Skip Navigation
Photos of Raynham
Raynham, Massachusetts.  Incorporated 1731

This table is used for column layout.


UniPay Online Payment Center


Raynham Town Seal
 
Planning Board minutes October 2, 2014
The Raynham Planning Board held~a meeting on Thursday, October 2, 2014, at Raynham Veterans' Memorial Town Hall.~ Chairman Daniel Andrade opened the meeting at 6:03 p.m.

Board members present:~ Daniel Andrade, Burke Fountain, Henry Ellis, Christopher Gallagher, Russell Driscoll

Staff present:~~ John Charbonneau, Director Planning & Community Development; Maureen McKenney, Administrative Assistant

6:03 p.m. – Public hearing for zoning amendments was opened.~ Mr. Gallagher read the notice.~ Mr. Charbonneau explained the amendment proposed for Section 6.2.  Mr. Fountain noted the amendment will protect a residential buildable lot from zoning changes provided the lot conformed to zoning requirements at the time of its creation.~ There were no comments or questions from those present.~ Mr. Andrade moved to recommend the amendment to Town Meeting; second Mr. Fountain; motion passed 4-0-0.~ (Mr. Ellis arrived.)

Amendment to Sec. 13.8.d was discussed.~ The amendment will allow a single building within a multi-family development to seek a permanent occupancy permit with certain conditions.~ There were no comments or questions from those present.~ Mr. Andrade moved to recommend the amendment to Town Meeting; second Mr. Fountain; motion passed 5-0-0.

Amendment to Sec. 5.1 was discussed.~ The amendment is a ‘housekeeping’ matter to clarify the dimensional requirements table in Sec. 5.1.~ Resident of 69 Paddock Road asked about  the minimum setbacks.~ It was stated front setback is 45 feet, side and rear setbacks are 20 feet.~ Mr. Andrade moved to recommend the amendment at Town Meeting; second Mr. Fountain; motion passed 5-0-0.

Mr. Charbonneau informed the Board that the amendment to Sec. 6.6.9 regarding temporary signs is being reconsidered and will be withdrawn at Town Meeting.

Amendment to rezone property at 252 Britton Street was discussed.~ The property is currently split-zoned for Residential A and a portion for Business and the amendment proposes to zone the entire property Business.~ The amendment was sponsored by the former Building Commissioner.~ There were no questions from those present.~ Mr. Gallagher said he will abstain from voting as he is not in favor of ‘zig-zagging’ a zoning line for one parcel.~ Mr. Andrade noted he is in favor of making the entire lot Business zoned.~ Mr. Andrade moved to recommend the amendment at Town Meeting; second Mr. Fountain; motion passed 4-1-0 (Mr. Gallagher abstaining).

6:20 p.m. – Bassett Knoll Estates public hearing was opened.~ Mr. Gallagher stated that applicant Nick Harris is discussing a land deal with his sister on property that is not part of this subdivision but is adjacent to it so he will abstain from the hearing.~ It was noted Mr. Gallagher has no financial interest in the negotiations but his sister does.~ Mr. Ellis said he saw no reason for Mr. Gallagher to abstain in that case.~ Mr. Andrade noted the Board would be looking for Mr. Gallagher’s input on a subdivision of this size.~ Mr. Fountain agreed, noting that Mr. Gallagher can abstain from voting if he felt the need at that point.~ Board members agreed.

Mr. Gallagher read the public hearing notice.~ ~Mr. Andrade asked if anyone present had any issue with Mr. Gallagher participating.~ No one expressed opposition.~ Scott Henderson, P.E., and Bradley McKenzie, Principal, both of McKenzie Engineering Group, Inc. were present on behalf of applicant and were not opposed to Mr. Gallagher participating.~ Mr. Harris was not able to be present tonight.~

Mr. Henderson explained that Bassett Knoll Estates is located at the intersection of Locust Street and Pleasant Street.~ Mr. Andrade noted a 10-page project review report was received from Nitsch Engineering and the Highway Superintendent has not had sufficient time to send his comments to the Board.~ Mr. Henderson stated he also would prefer more time to address the Nitsch report received today.~ It was agreed the engineers need to discuss the issues and that tonight’s hearing would be an overview.~ Those present were informed that abutters will not be re-notified if the hearing is continued but the meetings are televised if anyone cannot attend.~ ~~

Mr. Gallagher explained how the open space shown on the plan is determined.~ He noted sewer line is to be extended, a new pumping station for the site may be needed, the lots on the land off Bayberry Road are not part of this plan and would be a different filing, and the lots on Locust Street are Form A lots.~ In response to a question from Richard Macolini, Paddock Road, Mr. Gallagher noted there are no Paddock Road lots involved in this plan and only sewer-related work will be done on that road. ~There is presently no turn around on Paddock Road.~ Mr. Henderson stated there are no design plans yet for Paddock Road but a hammerhead turnaround can be worked out when the pump station area is being designed.~ Mr. Andrade stated this may be the time to do a cul-de-sac for Paddock Road.

