TOWN OF SHARON

PLANNING BOARD

Minutes of a Meeting of the Planning Board held on October 19, 2005, at 7:30 p.m., in the Town Offices.

PRESENT: REGINA MANISCALCO, CHAIR

WAYNE BRADLEY, CLERK

ARNOLD COHEN

PAUL LAUENSTEIN

PETER O’CAIN, ASST. TOWN ENGINEER

Business Transacted:

I. Meeting called to order.

FORM A PLANS

None.

SIGN REVIEW

None.

II. DISCUSSION RE: HOUSING PRODUCTION PLAN

Ms. Maniscalco pointed out that the Planning Board is not the voting body to approve or disapprove this plan. The voting body is the Board of Selectmen. The Planning Board just drafted it, basically did all the work. She said that if the Planning Board wanted to, it could vote to approve it or not, but it was not a binding vote. She wanted to make sure Messrs. Lauenstein and Bradley are comfortable with it, as they were not on the Board when it was written. It would be great if the Town could also indicate that the Planning Board was in favor of the HPP by its vote of approval.

Mr. Bradley asked why December 31 was a critical date for approval of the HPP.

_________________________________

Administrative Assistant

Planning Board Minutes Page Two October 19, 2005

Ms. Maniscalco explained that is the date the approval needs to be submitted to the State, but its acceptance would be retroactive to the June date on which it was first submitted to the State. Mr. O’Cain added that it would have an impact on the Old Post Road proposed 40B. If the HPP is approved in the next few months, they could get moving on the Old Post Road subdivision pretty quickly. They have received all approvals from the ZBA but are dealing with an appeal filed by the abutters. Mr. Bradley added that, if by passing the HPP the Town could stop Pine Woods, then you would effectively be issuing 100 building permits and not 50. Ms. Maniscalco answered that no it wouldn’t, as you would start at 50 again. Ms. Maniscalco asked the Board members to review the HPP and report any problems to her by Monday.

I. REVIEW OF PROPOSED BOARD OF HEALTH BY-LAW CHANGES

Ms. Maniscalco indicated that she did not have the language with her, nor has she received an answer from Town Counsel about the global change that had come up during the meeting. Mr. Cohen added that there are certain things that can be done under the Subdivision Control Law, but a lot of what is being proposed goes beyond what is permissible under that law. Ms. Maniscalco said that she came to the same conclusion as Mr. Cohen, but does still need to get an official answer from Town Counsel. She also has not received an updated version of the changes from the Board of Health with amendments from the last meeting. Therefore, discussion on these articles will be postponed until the next meeting.

II. OTHER BUSINESS

• Hunter’s Ridge – Mr. Cohen cautioned against taking any kind of action until it has been determined that there has been some kind of violation of the conditions of the permit. The Board should also ask Town Counsel if in fact the Town would have any recourse before the Board even discusses any revocation. The issue was that if the developer did in fact violate the conditions of the permit, would the Board have any recourse. Mr. Cohen wanted Mr. O’Cain’s input on this issue also.

Planning Board Minutes Page Three October 19, 2005

Mr. O’Cain responded that the items the Board needed to take into consideration were first, was the intent of the buffer to retain the existing vegetation or to create a 20’ buffer when the subdivision is complete. The Board never got into a discussion about this with the developer during its review process. During the review, there was some discussion that a certain amount of the buffer area would have to be removed, which the Board concurred with. The other issue is that the 20’ buffer issue regulation has been violated. To get an answer to this question, there would have to be a legal survey done by a professional land surveyor. Mr. O’Cain suspects that there are areas where the applicant has cleaned out vegetation right up to the property line. However, in the end, when the subdivision is finished, there will be a buffer in place and the subdivision plans do show plantings. If it was the Board’s intent to preserve a certain amount of the natural vegetation, it is not clearly stated in the decision.

Mr. Cohen said he did not feel that the decision gave the applicant the right to take out everything in the buffer areas. Ms. Maniscalco agreed that there was some discussion of having to take out the vegetation for the swale, but if you go back to the Board’s minutes and its discussions, the clear intent of the Board was to give some room where they needed it, but not to tear out all the vegetation everywhere. This subdivision is going to be around for a while, and all the current Board members may not be. So she wanted it clear in the record that it was not the intent of the Board to have all vegetation removed so that future Board members know what the intent of the Board was.

Mr. O’Cain made the point that if you have 20 foot trees as a buffer, it would preclude any shrubs growing under them. The Board needs to determine what it wants to do about this in the future – maybe clarify it more and specify its intent in its decisions.

Planning Board Minutes Page Four October 19, 2005

Mr. Cohen concurred that the Board agreed to the removal of some of the vegetation for the swale, but not for the rest of the property. If they level everything, what can the Board do about it. Perhaps at a minimum, the applicant should be asked to come in and explain what happened here. If the by-law states that there has to be a buffer and they say they can’t keep the natural vegetation for some reason, they should be required to come in and request a waiver. If they do not ask for a waiver the by-law should stand.

Mr. Lauenstein said that he went down to the site and walked around to check it out. The applicant has cleared everything right up to the property lines, including at the North Main Street side. Mr. Lauenstein said that three years ago when the Board brought the CSD by-law to Town Meeting, he clearly remembered thinking whether or not this was a good thing for the Town and whether or not he should vote in favor of it. Since it proposed to conserve more open space, he voted for it. There is nothing conserved here and all the buffers are stripped. What the applicant did here is clearly in violation of what the by-law says (which section he read aloud).

Ms. Maniscalco asked the Board what it wanted to do about what has happened, if anything? Mr. O’Cain cautioned that if the Board was going to go forward with this, it should at the least hire a professional surveyor to prove the applicant went to the subdivision property line. Mr. Cohen said that the first question that needed to be answered is did the applicant in fact violate the conditions of the Special Permit. The Board issued a decision and that is the operative document.

Ms. Maniscalco said that there were three action items: Mr. O’Cain is to bring the landscape plan in to the Board for review; check the decision to see what it says about the swales; check all the minutes regarding the Hunter’s Ridge subdivision. She also added that it would be a good idea to review the CSD intensely and determine what kind of changes can be made to prohibit this type of thing from happening in the future.

Planning Board Minutes Page Five October 19, 2005

Mr. Lauenstein suggested the Board look at the Pine Hills subdivision in Plymouth to see what is considered the perfect subdivision, what does it look like when it is done right.

III. There being no further business before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 10:15 p.m.