Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - PB - 07/27/2005 Planning Board Meeting 1 of 6 July 27,2005 COHASSET PLANNING BOARD MINUTES DATE: WEDNESDAY,JULY 27,2005 TIME: 6:30 PM PLACE: COHASSET TOWN HALL—SELECTMEN'S MEETING ROOM 41 HIGHLAND AVENUE, COHASSET,MA 02025 Board Members Present: Alfred Moore, Chairman Peter J. Pratt,Vice Chairman Stuart Ivimey, Clerk Mike Westcott Board Members Absent: Robert Sturdy Recording Secretary Present: Jo-Ann M. Pilczak Town Planner Present: Elizabeth B. Harrington MEETING CALLED TO ORDER AT: 6:50 P.M. 6:50 P.M. 6 DEEP RUN,MICHAEL&KRISTYN STEVENS,LARGE HOME—BLASTING PLAN Applicant Michael Stevens and Ken Smith,Atlantic Blasting Co., in attendance. Blasting Plan submitted to Planning Board. Blasting done at the Roy property was greater magnitude in area and depth than will be used here. AMFO will not be used at Stevens property. Additional delays will be introduced if necessary. 1,000 lb. steel mats were used at Roy property, 5,000-7,500 lb. to be used on Stevens property. Blasting will be limited to 9 AM—4 PM Monday—Friday. Work will be conducted with Cohasset Fire Department. Blast will be delayed if there is a safety issue. Blasting survey extended 400' to include 13 neighboring homes. John Modzelewski and Building Commissioner Egan are satisfied with plan. Town Planner Harrington asked that Planning Board receive copy of materials received by John Modzelewski today. Blasting to begin as soon as blasting plan is approved by Board. MOTION: by Member Pratt to approve all submitted blasting documents,forward to the applicant a copy of John Modzelewski's 07/22/05 memo regarding the blasting document and commend the applicant's team for a very thorough report and for their cooperation. SECOND: Member Westcott VOTE: 3 -0 MOTION APPROVED (Member Ivimey had not arrived at meeting at this time) 7:05 P.M. BOB EGAN—DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT Until now, Egan has not seen any downtown development. In the past,mixing residential and commercial in a business district was not encouraged which makes some of the bylaws seem confusing and contradictory such as 5.3.1, 5.4.1 and 5.4.6. For example,in the Table of Areas, in the downtown business district,dwellings for occupancy by more than one family require 40,000 SF plus 4,000 SF additional for every family more than two,which is not possible in the Cohasset downtown business district. It is possible that this figure was selected to limit the possibility of mixing residential and commercial in the business district or perhaps it was a typo but must be addressed/changed given the trend towards mixing residential and commercial. Planning Board staff to send memo to Town Manager asking to reserve space in the warrant for the September Special Town Meeting to address these housekeeping zoning issues as addressed in Egan's 07/06/05 memo and request Town Manager to forward to Town Counsel asking him to draft the necessary documents to address/remedy these zoning issues so public hearing notice can be issued. MOTION: by Member Westcott to have Planning Board Staff schedule a public hearing prior to the 09/15/05 Special Town Meeting and to issue the notice for the public hearing. SECOND: Member Ivimey VOTE: 4-0 MOTION APPROVED 7:25 P.M. JOHN FAIRCHILD,ABUTTER,DINERO'S RESTAURANT PLANTINGS Mr. Fairchild requested to be heard by the Planning Board regarding plantings at DiNero's Restaurant. Mr. Fairchild sent memo to Town Planner Harrington expressing his concern about plantings along the fence to be installed and about the installed refrigeration units that he does not recall on approved plans. Member Ivimey reiterated that his original Planning Board Meeting 2 of 6 July 27,2005 intent was to have the fence installed with enough room to allow plantings on Mr. Fairchild's side to soften the view of the fence and of the view of DiNero's from Mr.Fairchild's property. Planning Board staff will contact Mr. Amonte telling him that the Board has reiterated and agreed that there is to be vegetative screening on Mr. Fairchild's side of the fence and that the fence should be placed as close as possible to the existing chainlink fence as possible to allow this planting. Building Commissioner Egan will look at the refrigeration unit. 7:30 P.M. ZBA RECOMMENDATIONS • 154/156 KING ST., SPECIAL PERMIT APPLICATION, APP: 154-156 KING ST.DEVELOPMENT LLC, date stamped: 07/12/05. Applicant seeks special permit to reduce/reface sign at 154/156 King St. Sign to be reduced from existingl20 SF to 54 SF. B. Egan pointed out to applicant