Peter Atwood, Paddock road, asked about bond money being held by the sewer department for Paddock Road.~ Mr. Gallagher explained there is approximately $83,000 in bond being held by the sewer department and approximately $15,000 being held by another Town department that might be available to upgrade Paddock Road pump station area.~ During discussion, it was noted that three lots previously shown on Paddock Road cul-de-sac area will now be part of the Bassett Knoll open space.~ Mr. Andrade asked Mr. Charbonneau to discuss the matter of available funds with the Highway Superintendent.

Steve Blake, Paddock Road, asked if open space can be used at a later time for development.~ It was explained there can be no waiver granted on open space in the future and that to remove a conservation restriction on open space must be done through the State and involved replacing the open space elsewhere.~ It was noted the Bassett Knoll open space can either be given to the Town or the homeowners’ association.

There was discussion about a subdivision off Bayberry Road that was approved years ago but never built due to wetland and other issues.  The Bayberry Road land is now part of property that Mr. Harris owns and could develop in the future.~ Mr. Fountain felt the formerly approved plan on Mr. Harris’ property should be rescinded and suggested the Board could rescind that subdivision approval to avoid deed problems for future homeowners.~ Mr. McKenzie suggested sending the matter to Town Counsel for opinion.~ The Board agreed they could rescind the older subdivision plan if Bassett Knoll is approved.~

John Cameron, Locust Street, questioned where Bassett Knoll is in relation to Pine Street.~ It was noted the woods behind Bassett Knoll Estates go up to a section of Pine Street.

Mr. Andrade noted there are $525,000 plus due in taxes on the locus property.~ A proposed agreement between Tax Collector Diane Warren and Mr. Harris regarding payment of the taxes was received.~ Mr. Harris will be advised to contact the Tax Collector.

In response to a question,  it was noted the applicant pays the cost of the project review.~ It was also noted that there is little difference between taxes on an open-space subdivision lot and taxes on a conventional subdivision lot.~

Joanne Kellogg, 380 Locust Street, addressed the Board to discuss several concerns.~ She asked what the 137 acres shown on the plan consisted of.~ Mr. Henderson explained the breakdown of the open space land and the uplands on the property. Ms. Kellogg stated a Natural Heritage communication she read stated there were 125 acres for the box turtles, and she asked where that land is.~ Mr. Henderson explained they are in contact with Natural Heritage and that issue will be worked out, but less than 125 acres is needed now.~ Mr. McKenzie added that a conservation management permit will be needed for the project as a final condition of approval.~ He stated Natural Heritage has seen the plan and their issues must be worked out before their final approval but those issues are not relevant to the Planning Board’s action.~ Mr. Charbonneau noted he spoke to Natural Heritage and they informed him the plan is under review.~ Ms. Kellogg stated she thinks a February 2013 letter from Natural Heritage states there are issues other than box turtles.~

Ms. Kellogg discussed her concern with noise from the nearby highway being amplified if trees are removed from the property.~ Mr. Andrade felt this project will not impact in that way. ~Mr. Gallagher noted there will still be wooded area beyond the Locust Street property.~ Ms. Kellogg cited a communication from the Executive Office of Environmental Affairs that referenced a 720 vehicle increase by the project, which would have a big impact on residents.  Mr. Andrade noted the Highway Superintendent is reviewing the plan and its impact.

Unidentified man asked about Indian burial grounds on the property.~ Mr. Gallagher stated burial grounds have been identified on site and there is a memo of agreement stating they cannot be disturbed and will stay intact.~ Mr. Henderson and Mr. McKenzie both said they were aware of the burial grounds.~ It was noted no new markings of the grounds can be added to the site.~ Ms. Kellogg questioned how it will be known if more remains are found during construction.~ Mr. Gallagher suggested contacting State agencies in that case as it is out of the Board’s scope.

Mrs. Blake asked if anyone at the schools was spoken to about the impact of the project.~ Mr. Andrade explained the Planning Board looks at the road construction and related issues.~ Mr. Ellis noted the schools must make room for new students.

Mr. Cameron stated there may be Indian burial grounds near the area of sewer pump station work.~ Mr. Gallagher noted there is just water line being added in the area.~ Mr. McKenzie stated the Indian burial grounds are several hundred feet away from work.

