that the paper work had been submitted and approved. DPW had recommended favorable action with the condition of the Planning Board holding the bond money for the street trees. The DPW felt that the trees may not survive the winter and would like to be able to replace them come spring. Mr, Nardella stated that they cannot place conditions on street acceptance but would have to remember -' to hold the money until the spring. Mr. Nardella motioned to recommend FAVORABLE action for warrant article- street acceptance Christian Way Extension, 2"d by Mr. Angles, voted 4-0 in favor of the motion. Public Hearings: Lot 13C Duncan Drive-Access Across Street Frontage & Common Drivewu Special Permit Mr. John Moran of Thomas Neve Associates informed the Planning Board that an ANR plan had been recorded in 1983 to divide the parcel of land into two lots. Currently there was a house located on lot 13B with an existing driveway. The applicant would like to construct a dwelling on lot 13C by accessing their lot with a common driveway at lot 13B. Lot 13C has 5700 SF of wetlands at the front of the property. Mr. Moran stated that when the property was divided in 1983 it was zoned for R-2 district the lot is now zoned R-1, which requires 175 feet of frontage. The applicant believes he is grandfathered from the 175 feet of frontage. Mr. Moran stated that they would submit the necessary covenant and maintenance agreements at the next Planning Board meeting. Mr. Nardella stated that the reason for an access other than special permit was to prevent what the applicant was asking for,to have a house located behind another house. Mr. Moran stated that when the land was purchased the lot was buildable since then the wetland flagging has changed considerably. Mr. Nardella stated that since the property cannot be accessed without a special permit then the lot should not be built on. Mr. Moran stated that the Conservation Commission would not approve a driveway through wetlands. Mr. Nardella stated that he would like to see something in writing from the Conservation Commission that approval will not happen. Mr. Angles question what the replication was? Mr. Moran stated that it would be at least 2:1. Mr. Moran stated that he would look into whether there is room to replicate on the lot. Mr. Simons requested that Ms. Byerley pull the approved ANR plan to verify that the lot was not marked as unbuildable. Mr. Moran informed the Planning Board that the Conservation Commission had wanted the proposed utilities connected to the existing, Mr. Moran contacted the electric 2 l �r company and the current conduit does not have the capability to service two homes. The utilities have to be trenched on the East side of the driveway. Mr. Howard McKew an abutter to the proposal stated that he owns 12 '/z acres of land behind the proposal and would like to see the property developed properly. a Mr. Blake Adams wanted to know whether the proposed dwelling was accessible by the a fire trucks? Ms. Byerley stated that the fire department only requested that a hydrant be placed at the fork in the driveway. Ms. Griffin stated that the deeds for the common ownership are the applicant's responsibility. Mr. Simons requested that Ms. Byerley research whether Contiguous Buildable Area was required in the 1983-zoning bylaw. Mr. Nardella motioned to CONTINUE the Public Hearing for Lot 13C Duncan Drive Access Across Street Frontage & Common Driveway Special Permit until December 4, 2001, 2"by Mr. Angles, voted 4-0 in favor of the motion. 1812 Turn ike Street-Site Plan Special Permit Mr. Ben Smith of Allen &Major Associates Inc informed the Planning Board that he had received comments from DPW and Bob Nicetta regarding the proposal. The proposal is for a two story 20,200 total square foot office and retail building. Mr. Smith stated that the site drains toward Turnpike Street, no work will be conducted in the 25' no work zone. Mr. Smith believed that all of Coler& Colantonio's comments had been addressed. Mr. Smith stated that DPW had a methodology issue which they have revised the plans accordingly. Mr. Nicetta's comments were in regards to the setback with the overhang. Mr. Smith stated that the overhang has columns, which cause it to be considered into the setback of the building. Mr. Smith suggested that they could eliminate the columns and use cantilevered overhang or awnings. Mr. Nardella suggested that they use the cantilevered overhang. Mr. Smith stated that Mr. Nicetta had also commented on the driveway width showing 18', Mr. Nicetta's memo stated that the driveway width should be 25'. Mr. Smith stated that the driveway at 18' would be designated one way and is used to circulate traffic and access for emergency vehicles. The portion of the lot that accommodates parking has been revised to a width of 25'. Mr. Nardella questioned the 6,000 sf of retail proposed as to what kind of retail. Mr. Nardella stated that the parking requirement calculation differs for restaurants. Mr. Smith believed that no restaurants are proposed. Mr. Nardella stated that the decision would read that no restaurants would be allowed. 3 Mr. Smith stated he would provide the necessary easements for the detention pond on the abutting property. Ms. Griffin stated that the parking usage table should be broken up to what is required for retail and office and what is being provided. Mr. Nardella motioned to CONTINUE the Public Hearing for 1812 Turnpike Street Site Plan Special Permit, 2°d by Mr. Angles, voted 4-0 in favor of the motion. Second Order of Remand-Red Gate Pasture Definitive Subdivision Ms. Griffin stated that the proposal before the Planning Board was a settlement to an appeal regarding the denial of Red Gate Pasture in June 2001. Mr. Nardella stated that he had met with the developer and had come to an agreement regarding the approval. Mr. Patrick Michaud, attorney for Stephen Cyr, stated that the proposal did not address water runoff, stabilization issues and the sufficiency of detention pond. Attorney Michaud on behalf of his client requested that the Planning Board not revoke their denial until the developer perforins adequate tests on the site. Ms. Griffin informed the attendees that the reason the court remanded the case back to the Planning Board is because an agreement had been reached for an approval. Ms. Griffin also informed the public that they have a right to appeal any decision made by the Planning Board within twenty days of decision. Mr. Nardella stated that the Planning Board was aware of the history of the project and they have recommendations from the Town's outside engineer and DPW that the project meets the requirements. Mr. Angles stated that the slope stabilization and detention basin were concerns of the Planning Board and felt that they had been addressed in the decision. Mr. Nardella stated that they had placed an additional bond for the slopes within the decision that the Planning Board had not previously done before. Mr. O'Reily, abutter, stated that his lot already fills up with water during a storm and felt that with the addition of this subdivision it would create more problems for him. Mr. Nardella stated that the town's engineer confirmed that no additional runoff would occur. Ms. Griffin stated that evergreen trees would be planted along Salem Street and baffles would be placed inside the detention pond. DPW would maintain the detention pond. Mr. Nardella stated that the settlement was the best agreement they could come to, if the court had not remanded the case back the developer could have received an approval with no conditions attached. Mr. Angles motioned to CLOSE the Pubic Hearing for Second Order of Remand- Red Gate Pasture Definitive Subdivision, 2n by Mr. Nardella, voted 3-0 in favor of the motion. 4 Mr. Nardella motioned to APPROVE the Red Gate Pasture Definitive Subdivision as drafted, 2nd by Mr. Angles, voted 3-0 in favor of the motion. y Warrant Article-Zoning Amendment-Section 9.3 Nonconforming Structures Ms. Griffin informed the Planning Board that this warrant article was to help streamline the permitting process. This article would allow the Building Commissioner to determine that the applicant follows within certain guidelines that would not require them to go before the Zoning Board of Appeals for a variance if the lot was nonconforming. Mr. Nardella asked what would prevent the homeowner from building up to three-stories. Mr. Nardella suggested that Ms. Griffin look into the definition of alteration and reconstruction. Mr. Nardella wanted to see that there was a certain amount of limitations to the amendment. Ms. Griffin stated that she would look into what can be done to limit the amount of work performed. Mr. Nardella motioned to CONTINUE the Public Hearing for Warrant Article- Zoning Amendment-Section 9.3 Nonconforming Structures until before Special Town Meeting December 3, 2001, 2nd by Mr. Angles, voted 4-0 in favor of the motion. Continued Public Hearings: Lawrence Industrial Park-Definitive Subdivision Mr. Gabe Crocker informed the Planning Board that they had addressed VHB's comments. Mr. Nardella stated that he had spoken with the Town Manager and had been assured that the town will receive something for the services the town provides. Mr. Nardella motioned to CLOSE the Public Hearing for Lawrence Industrial Park-Definitive Subdivision, 2nd by Mr. Angles, voted 3-0 in favor of the motion. Mr. Nardella motioned to APPROVE the Definitive Subdivision for Lawrence Industrial Park, 2nd by Mr. Angles, voted 3-0 in favor of the motion. Boston Hill Condominiums-Site Plan Special Permit Mr. Tom Laudani representative for Mesiti Development gave the Planning Board a brief history of the project. Mr. Laudani stated that the developer would like to get the Planning Board's ideas regarding reducing the density from 108 units to 98 units, adding a retaining wall with an additional wall and add 10 acres of non-disturbed open space. This would create 19.5 acres of common open space. The detention basin would be changed to underground along with the trail being connected to the parking area. 5 Mr. Angles questioned whether the new area of open space would be wooded or cleared? Mr. Rosati stated that the slopes would be second growth vegetation; the waterline loop would stay cleared. Mr. Nardella questioned whether the underground detention basin would be grassed? Mr. Rosati stated the detention basin would collect water overland from the hill through swales; there would be depression in the land where the detention basin is located. Mr. Rosati stated that they might be able to plant small trees over