Town of Raynham, MA - Planning Board Minutes July 14, 2005

The Raynham Planning Board held a meeting on Thursday, July 14, 2005, at Raynham Town Hall.~ Chairman Daniel Andrade opened the meeting at 6:30 p.m. with Burke Fountain, John Canto, Chris Gallagher present.~ Also present were Town Planner Richard McCarthy, John Schmid of Judith Nitsch Engineering, Inc. (JNEI) and Administrative Assistant Maureen McKenney.~

6:34 p.m. - Joseph Zreibeck, P.E., of Pro-Line Engineering, Swansea, MA, presented a Form A plan for Karen Arruda, Raynham, MA.~ Mr. Zreibeck explained a new lot is being created from land owned by Josephine Arruda, Church Street.~ After review of the plan, motion was made to approve "Approval Not Required Plan A.P. 18 Lot 20 Church Street, Raynham, Massachusetts Prepared For Josephine Arruda 429 Church Street, Raynham, MA Prepared By Pro-Line Engineering,” dated July 6, 2005, as a plan not requiring subdivision approval; (Henry Ellis arrived) motion seconded; motion passed four votes in favor and Mr. Ellis abstained.~ The plan was endorsed.

6:40 p.m. - Chris Marchaselli, MPM Builders, presented a Form A plan for land on Fair Lane.~ Mr. Marchaselli reviewed the plan, noting a Land Court case involving the subject property was recently settled in his favor.~ After review, motion was made to approve "Form A Plan Of Land Lot 2, Fair Lane, Raynham, MA June 8, 2005," prepared by BDO Engineering, Mansfield, MA, as a plan not requiring subdivision approval; motion was seconded; motion passed by unanimous vote.~ The plan was signed.~ Mr. Andrade requested a copy of the plan be sent to the Cemetry Department for their records due to the fact that an old cemetery is located adjacent to the site.

6:50 p.m. - Nick Mirrione, Easton, MA, appeared before the Board to discuss King Estates subdivison (located off King Street).~ A Construction Cost Estimate (CCE), dated July 12, 2005, was received from JNEI, setting a surety bond amount of $276,125.~ John Schmid submitted a revised CCE, dated July 14, 2005, establishing a new bond amount of $232,783.~ After discussion of the CCE, it was agreed Mr. Schmid would conduct a site inspection to determine if the bond amount can be reduced to the July 14th revised amount.~ After discussion, motion was made to accept the surety bond estimate of $276,125 as set forth in the JNEI July 12, 2005 letter and to allow Town Planner Richard McCarthy to reduce the surety amount to not lower than the $232,783 amount set forth in the JNEI July 14, 2005 letter, if JNEI submits a letter that necessary work is completed; motion seconded; motion passed four in favor and Mr. Gallagher abstained.

Board members and Mr. Mirrione then discussed Berry Hill.~ A letter dated July 13, 2005 was received from Town Counsel Marc Antine re. Berry Hill surety bond.~ Board members and Mr. Mirrione discussed the concerns Attorney Antine has with the proposed surety bond.~ After discussion, it was agreed that because Berry Hill was approved under older subdivision regulations, Mr. Antine's comments do not apply to the new bond.~ After further discussion, Board members agreed they could accept the “B ++” rating of the bond if Mr. Antine approved of the bond.~ Mr. Schmid then explained to the Board that Mr. Mirrione wants to replace the existing cash passbook surety funds being held for Phase I of Berry Hill with a new surety bond to cover Phase I and Phase II of Berry Hill.~ Mr. Schmid noted the remaining value of work to be completed is in the new CCE.~ Mr. Schmid agreed to issue a new letter to reflect the value of Phase I and II work.

