Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAboutPlanning Board -- 2006-06-06 Minutes\\\\\\ ~~ ~~~~~ U 1 1 11 l I I 1 I I!!! f 1! 1 I N I i~ i ~i~ o~~` ARE' W 5I'E` ~~'~/i `~ ~` E{. D E R B~4- ~ /i L!' O 9F RC. r 3 ~e N~~r D O C~j /w = ~. -~~. - ~'~'0 i~~ i~ u a i r a! r i i i l i u l i u u~~~~~~~°~~\\\ Date Approved: January 24, 2007 VOTE: 5-0-0 ~-+ Brewster Planning Board 2198 Main Street Brewster, Massachusetts 02631- BREWSTER BICENTENNIAL 1898 ~' (508) 896-3701 p FAX (508) 896 8089 TOWN OF BREWSTER MINUTES OF PLANNING BOARD Tuesday June 6, 2006 7:00 P.M. Brewster Town Office Building Present: Members Henchy, Taylor, Tubman, Pierce, McMullen and Remy. Also Present: Jillian Douglass, Assistant Town Administrator. Chairman Henchy convened the Planning Board meeting at 7:OOPM in the Brewster Town Office Building Eastward Homes -Request full release; lot 2 from covenant and road inspection-Long Pond Landing Subdivision, Whidah Way on assessor's Map 48, Lot 8. Henchy -Did any members of the Board inspect Whidah Way? McMullen -The road looked good. The berm was fine. Pavement was good. I didn't' see any light at the intersection of the town road. I didn't see one. I thought the sign was great. There was adequate drainage. The road looked swept. I think the trees should stay in the cul-de-sac as long as the fire department says it is okay. The shoulders were in good condition, no trees or obstructions. It has passed inspection in my mind. Henchy - I spoke with the Fire chief today and he stated there is adequate room and he is prepared to let the trees stay. Taylor - no issues. Remy - no issues Henchy -The street measures 22 feet. There is a berm on the north side only. Paving conditions seem very good. A street light at a new subdivision road is very helpful and we should clear up our rules and regulations to have a street light at the intersection of every road. The sign was great and the underground utilities are there. I could not find all the monuments change of directions. I couldn't find any on the south side of the road. I did find a few on the North side. McMullen - I did find them. I'm sure I saw them, on the side that the houses are. Henchy - Do we have a motion to release the subdivision from the covenant and ask the developer to post the maintenance bond. Moved by Taylor Second by Pierce All voted AYE Planning Board Meeting Page 1 of 9 June 6, 2006 LEGAL HEARING -Road name hearing -change unnamed portion of Olde Owl Pond Road that leads to Flax Pond Road, which is an undefined way to Fishers Cartway, for house numbering, and emergency purposes. Mr. St. Aubin the applicant is present Henchy -Your letter states you own a parcel of land on Assessor's Map 31, Lot 46, as shown on the site plan. Is this the land on Black Pond Road, Brewster, MA? St. Aubin -Yes Henchy -Reads letter from St. Aubin - We have uncovered a road name problem. The access dirt road has been referred to an Owle Pond Road by the State Park, by the land court and other individuals. From what we understand the road from Owle Pond to Higgins Pond Road became Old Owle Pond, leaving the road nameless. We are proposing renaming the dirt road that runs the length of the lot, from Flax Pond Road to Old Owle Pond Road. We would like to use the name Fisher's Cartway. This would give a location for the lot to the Brewster Fire, Police and DPW. Without an address, we are having difFculty obtaining valid permits to build our home. When your letter came and the hearing was posted, another letter came in from Jim Walch from Westford, MA. Have you seen that letter? St. Aubin - Yes, I have. Henchy - Mr. Walch writes - he is concerned the proposed naming of the cart way located in East Brewster that is currently under discussion. He doesn't want to "gum" up the works, but is questioning the naming of the cart way and is proposing other suitable names. He recognizes the need for naming the way for emergency and town services. As representative of the estate of Eleanor Walch, which is Lot 1 on Assessor's Plan 31, an abutter to the said way, he would like the name to reflect the historic names it has been called rather than ugly animals that are coming prevalent near my home. As a person who has summered on Owle Pond since birth, and as someone who roamed the woods in question long before development was contemplated, would like to inform the board that the cart way in question has been referred to as the Old Cranberry Bog Road, Lee's Way, The Way to Lee's Cranberry Bog, Lee's Pond, The Road through Thompson's Property and the Forest Camp Road. I have been informed by my family as well as the park officials, that the road may very well have been used as a dumping ground for the Nickerson Hunting Lodge, now the forestry camp. The most prevalent name used by family members and old timers that would stop by, was the Old Cranberry Bog Road. That was where the beginning or the en d of the road was depending on the direction you were coming from. I know that old maps indicate that Cliff Pond was the other end point but I had never attempted to pass that way past the asphalt of Flax Pond Road. I know it is rather a trivial matter, but for sentimental reasons, as well as family reasons, I'd like to propose using one of the previous names for Fisher's Cartway. My family is still trying to comprehend Pell's Fishing way and Olde Owl Pond Road and how we identify these areas to each other. We are so used the old ways. That letter provoked some correspondence here in town hall. Jillian would you like to comment on this aspect. Douglass -The Selectman's Office was asked if we had any input to the names. We didn't have anything in particular in mind. Mr. Walch does make some good points regarding historical features of the land and how the town has used those historical features to name roads. The historic use of the road should take precedent of random names in order to preserve or document the town's heritage specifically since the road currently accesses lands which are now publicly held. Ultimately, it is up to a majority vote of the elected Planning Board, based on the request. Henchy - The chair is pretty neutral on this situation. John, which way do you feel you want to run with this request? Mr. St. Aubin request for Fisher's Cartway or would you like to go with one of Mr. Walch's suggested names. The Fire Department has approved Fisher's Cartway. St. Aubin suggested Angler's Cartway. Motion to rename this road Angler's Cartway subject to approval of the Fire Department Pierce Moved Tubman Second Planning Board Meeting Page 2 of 9 June 6, 2006 All voted AYE LEGAL HEARING -SPECIAL PERMIT #SP2006-10 -CORRIDOR OVERLAY PROTECTION DISTRICT BYLAW - LATHAM CENTER, INC. -Located at 1646 Main Street, on Assessors' Map 24, Lot 21, - An approximately 4723 sq. ft., a single story dormitory in generally the southeasterly portion of the lot on the existing school campus. Sitting on the Planning Board and present at the opening hearing were members Henchy, Taylor, Pierce, Tubman, McMullen and Remy. Chairman Henchy opened the hearing on June 6, 2006 by reading the legal advertisement and making the applicant and parties in interest aware of their rights to appeal as required under Chapter 40A, Section 17. He stated that during the hearing any member of the Board or interested party could direct questions through the Chairman to a speaker relating to the proposal. There were no letters, pro or con, read at the hearing. Abutters were present. Henchy asked the applicant to make their presentation. Present for the applicant: William D. O'Brien, Esq, Singer & Singer, LLC; Anne McManus, Latham Director; Sibyl Asantugrul, Architect with S. A. Architecture; Brad Malo, Coastal Engineering. Remy disclosed that she has done business with the applicant, but that this prior relationship would not have any bearing on her decision relative to the application. O'Brien -This property is a residential educational facility currently consisting of six structures. It is in the R-M Zoning District. The applicant is proposing to construct a new single story dormitory for additional living accommodations for its students. The dormitory will provide bedrooms and living space for sixteen (16) individuals, replacing certain accommodations currently located in other buildings. The proposed dormitory will not increase the number of students or staff on the premises, but will provide better living space for the students. There will be 12 single rooms and two double rooms. Access: The current access from Main Street will continue to be utilized, however, a new gravel fire access lane is being proposed to run along the southerly edge of the property out to Alden Drive, at which location a new curb cut is being proposed. This is being proposed to satisfy the Fire Department's requirements as conveyed to the applicant in a letter from Captain Arthur Romme. Parking: Since the addition of a new dormitory will not increase the number of students or staff, the required number of parking spaces will not change. There will be a slight change in the layout of the existing gravel parking area. The total number of spaces will be 68 Landscaping: There will be no changes. Any areas disturbed by the applicant will be stabilized and re-vegetated with loam and grass seed. There are existing buffer strips on the campus. The current square footage is 4,723 (estimated from a plan used for a prior application). The new finished total will be 4,820. Taylor -Currently there is not an adequate buffer strip along the proposed new driveway. Where will the lighting be? The Fire Department has requested that there be no islands in parking areas, since this creates problems with maneuvering their vehicles and trying to get close to buildings. Will there be any loading areas? What about screening of dumpsters, etc? How will parking be delineated? O'Brien- Lights will be on the buildings - 14 fixtures total. They are carriage lamps and light is directed downward. We can remove the islands in the parking lot. We will also have bike racks. Taylor -Has there been an HDC approval? O'Brien - We have been before the HDC and indicated that the new dorm was designed to be consistent with that of the schoolhouse addition which had received approval a couple years ago. We have not received an approval yet. Planning Board Meeting Page 3 of 9 June 6, 2006 Remy -What about all of the parking on Alden Drive? What is on the second floor of the building? How will the parking spaces be marked? O'Brien - We can re-schedule staff meetings and tell staff and students/families that there is to be no parking on Alden Drive or on Route 6A. The second floor area is strictly attic storage. Henchy - We will need to see Lighting on the plan as well as Landscaping and Parking delineation. There are no lines to delineate parking spaces. We need to see concrete parking bumpers. Abutter Comments: Levine - We live four houses down. We need to know that there will be no additional people. It is terrible when they park cars on Alden Drive. There is also a Latham house on Alden Drive with trucks and cars parked all over the lawn. It does not look attractive. What will be done about the parking? O'Brien -There will be no increase in students or staff. We will make sure that everyone is aware that they cannot park on Alden Drive or on Route 6A. McManus -The house on Alden Drive has been cleaned up and the cars and truck are no longer parked on the lawn. Henchy - We will have to continue this hearing in order to receive a revised plan showing lighting, landscaping and parking. There being no other comments the hearing was moved to be continued to June 28, 2006 at 7:30 PM. MOTION by Pierce SECOND by Tubman All voted AYE LEGAL HEARING -SPECIAL PERMIT #SP2006-11 -CORRIDOR OVERLAY PROTECTION DISTRICT BYLAW -OLD KINGS HIGHWAY NOMINEE TRUST -Located at 2681 Main Street, on Assessors' Map 14, Lot 59 - A change of use of a Residential (1-Family Detached Dwelling) to, Services to Ocean Edge (Miscellaneous Business Offices and Services). Sitting on the hearing were members Henchy, Bugle, Pierce, Tubman, McMullen and Remy. Chairman Henchy opened the hearing on June 6, 2006 by reading the legal advertisement and making the applicant and parties in interest aware of their rights to appeal as required under Chapter 40A, Section 17. He stated that during the hearing any member of the Board or interested party could direct questions through the Chairman to a speaker relating to the proposal. He asked the applicant to make his presentation. Present for the Applicants: Atty. John Mostyn; Thomas Devane, Operation Supervisor for Ocean Edge; David Michniewicz, Coastal Engineering Abutters present: Janine Getek and Joan Orr Mostyn provided the following project narrative: The proposed business offices and services use is consistent with the uses of the neighboring buildings on Route 6A. The proposed use is for an existing building which is similar in type, character and size to the abutting buildings which exist in that neighborhood. The site is suitable for the proposed change of use of a Residential (1-Family Detached Dwelling) to, Services to Ocean Edge (Miscellaneous Business Offices and Services). Adequate access already exists for fire protection, police protection and other emergency equipment. Planning Board Meeting Page 4 of 9 June 6, 2006 Access to the site is from Route 6A, which has adequate width, grade, construction, safety, and design capacity to carry traffic to the prospective site and allows for vehicles entering and exiting the site to do so without creating traffic congestion. Vanpooling is practiced already and used extensively to minimize trips generated at the site. The use of bicycles is also used to minimize vehicle trips. Adequate parking and loading facilities have been provided at the site and meet the Town's Zoning Bylaw 179-22 for Parking and Loading requirements. The site is finely landscaped with trees, shrubs and lawn area. No changes to the existing landscaping is proposed. The site is connected to Town water and has an on-site Title 5 sewage disposal system. The proposed use of the building complies with all applicable provisions of the Zoning Bylaws. A discussion followed relative to the proposed access connection to Villages Drive. Douglass - At DPRC they discussed that they wanted to review the exact location of the connecting drive to make sure that it was far enough back from 6A. The Fire Department also wanted input on where the connector would go. Remy - I wanted to see the landscaping plan and wanted to know what you are not going to add. Since the traffic is so bad here, are you going to be working here on the weekends? We want to make sure that you have the buffering around the parking lot. Henchy - We can condition the special permit that they have to complete the access road and it has to be started within six months after the decision is filed and completed within nine months after the decision. Mostyn -That's fine. Janine Getek - I live at 39 Thad Ellis Road and Joan Orr is also here with me. I guess my biggest concern is, if there is a proposal for office space, we feel very comfortable with that -quiet office space without maintenance going on. My concern is that I feel quite distrustful of Ocean Edge as neighbor. For the past two years, this property which has for decades been a residential use property has been used in a way that it is not zoned for. What I mean by that is there have been industrial containers, industrial refuse, used refrigerators, used air conditioners. Who knows what's happening with the Freon and chemicals that might be coming out of these. I'm just going to pass around some pictures. These were already submitted to the Building Commissioner. After two years, we complained several times, they finally received a letter from Mr. Staley, asking them to remove this stuff, since there was no such record that they had the proper permits. They cleaned it up on the 30th day. There is a lot of noise coming from that property -industrial noise. Certainly the industrial containers had a lot to do with that. There is still an industrial sized dumpster on the site. This is stuff that we can see from our property and hear from our property. We have not stepped on the property. So our concern is that, is this is going to be used for offices? Which I would understand to be a quiet use of the property or is the property going to be used for maintenance such as the noise that is coming out the garage right now, such as the use of this property for the past two years. As a citizen of Brewster for the past fifteen years, as a property owner, it disturbs me that anyone in the Town feels that they are above the laws of the Town. And, this is an example of a corporation in our Town that has felt that they were above the laws. If they didn't feel that way, they would have gone through the proper permit processing. It was only after contact from the Building Commissioner and other Town officials that they felt the need to: a. clean up the industrial use. b. apply for some special permits. The character of our area is important. As I said, it abuts residential use buildings, so is this is going to be used for maintenance and engineering and parking? At any given time, there are 11-12 vehicles parked in that lot; not just in the Planning Board Meeting Page 5 of 9 June 6, 2006 daytime, but in the evening as well. Whether it is hearsay or not, I hear that laundry is being washed in there, as well. I see housekeeping going in and out. The gentlemen from Coastal Engineering mentioned that the traffic that will coming out of that building back and forth will be the same as a single family dwelling use. I don't come in and out of my driveway 29 times a day with 11 vehicles. So these are my concerns: the noise, the unsightly refuse that I have to look at so it impacts my quality of life, and the fact that even in this proposal, the gentlemen does not propose to put out some sort of landscaping barrier or privacy fence. So what I would ask is that not only that there be some additional landscaping, but that a privacy barrier be erected, a wooden structure of some sort that would be in keeping with the culture of the area and that before this is approved that there is confirmation that in fact that this is going to be used for quiet office and not for maintenance. I think in Chapter 179 our Zoning laws, when it talks about office use, it talks about "Office Use and Miscellaneous". I think that "miscellaneous" needs to be defined before it should be approved. I appreciate the time of the Committee Thank you Mr. Chairman. Henchy - Do you want to address yourself to that mess behind the building? Mostyn - A few things, like I said, the longevity of the housekeeping and engineering at this property has been an unknown for a long time. We had hoped to find a home for it elsewhere and thatjust didn't happen. And we have been in constant communication with Victor Staley about this property and keeping him abreast of our plans and what we are intending to do. One of the biggest concerns I understand were the trailers in the back, which have been removed. And which are never going to re-appear I guess, without express