that he could issue a permit if the applicant wanted to install a 40 SF sign that complied with bylaw. However,anything larger would require going before the ZBA,noting that sometimes the ZBA takes into account the existence of an oversized pre-existing sign and the 40 SF allowed, striking a compromise between the two. Planning Board applauded the fact that the proposed sign will be an improvement over the existing sign and, substantially smaller. Member Pratt felt the business district will be better served the more it gets away from internally lit signs. Member Moore felt that detailed comments by the Planning Board would be arbitrary without hearing applicant's case presented to ZBA. MOTION: by Member Ivimey to leave the fine details of the sign to the discretion of the ZBA while noting that it would be the desire of the Planning Board to see smaller signs and to move away from internally illuminated commercial signs, citing the very tasteful, externally lit wooden style sign installed at Hingham Lumber which tends to be more aesthetically pleasing while softening the appearance of a commercial site. SECOND: Member Pratt VOTE: 4-0 MOTION APPROVED • 49 MARGIN ST., SPECIAL PERMIT APPLICATION, APP: PETER A.ROY, date stamped: 07/12/05 The applicant seeks a special permit to construct a reflecting pool and barbeque in the flood plain. MOTION: by Member Pratt to recommend that the ZBA approve this application for a special permit. SECOND: Member Ivimey VOTE: 4-0 MOTION APPROVED 7:40 P.M. 150 NO.MAIN ST.—KENDALL VILLAGE BLDRS.—LARGE HOME REVIEW— DRAINAGE SWALES Applicant Steve Bjorklund and abutters Chris and Kimberly McGowan in attendance. Right now,Bjorklund is planning on a RR tie wall. 4 front parking spaces slope towards McGowan property—John Modzelewski would like to see drainage towards the swale, Bjorklund wants to keep drainage on his property rather than towards McGowan's by elevating the parking spaces and,will direct McGowan's downspout so its flow is directed away from McGowans home. The Planning Board agreed to the following subject to a visit by the McGowans and a member of the Planning Board: • tree in area of swale will remain • swale will be 2'-3' wide, asphalt(OK with John Modzelewski) • Bjorklund will stake out swale so McGowans can see it • Bjorklund will rough out swale and have McGowan and Planning Board see it prior to paving • Bjorklund will elevate parking spots to help drainage move towards Bjorklund's property and away from McGowans • FOR THE RECORD: if problems with ants develops with RR ties,Bjorklund stated he will treat RR ties 7:50 P.M. SCITUATE HILL SUBDIVISION—PRELIMINARY FILING,NAME OF SUBDIVIDER: CROCKER II REALTY TRUST, date stamped: 07/07/05. (45 day decision deadline: 08/20/05)Member Moore recused self. John Cavanaro, Cavanaro Engineering, Rob Schwandt,representing Crocker II Realty, Rick Bryant,Rizzo Associates in attendance. Member Pratt noted this is the first commercial subdivision in Cohasset. John Cavanaro addressed site: This is the last piece to be developed associated with Crocker II that began 10 years ago. This plan is initiated by pending sale of one lot to Rosano Davis—much of the road design anticipates their use—at the top of the hill. This proposal creates four conforming 80,000 SF lots with 200' frontage. Existing detention basin next to Sunrise can be used with some modifications. Wanted reasonable 6%cuts—currently cuts are in excess of 6%and may ask Board for a waiver. Planning Board Meeting 3 of 6 July 27,2005 Rick Bryant addressed traffic: Driveway creates 4-way access with King Street which lends itself to signalization. Currently,no plans to eliminate any curb cuts. Current volume and number of accidents at this intersection— independent of Scituate Hill—warrant signalization. Mass Highway concern is that other locations also warrant signalization and may result in too many stops. Number of trips: Scituate Hill— 1100;Avalon Bay-1300; MBTA-1600; 154/156 King St.