The Raynham Planning Board meeting of June 22, 2006 opened at 6:30 p.m., at Raynham Town Hall, with Daniel Andrade, Burke Fountain, John Canto and Henry Ellis present.~ Also present were Town Planner Richard McCarthy and John Schmid of Judith Nitsch Engineering, Inc. (JNEI).
6:30 p.m. - Form A plan for land at 1084 Broadway was presented by Dave Dunham, Raynham Main, LLC.~ Lisa Dunham informed the Board she submitted the Form A application and fee to the Town Clerk; however, it was noted there was no Municipal Lien Certificate with the application.~ Mr. Dunham explained the plan, noting there is no subdivision of the land, the plan meets frontage by Raynham zoning by-laws standards and by case law of Fenn v. Middleboro.~ Mr. Dunham provided the Board with a copy of the case law he cited.
During discussion of the plan, it was noted that access to the locus property is provided by easement from Mass. Highway.~ Mr. Dunham stated that frontage to the site was along Route 495.~ Mr. Fountain stated he believes there no real frontage but only illusory frontage, which is not adequate.~~~
Mr. McCarthy noted he disagrees with Mr. Dunham's interpretation of the matter and that the lot is not entitled to ANR endorsement but rather a variance is needed to utilize the property.~ Mr. McCarthy noted Route 495 is limited access highway frontage.
Mr. Dunham explained that years ago Mass. Highway created the locus lot with ANR plan qualifications in mind.~
After discussion, Mr. Andrade said he did not want to approve the plan tonight.~ Mr. Fountain said he thinks the land does not meet Raynham zoning frontage standards.~ Mr. Canto noted a road way or access way must be certified by the Town Clerk as a public way to meet zoning standards for frontage.
After discussion, the Board agreed to seek an opinion from Town Counsel on the matter of the frontage.~ Mr. Dunham signed an extension of time-to-act and the matter was continued to July 27, 2006.~~
6:45 p.m.~ - Mr. Andrade announced to those present that the Bella Estates public hearing would be continued when it was opened later in the meeting.
6:45 p.m. - Joe Pacheco of the Route 138 zoning study committee appeared before the Board to update them on the committee's activities.~ He explained that the committee was discussing possible zoning changes for Route 138 and they were considering creating a use table similar to the one used in the town of Carver.~
Mr. McCarthy explained the goal is to create one use table for all zoning districts and uses in order to consolidate the by-laws so they will be more defined with better categories.~ Mr. Fountain suggested a special meeting of the Planning Board and the Rte. 138 committee to discuss the issue, and Mr. McCarthy agreed with the idea.~ During discussion, it was noted that SRPEDD is providing input on the zoning study and perhaps they could attend a joint meeting also.~ After further discussion, it was agreed that Planning Board members could attend the Rte. 138 committee meeting on Monday, July 17th, at 5:15 p.m. at Town Hall.
7:00 p.m. - Bella Estates (located off Hill Street) special permit and site plan public hearing was opened.~ Mr. Ellis read the hearing notice.~ He noted a request for continuance was received from the applicant.~ It was noted the time-to-act on the plan is July 15, 2006.
After discussion, motion was made to have a special meeting at the Highway Department offices on June 28, 2006, at 6 p.m.; motion seconded; motion passed by unanimous vote.~ The public hearing for Bella Estates was then continued to June 28, 2006, 6 p.m., at Highway Department building on King Philip Street, in order to get an extension on the Board's time-to-act for Bella Estates.~ It was noted the public hearing will be continued to July 27, 2006, at 7 p.m., if an extension is signed.~ Mr. Andrade noted he will not vote to approve the Bella Estates plan on June 28th if no extension is granted.~
Marcia Goslin, Hill Street, questioned if there was a problem with the paperwork for Bella Estates.~ Mr. Andrade explained the time-to-act extension was not filled out properly.~ He noted the Board was required to open the public hearing even though a request for continuance was received.
