Town of Raynham, MA - Planning Board Minutes

The Raynham Planning Board held a regular meeting on Thursday, August 5, 2010, at Raynham Veterans' Memorial Town Hall. Chairman Daniel Andrade opened the meeting at 6:10 p. m.

6:10 p. m. – Hall Street/Aaron Mello definitive subdivision public hearing was reconvened. Mr. Andrade noted he was not present at one of the meetings for Hall Street subdivision but he had read the minutes and correspondence of the missed meeting.

Attorney Matthew Costa, Taunton, MA, and Paul Patenaude, P.E., Earth Services, Taunton, MA, were present along with applicant Aaron Mello. Review correspondence, dated August 3, 2010, was received from Nitsch Engineering. Steve Ventresca, P.E., Nitsch Engineering, was present.

Attorney Costa noted a question arose as to the legality of Lot 2 on the plan in light of the fact that there are considerable wetlands on the lot. Letter dated August 3, 2010, was received from Town Counsel Marc Antine on the matter. Attorney Costa noted that Attorney Antine states in his letter that the matter is an “esoteric” area, and the Planning Board has the authority to allow the plan as a subdivision.

Mr. Patenaude addressed the Board and noted the primary concern of the Planning Board is the impact of the plan on the Town’s drainage system.

Mr. Gallagher stated he was not voting on the plan because he had missed a meeting but he was participating in discussion. He noted he is satisfied with the plan after a discussion with Highway Superintendent Roger Stolte, and he agreed with the legal opinion of this being a two-lot subdivision.

During discussion, it was noted Mr. Ellis was not present tonight to vote on the plan. Mr. Andrade noted a detailed letter was received from Marc Antine advising the Board has the right to approve or deny this two-lot subdivision. Mr. Andrade stated that the Board could now proceed because the legal question was settled. Mr. Fountain agreed with Mr. Andrade.

Mr. Andrade noted the biggest concern is the drainage. He noted a letter dated July 29, 2010, was received from abutters Harry and Rita Papp, 32 Laurel Lane. Mr. Papp was present and upon question from Mr. Andrade, stated he could provide the Board with a copy of the letter from his engineer who reviewed the plan for him.

Mr. Andrade asked where the water from the site is going. Mr. Patenaude explained that he had followed the water and it goes across the street by Carr’s house and runs over land to the river. Mr. Patenaude stated he found the end of a drainage pipe.

Mr. Gallagher noted he received the same plan at the sewer department and that Mr. Stolte also has the same plan. Mr. Patenaude showed photos of the area in question. It was noted the pipe in question is located under the lawn area. Mr. Andrade asked if Mr. Carr was present, but he was not.

Mr. Patenaude stated he conducted a detailed drainage analysis and determined there is “no impact in terms of increasing flow” to the drainage system from the plan. Mr. Gallagher verified that.

Mr. Andrade asked Mr. Ventresca if he reviewed the plan and submitted a report. Mr. Ventresca stated yes and explained that based on the calculations, it appears the rate and volume are reduced by the plan.

Mr. Andrade stated that the water is reduced but that does not mean the neighbors’ issues will go away. He noted the main focus for the plan is to not increase flow. Mr. Ventresca stated that is correct and the flooding in the area will be no worse if development is built per the plan. It was noted the applicant provided a test pit.

Mr. Fountain questioned the comment in the Nitsch August 3^rd letter regarding zoning issues. Mr. Ventresca explained the comments were based on the lot before the subdivision plan.

Mr. Andrade asked if anyone present had questions. Al Proctor, Hall Street, asked if Roger Stolte is involved in the plan. Mr. Gallagher stated he met with Mr. Stolte today and reviewed the plan. Mr. Proctor had a question regarding an easement on the northern end of the property and stated the issue is not being addressed. Mr. Andrade noted the northern end of the site is not being touched and there will be no construction in that area.

Cathleen Grant, 424 Hall Street, stated if a house is built without drainage improvements, she would have water in her basement. Mr. Andrade noted the proposed house will have no further impact on the other lots and the plan will not make the area better or worse. Mrs. Grant stated that is not known for sure. She presented photos of water on nearby property.

Mr. Andrade noted there is not much known about the existing drains in the area. Mr. Gallagher stated that if Mr. Stolte visits the site again, he will go with him.

Mrs. Grant asked what would happen if the project is built and the water increases. Mr. Andrade advised her to return to the Board but it has to be proven the water was caused by the development.

