HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - PB - 07/11/2005 Planning Board Meeting 1 of 4
July 11,2005
COHASSET PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
DATE: MONDAY,JULY 11,2005
TIME: 7:00 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: 7:00 P.M.
7:00 P.M. FORM A'S NO FORM A'S WERE SUBMITTED
7:00 P.M. ADMINISTRATION
• VOTE TO ACCEPT 06/21/05 MINUTES
MOTION: by Member Ivimey to accept 06/21/05 minutes
SECOND: Member Pratt
VOTE: 3-0 MOTION APPROVED
• 40 ATLANTIC AVENUE—STATUS OF FORM A Citing the 06/08/05 letter from Leila and Brian Hill,
Town Planner Harrington noted that the Planning Board signed a Form A which created the 50' frontage on
Atlantic Avenue to access the parcel behind. The Hill's letter gave notice that the agreement to sell the 50' swap
had not come to fruition. The larger issue is that the approved and signed Form A has not been recorded,leading
the Board to question if there is a sunset on recording an approved Form A. Member Ivimey stressed concern that,
in a general case, someone(e.g.potential future buyer)other than the landowners rights could be impacted in the
future. Planning Board Administrator to obtain Town Counsel's opinion on two questions:
1. What are the ramifications of an approved Form A not being recorded by the applicant?and,
2. Can a deadline for recording be conditioned as part of the Form A approval?
7:15 P.M. ZBA RECOMMENDATIONS
• 247 FOREST AVE., SPECIAL PERMIT APPLICATION, APP: WILMARC CHARLES,
OWNER: RENATA KLUZA, revised plans date stamped: 06/28/05. The Planning Board reviewed and
discussed the memo and modified plans dated 06/24/05 which were forwarded by the applicant. The Board's
interpretation of the modified plans was that a variance is no longer required as the proposed garage has been
pushed back to be within the area of the existing footprint. However,this modification does not address the special
permit application for the side setback(Section 8.7)on the Forest Avenue side of the house and does not alter the
Planning Board's position under Section 8.7 regarding the side setbacks.
MOTION: by Member Pratt to iterate to the ZBA that the Planning Board believes it would NOT be in the
public interest to issue a special permit for the side setbacks as requested by the Applicant.
SECOND: Member Westcott
VOTE: 4-0 MOTION APPROVED
Further, it appeared to the Board that, even with this modification, a Large Home Review will be necessary once
zoning issues are resolved. Noting that the original Large Home Review filing by the Applicant in May was
presented in a rather disorganized fashion,the Board commented that the applicant will be asked to present
updated, complete and comprehensive plans at the time of the next Large Home Review for this site.
Planning Board Meeting 2 of 4
July 11,2005
7:30 P.M 2 SMITH PLACE, SITE PLAN REVIEW 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) Member Pratt recused self from this hearing as his home is within close proximity(the
commercial district in which the applicant owns property ends at Member Pratt's property line)and he does not
think if would be fair to either the applicant or the abutters for him to participate in this SPR hearing. Member
Ivimey read public hearing notice. Richard Brown,Applicant and Terry McGovern, Stenbeck&Taylor, Inc. in
attendance to represent application. Site is just opposite the MBTA railroad track. Applicant intends to construct a
9615 SF commercial building. Easterly side is open to railroad bed, southerly side abuts residential properties,
westerly abuts Hochkeppel property. Most existing grade is elevation 9. Berm circles good portion of site. Two-
thirds of property is in Downtown Business district and one-third is in Residence A district. By recent FEMA map,
a portion is in the flood zone. Applicant proposes to build a 200' x 50'open steel span building containing a max.
of 8 individual bays for use by small individual contractors who need a place to put desk, some storage and parking
—no work done on site. Building itself will be entirely within the Downtown Business district Driveway will
enter at center of property with 16 parking spaces outside(24 spaces including 1 space within each bay). Height
will be 14' at the front. Do not anticipate multiple vehicle trips in and out each day—instead, one trip out and one
trip in each day. Drainage fore bay in front and along SW side. Both fore bays are designed to take a 100 year
storm. Existing site is pretty flat and very little change in grading is proposed. Some excavating to build up berms.
Entire drainage system is designed for easy maintenance and cleaning. Lighting will be minimal—small light over
each access door, 1 wallpack,hooded light at each end—no exterior lights on N,NW or S sides. Landscaping plan
is to save as much of existing as reasonable and supplement with ornamental and shielding plantings.
