Planning Board

************************************************************ TAUNTON PLANNING BOARD MINUTES Meeting held at Maxham School, 141 Oak Street ************************************************************* DATE: April 2, 2020 BOARD MEMBERS: Bob Campbell, Chairman Anthony Abreau Arthur Lopes, Vice Chairman John Reardon Manuel Spencer, Clerk Dennis I. Ackerman Brian Carr ADVISORS: Michael Patneaude, City Engineer Kevin Scanlon, City Planner __________________________________________________________________________ Roll Call: Carr, Reardon, Abreau, Lopes, Ackerman, Spencer, and Campbell present. Meeting opens at 5:30 PM. By virtual means. Also present was City Planner Kevin Scanlon. Arthur made motion to approve minutes of March 5, 2020, seconded by Dennis. All in favor. Public Hearing – 9 Swan Drive – Special Permit from Section 440-710 of the Zoning Ordinance for an 832 sq. ft. accessory dwelling unit, submitted by Gregg & Patti-Ann Doherty. Roll Call: Abreau, Lopes, Ackerman, Spencer, Reardon, Carr, Campbell present. Hearing opens at 5:31 pm. Dept. comments from the Water Dept., B.O.H, Veolia Water, City Engineer, Conservation Commission, City Planner were read into the record. Brad Fitzgerald, P.E. SFG Associates states they are proposing an 832 square foot one-bedroom accessory dwelling unit for the petitioner’s parents to reside. The proposed addition meets all zoning setbacks and they have shown the adequate parking on the submitted plans. Manny asked if the addition is going in the rear of house and it was answered yes. Brad stated there will be one entrance in back, one on the south side of the building. Manny asked who will be living there and Brad answered Gregg’s parents. Public Input open. No one in favor or in opposed called in. Public input closed. Dennis made motion, seconded by Manny to grant the Special Permit for an accessory dwelling to include dept. comments. All in favor. Hearing closed at 5:41 PM Public Hearing – 65 Par Place – Special Permit from Section 440 Attachment #1 of the Zoning Ordinance for a 2-family use in a Suburban Residential District., submitted by Francisco & Maria Lima. Roll call: Lopes, Abreau, Spencer, Carr, Reardon, Ackerman, and Campbell. Dept. comments from City Planner, City Engineer, Conservation Commission, B.O.H , TMLP, Veolia Water and were read into the record. Francisco & Maria Lima present. Mr. Lima stated they wish to be able to rent out to anyone so they are asking for a two-family use. They had their son living there but he has since moved out and now they wish to rent it out to anyone. There was some discussion as to whether or not this was an in-law apartment that was built. The petitioner stated his son lived there and now they want to add kitchen to make it a two- family. Manny stated the entire neighborhood consists of single family dwelling and this would not be 1 compatible. Kevin reminded the Board the zoning recently change and allows for someone to apply for special permit for a two-family use in a Suburban Residential District. This is consistent with the Master Plan allowing two-family dwellings in a Suburban Residential District. Brian agrees with Manny it doesn’t fit in the neighborhood. Kevin stated there is going to be a first because the zoning just recently changed. It was brought up that the sewerage might need upgraded. Mr. Lima stated it’s connected to city sewerage. It was noted the parking area is located right next to the wetlands per the city engineer’s letter. They said they could re-locate the parking spaces to the front. Mr. Lima stated they originally had a family member living there (son) and he has since moved out. Several Board members had reservations about making it a two-family. Dennis stated the property has the main house and an apartment. Chairman Campbell stated according to the aerial photo there are landscaping vehicle on the premises. Mrs. Lima stated that was her son and he has moved out. Tony asked how many bedrooms and it was answered 2 bedrooms. He stated they would need to pay the inflow and infiltration fees to the DPW. Brian wasn’t in favor of this even though it’s consistent with the Master Plan. Public Input: No one in favor or opposed called in. Public Input closed. Manny stated he has major concerns with this because he’s worried it being a two-family people will be parking on the cul-de-sac and he’s against it. John asked if this will have separate utilities? Chairman Campbell answered it will be a one owner home with one water and sewer bill. John isn’t in favor of it. Dennis stated reminded the Board that they and the Municipal Council supported the zoning change that allowed this and if they have any issues with the parking they can move it to the front. Manny stated he wouldn’t want this is in neighborhood and it’s just not parking for residents but visitor parking. Kevin pointed out the Board approves accessory dwelling units and this is similar but it’s ultimately up to the Board to determine if fits in the neighborhood. Chairman Campbell said the aerial photo shows the parking area against the wetlands. The plans submitted were form 2009 and they were from a conservation filing. Arthur asked how many bedrooms and it was answered 2 bedrooms. Kevin stated he doesn’t see a large impact to the neighborhood. Several board members were against putting 2 families in an established neighborhood consisting of all single families. Chairman Campbell stated the zoning change allowing a person to apply for a special permit for a 2 family use in a Suburban residential district, it’s not a matter of right, it’s at the Board’s discretion. Unfortunately it sounds like the use has been there without the property permits and there won’t be much of a difference. Dennis stated if denied can they have people living there? They cannot use it as a two-family if denied. Motion made to grant as presented with the following conditions: move parking to front, and applicant must pay inflow & infiltration fees to DPW. Vote: Ackerman, Abreau….Yes Spencer, Lopes, Carr, Reardon…No Motion does not pass. Motion made to Deny the Special Permit as presented: Vote: Lopes, Spencer, Carr, Reardon…..Yes Ackerman, Abreau………………No Motion passed. Special Permit DENIED. Hearing closed at 6:14 PM 2 Public Hearing – 340 Winthrop St. – Special Permit from Section 440 