The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My Public Portal AboutPlanning Board -- 2010-10-27 Minutes (2) \\\\00111i1I1/101 Li fi Brewster Planning Board o s;.oF •4.0q7. ■., 2198 Main Street Brewster, Massachusetts 02631-1898 x iE�LiSi _ �� s' ! ;iji+lei a _' (508) 896-3701 ext. 133 0 ,, —Iiir1�lilsa-'=!! y` FAX(508) 896-8089 f f f f I I l l I f 11 I I f I 1 l i i 1 1 1 1 11 Date Approved: 1/26/11 Vote: 5-0-0 TOWN OF BREWSTER MINUTES OF PLANNING BOARD REGULAR MEETING MINUTES Wednesday, October 27, 2010 at 6:35 P.M. Brewster Town Office Building Chairman Taylor convened the Planning Board meeting at 6:34 pm in the Brewster Town Office Building with members: Bob Bugle, Bob Barnard, Rick Kuzman, Scott Collum, and John Leaning. Absent: John McMullen Also Present: Sue Leven Discussion of Site Plan Review and Staff Plan Review Draft By-laws. Leven and Taylor: 40B discussions after next week. Leven: DPRC/Staff Plan Review, COPD/Site Plan Review was discussed & edited. Staff Review: Creates staff driven, early stage review. Review applications. Allows someone to get the reading of the town early in the process. It is not a committee. No advertising or minutes. Department heads and the applicant. Can let the applicant know where to go. Present the path for the applicant. Leaning: Where is the initial trigger for DPRC?When an applicant does X ... Who determines that they need to go through process? Leven: Article II, Procedure. She pointed it out in the document. With zoning cases it is usually the Building Commissioner. Leaning: A department or single entity who informs the applicant? Leven: No office of development review. The purpose is to get the applicant in the room with department heads. Leaning: Example noted: Nursery on 6A already went through DPRC already. Is there a way to better identify an individual who might be responsible for informing an applicant of a project? Initials for departments? Have applicant sign something in writing. Planning Board Meeting Page 1 of 11 PB Minutes 10-27-10 approved.doc Leaning: Specificity in the approach. Whenever something needs a permit. Leven: This is a fact gathering process. (Developing property, addition, parking.) Leaning: Suggests a procedure with a sign off sheet. Leven: Collum: Barnard— all discuss DPRC process. Leaning: Let's make the process easy and simple as possible so applicants understand where they need to go. Kuzman: Wind towers and solar farms -- addition. For example 85 ft. or 400 ft. wind tower. Letter from Leven required. Collum: Board is a good idea. Barnard: Why doesn't it work now? Leven: Duplicates COPD. Point of this is to get people in at the beginning, before making decisions and having a final plan made. Taylor: Add ancillary stuff from DPRC. Covered? Leven: It already has been. Leaning: Corridor overlay redundant? Leven: DPRC was first. Corridor Overlay came afterward. Yes, right now it is redundant. Leaning: Let's take steps to remove redundancy. Leven: Shared an example regarding parking. Department heads meeting with applicants. Leaning: DPRC is the first step for people. Corridor Overlay Protection District has its own authority. Leven: Agreed. Referenced the 3 page document. Taylor: What will we call it? Leven: It really is Staff Plan Review. You can call it a Site Plan Review or something else. Corridor Overlay doesn't make sense since it covers the entire town. Staff Plan Review could be Preliminary Review. Leaning: We need a catchy phrase. It will make everyone's process simpler. Leven: Single family home on a challenging site, septic system concerns. Applicant can come to the group and informally discuss plans. Taylor: Has Victor seen it? Leven: Yes, Also Nancy and it has been discussed at DPRC meetings. Planning Board Meeting Page 3 of 11 PB Minutes 10-27-10 approved.doc Barnard: Any one project where by sending them to a staff review it is considered excessive vs. today's process? Leven: Not necessarily. Waiver provision in site plan review. 