Mr. Smith, Hill Street, asked if it is correct that people do not need to go to the Highway Department building on June 28th because the hearing will just be continued.~ Mr. Andrade stated that was correct.~~ Mrs. Smith, Hill Street, asked if the Board could continue the hearing again on July 27th.~ Mr. Andrade stated that was correct.~ Board members suggested the public contact Mr. McCarthy to check on the status of the hearing.~ No testimony was taken on Bella Estates special permit/site plan.
7:15 p.m. - Ryan Drive subdivision (located off Broadway) plan public hearing was reconvened.~ Joe Harnois, P.E., Coneco Engineers and Scientists, appeared before the Board on behalf of the applicant. Review correspondence dated June 5, 2006 was received from JNEI.
Board members discussed the draft Certificate of Action (COA) that was prepared.~ Mr. Harnois noted there is an improved entranceway shown on the plan.~ John Schmid confirmed that was correct and he noted the entrance must be constructed as previously approved before any work from the site plan is done.~ Board members agreed there should be a condition on the COA regarding the entranceway.~
Board members and Mr. Harnois discussed surety funds for the subdivision plan.~ Mr. Harnois stated he was not sure what form of surety the applicant would be submitting.~ Conditions of approval were discussed.~ Motion was made to waive reading of the Certificate of Action; motion seconded; motion passed by unanimous vote.
Waiver requests were discussed.~ Mr. Fountain noted he visited Ryan Drive and he found it to be in awful condition so he would not vote for anything else at the site until the roadway is improved to current standards.~ Mr. Ellis agreed, noting he also visited the site.~ Motion was made to approve the waivers as set forth on the cover sheet of the plan; motion seconded; motion passed by unanimous vote.~
Motion was made to approve the plan and the Certificate of Action as set forth in the June 26, 2006 rough COA draft with the waivers attached; motion seconded; motion passed by unanimous vote.~ Certificate of Action will be issued.
Proposed modification to Berry Hill Adult Retirement Community (located off Pine Street) plan was discussed.~~ During discussion, it was noted a modified site plan is being prepared to move the location of the swimming pool and to add stonewalls at the site entrance.~ It was noted there will be only a small change to the drainage at the site entrance and there will be no change to the parking.~ John Schmid informed the Board he is agreeable to the proposed modifications and considers the changes as minor modifications to the approved plan.~ The Board was agreeable to the modified plan being presented at their August meeting.
North Light Realty Trust/Rte. 44 (adjacent to Meineike/1555 Rte. 44) site plan public hearing was opened.~ Attorney Edmund Brennan, Taunton, MA, was present as applicant's representative.~ He requested that the hearing be continued to July 27, 2006 because there were only four voting members present tonight.~ Board members agreed no testimony would be taken.
Mr. Ellis asked those present if anyone was notified of the continuance, and someone answered no.~ Mr. Ellis noted the Board previously promised an abutter's attorney that they would be notified of continuances in order to avoid a long drive to the meeting.~~ Attorney Brennan explained that he attempted to find Attorney Jeff Jones but was not able to do so.~ He noted he did not notify Mr. Coletti, owner of the property.~ Mr. Colletti informed the Board that his attorney is Attorney William Pizzone.~ After discussion, Attorney Brennan agreed to notify abutters and/or their representatives of any further continuances.~ He noted that his name appeared in the hearing notice and he can be contacted if needed.
Mr. Ellis read the North Light Trust/Rte. 44 site plan public hearing notice.~ After discussion, the public hearing was continued to July 27, 2006, 7:30 p.m.~ No testimony was taken.
Public hearing for George Estates (located off Judson Street) subdivision was reconvened.~ Request for continuance was received from applicant Joseph Arruda.~ Mr. Andrade noted there are many outstanding issues with the plan and the applicant had previously indicated he was not going to fulfill some of the Board's requests.~ John Schmid explained there was a design review meeting recently and the applicant is now moving towards completing some of the issues.~ Mr. McCarthy agreed with Mr. Schmid, noting that the five-feet grass strips in the sidewalks are no longer an issue.~
John Canto suggested Board members visit Mary Lou Court to view the granite mail stands in the sidewalks.~ He noted the mail stands looked good but he questioned if they could be a hazardous.~ After discussion, the George Estates public hearing was continued to July 27, 2006, 7:45 p.m. No testimony was taken.