authorization from the Building Commissioner. We don't anticipate their ever returning and the site has been cleaned up. We would be happy to prepare a landscaping plan. It looks like that property immediately to the west of the parking lot is a vacant lot. Apparently there may be another property just to the west of that Getek -These may be vacant lots, but they are small lots. It's owned by Anderson. But we are not talking about much of a barrier. The noise travels and we can see right through the lot. Henchy -What kind of noise is coming out of this garage? Getek - We don't know. Sawing, metal, machines, constant noise, the banging down by the dumpster. We don't want to be seeing what's going on next door. It's not our business. But it is your business when you see it and hear it constantly. More so in the summer, because we are outdoors. Henchy -How do you folks plan to approach the noise problem? Mostyn -This is the first I have ever heard of a noise problem. That was communicated to me by the Building Commissioner. Henchy -It's in situations like these that we look for a landscape barriers. Mostyn - We were hoping that the landscaping would suffice rather than fencing. Could this be something that we could investigate with our landscape plan - whether or not landscaping would provide enough of a barrier? Taylor - If we are trying to stop industrial noise, I think that you are going to need both. Because, unless you are putting up 15-Ft. Leyland Cypress, like 8 or 10 feet on center, you are not going to have any sort of noise buffer at all. But I think that fencing isn't that expensive. And I think you are going to need both at least back here to the west of the garage and that whole parking area. Now you just have one small dumpster there now? Mostyn-Yes Taylor - Putting a surround around that will help cut down on noise too. What are you using that dumpster for? Are you bringing in trucks and emptying them or is thatjust for engineering work or is this like a staging site for construction? It sounds like it. Mostyn - It shouldn't be. There is a lot of construction going on the property, but it has nothing to do with this maintenance facility. Planning Board Meeting Page 6 of 9 June 6, 2006 Taylor -And when you start work across the street, you aren't going to have anything, any staging from here? Mostyn -That is my understanding of that. They don't do heavy-duty maintenance on this property. Taylor -When we write up the permit we're going to have conditions in there, I'm sure, about any additional dumpsters, or any additional activity that isn't covered in the permit. Henchy -And you know we can't tolerate stuff like that in residential areas. I think we are going to have to be very emphatic in our permit, if we issue it, to insist on visual and sound protection. Taylor - I forgot to ask, if I may, hours of operations. Is this a 24/7 operation? Mostyn - A skeleton crew in the evenings, definitely. Taylor -But not trucks and stuff going on weekends or nighttime? I'm still not sure what this building is going to be used for. That's my big question. If it's engineering, that's one thing, but this sounds like housekeeping and maintenance and everything going on there. Mostyn -Housekeeping and engineering, maintenance and engineering -those are the departments. It's really office space. There is some minimal wood work and so forth down in the garage, but anything substantial we don't do on site. None of the materials for housekeeping are stored at the site, they are stored elsewhere. McMullen -Maybe we can address it by what sort of equipment do you have. Do you have saws and things like that in the garage? Devane - Can I answer that please? My name is Tom Devane and I was hired by the Corcoran-Jennison Company to oversee the development of Ocean Edge. I started about the same time that we received the notification from Victor Staley to clean up the back yard and to be honest with you - I am very embarrassed that we would have to be told to do that. It was a mess and I made sure that it was cleaned up right away. It took us right to the end -the final day to do it. We should have done it two weeks before; we should have done it a year before. And it is an embarrassment and 1 apologize. It won't happen again. We have moved all the trailers off the site and I can tell you what happens in that building. Our housekeeping and engineering staff work out of that building. There are offices in every room. All the concerns, all of the calls that we have for engineering services in the entire Ocean Edge property go into to there. From there work orders are distributed and they go out and they repair the problems. Our housekeeping assistant director and a few others in the housekeeping department are positioned in there. From that point they oversee our housekeeping