Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - PB - 08/04/2004 COHASSET PLANNING BOARD MINUTES DATE: WEDNESDAY, August 4,2004 TIME: 7:00 PM PLACE: COHASSET TOWN HALL-BASEMENT MEETING RM 41 HIGHLAND AVENUE, COHASSET,MA 02025 Board Members Present: Peter J. Pratt,Vice Chairman Stuart Ivimey, Clerk Michael Westcott Board Members Absent: Alfred S.Moore, Chairman Robert H. Sturdy Recording Secretary Present: Jo-Ann M. Pilczak Town Planner Present: Elizabeth B. Harrington, Town Planner MEETING CALLED TO ORDER AT 7:15 PM Vice Chair P. Pratt chaired in Member Moore's absence. 7:15 P.M. FORM A—APPLICATIONS • 792 Jerusalem Road, APP: Barbara A. Campbell, date: July 22,2004 (21 days=8/11/04) Mr. Campbell represented the application. Land is a 10 acre parcel that extends to Lambert's Lane. 3 yrs. ago, there was an application for the division of one lot of land to be divided off from the 10 acres. At that time, Planning Board did not agree that Cemetery Road was an appropriate way used and maintained by the Town and therefore able to be used for frontage purposes. The civil proceeding that followed resulted in a judgment that was negotiated between the Town and Mr. Campbell(who represented the applicant in court). The resulting agreement was that the applicant would improve the roadway stated Mr. Campbell. He further stated that originally, Town Counsel judgment was that the roadway should be improved to subdivision control standards whereas Campbell wanted to improve the road only to"construction standards"as he felt any further improvement was too complex, too expensive and simply unnecessary. Mr. Campbell indicated that the Superior Court judgment agreed and provided that Cemetery Rd. would have to be improved only to construction standards. New plans before the Board with this application included road improvement to construction standards. Town Planner Harrington provided Mr. Campbell with Rules&Regulations for Subdivision Bylaws culling out the parts dealing with roadway construction to be used as a guideline that could be followed regarding the process. Coler&Colantonio engineering plans are to clean up road to construction standards keeping the road in the same dimensions as it now exists. Town Planner Harrington also stated that she would like John Modzelewski involved to address the requirements of"construction standard"and to help establish a mechanism for determining that"construction standards"improvements have actually been completed. Mr. Campbell agreed to meet with John Modzelewski to discuss concerns and further stated that he will meet"reasonable and appropriate requests"by the Town and will agree to pay for John Modzelewski's engineering review through the Town. Mr. Campbell noted that he and Town Counsel Saillant discussed whether the proposed improvements had to meet the subdivision control laws,particularly design laws and, determined they did not and, chose the word"construction"so that everyone would focus on construction and not design.Member Ivimey asked how the applicant would separate construction and design. Coler& Colantonio responded that looked at the road as it currently exists and determined that to bring that road up to construction standards they would remove down to 16"below existing grade,put in 12"of compacted gravel, and put in a binder and the top course so the road would not change at all but would be brought up to the standard construction of a town road. Mr. Campbell further noted that if the applicant's intent was to build a subdivision road to meet subdivision standards,they would have stated that. Mr. Campbell pointed out 3 catch basins to deal with drainage. Member Ivimey asked Mr. Campbell how the town enforces the development of the road if they do the developing before they do the road. Mr. Campbell stated that they have no plans to build homes at the present time. Mary Hunnewell, 796 Jerusalem Rd.noted that the Hunnewell's own part of Cemetery Road with easements and requested that they therefore be brought into the discussions about changing the roads and the easements. Town Planner Harrington noted that this situation is more than a typical Form-A but there is the requirement that the roadway be brought up to standard and suggested a conversation with Town Planning Board Meeting Page 2 of 4 August 04,2004 Counsel to determine and agree to what the standards are and how to verify if the road has indeed been brought up to those standards. Member Pratt agreed that obtaining advice from Town Counsel as