After discussion, motion was made to accept a bond with a ratng of “B ++” ; motion seconded; motion passed three in favor, Mr. Canto, opposed and Mr. Gallagher abstained.~ During discussion, it was noted that Massachusetts’ statutes require a bond be allowed as surety.~ Board members agreed the bond should match up with the completion date for the subdivision, and the dates on the Certificate of Action and Special Permit should coincide with the bond.~ It was further agreed that if the bond rating drops to a "B," the Board should take action after consulting Town Counsel.~ Motion was then made to allow Marc Antine as authority on the bond wording and documentation; motion seconded; motion passed four in favor and Mr. Gallagher abstained.~

Mr. Mirrione asked the Board if they would consider lowering the cost estimate on the July 11, 2005 JNEI Construction Cost Estimate for Berry Hill because he feels it is too high.~ After discussion, it was agreed the estimate would not be reduced and Mr. Mirrione should proceed as discussed at a previous Board meeting.

7:20 p.m. - Public hearing for Bassett Knoll Estates preliminary subdivision plan was opened.~ Mr. Gallagher read the hearing notice.~ Mike Carter, P.E., of GCG Associates presented the plan.~ It was noted applicant Donald Shute was not present.~ Mr. Carter reviewed the plan, noting the wetland line was reflagged.~ Mr. Gallagher explained the history of the old Bassett Knoll subdivision plan.~ He noted there is a fee reserved on Paddock Road; Mr. Carter said he would research that issue.~

Letter dated June 27, 2005, was received from the Highway Department and letter dated July 12, 2005, was received from JNEI.~ John Schmid spoke about the plan, noting the wetlands were flagged but not approved, the detention basins need to be located on their own parcels, and the number of lots may be reduced after wetland delineation.~ Mr. Carter presented a cluster plan with 75 lots, including 7 affordable lots.~ Mr. Andrade noted the plan did not look like a typical cluster plan.~ Mr. Ellis noted he liked the cluster design.~ During discussion, it was suggested that a plan with part cluster and part conventional lots could be considered.~~~ Board members agreed to view Whippoorwill Estates and SteepleChase subdivisions before deciding on a design.~

Mr. Andrade asked if anyone present had comments or questions.~ Bill Vareika, Robinson Street, asked if the Board considered the effect of a cluster on the Town's infrastructure.~ Mr. Andrade explained that a cluster design would reduce the paved roadway and that it was possible the number of lots would be reduced during Conservation Commission approval.~ During discussion, it was noted the only issue that could stop the proposed development would be sewer.

Joan Kellogg, Locust Street, spoke about her concerns that the development would effect her well, would increase traffic and there would be no buffer for noise if trees on the site were cut.

Dave Caron, 134 Paddock Road, questioned what "dotted lines" on the plan indicated.~ Mr. Carter explained they were water and sewer lines.~ Mr. Caron asked about the elevation of retention ponds; Mr. Carter noted they were not designed yet but they will meet separation standards.~ Mr. Caron noted that if unusable land was being given back to the Town as part of the open space/cluster plan that was of no benefit.~ Mr. Andrade stated that 34 acres of upland will be given back.~

Greg Windsor, 292 Locust Street, had questions about sewer lines on Locust Street.~ Mr. Andrade noted that was a Sewer Department issue.~~ Mr. Windsor asked about the approval process for plan.~ Mr. Schmid explained the Board does not typically act on a preliminary plan but does make comments and suggestions on it.~ He noted the applicant has seven months to submit a definitive if he chooses to.

Mr. McCarthy advised the Board they should indicate if they approve of the cluster design so the applicant will know how to proceed.~ Mr. Andrade said he was not comfortable doing that yet, Mr. Gallagher stated he wanted the ANRAD to be met but he will be reserving his opinion, Mr. Fountain noted he needed to see more information but he was doubtful about the plan so far, Mr. Ellis stated he would like to know how the neighbors feel about the cluster, and Mr. Canto said he was not sure yet.~

8:16 p.m.~ Special Permit public hearing for parking reduction for the EuroTech/Broadway site plan was opened.~ Mr. Fountain read the notice.~ A request for continuance of the hearing was received.~ After discussion, the hearing was continued to August 11, 2005, 7:25 p.m.~ After further discussion, the hearing was continued to July 25, 2005, at 6 p.m. at Gilmore Hall in order to extend the time-to-act only.

8:20 p.m. Public hearing for Butler's Way preliminary subdivision was reconvened.~ David Butler was present and requested a hearing continuance.~ He explained he will be going to the Board of Appeals with a variance request.~ The hearing was continued to October 13, 2005, 7:15 p.m.

