The Raynham Planning Board meeting of June 8, 2006, opened at 6:30 p.m. with Daniel Andrade, Burke Fountain, John Canto, Chris Gallagher and Henry Ellis present.~ Also present were Town Planner Richard McCarthy, John Schmid of Judith Nitsch Engineering, Inc. (JNEI) and Administrative Assistant Maureen McKenney.
6:30 p.m. - A scheduled Form J was tabled to a later date because no one appeared on the matter.
6:32 p.m. - Form A plan for land on Elm Street East, owned by Henry and Judith Ellis, was presented.~ Board member Henry Ellis recused himself from the matter.~ Proper application and fee were submitted.~ The plan was reviewed.~ During review, it was noted two variances were sought and granted for the property.~ After review, motion was made to accept the plan entitled "Approval Not Required Plan of Land Located In Raynham, MA Prepared for Henry C. & Judith S. Ellis," dated May 22, 2006 and prepared by Sitec, Inc., as a plan not requiring subdivision approval based on the variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals as set forth on the plan; motion seconded; motion passed by unanimous vote of the four members present with Mr. Ellis abstaining.~ Mr. Gallagher signed the plan.
Board members briefly discussed the matter of applicants being required to submit recording slips from the Registry of Deeds so there will be a record for the Board’s files.~ No action was taken.
6:42 p.m. - Public hearing for George Estates subdivision (located off Judson Street) was reconvened.~ Mr. Fountain recused himself and left the meeting table.~ It was noted the hearing was opened on May 25, 2006, with no testimony taken.~ Dan Aguiar, P.E., Sitec, Inc., applicant Larry George and Joe Arruda were present.~ Project review correspondence, dated June 6, 2006, was received from JNEI.~
Mr. Arruda briefly described the locus property for Board.~ He noted the requested waivers have not been submitted yet but a waiver from the road length requirement will be needed.~ John Schmid noted that most comments in the review letter necessitated only minor plan changes.~ He noted the drainage issues must be discussed with Conservation Agent Erika Ueberbacher, Highway Superintendent Roger Stolte and Building Commissioner Rod Palmer.~ He noted the sidewalk waiver and Judson Street drainage extension should be discussed.
Mr. Aguiar told the Board he was not sure about the possibility of the applicant extending sewer lines to the project.~ Mr. Andrade stated that if septic is proposed, the plan must show elevations, contours, grading and related items.~ He suggested that JNEI review the sewer/septic issue further.~ Mr. Aguiar noted that the plan is designed to accommodate both sewer and septic.~
Waivers were discussed.~ Sidewalks with and without grass strips were discussed.~ Vertical and sloped granite curbing was discussed.~ Mr. Aguiar noted he will be asking for a waiver for sloped granite.~ Mr. Arruda noted that the police and fire departments do not want vertical curbing so a waiver will be requested.~ Mr. Aguiar said he would change the plan to indicate sloped granite with a waiver request.~ Mr. Canto noted he was favorable to vertical curbing at the house lots and sloped curbing where no houses are planned.~ Mr. McCarthy noted the new Board standard for curbing is vertical.~ Mr. Andrade said he was concerned that the Board spent months working on new subdivision regulations that may now be waived.~~Mr. McCarthy told the Board that sloped rather than vertical curbing was proposed in exchange for work to be done off site on
Judson Street for the Town.
Letter dated May 8, 2006 was received from Highway Superintendent Roger Stolte.~ Mr. Andrade noted the letter is generic.~ Mr. Gallagher stated he did not agree with half of the letter. Mr. Andrade again noted the subdivision regulations were approved after many months of work.~ Mr. Aguiar explained that sloped curbing was planned because of mitigation work that was to be done.
Mr. Canto asked if there are drainage or flooding issues at the site.~ Mr. Aguiar stated no.