Mastria Nissan/1305 Rte. 44 site plan was presented for minor modification.~ Review correspondence, dated June 20, 2006, was received from JNEI.~ John Schmid noted he reviewed the proposed modification and found no objections to it.~ The modification to the drainage was discussed.~ Mr. Andrade noted he had no objection to the proposed drainage modification but he reminded the Board that there were residents at a recent meeting who voiced concerns with drainage problems in the Hill Street/Paramount Drive that is near this site.
Mr. Fountain explained that he spoke to Conservation Commission agent Erika Ueberbacher and she informed him that a stream behind Hill Street had been destroyed by unknown persons and that property markers had been moved, which was part of the reason area residents had problems and concerns.~ Mr. Schmid noted that the residents were concerned with drainage problems coming out of Paramount Woods.~ Mr. Andrade noted the Board has been trying to address the drainage issues at Paramount Woods.
The Board discussed the second proposed modification to the Mastria Nissan site plan, construction of a retaining wall.~ During discussion, it was noted Mastria Nissan has a 36-month temporary limit to operate on this site before having to return to the Board for full site plan approval.~
Mr. Canto noted he was concerned with the retaining wall being built because it separates the corner of the property and might lead to another use on the piece.~ Mr. McCarthy noted the owner would need to return to the Board for new site plan approval if any other use of the property is proposed.~
Mr. Andrade questioned if the trees on site are being maintained as approved, noting that he wants no adverse effect from the proposed retaining wall.~ John Schmid said he did not know about the trees.~ During discussion of the retaining wall, Mr. McCarthy noted that if "redi-rock" is being used on the wall that will be acceptable but if another type of material is used that could be a problem and the applicant must come to the Board for approval.~
Mr. Canto stated he was not happy with the proposed retaining wall and he would not vote for it because it separates the property.~ Mr. Ellis questioned why the land could not be left sloped, noting he did not see the need for the retaining wall.~
After discussion, motion was made to approve the minor modification for the drainage as presented on plan entitled "Nissan Grading/Utility, Lot 18, Cape Highway (Route 44) Raynham, MA,” dated January 25, 2006, revised through June 15, 2006, prepared by Hayward-Boynton & Williams, Inc.; motion seconded.~ During discussion of the motion, Mr. Fountain asked the project engineer if he wished to reconsider the plan.~ The project engineer noted that there was mention of the landscaping at the site being changed in the interim.~ Mr. Andrade noted that change was not presented as a modification.~ It was noted that the drainage modification was presented and was reviewed by John Schmid and Mr. Schmid had informed the Board there is no change to Hill Street or to the downstream area from this proposed change.~ Vote was then taken on the
motion.~ Motion to approve the drainage modification passed by unanimous vote.~
Motion was made to approve the proposed modification to rebuild a redi-rock retaining wall or approve equal other material on the east side of the property as shown on the plan entitled "Nissan Grading/Utility, Lot 18, Cape Highway (Route 44) Raynham, MA,” dated January 25, 2006, revised through June 15, 2006, prepared by Hayward-Boynton & Williams, Inc.; motion seconded.~ During discussion of the motion, Mr. Fountain said he wanted to review what the Board had done with the site plan at the corner lot.~ There was further discussion of the proposed retaining wall.~ Vote was taken on the motion to approve the wall as requested.~ Motion to approve failed to carry by unanimous no vote.~ Board members noted the applicant could return with a new request for modification.
In answer to Mr. Fountain's earlier question, Mr. McCarthy explained that in March 2005 a Certificate of Action was issued to M.T. Lot, LLC, for use of the locus lot for a maximum of 36 months after which the applicant must return to the Board for site plan approval.
General business:~ Invoices were tabled to next meeting.~ Endorsement of Richmond Street waiver of frontage plan and Roger’s Way subdivision plan were tabled.~
Mr. McCarthy informed the Board a discussion with Help Raynham, a citizens' group originally formed to oppose a proposed trash transfer station and now working on zoning Rte. 138 issues, is scheduled for the Board's August 10th meeting.
~
There was no further business and the meeting adjourned at approximately 8:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Chris Gallagher, Clerk
| 