8:24 p.m. -~Public hearing for Greyhound Industrial Park preliminary subdivision plan (Broadway) was reconvened.~ Attorney Michael Morrizzio and Craig Horsfall, P.E., Hayward-Boynton & Williams (HBW) were present.~ Attorney Morrizzio reviewed the plan and discussed the proposed curb cuts on Broadway.~ Mr. Andrade stated the Board needed more information and data regarding traffic issues for the proposed uses on the site.~ Mr. Ellis noted the traffic data should take the Wal-Mart, Rozenas and other sites into consideration.~

Mr. Andrade questioned why the existing site plan for this property could not be modified to incorporate the proposed lots.~ Attorney Morrizzio stated there were different owners of the properties.~ Mr. Andrade noted the owners were within the same family.~ Mr. Canto stated if a site plan modification was done, there might not be public input.~ Mr. Schmid noted that through the subdivision process, the road standards must be met.~ Attorney Morrizzio indicated they preferred to proceed with the subdivision process as the mechanism and requested JNEI bring in traffic advisors to comment on the issues.~ After discussion, the hearing was continued to August 25, 2005, 7 p.m.

Mr. Andrade asked if anyone present had comments or questions.~ Bill Vareika, Robinson Street, asked the project be pushed away from Robinson Street because the plan will make the traffic worse in the area.~ Mr. Andrade noted they will be getting the traffic situation analyzed.~ Mr. Vareika asked if the dog track got a break in taxes.~ Attorney Morrizzio stated the dog track paid over 4 million dollars in taxes last year.~ Mr. McCarthy noted the track does not qualify for tax reductions.

Henry Jaskola, 1916 Broadway, asked how wide the buffer would be.~ Mr. Canto noted that was at the Board’s discretion and 25 feet might not be wide enough.~ During discussion, it was agreed that John Schmid would look into whether or not the Wal-Mart traffic study was part of the MEPA study for this site.

Attorney Morrizzio next discussed the proposed solid waste transfer station plan for this site.~ He stated the plan is presently before DEP and the proposed facility is not subject to zoning and site plan review because it is exempt by state law.~ He requested that because the administrative filing fee for the site plan will be over $20,000, the plan be filed with a fee for the office building only.~ Mr. Andrade suggested filing the plan with the proper fee and then requesting a waiver from the Board.

8:25~p. m. - 1958 Broadway/Wastewater Treatment Plant site plan modification was presented by applicant Bob Kelley.~ He explained the proposed changes to the approved plan:~ the covered truck loading area will be reduced and relocated; the transfer pad will be relocated; the lime silo pad will be moved; two tanks will be moved; one tank is eliminated; CO2 tank is reduced and~relocated; an above-ground oil tank is proposed; a water meter shed will be relocated; and some site utilites will be moved.

Review correspondence, dated July 14, 2005, was received from JNEI.~ Mr. Schmid informed the Board there were no significant issues with the plan.~ Mr. Kelley explained the proper permits for the site would be obtained.~ It was noted the building is up but the proposed changes have not yet been made.~~ After discussion, motion was made to accept and approve the requested site plan changes as a minor modification, as set forth in the July 14, 2005, JNEI letter; motion seconded; motion passed on unanimous vote.~ Bill Vareika asked if the plan was accepted.~ Mr. Andrade explained it was accepted as modified.

9:03 p.m. - Keith Wrigley, South Street East, and Gary Wilson of Johnson & Johnson (J & J), appeared before the Board to discuss noise issues at Mr. Wrigley's property.~ Mr. McCarthy explained the noise coming from J & J has been an ongoing problem for Mr. Wrigley, who says the noise is still intrusive even after changes have been made by J & J.~

Mr. Wilson informed the Board it was determined the noise level was over the allowable limit, and he has been working with Mr. Wrigley to resolve the problem and will continue to do so.~ He noted speed bumps were removed, which eliminated some truck noise, bearings on dust allocaters were replaced and 2" thick soundproofing has been installed on dust collectors and blowers.~ He noted a problem was discovered with compressors and a wall was placed around them.~ Mr. Wrigley stated although J & J has been working on the problem, the noise is still very bothersome.~ He noted he can see the J & J building now because trees have been removed.