Open to Public Comment: Kurt Hochkeppel, 22 Smith Place,voiced concern about: the proximity of the first
parking space to his property(25'); the potential use of hazardous materials; and,the increase in traffic on his
street when Smith Place becomes a dead end(when closed off for the train). McGovern stated that it could be
conditioned that a sump be installed to deal with any spill that might happen. Chris Holland, 21 Pleasant St. asked
about parameters of the lease and,the anticipated profile of tenants. Applicant answered that the goal is to lease to
contractors who will be gone to a site all day. Member Moore asked the applicant if he would agree to condition
that leases with tenants will clearly outline acceptable parameters and activity—Applicant agreed. Linda Keller,22
Cushing Rd., stressed concern that in the past, new owners have cleaned up and maintained the property but that
once they sold the property, it deteriorated and, asked what a can be done to protect abutters from that happening
again. Member Moore mentioned that the applicant- as a local owner-is more likely to maintain it. Further,
Keller stated that the proposed project is a big change for this neighborhood,that the traffic will be utilizing a very
narrow road and, asked if there is anyway the traffic can be routed to not run though a residential neighborhood.
Member Moore mentioned that the property owner cannot be penalized because of a decision the MBTA made to
close Smith Place and suggested that the Planning Board could forgive the number of parking spaces required
resulting in fewer parked vehicles and traffic and more green space(that could be converted to parking in the future
if needed). Member Westcott pointed out that the train is cutting off the business district so this site is actually
becoming a commercial building in a residential neighborhood. John Modzelewski noted such points as: fore bays
must be labeled; detail for the cape cod berm must be added; architectural plans must be submitted to the Board;
this building is a different scale and utilitarian structure than the existing quaint neighborhood; water level during
flooding will be at elevation 10,not elevation 6, as all the fore bays will be flooded; recharge from roof should go
into ground; number of parking spaces could be reduced; loading zone spaces are in the front of the building;
natural gas connections, and,underground water and electrical should be on the plans; Planning Board should
decide if irrigation system should be installed; lighting really not shown and photometrics have not been submitted;
more detail about plantings/bushes should be added.
MOTION: by Member Ivimey to continue the public hearing to July 27, 2005 at 8:15 P.M.
SECOND: Member Westcott
VOTE: 3-0 MOTION APPROVED
8:15 P.M. 44 BEACH ST., LARGE HOME REVIEW PUBLIC HEARING, APP/OWNER: PAUL M.
OGNIBENE,JENNIFER E. SAYER,date stamped: 06/23/05. (21 day deadline for opening public hearing
=07/13/05) Paul Ognibene and Attorney Richard Henderson in attendance to represent the application. Member
Ivimey read public hearing advertisement. Abutters/Public signed in at Public Hearings: Robin and Louis Eaton,
30 Beach St.; Judith Chute,46 Beach St.; Lincoln Bloomfield, 37 Beach St. Henderson explained that this is a
Planning Board Meeting 3 of 4
July 11,2005
5,000 SF home on a 60,000 SF lot which really does not even need a Large Home Review. However, in renovating
the property,the applicant needed some special permits to modify(add a 2nd story,build a deck, increase some
living space in the attic)a non-conforming structure. The ZBA addressed: height(architect has since addressed);
the wetlands bylaw with respect to whether the pylons into the marsh created construction below the 10' line; and,
only inclusion of uplands in the definition of area. ZBA proposed compromise where adding second story over
existing footprint will be allowed if applicant agreed to withdraw objections to a Large Home Review to discuss
completion of the attic over the existing foundation and the addition of the deck. All abutters spoke in favor of the
proposed home(even though they would prefer not to see deck in the wetlands),preferring it to the derelict
property that has occupied the site in the past and, stated that the applicant has gone to extraordinary lengths to
communicate with the neighbors. Member Ivimey stated the belief that this project is harmonious with and not
injurious to the surrounding neighborhood and recommends approval.
MOTION: by Member Ivimey to close the public hearing.
SECOND: Member Pratt
VOTE: 4-0 MOTION APPROVED
MOTION: by Member Ivimey to recommend that permits be issued conditioned upon placement of survey
monuments,the satisfaction of points highlighted in Town Planner Harrington's 07/06/05 review of this
Large Home application and,the submission of a current set of plans.
SECOND: Member Westscott
VOTE: 4-0 MOTION APPROVED
9:00 P.M. LEGGAT/MCCALL—CEDARMERE—PROPOSED CHANGE TO APPROVED PLANS
John Smalanskas and Bill Gause in attendance to represent Leggat McCall. Purpose of coming before the Board is
to highlight some changes they would like to make to the approved plans. Submitted to Board: Highway Permit,
Recorded Order of Conditions for ConComm, Construction Mitigation Plan and Construction Time Frame.