Mr. Andrade asked Mr. Schmid his opinion on grass strips at the sidewalks and sloped curbing.~ Mr. Schmid stated that sloped granite came as a result of discussion about off site Judson Street improvements and he understood the Board's frustration with the regulations and waivers.~ Mr. Ellis noted the Board would need to see the cost of sloped vs. vertical curbing before making decisions.~ After discussion of the grass strips in the sidewalks, Mr. Andrade stated he wanted the grass strips and Mr. Ellis agreed.~ Mr. McCarthy said he was not sure the drainage proposed off Judson Street is the best solution for the Town.~ Mr. Andrade noted it is not Mr. Stolte's decision to decide waivers or mitigation and the applicant should follow the regulations.~ Mr. McCarthy noted Mr. Stolte liked vertical curbing but he was considering the sloped curbing
because of the mitigation.~ Mr. Gallagher said he was agreeable to sloped curbing but not because of the mitigation.~ He noted the grass strip on the sidewalks should be wider than 2 feet proposed.~ Mr. Andrade stated that if vertical curbing is planned, a grass strip is needed.~ Mr. Aguiar said he will talk to Mr. Stolte further.
Mr. Arruda explained the problems involved with having grass strips in sidewalks, noting the sidewalks become difficult to maintain.~ Mr. Andrade suggested the regulations should be changed if it is a problem for others as well.~ After further discussion of sidewalks and grass strips, Board members agreed the applicant could request any waiver that he wanted.~ Mr. Andrade stated~that if grass strips are not required now he may not require them in the future.~ Mr. Ellis suggested leaving the issue open at this time.~ After further discussion, Board members agreed the sidewalk in the subdivision should be located all the way around the cul-de-sac.
The type of fencing around the basin was discussed.~ Mr. Aguiar noted the Conservation Commission wants a post-and-rail fence.~ Board members noted the post-and-rail fence was not helpful for safety.~ After discussion, they agreed a four feet post-and-rail fence with backing is acceptable.~ Mr. Ellis expressed liability concerns for the Town with the type of fence.~ Mr. George stated he would keep the basin private and not deed it to the Town.~ Mr. McCarthy suggested talking to Town Counsel regarding the liability issue.~ Mr. Andrade suggested the applicant present a safe solution to the problem.
After discussion, it was agreed another design review meeting with conservation agent and highway superintendent is needed for the plan.~ Mr. Gallagher offered to attend the review meeting.~~ Mr. McCarthy said he would invite Mr. Cabral of the sewer department to attend.~ The public hearing was continued to June 22, 2006, 7:30 p.m.
7:45 p.m. - Public hearing for Norway Wood preliminary subdivision (located off Raymond Avenue) was reconvened.~ Request for a continuance was received from applicant Philip Martin.~ After discussion, the hearing was continued to July 22, 2006, 7 p.m.
7:47 p.m. - Public hearing for “Greyhound Industrial Park” (Rte. 138) preliminary subdivision plan was opened.~ Mr. Gallagher read the hearing notice.~ Tom Pozerski, P.E., of Hayward-Boynton Williams, and Attorney Michael Morrizzio were present for the applicant.~ Attorney Morrizzio explained that a previous preliminary subdivision plan was presented to the Board and at that time access to the racetrack from Route 138 was an issue.~ Attorney Morrizzio explained that the process with Mass. Highway for street openings along Route 138 is still ongoing and if a permit for an opening on Route 138 is received from Mass. Highway, the access being shown on the plan will be an exit only.~ He stated the applicant will go forward with the proposed plan.
Mr. McCarthy asked why a preliminary plan is needed.~ Attorney Morrizzio explained it is being done to change boundary lines.~ During discussion, the following was noted:~ there is presently a fence in the area proposed for an opening, there will be signage if the access is changed to exit only, the existing openings will be narrowed by the proposed plan, and all three lots shown on the plan exist with frontage on Route 138.
Mr. Pozerski reviewed the proposed plan for the Board.~ He noted the lots comply with zoning, the lots do exist as shown, and the intent of the plan is for traffic safety and to allow trucks to access the back of the lot properly.~ He noted the right-of-way shown will be private, a two-way collector road is shown but eventually it will be a one-way road and there are no sidewalks proposed.
