HomeMy Public PortalAboutPlanning Board -- 2010-10-27 Minutes I
\`\\�
au a nlirir/u
oW /T,
Brewster Planning Board
- k s Fr
0
2198 Main Street
2 4ig i�113 � 3 Brewster, Massachusetts 02631-1898
3 a. ; ilGi a' = (508) 896-3701 ext. 133
0 Ptitlil�Y-=':• T FAX(508)896-8089
lf4 :r
F ORPORASO 5
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
NNW
Leven: They don't have to do this. Staff plan review group would give the applicant something.
Collum: Totally informational meeting for the applicant. Nothing is binding.
Leaning: Two meetings ago the church came and said they did not know about a process. How
come they did not know this?
Leven: Everyone starts at a different place. Technically each department should be telling the
applicant where to go.
Collum: Each department should sign off and tell the applicant what is next.
Discussion followed regarding who provides information to the applicant, etc...
This is so we can see people while they are still thinking about the project....
Taylor: Would they have been told already by the Building Department? Question about
enforcement violation penalties?
Leven: Will not be heard by board until they complete the process. i.e. talking to people who
want to do projects in town. Leven shared some examples of current discussions with people
thinking about projects.
Barnard: Building Inspector sees 9 out of 10 who are directed to DPRC. Beyond that engineers
should be educated. As part of the application process you probably capture almost all of it
Taylor: Once process is shared it will be better known. Once word spreads around people will
know they have to follow the process first.
Bugle: Victor is one of the first people you go to i.e. addition
Leaning: Or maybe Sue. Let's make it clear that this is an important first step.
Leven: It is usually small projects to medium size projects. People working on huge projects are
already seeking out this information.
Collum: As someone is new to the field of building I am always running into issues. If you don't
ask the right question you won't get the information. They won't volunteer information. I thought
the whole point of getting this board together is that you can get your answers.
Leaning: Agree.
Kuzman: Include this in the intent.
Taylor: A routing slip, here are the steps. Start here...When you go to someone else's office,
you have already been to other departments. Waste of time and money. Something.
Leven: Based on the conservation you need to see health, conservation, planning, etc.
Collum: It is this way in Dennis. Save everyone's time and money. You can't go to building until
you have your conservation stuff. Another reason we are doing this board is to save our time,
Building Department time and save money. Who are we paying to attend meetings?
Planning Board Meeting Page 2 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
Taylor: Add cell towers and wind turbines. Need a name.
Discussion about buildings—type of review, Barnard, Leven
Leven: Board members should not be involved in this process.
Barnard: DPRC today is an advertised meeting. How does the public know?
If someone is required to go through a public process then they will.
Leven: You can't require agricultural use to go through special process
Discussion followed re: recent project—garden center, zoning, DPRC,
Leven: An opportunity to meet with staff and review options. Continued discussion re: garden
center
Agricultural uses have special permit protection.
Leaning: Very early in the process it is important that the public is made aware.
Leven: Not until they have an application filed. This is an opportunity to discuss projects without
going in front of the board. Not public.
Bugle: Determination of who would sit and listen to the ideas ("bureaucrats" as opposed to
board members)
Taylor: This takes care of DPRC. It is not where they can speak freely. What is? This probably
will encourage people to come in. DPRC does not work.
Barnard: Why doesn't the DPRC make it clear to people what they need to do?
Leven: DPRC is doing corridor overlay.
Taylor: If I have a signed plan then I feel that I have seen everyone. Then people don't see why
they need to go in front of the planning board.
Leven: COPD, same thing over again. A little more information in the intent. Advantages for
people beginning the process.
Bugle: Solar installation — non residential solar'? Non residential solar application eliminates
homes. Over 200 square feet, 10x20.
Leven: By-law does not define power plants. I can ask Luke Hinkle. Roof mounted solar or
ground array?
Discussion about solar panels
Leaning: Add Power plants as a definition.
Taylor: Talk to Luke and Victor.
Planning Board Meeting Page 4 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?
Collum: 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
Leven: Sign off Sheet or a Checklist. Also non binding.
Taylor: Is this a checklist that someone could use who does not need a special permit?