to how to proceed would be helpful and noted that this must be dealt with by August 11. Mr. Campbell agreed to give the Town a reasonable amount of additional time to consult with Town Counsel. Member Ivimey noted that the applicant should request the extension of the 21 days. Mr. Campbell agreed to communicate with Town Counsel over the next week and to request an extension and requested Planning Board have Town Counsel contact him. MOTION: By Member Pratt to postpone this matter until the August 11,2004 meeting. SECOND: By Member Westcott VOTE: 3—0 MOTION APPROVED • 246 Pond St., APP: Joseph and Lillian Sestito,dated: Aug.3,2004. Applicant is represented by John Cavanaro,John Cavanaro Consulting. Lot was cut in half and reconfigured to produce a conforming lot with more frontage than originally existed. Sidelines are slightly different to conform. Driveway was moved further west on Pond, away from wetlands. MOTION: By Member Ivimey to approve this Form A-Application SECOND: By Member Westcott VOTE: 3—0 MOTION APPROVED • 724 Jerusalem Rd., APP: Steven Cifrino, OWNER: James &Anne Cifrino,dated: Aug.3,2004 Attorney Henderson represented the applicants. Attorney Henderson pointed out that section 81 L defines what is not a subdivision. Henderson read sections 81L,b,c. Section 81L,b states that if a lot fronts on away that is shown on a plan previously endorsed in accordance with the subdivision control law as suitable for frontage then it serves as frontage on future plans. Section 81L,c reads a way in existence when subdivision control became effective in a Town—which was 1955 in Cohasset—in which an opinion of the Planning Board has sufficient width and grade as currently existing to satisfy the request,which in this case is only one additional single family house. Henderson showed that Hyde Way was on plans in 1914. Hyde Way and Cunningham Way are on plans dated 1935 and 1951 showing that both existed on plans that existed before 1955. The 1967 plan shows that on 6/21/67, the Planning Board approved and endorsed the plan with frontage on Hyde Way making it permissible for frontage in the future according to 81L,b. Further,Henderson noted that there is nothing in the statute that compels it to be a"public"way but defines a"way"as a way to communicate to and from a place and eventually provide an access to a public way. Member Pratt noted that these are all old estate roads and were not laid out for subdivision and suggested consulting with Town Counsel. Member Ivimey stated that he feels Attorney Henderson is absolutely correct. Town Planner Harrington pointed out that endorsing this plan does not obligate the Board to further endorsements of frontages off this way. Member Ivimey noted the distinction between this situation and Otis Avenue,that being that Otis Avenue applicant did not provide an approved subdivision plan showing Otis Ave. Attorney Henderson presented above noted plans from 1914, 1935, 1951 and 1967 for the Planning Board files. MOTION: By Member Ivimey to approve this Form A-Application SECOND: By Member Westcott VOTE: 3—0 MOTION APPROVED 8:10 P.M. 231-235 HULL STREET,DINERO'S RESTAURANT, PUBLIC HEARING, SITE PLAN REVIEW APPLICATION, APP: KIM-RICH REALTY TRUST, OWNER: HIM-RICH REALTY TRUST, DATE: JULY 6,2004. (75 DAYS=09/18/04) Member Ivimey, Clerk,read Public Hearing Advertisement. Representatives for DiNero's: Attorney Greg Sullivan,Applicant-Mr. Plotner,Frank Amonte, David Mackwell,Kelly Engineering. Presented 17 new letters of support—on file. Frank Amonte highlighted changes: height increases from 12' to 15'; enlarged lounge and main dining area;2 fully handicapped restrooms in main area; adding two small function rooms;parking changes to 37, 20'x 9'6" conforming spaces with controlled access&egress;wall in rear varies from 18' to 22' with guardrails, chainlink&landscaping on top of wall; dumpster enclosure access is to side,not facing street and dumpster is top quality,with vinyl doors,will be filled from tip, screen around, 3 regular pick-ups/week with more as needed,will be sprayed when emptied to control odors, looking at seagull deterrents; all lighting is cast downward;trying to replicate an expansion farmhouse; a/c is concealed and contained on roof with sound buffers—anticipating significantly less noise than currently exists; seating increases from 70 to 93 seats; Planning Board Meeting Page 3 of 4 August 04,2004 existing sq.ft. increases by 1703 sq.ft. from 2935 sq.ft. to 4638 sq.ft.,building is already fully