The Raynham Planning Board held its regular meeting on Thursday, October 28, 2004, at Raynham Town Hall.~ The meeting opened at 6:30 p.m. with Board members Dan Andrade, Burke Fountain, Carl Carlson, John Canto and Chris Gallagher present.~ Also present were Town Planner Richard McCarthy, Administrative Assistant Maureen McKenney, and John Schmid of Judith Nitsch Engineering, Inc. (JNEI).
~
6:32 p.m. - Tim Grady, representing applicant Brian McLaughlin, presented a minor modification to the Papa Gino's/D'Angelo's-Rte. 138 site plan.~ Mr. Grady explained that in order to accommodate a prospective tenant at the retail plaza, two handicap parking spaces are being moved to the left of their present location.~ He noted the number of parking spaces at the site has not changed.~~
~
Board members reviewed a proposed Certificate of Action (COA).~ Mr. Andrade read the COA, and it was noted there were no conditions of acceptance.~ A motion was then made to approve the site plan entitled "Revised Parking Layout in Raynham, Massachusetts Owned by Brian J. McLaughlin, " dated October 25, 2004, as a minor modification.~ In response to a question from Mr. Canto, Mr. Schmid noted no bollards are needed because there is a brick wall along the front of the building.~ The motion was then seconded; motion passed by unanimous vote.~ Certificate of Action will be issued.
~
6:38 p.m. - Town Planner update:~ Mr. McCarthy informed the Board he will present the final subdivision revisions at the Board's November meeting.~ Mr. McCarthy suggested for future discussion a potential retreat by-law as well as possible zoning protection for unbuilt lots on an approved roadway to avoid the need for variances for such lots.~ Mr. McCarthy will research these matters for the December meetings.~
~
Mr. McCarthy informed the Board that the GIS version of the zoning map should be approved at the 2005 Town Meeting.~~
~
Mr. McCarthy informed the Board that their scheduled November 15th meeting will conflict with the Town Meeting.~ It was agreed the public hearings would be opened on the 15th but would be continued without testimony.~
~
During general discussion, Mr. Canto questioned whether or not the TDR by-law should be dissolved because it was not being utilized to its potential.~ After discussion, Board members agreed it was a good concept and will be kept on the books.~
~
Also discussed was the possibility of a two-stage site plan review in order to simplify the process for smaller projects.~ After discussion, Board members agreed that for small scale projects, site approval could first be done before a design review board with final approval coming from the Planning Board.~ Mr. McCarthy noted he is still considering the matter and will research it further.
~
7:00 p.m. - Chelsea Lane (located off Pleasant Street and Darrington Drive) public hearing was opened.~ Mr. Carlson read the hearing notice.~ Correspondence dated October 12, 2004 was received from Highway Superintendent Roger Stolte re. the proposed subdivision.~ Applicant Shawn Freeman appeared before the Board with the proposed two-lot subdivision plan.~ Mr. Freeman explained he wants to subdivide his existing Pleasant Street house lot to gain an additional lot that will have access off Darrington Drive.~ He noted he attempted to work with neighbors to gain additional property but could not reach an agreement so the proposed subdivision is his only option for creating an additional lot.~ Mr. Freeman stated he is looking for waivers from road construction.~
~
During discussion of the proposed plan, Board members noted that Campbell Court is an approved roadway but it is not built yet. There was discussion of whether or not Mr. Freeman had the right to access his lot through Campbell Court property.~ Mr. Gallagher stated there was case law that would prohibit Mr. Freeman from using Campbell Court because it is not built.~ Mr. Fountain was not sure and suggested Mr. Freeman obtain an attorney to research the matter further.~ Mr. Andrade said he would like to see a better plan presented to the Board for approval.~ Mr. Canto noted the plan seemed to be circumventing zoning and subdivision control laws.~ Mr. Carlson noted it might be a matter for the Board of Appeals.~ After further discussion, it was agreed the matter was complicated and should be researched.
~
Mr. Andrade asked if anyone present had questions or comments.~ Mr. Menice, an abutter, was present but said he had no questions or comments.~ Mr. Fountain then explained that Mr. Freeman should get an opinion on whether or not he has the right to use Campbell Court as access or frontage for his property.~ The public hearing was then continued to November 15, 2004, at 6:35 p.m.~
~
7:30 p.m. - Berry Hill (off Pleasant Street and Pine Street) public hearing was opened.~ Mr. Carlson read the hearing notice. Scott Faria of Gallagher Engineering, Foxboro, MA, and Fred Clark, representing applicant Walter Mirrione, were present.~ Planning Board member Chris Gallagher recused himself from the public hearing.~ A letter dated October 27, 2004 was received from the Town of Bridgewater Planning Board requesting a Traffic Impact Report for~the project, if available, due to the fact that the proposed subdivision borders a residential area of Bridgewater.~ After discussion, Mr. Faria agreed to forward all information regarding the project to the Bridgewater Planning Board.~
~
Mr. Faria reviewed the ARC plan for the Board, discussing the proposed roadways and drainage areas.~ He noted Mass. Highway Department (MHD) will not approve the drainage until the Town of Raynham approves it.~ He noted a clubhouse and pool are proposed for the development.~ He stated that except for the buffer area, most of the trees on site will be taken down.~ Mr. Faria explained that common driveways are planned for the site and an emergency access road to Pleasant Street will be provided with a breakaway gate and a fire hydrant.~
~
Correspondence dated October 27, 2004 was received from JNEI.~ Mr. Faria noted most of the issues in the 11-page review letter were either done or easily remedied, and he will be meeting with JNEI for further review of the issues.
