Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - PB - 01/01/2009 - Planning Board Meeting Minutes 2009 (10) Planning Board Meeting APPROVED MINUTES 1 of 2 September 2,2009 COHASSET PLANNING BOARD MINUTES DATE: WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 2,2009 TIME: 7:00 P.M. PLACE: COHASSET TOWN HALL— SELECTMEN'S OFFICE 41 HIGHLAND AVENUE, COHASSET,MA 02025 Board Members Present: Alfred S.Moore,Jr. - Chairman Stuart W. Ivimey,Vice Chair Jean Healey Dippold, Clerk Clark H. Brewer Board Members Absent: Charles A. Samuelson Recording Secretary Present: Jo-Ann M. Pilczak Meeting called to order at: 7:00 P.M. 7:00 P.M. ASSOCIATE PLANNING BOARD MEMBER—DISCUSSION—Town Counsel in attendance to answer Board member questions. 5 member board can have 1 associate member. Warrant article will be needed to amend General Bylaw and maybe Zoning Bylaws—Town Counsel will confirm. Town Counsel explained that if there was an instance where only 3 members were eligible to vote on a special permit,that the special permit could not be granted.Associate member is called into action when a special permit is filed—they actively participate in public hearings,but only vote if a full board member cannot vote for whatever reason. Associate Member could be an elected position. Length of term to be set by Planning Board—Member Moore thinks the longer commitment of a multi-year term is a way to avoid having people with special interest in an upcoming filing seek election just for that special interest and,provides opportunity for associate member to gain background knowledge and experience. Member Healey-Dippold commented that special permits seem to be the most controversial of filings—she likes the idea of associate member being an elected position—would show more commitment and accountability. Member Ivimey concerned that position of associate member would mean that there might not be consistency from one special permit filing to the next if associate member had to be called upon to vote in one of the filings. Town Counsel will draft a warrant article—goal is to have the article ready for the Fall STM warrant so election could happen in Spring of 2010—this means time is tight. Board to review article and vote whether to go forward with associate member position. 7:25 P.M. SUBDIVISION RULES & REGULATIONS UPDATE— ADMINISTRATIVE DISCUSSION& TOWN COUNSEL INVOLVEMENT DISCUSSION—Town Counsel services are available to participate in the writing and/or review of the update. Planning Board administrator to ask Town Manager if these services are included in Town's retainer with Deutsch/Williams. 7:35 P.M. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD—DISCUSSION—DRB members Rob Skolnick,Jim Sandell and John Cavanaro in attendance. Member Moore explained that Planning Board has technical review capability via John Modzelewski,but needs aesthetic and subjective review expertise and input from DRB. Skolnick explained that 8 James Lane, as first application the DRB has reviewed, has brought some things/questions to light: 1. DRB should be involved earlier in the process. All agreed that the DRB should be involved early in the review process. Member Moore suggested that the DRB attend the informal discussion which is typically held before the formal filing. Skolnick then sees the process as including an initial review,a final review and then formal recommendations. DRB would like more clarification of timelines. However, although most filings have legal timelines that must be met, it is hard to anticipate timelines as time required varies depending upon project, organization of developer,necessity for extensions etc. Planning Board can try to schedule more time between continued public hearings to allow applicant time to make changes, forward changed plans to Planning Board&John Modzelewski with adequate time for review,meet with DRB etc. 2. How should the DRB utilize the Villa e Design Guidelines? Skolnick commented that the guidelines are very thorough in terms of design purposes but may be a little restrictive in some areas—perhaps they could be opened up a little. Member Brewer explained that the purpose of the guidelines is to provide the applicant with information to understand the goal of making the village a vibrant area Planning Board Meeting APPROVED MINUTES 2of 2 September 2,2009 and to give the applicant a clear sense of what is important in design. Member Moore suggested that most of the "shall"statements should probably be"should"statements so the guidelines are not so restrictive so as to inhibit creativity. Member Ivimey did not share Moore's optimism—he believes most developers begin projects with the goal of constructing the least expensive project and that the more restrictive guidelines ("shalls") raise the bar. Ivimey believes the Planning Board needs to legislate quality in the Village and, can always waive something that proves too onerous for a particular property. Member Healey-Dippold likes the idea of waivers when necessary. John Cavanaro felt it important to adopt the guidelines sooner rather than later so they are in place before another application is filed. Board asked DRB to review and give input regarding the "shalls"and"shoulds"and any other specific points and changes the DRB feels should be addressed (Skolnick mentioned signage). 8:00 P.M. PRELIMINARY DISCUSSION—100 POND ST.—AMEND CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT SPECIAL PERMIT— RICHARD HENDERSON Attorney Richard Henderson and Engineer John Cavanaro in attendance. Henderson indicated that they have resolved the zoning issues—they no longer need to rely on the 1983 zoning. They are adding 3 units on 2 parcels of land—one acre has been added, so they have 108,000 SF available and, only need 105,000 SF (35,000 SF X 3 units) so there aren't any zoning issues. This will be an amendment to increase the number of units in the cluster—bylaw gives the Planning Board the power to increase density as long as current zoning is met. All engineering and amended site plan will reflect activity only on the 2 parcels. Have already been awarded 3 sewer connections. Henderson believes he can proceed with a letter to amend the cluster development special permit rather than a formal application. He will submit motion to amend special permit and letter in near future with original condominium documents. 8:25 P.M. QUONAHASSIT TRAIL—LOT#7 RELEASE REQUEST—RICHARD HENDERSON 09/01/09 memo from John Modzelewski indicated that subdivision has been completed to an extent to permit reasonable access to Lot 7 and there is sufficient value in remaining unreleased lots to ensure completion of subdivision. MOTION: by Member Ivimey to sign release form for Lot#7 SECOND: Member Brewer VOTE: 4-0 MOTION CARRIES Lot release form was endorsed by Planning Board and given to Attorney Henderson. 8:40 P.M. ADMINISTRATION • VOTE TO APPROVE AUGUST 19,2009 MINUTES MOTION: by Member Ivimey to approve the August 19,2009 minutes SECOND: Member Healey-Dippold VOTE: 4—0 MOTION CARRIES 8:41 P.M. UPDATE ON GREEN COMMUNITIES PROGRAM—Member Brewer updated the Board on the $25,000"GREEN COMMUNITIES PLANNING ASSISTANCE"grant that was awarded to Cohasset. Cohasset will be assigned a consulting firm to help Cohasset identify ways it can become a Green Community and comply with the Green Community Program. There are 6 sections, one of which may require zoning amendment. Brewer and Andrew Willard(AEC)have gone through town map and located alternative energy sites that make sense and should not be controversial. Brewer also mentioned that it appears that an order by the DPU was passed on 08/20/09 which says that a renewable energy producer of up to 2 megawatts can pay no transmission fees and be compensated full retail for their power which puts into question CCI Energy ultimately selling power to the Town for somewhere between wholesale and retail rates. MOTION: by Member Brewer to adjourn at 9:00 P.M. SECOND: Member Ivimey VOTE: 4-0 MOTION CARRIES NEXT REGULAR MEETING: WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 23,2009 AT 7:00 P.M. MINUTES APPROVED: JEAN HEALEY DIPPOLD, CLERK DATE: SEPTEMBER 23,2009