During discussion, it was noted if the project is approved, one condition would be no more building allowed on the site. Attorney Costa noted that Attorney Antine recommended a note on the plan indicating Lot 2 will not be built upon. He stated Petitioner is not opposed to that.

Mr. Fountain asked if the water flow can be redirected to another area. Mr. Patenaude stated no. Comment No. 4 on Nitsch’s August 3^rd letter re. ESHGW was discussed. It was noted that a driveway, not a road, was being built.

Mrs. Whalley asked if the Board could put a condition in the Certificate of Action that the proposed road/driveway is not being accepted as a Town way. She questioned if a street name should be shown on the plan. Mr. Gallagher noted the fire department would rather have a house number assigned, and he explained how house numbers are assigned by the building inspector. Mr. Gallagher agreed with a condition of only one house being built, no building on Lot 2 and no further subdivision.

Mr. Andrade moved to approve the “Definitive Subdivision Plan Off Hall Street, Raynham, MA,” dated April 25, 2010, last revised August 2, 2010, as drawn; second for discussion by Mr. Fountain. The waivers were discussed. Conditions were discussed: only one house to be built on Lot 1; no building on Lot 2; no further subdivision (using language in Marc Antine’s letter), a Hall Street house number not a street name; the road/driveway will be private and not to become a Town way.

Mr. Ventresca told the Board he had no problem with the waiver requests. Mr. Fountain questioned the request for fee waiver. Attorney Costa stated a request is being made for waiver or partial waiver of the filing fee. Mr. Fountain stated the waiver request should be taken out. He moved to reduce the filing fee to $3,000. Mr. Andrade moved to amend Mr. Fountain’s motion and to remove the request for waiver of filing fee; second by Mr. Fountain; motion passed with three votes in favor and Mr. Gallagher abstaining.

Mr. Fountain moved to reduce the administrative filing fee from $12,000 to $3,000; second by Mr. Driscoll. Mr. Andrade moved to amend the motion by reducing the filing fee to $2,000; second by Mr. Driscoll; motion passed with three votes in favor and Mr. Gallagher abstaining. It was noted the project review fee will be returned by the usual process. Certificate of Action will be issued.

7:10 p. m. – Form A, Campbell Court – Paul Patenaude, P. E., Earth Services, presented the proposed plan on behalf of applicant. Proper paperwork and fee were submitted. Mr. Patenaude stated the owner is acquiring land from an abutter in order to obtain additional frontage.

Board members reviewed the plans. There were no questions. Mr. Gallagher moved to approve “Plan of Land In Raynham, MA Prepared For Richard A. Mastria, Sr.,” by Earth Services Corp., dated February 8, 2010, as an Approval Not Required plan; second by Mr. Fountain; motion passed with four votes in favor. Mr. Gallagher endorsed the plan.

7:14 p. m. – Munro Electric site plan and special permit public hearing was reconvened. Attorney William Rosa, Wynn & Wynn, Raynham, MA, was present on behalf of applicant along with Richard Riccio, P.E., Tibbetts Engineering, Taunton, MA. Letter was received from abutters Edward L. and Susan R. Peabody, Richmond Street. Letter dated August 5, 2010, was received from Building Commissioner Dennis Machado. Mr. Machado noted in his letter that most issues from the 2007 zoning violation letter have been addressed.

William Piche, 139 Richmond Street, addressed the Board. Mr. Andrade asked Mr. Piche what are his issues. Mr. Piche stated there were supposed to be two rows of 7-foot arborvitaes but there is only one row. Mr. Andrade noted it is impossible to place the trees in the wetlands. Mr. Gallagher noted the original plan was modified to put the trees up front per the Conservation Commission. Mr. Fountain noted it was his understanding that the ConsCom moved the tree line.

Mr. Piche stated that noise from 16 – 18 wheelers had been bad but recently that has cut down but he noted it could start again. He noted he remembers a discussion of a sound barrier on the site. Board members agreed the sound barrier was related to the site plan for an addition but the addition was never done. Mr. Piche noted he planted his own trees but they have not fully grown yet.

Attorney Rosa addressed the Board and noted applicant is seeking a special permit for parking reduction and for approval for the site entrance to remain where it has been located since built. He showed photos of vegetation and new trees on site. It was noted only one of the trees was dead.