After discussion, it was agreed JNEI would get involved with the situation.~ John Schmid will investigate barrier walls as an option.~ The matter was continued to August 25, 2005, 7:10 p.m.

9:20 p.m. - Modification to the approved Largo Realty/Shaw's-Ames site plan was presented by Craig Horsfall, P.E., HBW, and Sofia~Sarafoglou of Largo Realty.~ (Mr. Ellis left the meeting.)~ Mr. Horsfall explained the proposed modification to Marshall's, noting a 6,184 sq. ft. addition is planned to the rear of the building, the rear loading docks will be relocated and 36 additional parking spaces will be needed.~~

Mr. Andrade stated he was concerned with the impact of the addition on the adjacent abutter.~ Board members discussed alternatives to the plan to protect the abutting residential property.~ They agreed a buffer was needed between the commercial and residential sites.~ After further discussion, Board members agreed the proposed plan should go through site plan approval.~ Motion was made that the plan submitted from Largo Realty for #300 Rte. 44, Marshall's building expansion, does not come under the minor modification rule and will require full public hearing; motion seconded; motion passed by unanimous vote.

Mr. Horsfall asked if the Board was agreeable to the parking spaces on the side of the parking lot being restriped as shown on the plan.~ After discussion, Board members stated the restriping was okay if the spaces met the proper criteria.~ They noted they preferred the spaces to be wider than compact spaces as proposed and a special permit would be needed for any parking reduction.~~

9:47 p.m. - Brian Mulligan, developer of Village at Foxwoods subdivision (off Carver Street) appeared before the Board to discuss lot releases at Foxwoods.~ Construction Cost Estimate, dated July 11, 2005, from JNEI, and letter dated June 27, 2005, from Highway Superintendent Roger Stolte, were received.~ Mr. Mulligan informed the Board the sewer extension permit was finalized by the State so he wants to build one house at this time.~ During discussion, it was noted that all subdivision work will be bonded but all off site drainage work being done on Carver Street for the Town will not be bonded.~ After discussion, the Board and Mr. Mulligan agreed lots 1 through 7 will be released and two lots will be held back as additional security.~

Mr. Mulligan submitted a Tri-Partite Agreement with Mechanics Cooperative Bank as surety.~ Mr. McCarthy suggested the Board could sign the Form J for the lot releases and hold it in escrow until Town Counsel approves the Tri-Partite Agreement.~ After discussion, motion was made that subject to review and approval by Town Counsel, the Planning Board release Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 in exchange for security per the Lender's Agreement holding the developer and Mechanics Cooperative Bank to $166,931, as set forth in the July 11, 2005 Construction Cost Estimate by JNEI; motion seconded; the motion was then amended to add the Form L or substantially similar form be recorded at the Registry of Deeds after approval by Burke Fountain; amended motion then passed by unanimous vote.~ The Agreement and Form J were signed.

General Business:~ Mr. Canto questioned what the Board could do about the site violations at Munro Electric.~ It was agreed to wait until the full Board was present to discuss.~~ Mr. McCarthy informed the Board the Zoning Enforcement Officer will be issuing violations notices to businesses not in compliance with zoning issues.

Letter dated June 16, 2005, to Richard McCarthy from Attorney Robert Shelmerdine was received along with a Memo of Understanding re. work to be done to correct storm water run-off problems at Locust Woods that effect Whippoorwill Estates.~ No action was taken.~

A revised letter, dated July 14, 2005, was received from Russell Grabau authorizing the withdrawal of funds from the Everett Drive/Locust Woods bond.~ The funds will be held by the Town as payment towards the drainage work to be done at Locust Woods.

Memorandum was received from JNEI, dated June 23, 2005, re. MD Cabinety as-built plan review.~ After discussion, motion was made to release all funds being held for M.D. Cabinetry, if all bills and all review fees are paid; motion seconded; motion passed by unanimous vote.

Mr. Fountain informed Board members he would like a regulation in place dealingwith acoustics, and he would like the Board to consider a better standard for parking spaces.~~ It was agreed to discuss it further at another meeting.