~
Mr. Andrade asked if anyone present had comments or questions.~ Michael Mazzolini, 155 Pleasant Street, asked if percs were done.~ Mr. Faria said the perc tests were done and John Schmid stated he witnessed the tests.~ Mr. Mazzolini noted he talked to MHD engineering department and he thought they seemed skeptical about the proposed drainage.~ Mr. Faria stated he was told there was no problem but the drainage would need Town of Raynham approval first.~ After discussion, it was agreed that the development cannot be started until all approvals are received from the Town and the State.
~
Mr. Mazzolini stated he felt the proposed clear-cutting of trees was not within the neighborhood's character.~ Mr. Andrade noted that the Board will discuss issue during the public hearing process.
~
Wayne Arms, 425 Pine Street, asked how the Board could approve the project before the State approves it.~ He stated he felt all necessary permissions should be received before the project is allowed to start.~ He also stated he knew the land was not able to perc over the past 25 years.~ He noted both he and Mr. Mazzolini spoke to MHD regarding this project. Mr. Fountain noted sewer is now available to the property, which makes it a different situation than in the past.~ After a suggestion to send updated information on the project to the abutters, Board members agreed not to do that because all information is public record and available to anyone seeking it.~
~
Mr. Arms reiterated that he felt the State will not approve the project so the Board should not allow the project to start until permission is received from them.~~ Mr. Canto explained that a standard condition of the Board's approval is that all necessary permits are received before any project can begin
~
Clear-cutting of the trees was discussed.~ Mr. Carlson stated he was against it.~ John Schmid stated the design of the project requires the clear-cutting because much fill is needed.~ Mr. Schmid noted he has not yet seen the landscape plan.~ Mr. Faria then~reviewed the proposed landscape plan for the Board.~ He noted the interior of the site will be clear-cut but the buffer areas will not be touched.~ Mr. Schmid stated the landscape plan is not the same as what is shown of the definitive plan so that should be coordinated.
Mr. Faria then briefly reviewed a roadway cross-section plan.
~
In response to a question from Mr. Arms regarding noise from the highway traffic, Mr. Faria stated a sound barrier will be erected along the entire length of the project at the Rte. 495 side.~ Steve McDonald, Pleasant Street, questioned how well a sound barrier would work.~ Mr. Canto stated it would absorb the sound but there would be noise while the site is under construction.~
~
Chris Barnicle, 10 Heather Hills, Bridgewater, stated he felt the Board should consider the character of the neighborhood and issues such as traffic before approving the plan.~ Mr. Andrade noted the site is zoned industrial.~ Mr. McCarthy explained that a hotel, warehouse, manufacturing facility, filtration plant or other uses could be allowed by right on the site.
~
Mr. McDonald asked about the drainage.~ Mr. Schmid reviewed the proposed drainage, noting that if the State does not approve the drainage plan, the project will have to be revised.~ He also noted Mr. Stolte felt the drainage was acceptable.~ After discussion, Mr. Schmid agreed to research whether the drainage on Pleasant Street belonged to the Town or to the State.~ During discussion, Mr. Carlson again stated he was against clear-cutting the trees and he requested a specific landscaping plan be submitted.~
~
There was discussion about the proposed common driveways.~ Mr. Faria noted that depending on the style of houses sold, there is a possibility more driveways will be coming directly onto the street.~ Mr. Fountain said he is concerned with the number of common driveways proposed and the fire chief and police chief both had concerns regarding common driveways.~ Mr. Schmid agreed, noting too many could be unsafe.~ After discussion, it was agreed the number of common driveways should be held to what is specified on the plan and the applicant could return to the Board for a modification if necessary.~ Mr. Andrade suggested the fire department could review the common driveway issue.~ After discussion, Mr. Faria agreed the driveways would be as shown on the plan if the Board wanted that.
~
Waiver requests were discussed. During discussion, Board members agreed they were amenable to the proposed length of the street because it is boulevard style but a waiver must be sought from the street length requirement. Also discussed was curbing, the value of the project, on-street parking. After discussion, it was agreed that a detailed landscape plan is needed. During discussion, Board members expressed concerns with the height of the two-story houses so Mr. Faria agreed to bring floor plans of the proposed houses.