-1800; King St. (without this proposal)—4600. King St. also has more left hand turns than Sohier St. and requires signalization more. Bryant suggested that Sohier St.,King St. and MBTA stop could be signalized so as to synchronize with one another to move traffic. Member Pratt suggested that the Planning Board and Board of Selectmen push this signalization plan. Member Ivimey questioned the impact of eliminating the 4-way at King St. and have all buildings connect to one entrance at Crocker Lane,thereby eliminating curb cuts. Bryant does not think this will work—Schwandt does not think there is enough land. Member Westcott liked the idea of 4-way at King St.,with signal and eliminate a curb cut at Brass Kettle. Member Ivimey stated concern about trucks making the grade up to Rosario Davis. John Cavanaro noted that the average grade is 8%and has been reduced as much as possible(5% at top, 8%in middle and 2%at intersection). John Modzelewski suggested leveling more at intersection and increasing grade beyond that. John Modzelewski comments about filing: major issue at time of definitive filing will be traffic; King St. is a good spot for a traffic light; drainage design is reasonable although water quality needs to be addressed at definitive stage; questioned if there are any watershed constraints; landscaping should be added to shield hill and industrial buildings; grading is steep—cuts would help reduce it to 6%. Although he would use longer leveling area if he could get it and grade is on edge of safety-he is comfortable with it. No Comment from public. MOTION: by Member Westcott to have Town Planner Harrington draft a preliminary decision to accept the preliminary subdivision filing, asking the applicant to include the following in the definitive plan filings: • Close the curb cut at the Brass Kettle • Move the I't driveway back 150; • Landscaping to provide shields • A less severe grade at the top of the hill • Incorporating John Modzelewski's comments as stated in his 07/25/05 review memo SECOND: Member Ivimey VOTE: 3 -0 MOTION APPROVED 8:50 P.M. 2 SMITH PLACE, SITE PLAN REVIEW CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING, APP: RICHARD BROWN, OWNER: 2 SMITH PLACE REALTY TRUST,date stamped: 06/21/05. (30 day deadline for opening public hearing=07/30/05)Applicant Richard Brown, Brian Taylor, Stenbeck&Taylor, in attendance. Taylor noted additions to plans based on last meeting including: existing conditions plan with utilities; developing conditions plan; notation that all lighting will be cast downward;notation that as built plans to be filed; notation of closest point of parking spaces to property line;notation of 20' wide driveway entrance; loading areas for each bay highlighted; 3"of pavement detailed; field elevations noted;retaining wall detailed; could not get access to existing drainage information. On architectural rendering,noted that eave height was reduced to 16', awnings added,landscaping buffer on street side,privacy fencing along abutters property with tree plantings. Noted that the RR right of way will be 40-50'. Taylor felt the parking is adequate for max.possible use. Planning Board would like to reduce parking by a few spots(they can forgive some parking and create green space as long as there is space to add the parking if needed in the future). Building materials eliminate the need for painting. Member Westcott expressed concern about the steel structure fitting in with the aesthetics of the Village area. John Modzelewski suggested the applicant simply submit a picture of an existing structure so everyone has a clear idea of what the structure looks like (same as the work building at the Cohasset Golf Course). Member Ivimey expressed concern about the road size as he anticipates traffic to increase. R. Brown noted that he counted 11 cars in 5 minutes on the morning of this meeting and anticipates a decrease once the road is closed by the MBTA and this proposed structure is in full use. Abutter Linda Keller,2 Cushing Road,disputed this saying there is very little traffic currently and the neighborhood was anticipating even less once the road closed. Question was raised about the proximity to wetlands to which R. Brown noted that it has already gone before ConComm and was closed in one evening. Susan Kecskemety, 7 Cushing Road, expressed concern about Smith Place being wide enough for two vehicles to pass one another and about use of chemicals and potential hazards to the neighborhood. Taylor responded that roof and pavement runoff will be captured in forebay and settle out 80%of the solids. He also noted that tenants can be required to provide safety locker to store/contain chemicals and that it can be written into the Planning Board Meeting 4 of 6 July 27,2005 lease and,that there will not be any floor drains in the building. Member Moore noted that it is always difficult to mix residential and commercials as both are entitled to use their land and that you cannot deny an application because of something like traffic but can work with the applicant to fix whatever they have control of and that the purpose of the site plan is to look at the structure. Brown noted