During discussion, it was noted that Mr. Machado was asked to determine if the site is in compliance with outstanding issues and that was done. Attorney Rosa noted the Cease and Desist order previously issued by the building department will be removed when approval of this plan is complete.

Mr. Gallagher moved that based on letter dated August 5, 2010, from Dennis Machado, as requested by the Board and received, the Board grant a waiver to allow the entrance as shown on the modified plan and to grant the special permit for parking reduction, in accordance with the applicant’s representative stating the new plan as modified by the Conservation Commission has not changed and complies with the original plan approved; second by Mr. Fountain; motion passed by unanimous vote. Certificate of Action will be issued.

Mr. Piche noted the noise from the site has cut down 60 – 70% but questioned if he has to put up with further noise. The Board advised him to see how things went. Mr. Piche asked if the 18-wheelers were going to stay on site. Mr. Andrade noted the trucks could be for other tenants.

7:35 p. m. – Carriage Hill Phase II subdivision public hearing was opened. Mr. Gallagher read the hearing notice. Attorney Michael Pollack, Taunton, MA, Jim Pavlik, P. E., Outback Engineering, John Crowley, Norwood Bank, and applicant Matt Dacey, Champion Builders, were present.

Attorney Pollack addressed the Board and explained that Norwood Bank has taken over the Carriage Hill property and done substantial work. He noted the Phase II plan proposes 11 lots off Durham Drive.

Mr. Fountain asked for the status of Carriage Hill Phase I. Mr. Pavlik stated Mr. Dacey is now working to complete that phase, and they will be seeking Town acceptance of Phase I in the fall. It was noted that of the 25 lots in Phase I, three now fall within Phase II six are owned by the bank and six or seven have been sold but not built upon with the balance having houses built.

Mr. Andrade asked if there are any issues with Phase I before proceeding to Phase II. Mrs. Whalley noted the last Nitsch Engineering review was done on May 18^th. She noted she visited the site about one month ago and the drainage structures seemed clean. Mr. Gallagher noted there are outstanding sewer department issues but they are not major. Mr. Ventresca stated he has not been to the site since the last report issued.

Mr. Gallagher noted the cul-de-sac was not graded properly so there will be water and icing issues in the winter. Mr. Andrade reminded that the owner previously asked for Town road acceptance and even though the cul-de-sac was not going to be part of that acceptance, there were too many outstanding issues to proceed with acceptance. Mr. Dacey stated he is now involved with the final issues for Phase I.

Mr. Andrade noted that letter dated July 28, 2010, from Michael and Janice Fruth cited issues at their property and on Durham Drive due to poor grading and resulting puddling. Mr. Andrade thanked Norwood Bank for the work to date but noted the issues need to be cleaned up.

Mr. Crowley noted the Bank was not satisfied with the earlier project developer so they asked Mr. Dacey to step in. Mr. Andrade advised the applicant to ask Nitsch Engineering if they need further information to help complete the work.

Photos from the Fruth property were reviewed and the driveway cutting was discussed. Mr. Dacey stated he received a copy of the letter and will contact the Fruths.

Mr. Pavlik noted that only a certain portion of Phase I will be up for acceptance, and it will not include Durham Drive or newer portion. Mr. Andrade stated the Town cannot accept without the completed cul-de-sac. During discussion, it was noted either a turn around is needed for safe access before the road will be accepted or a portion of the road could be accepted. The Board agreed that either way, the cul-de-sac must be fixed.

Mr. Pavlik explained that Phase II was shown conceptually on Phase I. He noted eight new lots are now proposed along with modification to Phase I. It was noted the plan was filed as a new submittal and that deed and road language can be changed later.

Mr. Pavlik informed there is a waiver request to allow one sidewalk. It was noted that Phase I has two sidewalks, which end at about the middle of Lot 9. The Board noted this may not look good. It was noted there will be two crosswalks provided.

Mr. Pavlik noted he has not had a chance to review all of Nitsch comments having received the letter today. He explained applicant has had discussions with Natural Heritage and the area was deemed “no-take” in a letter dated July 28, 2010.

Steve Ventresca noted that revisions such as tree placement are needed on the new plan. The Board advised that the trees in this phase should be consistent with the front part of the older section.

Mr. Ventresca noted the stormwater calcs from 2005 to present indicate an increase in stormwater volume, and he asked if there was missing information. Mr. Gallagher stated that if the stormwater requirement was met previously, do not change now. Mr. Andrade suggested applicant work with Nitsch Engineering on outstanding issues. Mr. Ventresca noted that Roger Stolte’s comments were incorporated into the “General Comments” section of his report.