The sewer pump station was discussed.~ After discussion, it was agreed the pump station lot would be deeded to the Town and there would be additional sewer capacity for the Town from the station.
~
Mr. Schmid suggested the applicant present sound barrier specifications to the Board for approval.~ Mr. Faria agreed.~~ The public hearing was then continued to December 9, 2004, 7:15 p.m.~ Applicant agreed to provide a three-month extension of the Board's time-to-act.
~
8:32 p.m.~ Gatsby Gardens public hearing was reconvened.~ (Mr. Gallagher was not present.)~ Nyles Zagut, P.E., Outback Engineering, and Dick Kelly were present on behalf of the applicants.~ Correspondence dated October 27, 2004 was received from JNEI.~ Mr. Zagut informed the Board he had complied with previous JNEI review comments and he had met with John Schmid, Richard McCarthy and Roger Stolte to discuss the plan.~ He noted the land ownership issue was settled and the application form was signed by the additional property owner, the Tanguays.~ Mr. Zagut informed the Board that a new application was filed with the ConCom and the new wetland line was approved.~
~
John Schmid informed the Board that the only issues left to discuss were the waiver requests.~
~
Mr. Andrade asked if anyone present had any concerns.~ Mike Vendetti, Gatsby Drive, asked if the applicants, the Li's, owned the locus property or not and, if they did not own the property, would the design fit within the property they did own.~ Mr. Andrade explained the ownership issue was resolved when the abutting property owner signed the application.~ Mr. Schmid stated he believed the additional abutting property will be purchased if the plan is approved and the Board can approve the plan because all property owners have signed the form.
~
Tom Tanguay, owner of the additional property on the plan, asked if his land was not available, would the plan be acceptable.~ Mr. Schmid stated no, because all the land is needed for the project.
~
Board members then discussed the waiver requests from Sections 4.2, 4.15, 4.22, 4.23, 5.4, 5.6.2, 5.6.4, 5.7.6 and 6.0.~ During discussion, Board members agreed the surrounding condo units should be shown on the locus plan for informational purposes.~ Carmella Ferioli, Gatsby Drive, asked if the Board had seen the original Gatsby Drive plan indicating a limit on the number of units.~ Mr. McCarthy stated no.~ During discussion, it was noted that the road and drainage were originally proposed and approved with all the planned units in mind.~
~
Building elevation plans were reviewed and discussed.~ Mr. McCarthy requested a final architectural plan be submitted before a building permit is obtained.
~
Mr. Andrade read the waiver requests. The Board and Mr. Kelly discussed the waivers.~
~
After discussion, Board members agreed the building elevation plan was not to their satisfaction.~ After discussion, Board members agreed Cape Cod berm was acceptable on the plan.~ It was noted that utilities will be underground.~ A homeowners' association was discussed.~ It was noted that since there are two lots on the plan with separate utilities and parking areas, there will be two homeowners' associations.
~
After discussion, it was agreed the applicant will prepare an expanded locus plan showing the approximate location of all the buildings on both sides of Gatsby Drive and this shall be done before the plan is endorsed.~~ It was also agreed that building elevation plans shall be submitted at the time a building permit is issued and if the plans have changed drastically, no building permit will be issued.~ It was agreed that any deviation from or changes to the approved plan will be subject to a minor modification.
~
Mr. Schmid suggested that as a condition of approval, an ANR plan shall be submitted for the site.~ After discussion, a motion was made to accept the waivers as read with the conditions discussed for Gatsby Drive.
~
Mr. Vendetti then asked the Board why they were waiving the traffic study because people had concerns with traffic.~ Mr. Andrade noted that the original plan was approved for this extra development.
~
Mr. Tanguay told the Board that the site is higher than his property and he expressed concerns with the noise level and height issues.~ He requested a fence along his property to buffer the noise and sight.~ Mr. Schmid suggested the applicant might agree to a fence if he needed to buy Mr. Tanguay's land.
~
In response to a question from Mrs. Vendetti regarding landscaping, Mr. Zagut explained that arborvitae will be provided along the site’s front property line as a buffer.
~
It was noted by the Board that both parcels on the plan were dependent on a land transfer being done.~ The public hearing was then closed.~ A motion was made to approve the waivers; motion seconded; motion passed by unanimous vote (Mr. Gallagher not present.)
~
A proposed Certificate of Action was read into the record.~ A motion was made to accept the Gatsby Gardens site plan dated June 30, 2004, last revised October 25, 2004, as presented with the approved waivers and subject to the conditions as discussed and read; motion seconded; motion passed by unanimous vote.~ (Mr. Gallagher was not present.)~ Certificate of Action will be issued.
~
There was no further business and the meeting adjourned at 9:26 p.m.
~
Respectfully submitted,
Carl Carlson, Clerk
| 