Greg Windsor, Locust Street, asked a question about the sewer line being built for this plan.~ Mr. Henderson explained the sewer is not connecting to Locust Street lines and Paddock Road will be the only connection to Town sewer.~ Mr. Windsor stated his concern that 20 houses on Locust Street will not be connected to sewer while all others around will.~ Mr. Andrade suggested he go to a Sewer Commission meeting to discuss.~ Mr. Gallagher noted the Sewer Commission is aware of the situation but agreed residents should see the Commission again.~ Mr. Andrade said sewer line should be done for all those in the area and would be unfair not to do so.~ It was noted a private developer is doing part of the sewer work on Locust Street.~

Bassett Knoll Estates public hearing was continued to November 6, 6:10 p.m.~ Mr. Ellis will not be present.~ It was noted any Board member not able to attend a hearing may vote on a plan after review of the information presented at the hearing and then signing an affidavit stating he has done so.

(Mr. Andrade left the meeting room.)

7:34 p.n. – Riverfront Estates public hearing was opened.~ Mr. Ellis read the hearing notice.~ Attorney Edmund Brennan was present on behalf of applicant Riverfront Estates, LLC, Daniel J. Andrade, Manager.~ He submitted letter dated October 2, 2014.~ Attorney Brennan discussed the proposed plans, noting that in 2008, in accordance with Article 17 of Raynham zoning by-laws, a special permit for a Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) plan was approved for this property, the former home of the Church Street winery.~ The TDR granted rights to 10 lots to the applicant, but transfer of development rights for those lots cannot be done until there is a conservation agreement in place with the Town, which has not yet happened. Attorney Brennan explained that the hearings tonight are to modify the 2008 TDR yield plan by removing three lots from that plan and also for approval of a conventional three-lot subdivision plan with the three lots being taken from the open space area.~ The removal of three TDR lots would reduce the available TDR lots from 10 to 7.~ Applicant has not yet tried to transfer development rights of any of the TDR lots.~ Attorney Brennan explained that ownership of the 24 acres of open space shown on the plan has yet to be determined, but the applicant would be willing to restrict use of the property if he keeps ownership, and the Town would still get a public access area.~

It was noted that the access road to the Taunton River will be kept private, will be 22 feet wide, graveled, have no sidewalks and will include a turnaround area for the public.~ Mr. Fountain noted he is not sure he would want a private road with public usage.  Mr. Ellis agreed.~ Attorney Brennan questioned if the Town would ever accept a road not built to subdivision standards.~

John Montagano, 464 Church Street, asked about the number of permits being transferred elsewhere in Town, what type of houses will be built and whether or not wetlands on the site are an issue.~ He stated he is concerned with traffic on the road.~ Attorney Brennan explained single-family residences will be built and will meet zoning requirements.~ He explained that if a conventional subdivision is built, there could be 16 houses on the plan.~

Gerard Knappik, Pastor at First Baptist Church and Church Street property owner, questioned why the lots show 100 feet frontage, noting that the church was held to 150 feet frontage for lots on a Form A plan they filed.~ Attorney Brennan noted the 100 feet frontage is allowed by Article 17, TDR bylaw.~ Mr. Fountain noted the applicant could get 16 lots but is getting 12 by the TDR plan and is giving up the rights to open space.~ Attorney Brennan explained the TDR is a trade of the 24 acres to be preserved for the lots on Church Street at higher density, and the applicant is not asking for anything not available to others.~ He noted Wildlands Trust favors this plan as a great accomplishment of preserving the land.

Mr. Knappik said he was not notified of the special permit hearing in 2008.~ Mrs. McKenney will check the files.

Greg Daley, 451 Church Street, questioned why someone would want a private road with public access and asked if there will be plantings as a boundary to the existing homes.~ Attorney Brennan stated the TDR bylaw encourages public use of the open space, which will be under a conservation restriction.~ He noted the proposed road will be adequate for three houses, and it is the developer’s risk that people will want to live there.~ Mr. Gallagher noted the open space cannot be developed but can be used for conservation or farming.~ Mr. Gallagher explained that the sewer department has stockpiled materials being used in their work on the street but the stockpiles will be removed when the work is done.

Mr. Ellis questioned if the plan should be reviewed.~ He stated he has concern that there is no sidewalk proposed as there could be people walking to the river.~ Mr. Gallagher stated he was comfortable with the plan.~ Mr. Fountain noted it looks like the roadway will have to remain private and Attorney Brennan agreed.~ After further discussion, the Board agreed to forward the plan to Nitsch Engineering, who reviewed it in 2008, for review with a maximum of $1,000.

Attorney Brennan asked the Board to reduce the filing fee, as requested in his letter.~ Mr. Charbonneau noted that the Board’s fee schedule was reduced by 50% this year.~ Mr. Ellis moved to reduce applicant’s $5,260 filing fee to $2,600; second Mr. Fountain; motion passed 4-0-0.~ The project review fee will be held.~

Mrs. Corliss, 575 Church Street, asked why the street lots were not being built first and if a buffer will be provided.~ Attorney Brennan stated the street lots probably will be built first, and he could not say yes or no to a buffer at this time but there is not one on the plan now.

Mr. Davis, 173 Elizabeth Drive, Trustee of First Baptist Church, asked where the road would enter the property.~ He stated his concerns with existing traffic problems getting worse and with kids on bikes using the road.~ Attorney Brennan explained entry will be close to where the road now goes into the old winery.~~ Mr. Fountain said he understood but the owner has a right to build on his property and Church Street is a public way.~ During discussion, Attorney Brennan noted it is not yet determined how many cars the cul-de-sac can hold, and the public access use could be taken out of the plan if needed.

Mr. Knappik asked if applicant Daniel J. Andrade is Daniel J. Andrade, Board Chairman, and, if so, is there a conflict and should he step down from the Board.~ The Board stated it is the same person and that is why Mr. Andrade is not present at the meeting.~ It was noted the Ethics Commission has controls on matters such as this and that Mr. Andrade is not present at the meeting as legally required.

The public hearing was continued to October 16th, 6:15 p.m.

(Mr. Andrade returned to the Board meeting.)

8:37 p.m. – 661 South Street West: Attorney William Manganiello appeared before the Board on behalf of MAREMI, LLC, to request an abbreviated site plan process for a plan to convert the existing residential home at 661 South St. West into an office.~ Letter dated 9/18/2014 was received from Paul A. Patneaude, P.E., P.L.S., explaining that there will be no change in the footprint, no increase in pavement, no change in driveway, a stone gravel parking area will be added, and there will be no impact to the riverfront area.~ Mr. Gallagher questioned if any site plan review is needed.~ After discussion, Mr. Fountain moved to allow abbreviated site plan process; second Mr. Ellis; motion passed 5-0-0.

8:40 p.m. – WalMart, Rte. 138:~ Attorney William Rosa, Raynham, MA, appeared before the Board to discuss a final occupancy permit for the store.~ He noted that Rte. 138 is now paved and striped, all other site work is done satisfactorily, the Murby easement is recorded, and the Town is holding a $300,000 bond.~ Attorney Rosa explained there are outstanding sewer issues at the site but a preliminary plan has been prepared for Mr. Gallagher and the Sewer Commission.~ Letter dated October 2, 2014 was received from Chris J. Gallagher, P. E., at the Sewer Commission, stating that there is outstanding work at the site and suggesting that all bond funds be held and possibly revoking the temporary occupancy permit.~

Mr. Andrade stated he wants the pump station finished so the temporary should be extended.~ Mr. Gallagher explained that loaming and seeding must be done soon and sewer lines must be cleaned again.~ After discussion, Mr. Andrade moved to extend WalMart’s temporary occupancy permit an additional 60 days from October 7 to December 7; second Mr. Driscoll; motion passed 5-0-0.

(Mr. Fountain and Mr. Gallagher left the meeting.)

General Business:~ Copies of two agreements between the Town of Raynham and Ronald Turowetz, President of Easecat, Inc., regarding use of Finch Farm I and Finch Farm II funds for Town of Raynham Planning Board was received.~ Mr. Andrade explained Town Counsel prepared the agreements.~ Mr. Ellis moved to approve the letters dated October 2, 2014 as received from Town Counsel and to be signed by Mr. Turowetz; second Mr. Driscoll; motion passed 3-0-0.

Mr. Andrade moved to waive the reading and approve the minutes of September 18, 2014; second Mr. Driscoll.~ Motion passed 3-0-0.

Certificate of Action for Carlton Street was approved for signature.

Letter dated September 25, 2014 was received from the State Division of Banks regarding an application filed by WalMart, Rte. 138, to operate as a check cashier.~ No action was taken.

8:50 p.m. – Town Planner update:~ Mr. Charbonneau discussed his Memorandum dated September 29, 2014 for an amendment to Planning Board’s fee schedule to establish a 90 day period in which the Board may consider return of filing fees.~ The Board was agreeable to the amendment.~ It was noted that filing fees will still be deposited within the 90 day period.

There was no further business and the meeting adjourned at approximately 9:00 p.m.



 
Town of Raynham 558 South Main St., Raynham, MA 02767
Virtual Towns & Schools Website