utilitied. Member Westcott addressed the entrance bumpout at the corner of the property. Dave Mackwell stated that it is not feasible to relocate/remove this entrance as it would mean redoing the restaurant in entirety including electricals and foundation. Attorney Sullivan noted that this is not an encroachment on public property as it is a recorded easement and the ramp was added at the request of the Town of Cohasset when the easement was granted. Member Pratt asks for a copy of the easement for the records. Member Ivimey stated that the Hub Refrigeration letter doesn't tell very much and asks exactly what the neighbors will hear. Jim Taylor,HVAC expert noted that the noise will be no more than hearing a fan as the equipment has self contained buffers and insulation as well as the fact that raising the side wall lines above roof line will act as a deflector for any noise. Frank Amonte stated that the applicant will present more information addressing this issue. John Modzelewski asked if there are plans for outdoor decks/dining that might increase outdoor noise. No plans for outdoor dining at the present. Member Pratt inquired as to the intention for a Keno License to which Attorney Sullivan replied that DiNero's is entitled to a Keno license but feels this has no bearing on the issue currently before the Planning Board. Attorney Sullivan noted that Mr. Plotner has a track record of being a very conscientious business owner who does everything in a top-notch fashion and thoroughly maintains all property and equipment.Member Westcott asks whether two handicapped means of egress are required. Frank Amonte replied that only one is required but that the footprint of the facility is better served by two means of egress. Public Comment: Jim Coughlin(customer),Weymouth and Richard Abbadessa, Old Coach Rd.,both spoke in favor of the expansion feeling that it is an asset to the Town and an enhancement to the entire area. John Fairchild, 800 Jerusalem Rd.,as an abutter living directly above DiNero's, addressed many lighting issues. He questioned whether the door on the back of the building is a fire exit and asked if it be moved to also eliminate a light. Frank Amonte noted that this is an emergency,panic-alarmed egress,with no access in/out and with minimal low level lighting for safety and that this is the only logical placement for it. John Modzelewski asked if these lights are on timers when business is not open. Frank Amonte noted that they are not on timers but will address this issue. Member Pratt noted that a photometric chart detailing foot-candles at various points of property as well as lot lines is available. Mr. Fairchild also asked if the light over the fire access is required with the other lighting that is planned and asked that all the lighting be lowered to some minimal standard after the close of business. Frank Amonte stated that they will investigate this and get back to Mr. Fairchild. Mr. Fairchild's overall concern is that lighting that is not necessary be kept to a minimum—for example, lighting on the wall for atmosphere. Member Pratt asked the applicant to keep abutters in mind by constraining lights and to inform the Board as to how this will be done. Regarding landscaping,Mr. Fairchild noted that there is not a definite plan for the landscaping at the top of the ledge beyond"existing vegetation to remain"and asks for definite landscaping plans to be established before approval of the plans or as a condition to approval. Mr. Amonte stated that the applicant is agreeable to"reasonable requests/approval"and will get definite plans worked up but also noted that August is the worst month to plant and that the planting may happen in September. Maria Plante, 798 Jerusalem Rd. voiced opposition to a Keno operation in a residential area because of the potential increase of traffic/daytime use and asks that a condition of no gambling be included in any Planning Board approval and further stated that she will strongly oppose any expansion if it includes gambling. Member Ivimey stated that the Planning Board needs to ponder what the role of the Planning Board is in the factoring the potential of Keno into a decision-whether it is within the scope of this Board or whether it is the area of "use"of the property. Jim Reichart, 3 Grace Dr., stated agreement with Mrs.Plante about Keno and asked whether there will be vegetation above the dumpster as use of it has been noisy in past and now with ledge removal it is even closer to his property line than in the past. Mr. Amonte noted that there is considerable vegetation in that area now and he further noted all the positive improvements to the dumpster construction,use and location as highlighted earlier in these minutes. Philip Cantillon, 794 Jerusalem Rd., asked if residential use changes with expansion and asked if there are any plans for additional storage on the site. Member Pratt answered that it is a pre-existing"by right"use and will remain in place and that this is best addressed to the zoning officer—Bob Egan. Mr. Amonte noted that there are no plans for additional storage on the site. Member Pratt noted that Fire Captain Trask's comments stated that there is a dangerous situation created between DiNero's property and the close proximity of adjacent Montefusco property that is best dealt with via sidewall sprinklers on the side of the building. Mr. Amonte noted that the Montefusco property encroaches on DiNero's not the reverse but that they will look into the sidewall sprinklers. John Modzelewski spoke to his comments that have not already been addressed—Comment#2 - asked the design engineers to look at the impervious material added to the site and come up with a method of making sure that it does not overtax the existing Planning Board Meeting Page 4 of 4 August 04,2004 infrastructure. He also inquired about the impact, if any, of the additional square footage on any zoning conformance and asked that the applicant give the Board a level of comfort by providing a letter that addresses that. He also asked the applicant to identify other locations where he has used the same lighting and HVAC systems via letter so the Board can go to those locations to examine that lighting. Based on the information covered at this meeting,he further asked: that Reichart's property be added to the plan; if it is possible to make the front green strip a few feet wider perhaps by making some parking spaces compact spaces;that the applicant look into getting signs so people don't park in front of the loading area—to which Mr. Amonte noted that this is state property and the Mr.Plotner cannot really take charge of state property. John Modzelewski thought they should put that in writing to the board;that the applicant identify the front stone wall fill-in material so the Board is confident that there will not be any material falling on cars. John Modzelewski noted that the applicant has submitted drainage calc.plan and he has asked applicant to look at some of the assumptions in the drainage plan.New parking lot is all bituminous concrete and drainage is going to existing catch basis right off site and into town pipes—need to make sure the additional flow will not impact anyone else—can add a few more trenches to catch water from abutting properties and increase depth of trench so drainage is actually held then sent to pipes. David Mackwell will investigate and confirm where drain actually dumps and indicates that drainage figures will be sent to John Modzelewski within the week. David Mackwell will fax a list of all items required to Planning Board Office for everyone to review for completeness. MOTION: by Member Ivimey to continue public hearing to August 25,2004. SECOND: by Member Westcott VOTE: 3 -0 MOTION APPROVED 10:10 P.M. PLANNING BOARD ADMINISTRATION • Vote to accept minutes: MOTION: by Member Pratt to accept minutes from August '02—December `02 SECOND: by Member Westcott VOTE: 3 -0 MOTION APPROVED MOTION: by Member Ivimey to accept July 14,2004 minutes SECOND: by Member Westcott VOTE: 3 -0 MOTION APPROVED • Informal Discussion, Powers Lane Subdivision Applicant was told to pave road. Road has been paved except the first 100' from No. Main up the driveway is still gravel. Question is whether they are obligated to pave that 100' so the entire length is paved. Plan and minutes indicate they are obligated and that this area was not subject to Conservation. Board would like applicant to appear before the Board and give an update on the status of this situation before the Board puts anything in writing. Town Planner Harrington will contact the applicant. • Review of coverage requirements bylaws: Town Planner Harrington believes a Special Permit for pre-existing,non-conforming is the way to handle this, however, discussion will be tabled until Member Moore is in attendance. MOTION: by Member Ivimey to adjourn. SECOND: by Member Westcott VOTE: 3 -0 MOTION APPROVED MEETING ADJOURNED AT: 10:30 PM NEXT MEETING: August 11,2004 at 7:00 P.M. MINUTES APPROVED: DATE: