HomeMy Public PortalAboutZoning Board of Appeals -- 2007-02-15 MinutesPage 1 of 5
Date approved 5-21-07
Vote 4-0-0
TOWN OF BREWSTER
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
Meeting Minutes
February 15, 2007
Chairman Harvey freeman called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. Members present were;
Harvey Freeman, Philip Jackson, Arthur Stewart, Paul Kearney, and John Nixon.
OLD BUSINESS
• Motion made by Arthur Stewart to accept Minutes of January 30, 2007 meeting as
presented. Second by John Nixon. VOTE: 5-0-0.
NEW BUSINESS
07-08 Mark Zippo (White Rock Commons), 157 South Orleans Road. Map 52 Lots 31-
1 and 33-1. The Applicant seeks a Comprehensive Permit under MGL 40B, sections 20-23 and
760 CMR 30.00 and 31.00. The proposal includes re-subdividing the land into two parcels to
include 24 single-family dwelling units under condominium form of ownership on new Lot 1 and
one relocated house on new Lot 2.
Attorney Andrew Singer- representing the applicant, Mark Zippo.
Mr. Mark Zippo was present at this hearing as well as the following; Robert Fitzgerald (Engineer),
and Laura Shufelt (Economic Consultant)
Harvey Freeman introduced Richard Heaton, Consultant for Comprehensive Permit process.
Mr. Heaton explained he is a process person. He would like to bring the applicant up to speed as
to where the Board is. He was pleased to hear the projected project start was the Fall, with 3-4
months of site work. He will also hear and balance community concerns.
Mr. Freeman stated this is an open process with communication back and forth. They would like
to start with an orderly progression of what is needed to make the hearings effective. Tonight he
has set a specific agenda including several motions to organize this process and delineate several
areas of concern both from the Zoning Board, the applicant and the public's points of view. As
well as set a time table for further meetings.
Attorney Andrew Singer would like to introduce into the record, materials submitted since the last
meeting.
Mr. Freeman acknowledged this receipt.
MOTIONS
1. Motion made by Phillip Jackson to adopt Mass Housing Partnership (MHP) Guidelines.
Second by Paul Kearney. VOTE: 5-0-0.
2. Motion made by Paul Kearney to accept a Grant from MPH for Richard Heaton to act as
Consultant for Comprehensive Permit. Second by Phillip Jackson. VOTE: 5-0-0.
ZBA Minutes 02-15-07
Page 2 of 5
3. Motion made by John Nixon to authorize Peer Review Consultants to be hired for various
areas of concern. Scope of work to be written by Richard Heaton and Phillip Jackson for
such purpose. Second by Arthur Stewart. VOTE: 5-0-0.
4. Motion made by Paul Kearney to request Applicant agree to pay for Peer Reviews.
• Singer-try to keep reviews within reason, certain issue areas can be done in
house or in town.
• Freeman- we would not require unnecessary peer reviews.
Second by John Nixon. VOTE: 5-0-0.
5. Motion made by Phillip Jackson to designate a "53 G Account" to track funds for Zippo
Peer Reviews. Second by John Nixon. VOTE: 5-0-0.58
FUTURE MEETING DATES
• Thursday, April 12, 2007
• Tuesday, May 22, 2007
Discussion
• Singer- Introduced into the record materials sent to Board since the last meeting. Not
necessary to agree on everything but feel good for the Town and the applicant.
Supplemental-landscape plan with parking, larger photograph of buildings, statement of
need of affordability, detailed letter in response to water, Fire and DPW, concerns of
Pleasant Bay and Draft Condo Documents.
• Freeman -read into the record a letter from Carol Ridley of Pleasant Bay Resource
management Alliance, dated February 12, 2007, signed by Arnold Henson (Chairman).
• Singer- discussion of Peer review for nitrogen loading, this is a regional issue on Cape
Cod. Various letter reference "load reduction produced throughout". As you're looking
at balancing the proposal remember there is no one clear answer as to how to reduce
nitrogen. Brewster has a small interest, multiple towns with areas of concern.
• Freeman- that is why we need an expert to provide balance with the number of
nitrogen sources.
• Singer- a report can break down septic, landscape etc.
• Freeman- the Pleasant Bay refer in the letter information on the website; a July, 2006
document (Pleasantbay.org.)
• Singer-it will serve as a guide.
• Freeman- peer review allows pros and cons.
• Singer-Peer Reviews have to balance and weigh this, and then we take the next step.
• Fitzgerald- DEP website water resources have good information on restoring the
estuary.
• Freeman- we are open to discussion, particularly areas that need more information.
• Singer-there are waste water issues; coordinating with an impartial person.
• Fitzgerald-low impact design for storm water run-off, not waste water.
• Freeman-the septic is a bio clear system. There may be percolation into a lens into
Pleasant Bay. What is the effluent next to Bioclear and how much of a decrease by the
time it gets to Pleasant Bay?
• Singer- we have tables and charts available.
• Fitzgerald=estimation of both on site and off site can be done.
• Kearney- does Peer Review speak to the monitoring and maintence of the system?
• Stewart-what is the potential to the Town of Brewster? What is the possibility of the
state coming back for responsibility?
• Singer-that was a provocative sentence, put in on purpose.
ZBA Minutes 02-15-07
Page 3 of 5
• Stewart- it is a meaningful statement. Should we ask for technical alternatives to
Bioclear- may be uneconomic.
• Singer- they all work but it becomes an economic factor. Would you want comments/
discussions on the alternatives as background?
• Freeman- that would be helpful in discussion with peer reviewer to know the costs.
• Shufelt-put in context with the whole project it may reduce income because it increases
condo fees through maintenance and other areas.
• Stewart-do you have a projection of condo fees?