There was discussion about three lots that were part of Phase I and it was questioned if there should be a modification of the original plan. After discussion, it was agreed the Phase II recorded plan will supersede Phase I. It was agreed the filing as a new submittal will be kept as is.

The public hearing was continued to September 16, 2010, 6:15 p. m. It was noted the covenant and conveyance of easements for the three lots discussed needs to be amended.

8:25 p. m. – Route 44 Hyundai site plan public hearing was opened. Mr. Gallagher read the public hearing notice. Attorney Daniel Viera, Easton, MA, was present along with Brian Dunn, MBL Land Development and Permitting Corp., Scott Balzak, Robert Barboza and Craig Jewett. Review correspondence, dated August 5, 2010, was received from Nitsch Engineering.

Attorney Viera addressed the Board and explained the proposed plan to raze part of an existing building and construct new building. He noted the existing entrances will be regraded, truck turning radii increased, area for unloading to be provided in back and truck circulation improved. He noted the applicant will be requesting waivers from some regulations.

Mr. Dunn addressed the Board to discuss the plan. He noted there will be some new pavement and some existing pavement will remain, the two access areas will remain, water lines will be upgraded and the existing parking at the building front will be gone. He noted a bypass lane will be provided for emergency vehicles.

Mr. Fountain asked about ownership of the lot and the adjacent lot. Mr. Dunn stated the owners were different and an easement would be provided. He noted there is no drainage system on site now so the new plan will improve that situation and there will be a net decrease in paved area.

Mr. Ventresca had a question about the access. Mr. Dunn explained there would be one way in and one way out. He noted there is no separate landscaping plan provided. Mr. Gallagher noted the landscaping on the plan is more than what currently exists.

Attorney Viera stated the plan is sensitive to lighting and everything will be done to code. After discussion, it was agreed the new lighting should be on the plan along with the existing lighting.

Mr. Bruno stated there were no complaints with the site now. It was noted the issue of cross easements with the adjacent site will be added to Nitsch correspondence.

8:55 p. m. – South Main Street/King Philip Street open-space subdivision plan public hearing was reconvened. Todd Pilling, P. E., Brockton, MA, and applicant Frank Campbell were present. It was noted that Town Counsel had previously opined that an open-space subdivision plan cannot be accomplished with a Form A plan, which applicant had submitted. Mr. Pilling stated the applicant will withdraw the Form A and File a Form C and proceed with the cluster plan. He noted applicant will be requesting waiver of road construction for the open-space plan and Lot 4 of the plan will be open space conveyed to the Town. Applicant submitted a time-to-act extension to the Board.

After discussion with Mr. Pilling, the Board agreed they will consider a fee reduction. Mr. Pilling agreed to provide a longer extension of time-to-act. The public hearing was continued to September 2, 2010, 6:30 p. m.

General Business: Minutes of July 15, 2010, were received. Mr. Fountain moved to waive the reading and approve as submitted; second by Mr. Gallagher; motion passed by unanimous vote.

Letter dated July 29, 2010, was received from Town Administrator Randall Buckner requesting a recommendation for Town acceptance of Foxwood Lane. The Board agreed to start the recommendation process and ask the water department, sewer department, tax collector and highway department to inform the Board if there are outstanding issues at the subdivision.

Letter dated July 15, 2010, was received from Raynham Housing Authority thanking the Board for their help in obtaining funds to apply for more elderly housing units and requesting a letter from the Board stating where the application funds came from. Mrs. Whalley told the Board she sent the requested letter. No action taken by the Board.

Jess Marie Estates – Construction Cost Estimate, dated August 3, 2010, from Nitsch Engineering, and e-mail correspondence, dated August 5, 2010, from Marc Antine, were received for Jess Marie Estates. Mr. Gallagher noted he conducted a site inspection today. The developer is working on finalizing the tripartite agreement and the matter was tabled to next meeting.

Aspen Hollow subdivision – Mr. Andrade noted it was brought to his attention that there is a strip of old blacktopped driveway that needs to be removed by the entrance to Aspen Hollow. Developer will be notified.

Mrs. Whalley informed that she and Mr. Driscoll attended a recent SRPEDD meeting and a signed partnership agreement was discussed. She recommended the Board support the agreement. Mr. Andrade stated the Board was okay with supporting.