that the Fire Department feels a ladder truck can use the road with a passing car. Brown stated this proposal falls under a"miscellaneous trade, service and shop use"-Member Ivimey vehemently disagreed as he felt storage and assembly will happen in locations with electricians,plumbers or carpenters. Member Westcott disagreed feeling this was pushing the issue—that these will be service businesses that do not qualify as manufacturing(assembly is not manufacturing)—and that the larger issue is how the construction materials and design will fit into the area. Member Ivimey stated that this proposal will be an eyesore("blight")in the area,that it will hurt the residential property values and is non- harmonious,injurious etc. to the neighborhood. Chris Allen,21 Pleasant St., expressed concern over the uncertainty of what will be happening in the bays and thinks the Planning Board has to take into consideration that they will not know what will be conducted. Member Moore stated that the Planning Board has to assume that what will be conducted will comply with zoning and if it does not,the Zoning Officer will address. Taylor further added that it can be conditioned in the lease that a tenant business must comply with zoning. Ralph Dormitzer, I I I Atlantic Ave., (speaking as a private citizen,not a member of the BOS) stated the belief that this is not harmonious with the area—not with the Art Center,the original train station and is completely out of character with the Downtown area and asks for a construction that is more harmonious with the character of the area. Jean Salvador,28 Elm Court, asked if the land had been tested for oil tanks that had been stored there to which Mr. Brown answered that the land has been tested. Member Westcott noted that a wood structure with clapboards and shingles would be more harmonious. Juliana Chittick Tiryaki, 17 Pleasant St.,noted that her yard looks directly into the site and would like more detail about lighting and buffering. The applicant is willing to go on site with abutters to look at the site from the abutters' properties and work with them about buffering and mitigation. Town Planner Harrington asked if access can be moved to the Town Parcel on the MBTA side of the property—Taylor noted that it could be explored but dealing with the"T"might be cumbersome and would require a Town Meeting vote and the assistance of the Planning Board and that this might need to be conditioned as their timelines are tighter than waiting for Town Meeting would allow. Modzelewski noted that the Planning Board should ask for landscaping plans. Brown will ask for extension in writing so he can meet with abutters and draw up new design. Continue to next meeting. 10:05 P.M. OX PASTURE LANE UPDATE Peter Baytarian and Attorney Robert Galvin in attendance. Despite 06/15/05 deadline set by Planning Board, the punchlist items are close,but not complete. Baytarian met with contractor regarding milling of the road and has contract to have this done and to create crown where it was improperly done. John Modzelewski noted that 50-70%of his checklist has been completed. Incomplete items included: swale between homes needs to be done; crowning; low points in roads need leak-offs; gas basins; 8"drain not going to work and needs to be redone; flared ends at upstream ends of pipes; raise value boxes to meet new elevations after crowning; on common drive`B",pavement needs to be cut in neat fashion not paved up against a ragged edge. Attorney Galvin wanted it noted that much of the work was created as a result of the paving contractors' work. It was pointed out to Mr. Baytarian that the Planning Board will not longer chase him regarding the completion of this work and that he should contact the Planning Board for review when all the work is completed.Until that time, all occupancy permits and lot releases will be withheld. 10:15 P.M. CEDARMERE Jim Smalanskas-Leggat McCall, in attendance. Following upon some of the preconstruction"to do"items, a number of which have been in process. John Modzelewski wants the drainage calculations and grading plans etc. as he is concerned about the people to the north of the site. Smalanskas asked the Board if they were comfortable with them going forward with work subject to Modzelewski's final review. • FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN—VOTE TO ACCEPT -Forest Management Plan distributed to Board. The plan showed a phased tree plan to address: the clearing of the roadways and the initial detention ponds coming off Beechwood St. which they would like to begin