Print
Share page with AddThis

Planning Board Meeting

Upload file: 
Microsoft Office document icon pb_minutes_6.28.2016.doc
Meeting date: 
Tuesday, June 28, 2016

Planning Board Minutes

June 28, 2016

Town Hall, Griffin Room

 

 

I.  Call to Order

The public meeting was called to order at 6:30 PM by J. Atkinson, Chair, with the following:

 

Members Present:                                          Planning Staff:

James Atkinson                                              David Spitz, Town Planner

Alan Atkinson

Peter de Bakker

Joan Kozar

Joe McParland

Larry Brophy (alternate)

David Harris (alternate)

 

 

I.a.  (continued)  PB2016-09 Robert W. and Patricia N. Shelley, 4-Lot Definitive Subdivision, Main Street Extension

 

Attorney Robert Scarano appeared on behalf of Robert and Patricia Shelley.  The first subdivision plan did not meet the shape factor requirement.  To change this, they moved the proposed road southerly so that all lots now front on the same side of the road.  They still will make improvements to Old Brewster Road as in the first plan.  The new road will serve 3 building lots.  The fourth lot is being held for possible access by the Shelleys to land to the rear (east) of this property.  However, such access will not be pursued for a long time to allow Land Court to resolve title issues with the rear property.  With the change in lot shapes, a new perc test is required for Lot 2.  They will return to the Board of Health on July 12th for approval.

 

Attorney Scarano said the new road will remain private, and maintenance provisions are included in the storm drainage report.  There are no wetland jurisdictional issues.  The new roadway will be at a 90 degree angle with Old Brewster Road.  They are requesting a waiver at the intersection with Main St. Extension.

 

Mr. J. Atkinson asked about the waiver request for road width.  Mr. Scarano replied that 18 feet is typical of this type of road.

 

Mr. D. Spitz summarized staff notes with comments on three issues.  Regarding Board of Health approval, he said that the Board had approved the first plan with conditions and the new plan should not change any of those conditions.  He recommended that the Planning Board proceed with the same conditions and a requirement that the applicant return if the Board of Health changed any of those conditions.  Regarding the waiver request for 18 foot road width, he cited both Table 1 requirements and his recent memo on recommended standards for rural roads serving 5 lots or less.  Regarding the ability to improve Old Brewster Road and its impact on an abutting property owner served by the same access, he said it was the applicant’s responsibility for demonstrating that he legally could provide those improvements.  Mr. J. Atkinson said he disagreed with granting final subdivision approval prior to final Board of Health approval.

 

Mr. McParland asked for clarification about Lot A and the status of title on the rear land.  Mr. de Bakker asked for verification that Old Brewster Rd. stops at Route 6.  Mr. Scarano replied that each person abutting a private way owns to the centerline and has an easement to improve the way for utilities and road work.  Mr. de Bakker asked what are the standards for ancient way.  Mr. Spitz replied that the standard is “safe and adequate access”, not the subdivision standards in Table 1.  However, even though the source is different, Mr. Spitz said his normal recommendation is to treat ancient ways the same as subdivision roads when access is provided to new building lots.  Mr. Scarano said that they will widen Old Brewster Rd. to 18 feet and will pave it.

 

Mr. McParland asked if the septic connections to be located at the front of each house should be shown on the plan.  Mr. Spitz replied that this sort of detail normally would shown on building and septic plans for the individual lot, not on the subdivision plan.  Mr. A. Atkinson asked if any other road can be connected to this new road, and Mr. Scarano replied no.

 

Attorney David Reed appeared on behalf of the neighbors living at 54 Main St. Extension.  They are not objecting to the applicant’s right to subdivide but have a couple of questions before final approval is granted.  He said that right now Old Brewster Rd is nothing more than a driveway.  They want the entire intersection of Old Brewster Rd and proposed Shelley Path to be paved with a paved apron into the new road to allow for a smooth transition.  He said this would also improve aesthetics as gravel roads tend to be dusty.  They also request landscaping to block headlights from cars on Shelley Path.  He said that the proposed stop sign at the end of Shelley Path should not be within Old Brewster Road.  He also requested that when line of sight clearing is done at the intersection with Old Main Street Extension that existing mailboxes will not be affected.

 

Most importantly, Attorney Reed said they want to know how the applicant determined rright-of-way width and location to make sure they will not be encroaching.  They also question if lots are being proposed over another old town road known as Old Factory Road.  If these issues are resolved, they will not object to this subdivision. 

 

Mr. J. Atkinson asked Mr. Reed what information are you basing your assertion of a road crossing this site.  Mr. Reed said that several maps show Old Factory Road going diagonally across this property, but he has not done further title research.  Mr. J. Atkinson then asked Mr. Scarano to respond.

 

Mr. Scarano said he has no problem with Mr. Reed’s aesthetic issues.  The applicant normally gets together with the abutter to determine which trees will remain.  The applicant also can pave through the intersection, but this will change drainage calculations.  An option may be pervious pavement.  The stop sign will meet Department of Transportation standards for a 90 degree intersection.  Regarding mailboxes, anything disturbed will be replaced. 

 

He said the Town Assessor’s map is not official and that Old Factory Road has never been taken by the town or abandoned by the town.  He found no rights to anyone for Old Factory Road, though he noted that it is carried on the other side of Route 6 in certain places.  No easements exist across Shelley Parcel.  Mr. J. Atkinson asked if it never existed, why did it show up on the Town Assessor’s map?  Mr. Scarano said he has already checked the list of public roads and it is not there.  Mr. J. Atkinson recommended doing more research and returning on July 12th.  He asked Mr. Spitz to check with the Town Assessor and Town Clerk.  They need to know if this is a Town right-of-way and whether the public has any rights to it.  He said his concern is not the applicant’s right to improve Old Brewster Road but whether there are any public rights to Old Factory Road across the Shelley property.

 

Mr. McParland moved and Mr. A. Atkinson seconded a motion to continue the hearing until July 12th at 6:30 p.m.  The motion was approved unanimously (5-0).

 

I.b.  PB2016-13 Jamie Kline, Site Plan Special Permit, Queen Anne Road

 

Dan Croteau, land surveyor and engineer, appeared for the applicant.  The applicant intends to build a space for his own business and two have two rentals on the property.  He said they have one concern after reading the staff notes.  They will have one paved area not designated for parking that they intend to use for outside storage of materials in connection with the business.  They have prepared a revised plan to clearly depict the proposed storage area.  They are proposing 19 parking spaces after reviewing parking requirements with the Town Planner.  They are requesting one waiver to allow less than a 50 foot distance between driveways.  Mr. Spitz replied that he believed the waiver was not needed as the distance between the traveled portion of the driveways is greater than 50 feet.  He said the curb radii at the entrance are not included in the calculation per the wording of the Zoning Bylaw.  He then proceeded to summarize the balance of the staff notes.   He recommended that the draft condition regarding outdoor storage be modified per the applicant’s request.  He also described a driveway encroachment by the property to the west which must be addressed so that the applicant’s plan will not exceed maximum site coverage.  An enforcement letter has already been sent to the abutting property owner.

 

Mr. McParland moved and Mr. A. Atkinson seconded a motion to approve the following findings:

  1. There will be no nuisance or serious hazard to vehicles or pedestrians. 
  2. The plan provides for efficient and safe disposal of surface water.
  3. The use is consistent with the Zoning Code and will not adversely affect the neighborhood.
  4. The specific site is an appropriate location for the use and structure.
  5. Landscaping and lighting and other site plan details are adequate.
  6. The Building and Planning Departments have notified the abutting property owner to the west of a driveway encroachment that requires correction.  Such encroachment and pending correction does not affect traffic flow or site plan approval for the current application.

The motion was approved unanimously (7-0).

 

Mr. McParland moved and Mr. Brophy seconded a motion to approve the site plan special permit and waiver requested for the proposed building and site improvements at 243 Queen Anne Road based on the fact that the application meets the necessary requirements and criteria for approval pursuant to the Code of Town of Harwich with the above findings and the following conditions:

  1. Outdoor storage of materials or equipment shall not be permitted in any green space.  Proposed parking spaces and green space shall be maintained for their intended purpose.
  2. Site lighting shall conform to the requirements of §325-132 regarding illumination levels §325-130 regarding downwardly-shielded fixtures.
  3. Any changes to the site plan shall be subject to further Planning Board review.

The motion was approved unanimously (7-0).

 

PB2016-14 John Our, Modification of Subdivision Conditions, Daluze Estates

 

John Our, applicant and owner of two lots in the subdivision, described work since he acquired the property.  He does not want to rip up lawns for homes that have already been built to put in a sidewalk.  He has letters from several property owners to that effect.  He said that staff had recommended payment of a $16,000 fee but that he could build the sidewalk for $11,000.  Mr. Brophy said the original developer did not choose the option to pay a fee in lieu of on-site sidewalk construction, but that is an appropriate option now.  Mr. J. Atkinson noted that the Planning Board has been requiring sidewalks for similar projects recently.  Mr. McParland recommended splitting the difference between $11,000 and $16,000 and Mr. Brophy agreed.    Mr. J. Atkinson disagreed saying that we must treat all applicants the same.    

 

Mr. McParland moved and Mr. A. Atkinson seconded a motion to approve the following findings:

  1. Daluze Estates was initially approved in 2002.  A sidewalk was included on the approved road plans.
  2. The initial subdivider did not complete construction of the sidewalk.
  3. The current applicant purchased the two remaining unbuilt lots in the subdivision at auction in approximately 2013.
  4. Several letters have been received from property owners in Daluze Estates requesting that the sidewalk not be built at this time.
  5. The subdivision meets the requirement for waiver of sidewalk construction under §400-14.M.(7).

The motion was approved unanimously (5-0).

 

Mr. McParland moved and Mr. de Bakker seconded a motion to approve the applicant’s request for payment of a fee in lieu of sidewalk construction.  The motion was approved unanimously (5-0).

 

Mr. McParland moved and Mr. de Bakker seconded a motion to modify approved subdivision plans for Daluze Estates by requiring payment of $16,000 to the Town sidewalk fund in lieu of on-site sidewalk construction.  The motion was approved unanimously (5-0).

 

Mr. McParland moved and Mr. de Bakker seconded a motion to close the public hearing.  The motion was approved unanimously (5-0).

 

II.  New Business

 

Mr. A. Atkinson moved and Ms. Kozar seconded a motion to approve the June 14, 2016 minutes.  The motion was approved unanimously (7-0).

 

 

III.  Old Business

 

IV.  Briefings and Reports

 

Mr. J. Atkinson noted that two members, Joan Kozar and Al Atkinson, would be leaving the Board at the end of the month followed shortly after by the retirement of the Town Planner.  He commended all three for work done with the Planning Board.

 

Mr. McParland said he has been appointed to the East Harwich Fire Station committee.  The committee is putting together preliminary information to decide whether to build a 2nd floor on the existing building or to tear it down.  In response to a question from Mr. A. Atkinson, he said that currently neither Brewster nor Chatham are interested in joining Harwich to provide joint fire services.

 

The meeting was adjourned at 8:10 PM.

 

Respectfully submitted,

 

 

David Spitz

Town Planner

 

Adopted:          July 12, 2016