Attachment #1 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow a single family use in a Highway Business District, submitted by Valerie Martin. Roll call: Abreau, Carr, Spencer, Ackerman, Lopes, Reardon, and Campbell. Hearing opens at 6:16 PM Public hearing notice read and dept. comments from the City Planner, Engineer, Conservation Commission and B.O.H. which were placed on file. Letter form Atty. Brennan requesting a continuance to the meeting in May. Motion made and second to grant continuance to May 7, 2020 meeting. Public Hearing – 497 W. Britannia St. - Form J Plan – Waiver of frontage requirements – to divide one lot into two lots, submitted by Cameron & Alexandra Moiotoza. Roll call: Abreau, Spencer, Carr, Lopes, Reardon, Ackerman, and Campbell present. Hearing opens at 6:17 pm. Public hearing notice read into the record along with dept. comments from the City Planner, Conservation Commission, B.O.H and City Engineer which were placed on file. Alexandra & Cameron Moitoza and Roy Delano, P.E. were welcomed to the meeting. Mrs. Moitoza stated they are proposing to divide the property into two lots so they can build house. Manny stated he drove by and he noticed the existing house is a 4 family. Mrs. Moitoza answered yes it is. Her grandparent own that property and they want to build new house next door. It was asked if there enough parking for the existing 4 family and Mrs. Moitoza answers and points out where they are on the plans. She stated they will have their own driveway to their lot. Public input opened: No one in favor or opposed called in. Public input closed. Brian asked if the lot has municipal water & sewer and it was answered yes. Tony stated the sewer and water come from road and there is no moratorium on this road. Tony stated the only work scheduled that he is aware of is the new RR across the street. Dennis wanted to know if there would be a problem connected to water & sewer and Tony answered no. Tony made motion to approve the Form J to include dept. comments, seconded by Arthur. All in favor. Hearing closed at 6:27 PM 1. If there is any work within the 100 foot buffer zone of the bordering vegetated wetland, then the applicant will be required to file with the Conservation Commission. 2. Any work on the existing or new City utilities will require DPW Permits including City Licensed Contractor, Street Opening and or Trench. Public Meeting – 36 Allison Ave. – Site Plan Review – to allow construction of a 50’x 50’addition, replacing existing loading dock and minor expansion of existing paved parking areas submitted by Jeff Burek/Burek, LLC. DIRB comments and Water Dept., B.O.H, Fire,, Eng. Cons. Comm., TMLP, and Veolia Water were read into the record. Joshua Borden, Arthur Borden Associates representing petitioner. They are proposing a 50 x 50 addition off the back of the building and slide the parking over a little. There will be a little increase in impervious area. He stated he has no issues with the DIRB comments and they will be preparing a 81X plan (combining the lots) Tony asked about the drainage and it was answered there will be no expansion to the current system, all impervious will still fit into the existing system. There will be no real work in the drainage system. Chairman Campbell asked if it would be better if we wait until you go to the Conservation Commission. Josh answered no you can move forward tonight he doesn’t see any issues with conservation. Public Input : no one in favor or in opposition called in. Close public input. Dennis made motion to grant the Site Plan Review with dept. comments, seconded by tony All in favor. 3 Condition #1) That the plans dated January 30, 2020 shall govern with the following additional conditions: Condition #1) That the plans dated January 30, 2020 shall govern with the following additional conditions; Condition #2) Lighting shall not illuminate any portion of abutting properties Condition #3) The site shall be kept clean and clear of debris Condition #4) Two set of as-builts shall be submitted upon occupancy for all work on site and shall include design engineer and land surveyor certification notes stating the development has been built according to the approved plans. Plans will show all construction of buildings, utilities, grades, setbacks etc Condition #5) Two sets of updated plans shall be provided that conforms to this decision prior to Building permit. Condition #6) Order of conditions from Conservation Commission is required. Condition #7) An updated utility as-built shall be provided. Condition #8) The site consists of two lots (107-53 and 107-52). The expansion of the parking lot as shown encroaches on the required landscape buffer on lot 107-53. If the lots are combined via a recorded plan then the encroachment would be eliminated. Otherwise, ZBA approval is required. One of these actions must completed prior to any building permits. Condition #9) Continued compliance with the ZBA decision case #3119 and the relevant conditions of the site plan review decision dated April 24, 2012. Condition#10) Any changes to the existing City utilities will require DPW permits including City Licensed Contractor, Road Opening and or Trench Permit. Fuller Estates - lot release for lots 3 lots, submitted by Hawthorne Dev. Dept. comments were read from City Planner, City Engineer and Outside consultant recommending release of 3 lots upon receipt of $9,000 per lot. John Garanito states he has issues and will post that amount. Dennis made motion to release 3 lots upon receipt of $27,000 ($9,000 per lot) of surety. Seconded by Arthur. All in favor. Oaklawn Avenue – Remand from Superior Court - Chairman Campbell stated this is a Remand from the Superior Court and we have been advised by the Law Department to comply with the order and grant the Form J. Tony asked if the sewer will get extended and Chairman Campbell stated yes the conditions still apply. Brian stated they have approved per court order. Motion made and seconded to grant the Form J for 3 lots with the following conditions: 1. The applicant must install the proposed sewer and repave the street the full width for the disturbed length. 2. Approval for 3 lots as shown on the plan. 6 members in favor. Ackerman excused because he wasn’t on the Board when initial hearing took place. Meeting adjourned at 6:41 PM 4 5