on 08/01/05; the area where the Westerly House would be situated near Rt. 3A; and,the retention ponds on either side of the existing driveway coming up from Beechwood St. At this point,they will have a sense of what the clearing would look like in terms of what specimens are in the area that can be retained and how the houses can be fit in between those existing trees,before they enter"Phase 11" of the clearing which would include the area adjacent to the road where the model unit will be situated and the first section of houses. There is a significant amount of grading that will have to occur along the 50' boundry line along Planning Board Meeting 5 of 6 July 27,2005 Beechwood St. and right up to the property line and into the buffer zone to fit the houses but that the 50' buffer will be maintained. Member Pratt and Town Planner Harrington expressed concern that it is not allowable to intrude 30' —50' into the buffer zone. Modzelewski stated that he thought the operative is"the permanent buffer shall remain in a natural state to preserve the natural character of the parcel to be developed"meaning that grading and replanting in the buffer zone(returning it to its natural state) are allowed but things like paved patios in the buffer zone are not(according to SMORD Bylaw 16.7.5). Member Pratt still felt that they cannot intrude 30-50' into the buffer at all. Member Moore stated that the Board wanted the area maintained as a buffer but that they could go in and regrade. Member Pratt wanted to see documented where the intrusions into the buffer would be,with the understanding that the Board would have considered some intrusions in a few defined areas. Modzelewski noted that he walked the area with the landscape architect and arborist who have been identifying/marking specimen trees. Harrington wanted to know if everyone was comfortable that the plan handed out provided enough information about existing vegetation before clearing takes place as a frame of reference for replanting after clearing/grading. Modzelewski noted that they will identify/mark trees as they proceed with clearing, see what exists and expand the information via a landscape plan. Further,he noted this is the appropriate way to proceed but that landscape plans should be forthcoming. Modzelewski stated that he thinks the plan is a reasonable depiction of what will happen and that the Forest Management Plan can be approved. The Board would like to review at the end of each phase. MOTION: by Member Pratt to approve Phase IA of the Forest Management Plan and issue permission to the Applicant to proceed with Phase IA. The Planning Board will revisit/review Phase IA and review the next phase prior to approving the next phase. SECOND: Member Westcott VOTE: 3 -0 MOTION APPROVED (Member Ivimey had left meeting for a few minutes) Jim Watt, 670 CJC Highway,would like a definitive condition plan of what is going to be replanted in the buffer to restore it to its natural state so everyone knows exactly what they are getting. Member Westcott stated this was consistent with what Modzelewski explained. Harrington pointed out that there is some disturbance to the 50' buffer in Phase IA. Member Pratt stated concern that the letter/spirit of the bylaw were not being complied with and was concerned with the rushed nature of the discussion/decision and asked that the areas that were being intruded into be called out. Modzelewski highlighted 2 areas that fell within 50' buffer in Phase 1A. Smalanskas clarified his impression that this is a work in process which includes a landscape plan to be presented but which was not required before any work started. Member Ivimey pointed out a parking area in the buffer zone that should not be there which Smalanskas believes is an error-he will discuss with N.Murphy. Removal of this parking will minimize grading/clearing required. MOTION: by Member Pratt to amend previous motion to allow start of Phase IA clearing to begin but to hold off on clearing the 2 small areas adjacent to the Westerly House that fall within the 50' buffer zone. SECOND: Member Ivimey VOTE: 4-0 MOTION APPROVED Member Moore noted that it is imperative that the Board see plans that reflect the replanting of buffer zones as the clearing proceeds and that there is an inventory of what is already there. Smalanskas agreed. Member Pratt stated concern as to how the areas will look like as the construction proceeds. • MODEL REGULATION—VOTE TO ACCEPT Memo received today from Town Counsel re: Model Regulation Draft submitted by applicant. Town Counsel flagged several