500 sq. ft. warehouse in industrial zone. Does the waiver belong in this? Collura: Good idea to have a waiver Barnard: Engineers know what they need to do. Kuzman: This informs all. Collum agrees. It informs the town. Bugle: How is staff required to do written reports? Leven: No. It is a staff meeting. No recorded document. Taylor: Same thing that happens now. By doing this everyone is in the room at the same time. It is informal and without the public. Barnard: Does this mean anything to me as a planning board member? Leven: It is a service to the applicant. Leaning: It is square one. Leven: The whole point of this is it stops being a repetitive process. Collum: In the intent, informational purposes, private. Leven: Staff driven process. It is a confidential discussion. Barnard: DPRC is non binding. Staff member vs. board member. Leven: Example. Sue says "I never speak for the board" Kuzman: Cluster zoning for example Leven: There is a real advantage to clustering this instead of Here is the process. Barnard: DPRC reps. John McMullen, Bob Bugle. Leven will make revisions and redistribute. Naming suggestions... Taylor: Does Orleans or Harwich have something like this? Leven: Architectural Design Review board in Orleans. Some discussion of Orleans HDC, Old Kings Highway, other towns. Informational Plan Review, Site Staff Review, etc... (possible names) Collum: Sign off card per board. Planning Board Meeting Page 5 of 11 PB Minutes 10-27-10 approved.doc Gets approved and goes in a book. Taylor: Keeping COPD itself? Leven: In zoning by-law Leven read from the by-law Barnard: MA state standards? Some discussion about retail, wholesale ....shall prepare a trip reduction plan? Leven: Takes another overlay out of the by-law Taylor: Mentioned in our parking rights? Barnard: Say state transportation guidelines Kuzman: Do we need to go through if we are removing them all? Bugle: If you take this section out, then remove it Leven: Important that you have highway Bugle: Don't change it too much. Leaning: We can make adjustments and we don't need by-law approval Leven: take out 179-67 (6 pages) pick up again on waivers section. Taylor: Do we really want to do it? Rules and regulations for something else. Leven: 3 page by-law, referencing the other document. This tells you what goes into your applications. Leaning; Clear references to other documents. Taylor: Storm water regulations? Leven mentioned photos regarding storm water...from Chris Miller Some general discussion and questions regarding storm water... Taylor: Parking? Leven: No Taylor: Landscaping buffers too? Leven: Sure. Parking by-law and then reference the by-law here in this document. Taylor: 40A 3, discussion last week. Parking but not under special permit. Planning Board Meeting Page 7 of 11 PB Minutes 10-27-10 approved.doc Leven: Deadlines. Moved the deadline back about 10 days for advertisements. Will bring calendar to next meeting 2. Discussion of covenant language. Leven: Harwich, Brewster and Truro examples. Leaning: Likes Harwich. Taylor: Any templates, dos and don'ts? Leven: Strictly from the Planning Board. Taylor: Tamer Lane Leven: Example shared. Further agreements and conditions of approval will be added. Leven: Covenant— Planning Board and developer (road and utilities). Protective Covenants— Developer's relationship with the homeowner. Taylor: Protective Covenant for Copelas? Leven: Probably not. Tamer Lane also had a strange setup in how the lots were done. You might want to think about sub division approvals? Will get a CR from Jim Gallagher. You never want to make the protective covenant part of your decision. The Town should not get into enforcing agreements between the developer and purchasers. Further explanation regarding protective covenants and covenants. Recap of meeting with Town Counsel on 40A Section 3 Leven will email the summary to the group. Minutes: July 28, 2010 Motion to approve, Leaning Bugle second All Aye August 25, 2010 Motion to approve as corrected, Leaning Barnard second All Aye Collum abstain September 8, 2010 Approve Barnard bugle abstain Planning Board Meeting Page 9 of 11 PB Minutes 10-27-10 approved.doc o 2 0 a ƒ St ƒ D7 \ o el 1..,:‘ \ k - eo \ 0- t Vs 0- % 3 $ t -o a 0 p %@ % t 0 c)p z. ve o 0 % @56 -0@o0 f 0 N c 7 0„) 0 �+ « k f $ t. to # cck- « % ° ® a) °a) a k 4+ \ % « 0— 0D �in ± « %•O %k 0� �� ik 0 �: .5% S. ¥ Q 07� »� ...1 a o t o » 0 � 0 0 % ƒƒ C % « k C. < 4 3 � t @ %k \ 0 o 4 %�$ f� -k 0 t c. ?oo -- 0 0 � o $ 3 3 0- e \ � t §■� ■o S .� c. o ° � 0 c. o ca\ t 3 c,(-0* � % w� ■ & tilt � t0 $ U �@