Board members discussed whether or not the proposed plan will be a modification to the approved site plan for the septic plan.~ Attorney Morrizzio stated no change to the septic facility site plan is proposed.~
Traffic issues and "funneling" of traffic on site were discussed.~ Mr. Canto noted the proposed plan does not solve traffic issues that need to be addressed.~ Mr. Ellis stated he would like JNEI to review the plan.~~~
The ownership of Lots 1 and 2 was discussed.~ Attorney Morrizzio explained that the lots were held in separate ownership for frontage for possible future use.
Paul Kelley of Ryan Iron informed the Board that the location of Ryan Drive and Ryan Ironworks was shown incorrectly on the plan and he would like to see it corrected.~ Mr. Pozerski said he would make the proper correction.~ Mr. Kelley stated the purpose of the plan is to access the trash facility site.
Bill Vareika, 313 Robinson Street, stated the plan plan was pouring traffic out across from Robinson Street and that did not solve any problems.
~
Attorney Morrizzio stated that waivers for the plan are worthwhile if improvements are made.~ He noted the applicant cannot move the proposed roadway 250 feet towards the gas station because of the loss of business so the plan would not be worthwhile then.~ Mr. Schmid stated he measured the distance and the gas station would not be lost if the road is moved.
Mr. Andrade said a solution is needed for all of the property and he would not approve improvements within 250 feet of Robinson Street.~ Mr. Fountain stated the plan did not comply with subdivision rules and the road design was terrible.~ After discussion, Board members agreed Mr. McCarthy should send a letter to Mass. Highway asking that the Board be included in their discussions with the applicant regarding improvements to this site.~ After discussion, the public hearing was continued to August 10, 2006. The Board's time-to-act was extended.
8:47 p.m. - Tom Pozerski, P.E., Hayward-Boynton & Williams presented a minor modification for the approved Mastria Nissan Route 44 site plan (1305 Route 44).~ Mr. Pozerski explained that a slope on the site needed stabilization and a 5-feet to 6-feet retaining wall is proposed.~ During discussion, it was noted Conservation Commission has approved the wall.~ After discussion, it was agreed the retaining wall should show a railing because it is over 4 feet in height.
John Schmid noted he has not seen the plan.~ He asked if there was any change to drainage.~ After discussion, it was agreed that Mr. Schmid will review the modification with the original plan.~ The matter was continued to June 22, 2006.
8:55 p.m. - Kevin Mello, Premier Construction, presented a minor modification to the approved Garcia Dental (Paramount Drive) site plan.~ Correspondence dated June 8, 2006 was received from Dave Medeiros of East Coast Dental Design explaining the proposed changes to the site plan.~ During discussion, it was noted more plantings are now being proposed.~ After discussion, motion was made to approve the minor modification of the landscaping for Garcia Dental site plan as presented by Premier Construction; motion seconded; motion passed by unanimous vote.
9:00 p.m. - General Business:~ Correspondence dated June 5, 2006 was received from JNEI re. the approved RNR Plastics (Bellows Road) site plan.~ After review, the plan was endorsed.~
Correspondence dated May 11, 2006 was received from Attorney David P. Frenette informing the Board the special permit for Carriage Hill subdivision was recorded and a Stipulation of Dismissal was sent to Town Counsel Marc Antine.~ No action was taken.
Board members discussed endorsement of Richmond Street/7th Day Adventist Church site plan and Roger's Way subdivision plan.~ After discussion, the matter was tabled to June 22, 2006.
The matter of the Town improving Tearall Road was discussed.~ Mr. Fountain suggested the Board request the improvements be made to Tearall Road rather than individuals coming before the Board with plans.~ Mr. Andrade stated he was agreeable to improvements if everyone can access the road.~~ No action was taken.
There was no further business and the meeting adjourned at 9:15 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Chris Gallagher, Clerk
| 