items he felt could be stronger such as making sure the affordable units stay on the Town's Subsidized Affordable Housing Inventory List. He also stated that resale of an affordable unit can revert to a fair market value if an eligible buyer isn't found after a certain period of time which potentially also takes it off the Town inventory. Member Ivimey suggest that discussion of this be tabled until the Planning Board has time to review it. Town Planner Harrington noted that the way the permit was written included wording"prior to the start of any activity"which would include clearing activity as far as Harrington is concerned which is why as many of these items as possible should be addressed prior to clearing. Member Pratt noted that the Planning Board has to keep pushing the Board of Selectmen to appoint the housing partnership which would oversee the entire sale process. • CONSTRUCTION/MITIGATION SCHEDULE—VOTE TO ACCEPT John Modzelewski ran down outstanding items including#10—drainage and grading,#47—drainage report,#57— approval of left-turn lane at the Conihasset Way/Route 3A intersection,#60—applicant shall submit appropriate evidence to be filed in the registry of deeds to assure the site cannot be further divided. Town Planner Harrington will contact Conservation agent regarding item#57. Smalanskas submitted a draft"Covenant Restricting Future Planning Board Meeting 6 of 6 July 27,2005 Subdivision"at the meeting to address#60. This document needs review and approval and will be forwarded to Town Counsel. Point#2 was also mentioned by Harrington. Member Pratt questioned whether even limited activity under Phase I (mentioned above) should be allowed to proceed because of the outstanding conditions that have not yet been complied with. Member Westcott felt the limited activity should be allowed and reviewed by the Planning Board upon completion before any further activity is allowed. Citing the long running issues with the conditions not met at Ox Pasture Lane,Member Ivimey inquired as to whether it might be better practice to be strict and get off on the right foot right from the beginning by not letting any activity proceed until all conditions are met. After discussion, Members Moore,Westcott and Pratt felt that Phase lA only involves some 4 acres of the entire project and that the new owners—Leggat McCall—have been showing due diligence and should be allowed to begin these very limited preliminary steps. Member Pratt reiterated that the applicant has agreed to submit a buffer zone landscaping plan as soon as possible before they are allowed to enter the buffer,which is the real concern for the public interest. MOTION: by Member Ivimey to reconsider the earlier motion/vote to let Phase 1A clearing begin until all outstanding conditions have been met. SECOND: Member Pratt VOTE: 1—3 PREVIOUS MOTION STANDS Member Pratt also noted great concern by Planning Board and Public about the easements through this property that other developers might try to use as access for further development, stating that this should be addressed by the Board and Town Counsel. Chip Kennedy, 115A Beechwood St.,noted that an easement was recorded over the applicant's property to access the former Flint property(now owned by the Calhoun's)which could allow 35 units to be constructed on the Calhoun property, further noting that Planning Board condition#10 noted that no substantial changes shall be made without Planning Board approval. Member Moore noted that just because an easement was granted does not mean that an existing, approved plan can be changed and that the easement across Cedarmere could not be used as frontage for development although the land could be developed using the 40' access frontage to South Main St. Smalanskas noted that the first right of refusal to purchase that property has expired. Board would like Town Counsel opinion re: easement and whether the securing of the easement changes the nature of that land subject to the order of conditions by the Town. Cedarmere to be continued at next meeting. 11:45 P.M. ADMINISTRATION • VOTE TO ACCEPT 07/11/05 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MOTION: by Member Ivimey to accept 07/11/05 minutes SECOND: Member Westcott VOTE: 4-0 MOTION APPROVED • SET PLANNING BOARD MEETING DATES FOR AUGUST Meeting set for August 10,2005 at 7:00 PM—may be the only meeting in August. MOTION: by Member Ivimey to adjourn. SECOND: Member Pratt VOTE: 4-0 MOTION APPROVED MEETING ADJOURNED AT: 11:50 P.M. NEXT MEETING: Wednesday,August 10,2005, 7:00 P.M. MINUTES APPROVED: DATE: