BELLINGHAM PLANNING BOARD

5 COMMON STREET

BELLINGHAM, MASSACHUSETTS 02019

(508) 966-0991; FAX (508) 966-2317

PlanningBoard@bellinghamma.org

September 14, 2006 Meeting Minutes

· Present at the meeting:

Brian J. Sutherland (BJS) Chair

Glenn C. Wojcik (GCW), Vice Chair

David Brown (DB) Secretary

Thomas J. Guerin (TJG), (not present)

Roland R. Laprade (RRL),

Stephen Bartha (SB) Alternate

Other officials: Stacey J. Wetstein, (SJW) Town Planner

Amy Cook, (AC), Commission on Disabilities

Mary Chaves, (MC) Coordinator

BJS opened the meeting at 7:00 PM.

Minutes have been distributed, but not reviewed. Will be presented at next meeting Sept ember 28, 2006.

RRL Motion to sign vouchers.

DB: Second.

Vote: 5-0, Approved.

306 Maple Street, 81P

Mike Simmons of Guerriere and Halnon appeared for the applicant regarding the division of property at 306 Maple Street. They want to combine it with a larger lot to make it more conforming to current zoning.

After some discussion it was decided that the Board would not sign as the lot is non-conforming.

Woodbury Ridge Definitive Subdivision and Major Residential Special Permit

Michael Moonan of Weston and Sampson Environmental Engineering and the applicant, David LaChance appeared before the Board. Their Conservation Commission hearing was held last evening and the Commission would like the catch basin to be filled with riprap instead of vegetation. They have a conditional approval based upon showing plans that document this change. Also, basin maintenance must be spelled out in terms of timeframe. George Holmes, Conservation Officer recommended late May and Late October of each year.

RRL asked about the donation of land to the Conservation Commission. Mr. LaChance stated that as soon as the plan was recorded the area delineated on the plan would go to Conversation.

Michael Moonan reviewed the comments from the DPW and agreed to perform all changes be agreed to except for moving the water lines which was said to be acceptable as designed.

RRL: Motion to draft a favorable decision for Woodbury Ridge Definitive Subdivision based on their making all corrections and meeting conditions of the Conservation Commission.

DB: Second.

Vote: 4-0, Approved.

RRL: Motion to draft favorable decision for Woodbury Ridge Major Residential Special Permit under the same conditions as the Definitive Subdivision.

DB: Second.

Vote 4-0, Approved.

RRL: Motion to accept request for extended decision deadline to Sept 29, 2006.

GW Second.

Vote: 4-0, Approved.

Maple Ridge 3- Lot Definitive Subdivision, Blackstone Street, 1^st Public Hearing

BJS opened the Public Hearting at 7:40 PM

RRL: Motion to waive reading of public hearing notice.

DB: Second.

Vote: 4-0, Approved.

Bruce Babcock, and John Parmentier, Dunn-McKensie Inc., project engineers appeared with Carmine Lorusso, representing the applicant.

John Parmentier showed several boards demonstrating the area highlighting different aspects of the project. The first was site layout with upland calculations; the second was a wetland-delineating map, and the third showed the roadway design and the fourth a topographic drawing demonstrating different grades. He advised the Board that one of the abutters had placed an in-ground pool on their property and that a full sized roadway would cause them to impact the area where the pool is situated. He requested that a narrower roadway width be allowed which would allow the neighbors to keep the pool and also intimated that this was something that the Conservation Commission would want to see, less impervious surface.

Thomas Donnelly Blackstone St Abutter, wanted clarification to the citing of the homes on the lots

He also had concerns about the flow of water. BJS advised him that all runoff created by this project must be contained on the property and the fact this would be a blind driveway to vehicles coming down the hill-BJS advised that the Safety officer would review those comments

Gertrude Fowler, 179 Blackstone lives as the lowest point on Blackstone Street and is concerned that it will cause more water to flow towards her property. RRL advised that they are not allowed to increase runoff.

Nancy Bland 179 Blackstone Street has similar concern about runoff and high ground water

Leroy Mayiner, Blackstone Street-concerned about safety of the egress to the parcel.

Louis Nazzaari, Heritage Way-asked about an expiration date on percolation test

Anne Burtwell Heritage Way was concerned about water levels

Michelle Kellian 174 Blackstone St concerned about the high water table

John Parmentier stated for the public record that this project would not solve any existing water problems.

Amy Shahasavan asked about type of homes being built.

Neal MacInnany of Saddleback Hill-felt nothing should be done there before Blackstone Street was repaired and elevated due to water and safety issues as the road is difficult to see for traffic turning from S. Main Street or crossing S. Main Street.

Dan Briggs, South Main Street asked about the status of the Conservation Commission hearing.

BJS advised the concerned neighbors that the public safety officer, Sgt. Rolls, would be asked to address their traffic and safety concerns.

RRL: Motion to suggest a common drive instead of full-blown subdivision road. All conditions for the subdivision roadway with the exception of width must be met.

DB: Second.

Vote: 3-1, Approved. GCW voted nay.

RRL: Motion to continue public hearing for Maple Ridge Definitive Subdivision to November 9, 2006 at 7:15 PM

GCW: Second.

Vote: 4-0, Approved.

Public Hearing October Town Meeting Articles

Don DiMartino, DPW Director, reviewed his proposed changes for storm water management, a multi page document putting in place the procedures for people to go through the permitting process for storm water systems would be added to the Planning Board’s Procedural Rules. Regulations are driven by existing procedures used by Conservation. BJS commented that this was not an additional layer or bureaucracy, and was done to ensure that systems work as designed in the future.

A paragraph would be amended in the Rules and Regulations directing the developer to the new procedural rules concerning storm water management. Also, Zoning Regulation 3282 would change the term Storm water “retention” to Storm water “management “ and also refer back to procedural rules.

The bylaw also gives the Town more ability to enforce the regulation with fines and criminal charges where appropriate.

The article referring to discharge into storm water systems prohibits the discharge of anything other than runoff into the storm water management system.

BJS commented on the importance of protecting our environment and water supply.

RRL: Motion to recommend article 13. Storm Water Revisions to the Zoning Bylaw.

DB: Second.

Vote: 4-0, Approved.

RRL: Motion to recommend Post Construction Storm Water Management of Private Property.

DB: Second.

Vote: 4-0, Approved.

RRL: Motion to recommend the bylaw governing discharge in to the storm sewer system.

DBL: Second.

Vote: 4-0, Approved.

Assumption Parish Parcels Overlay District

RRL opened the public hearing by stating that in 1998 the Town’s master plan called for incorporating village district style zoning of the Town Center and Crooks Corner in S Bellingham. The thought was that a committee would be formed to determine the exact location for the South of Bellingham as the Town Center was already called out in the Master Plan. The Planning Board authorized RRL to create a task force to proceed with outlying Crooks Corner Village District. Before the committee could bring something together. The Assumption Parish Parcel, in the heart of the proposed Village District Area, was closed by the Arch Diocese and purchased by a developer; in order for him to bring a project in keeping with the intention of creating a village district the zoning overlay for this parcel was moved up to the October town meeting.

SJW presented a slide show presentation explaining what on overlay district is and what this bylaw specifically addresses. On overlay district allows for more flexible, mixed-use development. Should a developer choose not to enact the overlay zone he has the option of using the existing, underlying zoning in place. Mixed use is a combination of business and residences on the same parcel; they can be combined in one building or in separate buildings on the same lot. All development must first go through the development review process and depending on the size of the housing component the special permit process as well. There are design standards to which the developer must adhere. The overlay district area, and an overview of what is allowed by right and also by the special permit process were reviewed. The overlay district would encourage redevelopment and revitalization of the area by allowing for more flexible development.

Judy Barrett (JB) of Community Opportunities Group was the consultant hired tow rite the bylaw. She had previously written the Mill Overlay District bylaw and is very experienced in overlay bylaw drafting in other comminutes as well. She was present to answer technical questions regarding the proposed bylaw.

BJS asked how she came about drafting this bylaw. She replied that the Board had hired her after being approached by a developer who has recently purchased Assumption Parish and was planning on redeveloping the parcel. The developer had been before the Board for informal discussion in the past, and although the Board like his concept, the proposed development would be impossible with a zoning change. She walked the area an analyzed the area before writing the bylaw and wrote the bylaw with the thought in mind that this overlay would eventually be part of applied to more of the Pulaski Blvd area.

JB advised the Board that the parcels surrounding the four corners at Crooks Corner were unique to Pulaski Blvd, and that after further analysis the Board may decide that this initial parcel be a subset of a larger overlay district or they may decide to extend the district with the overlay as written. She further stated that based on the conversations she’s had with Planning Board it was inconceivable that this draft was inconsistent with the Board’s objectives of establishing a Village District along Pulaski Blvd and Crooks Corner. In order to stimulate redevelopment a housing component makes redevelopment economically feasible to developers.

RRL stated that his intention was to include the four properties next to the church property along Paine Street. SJW stated that she did not understand that this was part of the Board’s plan at this time. Denis Fraine (DF), Town Administrator advised that if the map and parcel was specifically referenced in the article it may be an issue as the map and parcel was specifically referenced. JB replied that the article was not written specifically referencing the map and parcel, and BJS added that the map would be amended to include any expanded area. DF advised that the Board seek advice from Town Counsel to clarify this issue.

MC advised the Board that this type of overlay was encouraged by the Commonwealth under its Smart Growth program and would improve the town’s “score card” when being evaluated for State funding.

BJS stated that should the proposed project be developed as stated to the Planning Board, the driveway to the Veterinary office would be removed as that business would be relocated. The Mass Highway department had wanted to Town to come up with a solution to that driveway’s dangerous egress onto the state roadway, route 126.

SJW advised the Board that Attorney Amber has suggested a paragraph referencing the Subdivision Rules and Regulations should a developer choose to do a subdivision in the area stating that these rules would apply. JB has written a paragraph to be inserted into the bylaw stating that a subdivision is not required, but if the developer chooses to do a subdivision they must comply with the Subdivision Rules and Regulations.

Mitch LaPlante, Bellingham LLC, and property owner of Assumption Parish asked for clarification about the subdivision requirements and if that would come into play with his proposed development. BJS advised that as proposed, this would not apply to his project, as the type of uses he was proposing would be allowed under the special permit process of the overlay.

Ronald Lussier, Bellingham town resident and business owner, questioned if since they were planning on amending the article to include the four abutting parcels to the Church on Paine Street, would it be possible to include the parcels opposite the Church on Wrentham Road. He commented that some of these buildings were standing vacant and prime for redevelopment and would it make sense to add all four sides of Crooks Corner.

He also stated that the possibility of a river walk would be a great benefit to the town, especially the senior’s living in Wrentham Manor who would conceivably be within walking distance

RRL asked JB if she felt that the extension of this overlay worked for this area. SJW stated that these parcels would in the plans for the continued overlay, but that this made sense for cohesive design of the area.

BJS stated that once the amendments were on file with the Town Clerk it should be all set, as the map is currently on file with the clerk. It was again stated that Town Counsel would be asked for advice on this point.

BJS asked JB is she agreed that the area as amended was consistent and she stated that it absolutely was. BJS stated that he felt that this bylaw would be beneficial to the Town and thanked JB.

RRL: Motion to recommend the zoning bylaw to establish the Assumption Parish Parcels overly as modified with expanded area.

DB: Second.

Vote: 4-0, Approved.

SJW summed up the discussion for the amendments to Storm water management. This is nothing new but clarifies

Zoning bylaw, Subdivision Regulations and Procedural Rules

SJW reviewed the proposed changes to the Procedural Rules.

The cover has been amended with current Board members and revision date.

Page 3-5 #M- concurrent review process form with Conservation will be removed since it is not being used

4-11 changes to storm water management that Don DiMartino discussed.

4-8 new section 429-Permanent Private ways for 3-lot subdivision so that these small subdivisions would not require waivers for the private ways-Don DiMartino reviewed it as well. 3 lots can be maintained as private way with sight distance maintained at 125 feet and minimum centerline radius of 75 feet.

Appx. A –changing Windows 95 to Windows 2000 for submitting information on disc.

There were some changes to information requested on form B and D. and the current Form K.

RRL: Motion to accept changes to Planning Board procedural rules section 7 as submitted.

DB Second.

Vote: 4-0, Approved.

RRL: Motion to accept amendment to rules and regulations regarding the subdivision of land as submitted.

DB: Second.

Vote: 4-0, Approved.

RRL: Motion to Adjourn

DB: Second

Vote 4-0, Approved.

Minutes Accepted on: ______________ ____________________________

(date) (prepared by: Mary Chaves)

________________________________ _____________________________

Roland R. Laprade Brian J. Sutherland

______________________________ _____________________________

David Brown Glenn Wojcik

________________________________

Thomas J. Guerin