• Zippo- we looked at all 4 types of systems, one is not terrible economic but
maintenance was too high.
• Shufelt-this all effects the buyer, both affordable and other buyers.
• Singer- we will put it all together.
• Freeman- any other concerns.
• T. Gray- has the Board addressed the Pleasant Bay Rehabilitation Center?
• Douglass- they must develop a regional impact statement, at this time this has not
been done.
• T. Gray- is it being considered with both projects?
• Douglass- this Board does not face that, it is done separately. This is additional impact,
looked at separately. When talking about obtaining information on 4 types of systems
does it equal fewer units, less impact?
• Shufelt- could prepare proforma on lower density
• Singer-lose affordable units and nitrogen flow.
• Stewart- tighten the project, 19 instead of 24- more open space, add another bedroom.
Look at lower density; where does economics fall?
• Singer-review the numbers takes place at the State level. Proforma works or not. Tied
to the number of units all impacts money in the end.
• Shufelt- to reduce density in groups of 4; 25% is 20 and 16.
• Zippo- 19 condos and 1 house = 20 units.
• Freeman- what would be determined by this study?
• Stewart- septic (environmental), traffic and layout (open space).
• Shufelt- I can handle the numbers, Mr. Fitzgerald can do the site layout-very
preliminary.
• Stewart- projected condo fees?
• Susan Sutherland (93 So. Orleans Road) - we have 5 people in a house and had to
add a new septic system. I don't understand 24 units on 2 acres (the rational).
• Douglass- the applicant has a right. It is 3.64 acres. The town needs affordable
housing but we must protect the water shed...
• Sutherland-why is this all in one section of town. This area of town was referred to as
the ~~ghetto of Brewster".
• Zippo- as a property owner in the area, I don't agree with that at all, it is expensive
area and has one of the most exclusive golf courses on the Cape right there. Project
will not detract from the community or the area.
• Freeman-that is our task to balance all these issues.
• Singer the last sentence of the affordable housing description is need.....most
compelling for young people to stay on.
• Zippo- if not lucky enough to have an accessory apartment bylaw, could they afford to
stay in Brewster.
• Gray- we can not afford to live in the community we grew up in, that is why we moved
to Brewster.
• Freeman- there seems to be 3 areas of concern.
• Stewart-traffic, Cape Cod Commission did not answer where they got that data.
• Singer- the traffic numbers were based on standards numbers
• Stewart- CC Commission numbers were close.
ZBA Minutes 02-15-07
Page 4 of 5
Douglass-level of service on the roads-we have some data on that.
• Fitzgerald- Cape Cod Commission data was from 1995-2004, summer and average. Site
specific-trip generation, peak hours trip.
• Freeman- added to available data of Fire Department and Police coverage.
Nixon- talking about parking inside the area, proposed 24' wide road, is curbside
sufficient to allow vehicles in such as fire, police, trash pickup?
• Singer- attempted to look at those issues.
• Stewart- parking on both sides of the road, how does the Fire Department deal with
that?
• Zippo-there is a possibility to add parking.
• Stewart- are the driveways long enough for visitor parking.
• Zippo-what is more fruitful for the development-remove open space and add asphalt.
• Jackson-maybe gravel rather than asphalt
• Nixon- more asphalt adds other issues.
• Zippo- what works best for the project?
• Singer-conform to zoning bylaws, can be worked with.
• Stewart- doesn't cover potential parking problems.
• Freeman-are there any other areas of concern/
• Singer-the numbers on parking are really low.
Freeman- is there another area for an outside consultant?
• Shufelt- looking at lower density, treading to move away from the guidelines might not
be a first step.
• Singer- do we understand outside peer reviewer on environmental issues only.
• Freeman- parking is one, sidewalks and entrance to other development.
• Stewart-I don't understand the Cape Cod Commission asking for sidewalks-
maintenance issues.
• T. Gray- what is the access to the town land behind the project, there is nothing there.
• Stewart- can't walk there-public golf course.
• T. Gray-there is only one lot back there.
Freeman- are there other areas to add?
• Douglass-look at the options for density, now is not too late. Will it work for the
applicant. He may need to explain the figures of density.
• Singer-clarification-parking question; 1) majority feel more parking a need. 2) if accept
DPW and FD suggestion, pressure put on the plan.
• Stewart-show us both ways.
• Jackson- if FD is OK with street parking the original is better-less asphalt.
• Zippo-if Board is comfortable.
• Freeman- need for extra (off street) parking
• Singer- we will follow-up with FD.
• Jackson is this both sides of the street?
• Zippo- we are flexible
• Fitzgerald-regarding sidewalks-we would rather not do them
• Freeman- how much would they be used?
• Zippo- along Route 39
• Douglass- if sufficient clearance, safety concern, dirt path would be sufficient.
• Freeman can we come up with a list of possible candidates for consultants?
• Singer- Nate Weeks (Stearns + Wheeler), draft a statement of work.
• Freeman- work with Phil Jackson to send out proposal to 2-3 persons.
• Singer- can use your designee within the next week or 2, 2 weeks for work, 2 weeks
for Board and applicant to review by end of March.
• Douglass- the town is now using Mike Giggy (Wright Pierce)
• Freeman- proposal to be written up/scope of work
• Stewart- who writes the scope of work?
ZBA Minutes 02-15-07
Page 5 of 5
• Shufelt-Dick Heaton writes it, we review it.
• Freeman- any other comments or thoughts.
• Stewart- was a subdivision plan submitted
• Singer- we will get them to you.
Motion to adjourn made by Paul Kearney at 9:OOPM.
Second by John Nixon.
VOTE: 5-0-0
Respectfully submitted,
os: ~ ld s yaw Lo.
ZBA Minutes 02-15-07