Changes (based on feedback with potential buyers and conversation with architects)proposed include:
• Still have 105 units, 27 of which are affordable in the westerly house with 4 market rate units
• Change name of Crossing Lane to Cotton Lane
• Removal of a driveway to create more open space and reconfigure the access to the Manor House. Reoriented
Manor House by switching entrance with visitor parking and circular drive so entrance is more convenient for
visitors, offers protection from elements.Also allowed 1 entrance into underground parking and eliminate 1
driveway
• Conversion of some attached units into single units allowing mechanicals to be located between units
• Creation of more privacy for carriage house units by adding more green space and vegetative buffering
• Relocation of driveway of westerly house which reduces blasting, retains more of the vegetative buffer and
allows parking for the tennis courts
• Reconfiguration of layout of ridge units so the units are not so close together and are no so close to the road in
the rear,promoting more privacy and grade level access for garages.
• Existing Estate house will remain intact
• Trying to leave existing open spaces open
John Modzelewski cautioned that changes not violate the on-site treatment plant plans. Site visit/preconstruction
meeting to take place on July 20,2005 at 10:00 AM with Town Planner,Building Inspector and Planning Board
and at 6:00 P.M.with abutters to review construction protocol,logistics concerns, construction schedule etc. as
construction activities(eg: placement of hay bales,tree clearing etc.) are set to begin. Leggat McCall will notify
abutters. Trucks will enter from Rt. 3A rather than Beechwood St.
MOTION: by Member Westcott for the Board to approve the modifications as presented pending the
delivery of appropriate items to the Planning Board Office.
SECOND: Member Ivimey
VOTE: 4-0 MOTION APPROVED
B. Gause stated that a document is being revised to address DHCD concerns and that they are working with a
marketing agent to get a lottery process ready for the affordable housing and that DHCD is not concerned with the
affordable units being in a separate building as there is larger single building on the property.
Planning Board Meeting 4 of 4
July 11,2005
9:45 P.M. OX PASTURE LANE Peter Baytarian in attendance. Baytarian stated that paving is completed
and that the only remaining work is that which arose as a result of the paving—eg. drainage and some landscaping.
John Modzelewski noted that there is a drainage problem for about 100' of the roadway that needs cold planing.
Member Ivimey noted that the June 15,2005 deadline for completion of the work has gone by and that the Board
has lost patience with this. Member Moore reiterated that no further Town involvement will occur—inspections
etc.—until all work is complete and all requests for deposits have been brought up to date. Member Pratt asked
Baytarian to set up a meeting time with John Modzelewski for next week. Town Planner Harrington will contact
Chief Lincoln re: his memo. Baytarian to be put on July 27, 2005 Planning Board Agenda.
10:00 P.M. MILL RIVER BOATYARD—MOTIF#1 (not originally on agenda) Building Commissioner
Bob Egan,Attorney Charles Humphreys in attendance. Discussion was in response to Planning Board memo to
Bob Egan suggesting all work on this site be stopped until a Site Plan Review is conducted. Town Counsel opinion
is that the modifier of the bylaw which refers to 200 SF does in fact reference all of the aspects of work including
not just additional construction but reconstruction as well,and,while there is a fine line between a repair, a
renovation and a reconstruction, in this case, it is obvious that this is a reconstruction and the Planning Board
should insist on a Site Plan Review. Member Westcott suggested a site inspection by the Planning Board. Attorney
Humphreys would like to go back to the 1976, 1977 Town Meeting minutes/notes as he is not convinced this was
the interpretation that was voted for. Member Ivimey stated that the intent can easily be determined just by reading
the language and that the intent is clear—a construction,reconstruction or expansion of a commercial site that is>
200 SF requires a Site Plan Review. Member Westcott noted that it appears the new structure is being constructed
over the existing with an increase in size between the two. Humphreys noted that one wall is being moved back to
the original location so there will be no expansion. Humphreys will talk with his client about Site Plan Review.
Member Moore asked Building Commissioner Egan to let"structural work"that does not constitute
"reconstruction"of the upper building continue until Attorney Humphreys talks with his client and gets back to the
Board. The site visit will be on hold until that time also.
10:45 P.M. BOB EGAN—DISCUSSION: POSSIBLE BUILDABLE LOT Building Commissioner Egan and
Tom Fallon,2 Jerusalem Lane, in attendance for discussion. Mr. Fallon owns a 7400 SF lot on the corner of
Jerusalem Road and Jerusalem Lane. The question is whether it meets a single lot exemption(by Section 8.3)of
current zoning requirements. Items 2 a,b,c and 3 were reviewed regarding this lot and Member Moore felt this lot
met#3 but felt the Board needed a more comprehensive opinion.
MOTION: by Member Pratt to suggest Bob Egan have Town Counsel review this lot in light of Section 8.3.
SECOND: Member Westcott
VOTE: 4-0 MOTION APPROVED
MOTION: by Member Ivimey to adjourn.
SECOND: Member Pratt
VOTE: 4-0 MOTION APPROVED
MEETING ADJOURNED AT: 10:55 P.M.
NEXT MEETING: Wednesday,July 27,2005 at 6:30 P.M.
MINUTES APPROVED:
DATE: