HomeMy Public PortalAboutPlanning Board -- 2023-07-26 Minutesa'v'w"s""'///%,
Brewster Planning Board Approved: 08/09/23
E SEA eq�i�/moi_
0
2198 Main Street Vote: 5-0-1
_o
0 o a N`
Brewster, MA 02631-1898
(508) 896-3701 x1133 - - -
,,,,
brewplan@brewster-ma.gov _
aunnnnunn»"`o'
MEETING MINUTES -
Wednesday, July 26, 2023 at 6:30 pm
Brewster Town Office Building
Chair Amanda Bebrin convened a meeting of the Planning Board at 6:30 pm with the following members participating:
Charlotte Degen, Tony Freitas, Rob Michaels, Elizabeth Taylor, and Alex Wentworth. Madalyn Hillis -Dineen was not
present. Also participating: Jon Idman, Town Planner, and Lynn St. Cyr, Senior Department Assistant. Bebrin declared
that a quorum of the Planning Board was present. She read the Meeting Participation Statement and Recording
Statement.
6:32 PM PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS AND COMMENT
No citizen comments.
6:33 PM PUBLIC MEETING
Approval Not Required, Case No. 2023-07: Applicant/Owner: Jodie Cash -Eddy and Robert and Cheryl Dolan through
their representative BSC Group seeks endorsement of an Approval Not Required Plan for property located at 23 Franklin
Cartway shown on Tax Map 50, Parcel 11 and 33 Franklin Cartway shown on Tax Map 50, Parcel 12, both within the
Residential Medium Density (R -M) Zoning District. The plan is pursuant to MGL c. 41 §81L and §81P and §290-4 of the
Brewster Subdivision Rules and Regulations.
Documents:
• 07/11/23 Approval Not Required Application and Plan
• 07/18/23 Staff Report
Kieran Healy of BSC Group was present on behalf of the Applicant Jodie Cash -Eddy and Robert and Cheryl Dolan. Healy
described the plan as a land transfer from a large to a small parcel which is currently 2752 SF. The proposed transfer is
approximately 1000 SF and the parcel will become 3685 SF in size.
Michaels stated that he visited the property and noted a concrete pad in the land that is proposed for transfer. Healy
confirmed that the concrete pad would be part of the transfer.
Idman stated that frontage is not changing for either lot. A lot is being created to be conveyed to the smaller parcel.
The lot being created does not purport to be a building lot.
Motion by Degen to Endorse Approval Not Required,. Case No. 2023-07. Second by Michaels. Vote: 6-0-0.
6:39 PM PUBLIC MEETING
Maior Stormwater Management Permit, Case No. 2023-31: Applicant/Owner: The Latham Center, Inc. through their
representative TF Moran, Inc. has submitted a major stormwater permit application for property located at 1439 Main
Street and shown on Tax Map 48, Parcel 61, pursuant to Brewster Town Code Chapter 272 and its accompanying
Regulations.
Documents:
• 10/23/19 Site Development Plans, revised 06/19/23
• 12/11/19 Stormwater Management Report revised January 30, 2020 and June 26, 2023
• 07/07/23 Major Stormwater Management Permit Application
PB Minutes 07/26/23 Page 1 of 6
0 07/19/23 Staff Report
Bebrin recused herself as she is a member of the Latham Centers Board of Directors. Wentworth took over as Chair.
Robert Duval, Chief Engineer, of TF Moran was present on behalf of the Applicant. Duval stated that the project was
originally approved in March 2020 by the Planning Board. The Applicant filed an application with the Zoning Board of
Appeals who rendered a decision which was appealed. Negotiations took place, the scope of the initial proposed project
changed and the stormwater regulations have changed since the initial application was approved by the Planning Board.
Duval stated that the existing lot has several buildings and two of the buildings will be torn down. Additions will be made
to one of the remaining buildings and renovations to both remaining buildings will take place. The site will be used as
administrative offices, educational classrooms, gymnasium, and cafeteria.
Duval described proposed stormwater management. The site has approximately 16000 SF of existing impervious
surfaces. Stormwater runoff currently goes into wetlands to the north and northwest as well as onto Main Street to the
south or into wetlands to the southeast. The site will be regraded and a closed system of storm drainage with an
underground stormwater infiltration system will be used to capture and treat the new 8000 SF area of impervious
surface as well as most of the runoff from the original 16000 SF of impervious surface. There is a small area to the
northwest for which roof runoff cannot be captured but there is little to no pollutant load. Six catch basins will be used
on the site. Rate and volume of discharged are being reduced for all storm events. Requirements by DEP and the Town
for removal of TSS and nitrates and phosphates are being met with this system. Duval stated that during construction
the entire site will be surrounded by a silt sock. There are two existing infiltration basins which will be protected with
silt bags. The new catch basins will also be protected with silt bags as they are being brought online. There will also be a
stabilized stone construction entrance for all construction vehicles. Duval stated that no waivers from the stormwater
requirements are being requested and he believes the application complies with all stormwater requirements.
Taylor requested clarification from the Applicant on information provided on the existing site conditions plan. Taylor
confirmed with the Applicant that it is their intent to keep as many of the existing trees on site as possible, that the use
of fertilizer would be limited, and that invasive plants would be physically removed. Taylor asked for clarification on the
"meadow' areas described on the plan and their maintenance. Idman stated that the project is also being reviewed by
the Conservation Commission and he believed questions raised by Taylor would be covered in the Order of Conditions
issued by the Conservation Commission.
Jeremy Belanger of TF Moran joined the meeting via Zoom. Belanger stated that the project was before the
Conservation Commission last night for review. The Conservation Commission was amenable to the New England
roadside seed mix shown along the eastern property line. Belanger stated that a note was added to the landscape plan
at the request of the Conservation Commission stating that natural fertilizers would be used in accordance with
manufacturer's standards within the 100' buffer to the wetlands.
Michaels noted that the stormwater regulations require that the NOAA Atlas 14 be used to calculate precipitation
events and the Applicant used a different. Michaels wondered if the use of a different source would impact the volume
calculations provided. Michaels asked for clarification on the two existing catch basins and Duval responded that the
existing structures would be removed. Michaels asked whether the Applicant considered using nature -based swales and
Duval responded that swales were being used in the lawn area between the two buildings but due to limited room and
steep pavement there are no other swales proposed.
Degen asked whether the Planning Board needed assurance from the Applicant that the volume calculations complied
with the bylaw given a different source was used to calculate precipitation events. Duval responded that the overall
conclusion and effective treatment will be the same but there may be a slight shift in the reduction of runoff. Degen
confirmed with the Applicant that there is no longer a dorm proposed on site.
PB Minutes 07/26/23 Page 2 of 6
Freitas inquired as to the status of the Conservation Commission review and wondered if the Planning Board needed to
hear from the Conservation Commission before completing their stormwater review. Idman responded that the
Conservation Commission would review and issue an order for any activity within the 100' buffer to the wetlands.
Belanger responded that the Conservation Commission hearing was continued to August 8`h. The Conservation
Commission asked the Applicant to add a note to the landscape plan regarding fertilizer use and identify the curb on the
plans provided to them. There was a discussion on buffer impacts as well.
The Planning Board discussed whether supplemental information was needed to determine whether the application
complied with the stormwater bylaw and regulations. Duval asked the Planning Board to consider approving the
application with the condition that the Applicant provide revised calculations using the data source identified in the
stormwater regulations.
Motion by Michaels to Approve Major Stormwater Management Permit, Case No. 2023-31, subject to Submission of
Revised HydroCAD Report, Conservation Commission Approval of Work Within the 100' Buffer, and the Conditions
Required by the Stormwater Management Regulations. Second by Degen. Vote: 5-0-0.
There was discussion regarding the NOAA 14 precipitation chart assuming higher levels of precipitation in the future
than the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook.
7:17 PM PUBLIC MEETING
Continued review and discussion on the Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) provisions of the zoning bylaw including. review
and discussion of potential amendments.
Documents:
• Draft Article I General Provisions
• Draft Article IX Special regulations
• Draft Table 1 Use Regulations
• Draft Table 2 Area Regulations
• 07/21/23 Email from Jack Chandler
• 07/21/23 Email from Bill Kargman
• 07/21/23 Email from Elizabeth Hoffman
Building Commissioner Davis Walters, Assistant Town Manager Donna Kalinick, and Housing Coordinator Jill Scalise were
present.
The Planning Board reviewed and discussed Article 1, General Provisions. There was discussion on the term "accessory
use" which is defined in the zoning bylaw. The Planning Board discussed revisions to the net floor area definition.
Freitas asked for clarification on the definition and noted consideration of conditioned space versus unconditioned
space. Idman stated that revisions to the definition attempt to identify ADU/living space areas. Walters discussed
habitable spaces. He also provided examples of spaces such as stairwells and entryways that should not be included in
calculating the size of the ADU.
The Planning Board reviewed and discussed Article IX, Special Regulations. Idman stated that a purpose statement has
been drafted to be included with the provisions. It focuses on three things: creation of year-round rental dwelling units,
increasing housing choice and diversity of housing types, preserving the community by facilitating housing that allows
seniors, working people, and young adults to remain and live in Brewster. Idman directed the Planning Board to Section
A which now includes all forms of ADUs allowed through zoning. He reviewed proposed revisions to Section B which
includes removal of special permit requirements for properties located in Zone II, and the Herring River and Pleasant Bay
watersheds. Requirements for special permits based on lot size remains although the Planning Board will need to decide
what size lot will require a special permit. Idman stated that Table 1, Use Regulations, will need to conform with Section
B. There was discussion on lot sized of 15000 SF and 25000 SF.
PB Minutes 07/26/23 Page 3 of 6
The Planning Board reviewed Section C which requires an ADU to meet building height, coverage, and setback
requirements for the underlying lot. Idman stated that Section D deals with owner occupancy including bona fide
absences. Michaels asked if bona fide absences needed to be considered if part time residents are allowed to have an
ADU. Idman responded that part time residents would need to obtain a special permit for an ADU whereas a year-round
resident may not need a special permit. Idman also stated that this section proposes language to allow a full-time
owner to lease an ADU for 6 months. The value of the special permit for part-time owners is that provides accountability
for property and issue management. The Planning Board discussed the option of allowing both dwelling units to be
rented with 12 -month leases. Idman summarized revisions to Section E including a proposed size of no more than 1000
SF of net floor area. It removes the 40% calculation for size and removes the cap of 20 building permits. Idman stated
that Section F deals with the intent of ADUs including that they are not to be used for short-term rental use. Section G
notes that ADUs are subject to all other state and local laws and regulations.
The Planning Board reviewed and discussed the language in Section H. Wentworth stated that he thought the language
should include that no more than one ADU should be allowed on a lot. Idman stated that Section I has been revised to
require one parking space per ADU instead of one parking space per bedroom of the ADU. Idman stated that language
in Section J has been revised to clarify that the property should remain as single-family residential in nature. Idman
reviewed Section K which states that a detached residential accessory building in which an ADU is located shall not
contain bedrooms not associated with the ADU. Idman reviewed Section L which states that an ADU shall not be
severed in use or ownership from the principal dwelling including that an ADU cannot be held in a condominium form of
ownership. The Planning Board discussed creating ADU permits to not only track and enforce ADUs but also to make
future owners aware of ADU requirements. Idman stated that Sections M and N deal with enforcement and give the
Building Commissioner some flexibility with affidavit content and establishment of administrative
permitting/registration. Idman stated that Section 0 discusses enforcement remedies including removal of cooking
facilities within an ADU to abate or address a violation.
The Planning Board reviewed and discussed revisions to Table 1, Use Regulations. Idman pointed out a proposed change
from special permit use to permitted use for ADUs in the Village Business zoning district as single-family residences are a
permitted use in this district. Idman stated that a note is proposed for this section that states "except as may be
permitted for pre-existing nonconforming single-family residential properties under Article VIII'. This note would be
added to the table under the Commercial High Density zoning district for residential uses of accessory residential
building and ADUs.
The Planning Board reviewed and discussed revisions to Table 2, Area Regulations including revisions to the notes. Note
1 includes incorrect information that ADUs are allowed in the Industrial zoning district and that information is proposed
for deletion. A change has also been proposed for Note 13 removing the use of an accessory apartment. Language is
proposed to be added to the note stating that "except for single family residential use/structures, in which case the RM
district requirements in this Table 2 shall apply". This language will help clarify Table 2 as a single-family dwelling is not
allowed in the Village Business district on a lot of 15000 SF. Removal of Note 12 is proposed as the "S-1" referenced
could not be found in the bylaw. Idman also proposed removal of the Editor's Note regarding the C -L district.
The Planning Board discussed lot size and most lots being between 15000 SF —18000 SF. The Planning Board discussed
the procedure moving forward for amending the bylaw for Town Meeting in November. They discussed providing a
draft bylaw to the public for review and feedback as soon as possible.
The Planning Board reviewed items for further discussion including: 1. Whether the accessory apartment use should be
removed? 2. What is the appropriate lot size to trigger a special permit? 3. Owner occupancy -should part time residents
have to apply for a special permit? 4. If special permits are being kept, who serves as the special permit granting
authority (ZBA or PB)? 5. For year-round housing, is 12 months or 6 months an appropriate lease period? 6. Does one
property have to be year-round use and the other can be for personal use?
PB Minutes 07/26/23 Page 4 of 6
Bebrin noted that the Planning Board received some public comment which is available for review in the online public
meeting packet.
Jillian Douglass stated that she would like the town to think about a larger issue which is the commercial use of
residential property. Douglass further stated that many towns have a rental registration system and she believes
Brewster needs to think about a rental registration system. She suggested language for the purpose statement: "to
increase the potential for more affordable housing options, reduce economic displacement, and to encourage year-
round occupancy of residential property".
Steve Najarian, 571 Stony Brook Road, expressed concern with the proposed ADU size limitation of 1000 SF. He stated
that his property currently has two houses and he would like to use one as an ADU, but it is 1400 SF. Najarian has been
working on a design for a 750 SF ADU which would leave approximately 600 SF remaining in the home which he
intended to use as bedrooms for family and friends. Currently, the proposed changes would not allow him to use the
remaining 600 SF as bedrooms. He stated that he would like to create an ADU but the easiest route for him to take may
be to rent it through VRBO.
Kalinick stated that evaluation of the ADU provisions is one of the strategies listed in Brewster's Housing Production Plan
(HPP). The community provided feedback on the HPP and agreed that the ADU provisions needed to be revisited.
Kalinick asked whether additional language needed to be added regarding family usage of the ADU or whether it was
intended for a lease to exist between family members. She gave an example of parents living in the main house and
adult children living in the ADU. There was discussion on whether the ADU provisions needed to be revised further to
include additional language regarding use by family members and whether leases would be required for family. Idman
reminded the Planning Board that accessory apartments were currently allowed without lease requirements and asked
them to consider whether accessory apartments should continue to be allowed to allow for guesthouses.
Taylor referenced information the Planning Board received on ADUs prepared by AARP. She stated that zoning was only
one part of creating ADUs and that the town needed to be prepared to provide information and resources to residents
interested in creating ADUs. Taylor asked whether the town would be providing information on grants and loans offered
to those creating ADUs and if design help would be provided. She asked the Planning Board to consider more than just
the zoning. Scalise responded to Taylor stating that additional strategies of the HPP include working with residents and
providing information and resources to those creating ADUs and staff have been working internally and with outside
agencies to collect ADU information and resources.
8:33 PM APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES
Araproval of Meeting Minutes: July 12r 2023.
The Board reviewed the July 12, 2023 meeting minutes. Motion by Degen to Approve July 12, 2023 Meeting Minutes.
Second by Michaels. Vote: 6-0-0.
8:34 PM COMMITTEE REPORTS
Degen summarized a recent Select Board meeting and noted the public forum that would be taking place at the Sea
Camps property on Saturday, August 5th. She also noted rebates available through the Cape Cod Light Compact and that
more information was available on the Brewster website. The Select Board has encouraged public comment from
residents regarding the Pilgrim Nuclear plant as well as herbicide spraying. Wentworth stated that the Vision Planning
Committee continues its work on the Local Comprehensive Plan and is working on public outreach and engagement
opportunities. Bebrin provided more details on the upcoming public forum at the Sea Camps including that some
buildings will be open for public viewing.
8:36 PM FOR YOUR INFORMATION
The Planning Board received a public hearing notice from the Harwich Planning Board for Tuesday, July 25, 2023.
PB Minutes 07/26/23 Page 5 of 6
8:37 PM MATTERS NOT REASONABLY ANTICIPATED BY THE CHAIR
None.
Motion by Wentworth to Adjourn. Second by Michaels. Vote: 6-0-0. The meeting adjourned at 8:38 PM.
Next Planning Board Meeting Date: August 9, 2023.
Respectfully submitted,
4� ��i A
Lynn St. r, Senior Department Assistant, Planning
PB Minutes 07/26/23 Page 6 of 6