departments. In the back there is a garage. You are welcome to come in and take a look at it. It is one large work bench that takes up all the space in there. That is where we repair screens, minor items. There probably is at times noise that we should back off on, because it is right next to a residential area. We are planning to move that whole department, both the engineering and housekeeping to another section of the property, but that probably won't happen for about a year. Our plans have to go through the Development Review Committee and then we have to come back before the Planning Board for some work that we want to do, for some buildings that we want to build - to get those people out of that building. The house was in disrepair. I had it painted. We do have to go back to the Historic Commission - I want to put some nice green shutters on there. Eventually we will paint the garage in back. I apologize for the commotion that we have caused. We are working very hard to change a lot of operations over there at Ocean Edge and that's one of my responsibilities and we will continue to improve it. If you have any questions, I would be happy to answer them. And I would also be happy to have anyone come over to inspect the property and show you what we are doing over there. The Board asked the applicant to provide a landscaping plan to screen abutters from the view of the property. Also it was agreed that an access from Villages drive to the property be provided and completed in the next 6 to 9 months MOTION to Continue to June 28th at 7:45. Moved by Taylor Second Remy Planning Board Meeting Page 7 of 9 June 6, 2006 LEGAL HEARING -SPECIAL PERMIT #SP2006-12 -CORRIDOR OVERLAY PROTECTION DISTRICT BYLAW - DOUGLAS GROVER -Located off Freeman's Way, on Assessors' Map 45, Lot 72 -Existing Metal Building to be used for Multi -Use Storage building. Sitting on the Planning Board and present at the hearing were members Henchy, Taylor, Pierce, McMullen, Remy and Bugle. Tubman recused herself from sitting on this Special Permit application as an abutter to the project. However, she remained in the audience as an abutter. Chairman Henchy opened the hearing by reading the legal advertisement and making the applicant and parties in interest aware of their rights to appeal as required under Chapter 40A, Section 17. He stated that during the hearing any member of the Board or interested party could direct questions through the Chairman to a speaker relating to the proposal. He asked the applicant to make his presentation. Present for the Applicant: Attorney Roger O'Day and Mr. 8~ Mrs. Grover. In his presentation, Mr. O'Day stated that the DPRC reviewed this application in December and their recommendations were incorporated into the plan. A variance was granted by the Board of Appeals to correct a 3.5 inch side line setback error. The building was erected pursuant to a building permit. The applicant wishes to use the existing steel building on the property for storage and related purposes allowed under Brewster Zoning Bylaw. The location of the building is protected by a 200' set back from Freeman's Way. The steel building is a 60' x 120' and common type for the area. O'Day -There is adequate access for fire protection, police protection and other emergency equipment. No sewage disposal or water source will be provided. Adequate utilities to the site are already in place. The use will not require 20 trips per day, nor there any employees. Nine parking spaces, including one handicapped, are provided and shown on the plan. Henchy was concerned about the Key-Span use. O'Day explained that Key-Span has not acted on their lease and the special permit issued by this board will expire this fall. Taylor expressed concerns regarding no sanitary facilities and the Use not being specified but being left open ended as to what is allowed under the bylaw. The Board, after discussion, continued the meeting to June 28, 2006. MOTION by Remy SECOND by Taylor All voted AYE Victor Staley, Building Commissioner will be present to discuss uses and the Zoning By-law, and also whether the Planning Board might choose to only allow personal use and have each tenant come in and seek a permit for use. CONTINUATION OF LEGAL HEARING -SPECIAL PERMIT #COPD2006-05 -CORRIDOR OVERLAY PROTECTION DISTRICT BYLAW -Allard -Located off Millstone Road - on Assessors' Map 42, Lot 14-102 - Commercial Office Building with 3 garage bays and apartment above. Henchy informed Mr. Allard that a Traffic Study would be needed. MOTION TO CONTINUE TO JUNE 28, 2006 AT 8:00 PM. MOVED by Pierce SECOND by Remy All voted AYE. Planning Board Meeting Page 8 of 9 June 6, 2006 Respectfully submitted, 7 ~ , ~ Vii ~'~ E v-~- Marjori Pierce/Clerk ci ~ ~ rn ~ .. Z ~.i N v ~ - c~ o Planning Board Meeting Page 9 of 9 June 6, 2006