Leven: Informal review, show house plan, how does this look to you?
Good idea for staff to have a specific time where everyone hears what all is doing, talk to
applicants, etc.
Taylor: DPRC now is a mess. Every two weeks? It takes forever.
Leven: Once a month.
Barnard: Expedite the process. It is a group of paid employees who get together. Becomes
more efficient.
Leven: Ability for staff to work without interruptions. Savings there.
Barnard: No fee, cost to town, skeptic could say...
Leaning: More user-friendly for the applicant.
Discussion of upcoming Town Meeting articles
Taylor: 4 articles for town meeting.
Leven can provide script and talking points.
1) Leaning: Planned Residential Dev't
2) Kuzman: Fences
3) Taylor: Or any other actions
4) Bugle: Definitions
Leven will send Finance Committee minutes, 8 ft fence discussion. Send to Rick Kuzman.
Leven explained the Finance Committee discussion.
If there are questions from the floor, then the person speaking can ask for advice from a board
member.
Leven: There is a process. Discussion of the process at Town Meeting followed.
Leven: Everything in COPD and DPRC with duplicates removed.
Kuzman: Combine findings and purpose. Just purpose. Keep it simple.
Leven: This applies to the entire town. Need to keep "b"?
Kuzman: Site plan standards.
Leven: Can reduce by- law to four pages. You can add to it at a public hearing.
Leaning: Take out standard language and put in rules and regulations. Change as we want
without going back to town meeting.
Planning Board Meeting Page 6 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
General discussion about landscaping buffers and parking from recent meeting.
Leven, Taylor, Bugle.
Taylor: Require or'?
Leven: Read by-law.
Taylor: We have these requirements now. Parking, buffers,
Leaning: Call to order, back to site plan review
Barnard: Site plan review in line with the site plan review training?
Leven: Naming. The course is talking about what you can and cannot look at. If your by-law
allows a MacDonald's....
Taylor: May have the booklets.
After meeting —create the new standards....
This is for May town meeting.
Barnard: Would it work to have a board member assigned to each one of these and working
with Sue on this?
Leven: That is fine.
Leven: By-law, annotated by-law can be done
Bugle: Prior to 1995 — no child care on Rte 6A
Other Business:
Cleary— Comments—Taylor:
They need a variance from Board of Appeals. This lot has no frontage. Comments will be sent
from Elizabeth
O'Connor—Comments—occupational therapy
Leven: Explained case. Doing this to avoid corridor overlay and DPRC. Taylor asked members
to send comments to Sue
N&N Properties -- Comments— Leven:
Site plan requirement.
Leven explained the case. There was a general discussion about the addition. No site plan yet
Some comments about the water runoff. Storm water
Barnard: Do you want us to come in and review all plans and provide comments'?
Taylor: If you want to and suggest come look at the plans.
Planning Board Meeting Page 8 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
Leaning motion, Kuzman second
All Aye
Next Meeting: 11/10/2010
Leaning : Motioned to adjourn at 9:00 pm. Second by Kuzman . All Aye.
Respectfully submitted,
ItAIL
Jo n Leaning/ lerk
li‘171/0-11
Kelly Moore/Sr ept. Assistant Planning & Zoning
Planning Board Meeting Page 10 of 11
PB Minutes 10-27-10 approved.doc
{ I
li
Action items: As of 10/27/10
Case#/Reference Action Who Due Date
Site Plan Review Document Leven will make revisions and redistribute. Planner 11-10-10
Naming?Informational Plan Review, Site Naming suggestions
Staff Review... Talk to Luke and Victor
Four Articles for Town Meeting: May 2010 Assigned: Board
Leven can provide script and talking points. Leaning: Planned Residential Dev't
Kuzman: Fences
Taylor: Or any other actions
Bugle: Definitions
Finance Committee minutes, 8 ft Send to Board Planner 11-10-10
fence discussion. Requested from Marilyn Mooers
2010 Planning Board Deadlines Timeframe has changed.Distribute to the Planner 11-10-10
board
Recap of meeting with Town Counsel Planner send summary to the board Planner 11-10-10
on 40A Section 3
n"""'°-n_....a•ll.._s..... T1....,.. 44 .a 14