the detention basin. Mr. Huntress stated that they would like to have a meadow mix planted in the area. Mr. Simons questioned the depth of the swales? Mr. Rosati stated 3'. Mr. Schwarz questioned the width of the roadway entrance? Mr. Rosati stated that the entrance was originally 30' and the State Highway Department reduced it to. Mr. Simons questioned whether less cutting would happen if the roadway were 30'. Mr. Rosati stated that there would not be a significant difference in cutting. Mr. Nardella questioned whether there was enough room for visitor parking? Mr. Rosati stated that the units have a two-car garage with a driveway and there should be plenty of room on the shoulder of the road. Mr. Nardella questioned the contiguous open space located in the middle of the proposal. Mr. Schwarz questioned whether the circle was necessary? Mr. Rosati stated that the circle had a 50' radius and would help with turn around. Mr. Simons wanted to know whether the areas depicted, as dark green would be touched during construction? Mr. Huntress stated that the existing vegetation would not be disturbed but the areas depicted as light green would be restabilized and reworked. Mr. Simons wanted to know whether the road could be swung at a lower level to create narrower grades? Mr. Grandstaff stated that would cause the grade to move quicker uphill. Mr. Simons questioned whether a higher grade would minimize cuts. Mr. Grandstaff stated that the design was created to minimize the cuts. Mr. Simons questioned why some units have 5 and others 4? Mr. Grandstaff stated that with the grades and slopes this is what would be effective with the slopes and the grades. Mr. Schwarz questioned the traffic? Mr. Huntress stated that the third lane presently on Route 114 would still be in use; with the entrance being 600' from Johnson Street no improvements are proposed for Johnson Street. Mr. Schwarz questioned who would maintain the trails? Ms. Griffin stated it would be the Trails Committee. 6 t�� Mr. Rosati stated that DPW would not maintain the detention pond. Mr. Rosati went on to say that the mailboxes.would be at the island, trash and plowing would be the responsibility of the condo association along with the payment of the lights. q Mr. Nardella questioned the water in the swale. Mr. Rosati stated that the catch basin is located at the bottom of the swale. Mr. Rosati stated that the first unit built would be on top of fill. Mr. Huntress stated that the landscaping would be a hatch pattern with an upland slope mix, while re-vegetating naturally. Ms. Griffin wanted to know about blasting. Mr. Huntress stated that they would address the blasting issues within the construction phasing. Mr. Nardella stated the restriction of 55 and older should be placed in the decision along with the Town not providing plowing or trash pick up. Mr. Laudani stated that the Master Declaration would mirror the restriction placed in the decision. Ms. Griffin questioned the building heights. Mr. Huntress stated that the height was 30' with the Village Residential District allowing 35'. Mr. Nardella questioned the maximum numbers of units they are allowed on the site? Mr. Laudani stated that it is 135 and they were only placing 98. Mr. Angles questioned whether the removal of the units 3 and 5 would impact the topography? Mr. Rosati stated that the removal of units 14 and 15 creates the biggest change. Mr. Angles questioned the water table? Mr. Rosati stated that it would be 5-6' depth in the spring. Mr. Nardella stated that within the decision an additional bond would be required to cover breakout of the hill. Mr. Grandstaff stated that an independent engineering firm would be on site daily during some phases to ensure that the hill is excavated properly the first time. Mr. Nardella motioned to CONTINUE the Public Hearing for Boston Hill Condominiums until December 4, 2001, 2nd by Mr. Angles voted 4-0 in favor of the motion. Mr. Nardella motioned to ACCEPT the 60-day extension to render a decision, 2na by Mr. Angles voted 4-0 in favor of the motion. 7 l �G acilit AT&T-Stevens Estate-W eeWxreFess Facilit S rint PCS-Stevens Esta d the Planning Board that VHB's comments have all been sa Ms. Griffin informed royal b the Planning Board of the 100monopole Ms. Griffin stated that with the app peal would be required. variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals Angles motioned to CLOSE the Public Hearing for AT&T-Stevens Estate- Mr. Wireless Facility,2nd by Mr. Nardella, voted 4-0 in favor of the motion. Mr. Angles motioned to CLOSE the Public Hearing for of the motion.rint tevens g nd Mr. Nardella, voted 4-0 in fav Estate-Wireless Facility, 2 by the Mr. Nardella informed Ms. Griffin to check with the fire department ai bhldng�'eand access road. Mr. Narde la stated that in#11 of the decision delete to add the new pian dates. Nardella in to APPROVE as amended the site plan special permiof the for Mr. Nord Mr. Angles,voted 4-0 in AT&T-Stevens Estate-Wireless Facility, 2°d by motion. Nardella motioned to APPROVE as amended the site plan special permit f the Mr. les,voted 4 Sprint PCS-Stevens Estate-Wireless Facility, 2"d by Mr. Angles, motion. Mr. Nardella motioned to ADJOURN the Planning Board meeting of November 13, 2001,2 nd by Mr. Angles, voted 4-0 in favor of the motion. 8