Town of Sharon Planning Board
Meeting Minutes for Public Hearing of 5/2/07
Amended and Approved on 6/6/07
Planning Board Attendees
|
Eli Hauser - Chair |
Amanda Sloan – Clerk |
|
Arnold Cohen – Vice Chair |
Paul Lauenstein |
|
Andy Schwartz |
|
|
|
|
Guests
|
Susan Price |
Sandra Jacob |
|
Tom Houston |
Laura Nelson |
|
Seth Ruskin |
Eric Hooper |
|
Astrida Apse |
Rita Corey |
|
Ivers Apse |
Pam Turney |
|
Al Lipkind - Stoughton |
Barbara Radler |
|
Rob Germain |
Sue Kerr |
|
Richard Mandell |
Anne Bingham |
|
Paul Vitali |
Susan Peck |
|
Edmund Burr |
David Hearne |
|
Kathy Farrell |
John Connery (Brickstone) |
|
Elizabeth Giordiana |
Nancy Fyler |
|
S. Fyler |
David Wluka |
|
Jaffe |
Rob Maidman |
|
Bill Fleming |
John Kusmiersky (Brickstone) |
|
Nancy Wluka |
Chris Regnier |
|
Marty Spagat (Brickstone) |
Dick Gelerman |
|
Bob Vanasse (Brickstone) |
Bob Daylor (Brickstone) |
|
Alan Lurie |
Irv Weiner |
|
Dick Levine (Stoughton Selectmen) |
Jerry McDonald |
|
Kyla Bennett |
Rita Alpert |
|
Leslie Myatt |
|
Peter O’Cain, Assistant Town Engineer, Consultant
Meeting Initiation
The Public Hearing was called to order at 7:30 PM by Chair Eli Hauser. Clerk Amanda Sloan read the legal ad as posted in the Advocate, into the record.
Meeting Discussion
Chair Hauser set the order of the agenda for presentation purposes
1) Town Boards
2) Community Organizations
3) Residents
4) Guests
5) Planning Board members and Town Departments can have priority.
Chair Hauser also defined the rules of decorum as disallowing conversations back and forth as well as minimizing repetition of previously asked questions. He stated that the purpose of the public hearing is to provide input to the Planning Board to help them determine how they would vote. The target for completion was set for 10:30 PM at which time the Planning Board would close the Public Hearing and open the Planning Board meeting for discussion of what was presented. There would be no more public input after the close of the Public Hearing on whether to recommend the article to Town Meeting.
Mr. Cohen stated that by Massachusetts law whenever there is a warrant article to amend zoning, the Planning Board has to have a public hearing. It is the Planning Board’s function to make a recommendation to the Town Meeting regarding the article.
Bob Daylor, CEO of Daylor Group Consultants, consultant to the Developer provided a brief overview of the Brickstone plan for development of the land. He listed the benefits to the Town which include a six million dollar high pressure water system and a one million dollar water distribution system. John Kusmiersky also of Brickstone stated that there would be a 250 acre land contribution, a fire station as well as a monetary contribution to Simpson for affordable housing.
Mr. Lauenstein, Chair of the Water Advisory Committee recommended to the Selectmen the enforcement of a $4,000 hook up fee per dwelling unit which would yield 2.5 million dollars to the Town instead of waiving the fee. He also recommended that the developer should provide the Town with $1.1 million dollars in conservation funds to offset the demands on Sharon’s aquifers.
Suzi Peck of the Board of Health stated the BOH took a vote and 2 members voted in favor, 2 were opposed. In a second vote, 3 members voted in favor to postpone the decision in order to more fully understand the impacts and make sure the controls are built into the agreement with one opposed. She asserted that once the permitting process is entered into, our hands are tied. She asked that the vote be postponed in order to make an informed choice and understand the alternatives. She said there were several questions the BOH wanted explored: 1) water and wastewater – 116,000 gallons projected flow for the development versus a much smaller amount to be used if 88 homes were built. She stated that the mounding estimates were not done for the 116,000 gallon flow. 2) Pharmaceuticals – emerging contaminants are flushed – mostly come out of urine and are removed by the treatment plant. They will not get removed and will be going right to the wells. There are no standards right now to control or test this however the DEP is presently working to develop standards. 3) Conventional effluent is controlled by wastewater treatment and this should be fine. This is sensitive area for wells and Briggs Pond. She stated this is a risky site. She said it is the Selectmen’s choice as to where the groundwater monitoring will be. The BOH thinks they should be involved in the decision making. She stated that the traffic analysis done for Bay Road was not done for Mountain Street.
Irv Weiner of Bay Road questioned how the Town will be protected from the pharmaceuticals emitted from the 150 bed nursing home. Ms. Peck replied that the medical waste will be “tight tanked” and should not get into the wastewater. The nursing home discharges the wastewater into the treatment plant and the medical waste will be taken away.
Mr. Hauser asked Eric Hooper, Superintendent of Public Works to comment on water. Mr. Hooper stated that there are 6 productive wells; 3 in the Neponset River Basin which accounts for 65% of the use and 3 in the Taunton Basin which accounts for 35% of the use. The Taunton Basin is more highly stressed. He stated that the Town of Sharon is limited to 65 gallons per day per person and we have a water withdrawal permit of 650 million gallons. In the past 2 years 586 million gallons to 521 million gallons were used respectively. He stated that the water capacity the Town has for this project is enough and the Town is not intending to implement sewers or join the MWRA. He said the Town water is in good shape and the Town is well under our permit amount. He said we will not exceed capacity as a result of the proposed development. Mr. Lauenstein disagreed with Mr. Hooper’s comments and stated Sharon was on a list of 22 Towns targeted to MWRA as potential new customers. Mr. Hooper stated Sharon is expecting to join the MWRA for intermediate emergency connection if half of the production capacity is off line for six months only.
Tom Houston of PSC described the standards for monitoring. His firm was engaged on behalf of the Selectmen to assist in preparing the text for the bylaw. The bylaw requires that the effluents from the plant meets drinking water standards as well as class A surface water standards, and there are regulations to monitor the quality of water as it crosses the project boundary. He stated that the Board of Appeals grants site plan approval. The Board of Health can require groundwater monitoring at the property line to ensure standards are met. Mr. Houston stated that he received input from the various Town boards and concerned citizens in order to assemble the article.
Rob Maidman of the Economic Development Committee said the EDC studied options for many parcels for development. They looked at the larger issues faced by the Town and said that with joint determination we should go forward with the vote on 5/7/07.
Jerry McDonald of Stoughton, MA asked what protection is there if the effluent does not meet standard and what would the Town do. Anne Bingham of the BOH responded that most likely through state enforcement parameters would be brought back into compliance.
Bill Fleming of Briggs Pond Community asked if contamination of the well in the area occurs what exactly happens. What ensures groundwater is cleansed? Bob Daylor replied that a monitoring report will go to the DEP monthly. The distance from the discharge area to the Flemings well is 2200 feet. Things can be done, the contamination is not instantaneous. The DEP would enforce their rules.
Elizabeth Giordani of Briggs Pond Way disagreed with the building of a high rise city.
Tom Houston stated that the language in the bylaw is to primarily service the senior district. As citizens were concerned with the word “exclusively” in the text because it could prohibit guests. Mr. Gelerman stated that the project was not intended to have stores accessible to the public. It was questioned why the language did not state residents and guests and Mr. Houston felt it was a judgment call and the language was adequate.
Rob Maidman, Vice Chair on the Council on Aging said the use for seniors is not specific yet. It would allow Sharon Seniors access to the facility but not meant for retail facilities.
Rita Corey of Mountain Street advocated the idea of an organic golf course and not using pesticides. Mr. Houston replied that the present requirement for the zoning bylaw regarding pesticides and herbicides can be applied in context of the plan which placed reasonable restriction on their use. He thinks they are sufficiently controlled.
David Wluka of 64 Massapoag Avenue question the pending litigation surrounding this property and Mr. Gelerman replied that there are two litigations pending 1) appeal by developer of 150 unit comprehensive permit and 2) lawsuit in Superior Court by abutters for 250 units.
Mr. Apse of 1 Coach Lane asked if the sewage treatment plant makes noise. Bob Daylor replied that the plant is housed in a building and it is not noisy. There are sound requirements at the properties edge.
Leslie Myatt of Mountain Street asked that the language within the bylaw be changed to include residents and guests and that when the golf course bylaw was voted, it was voted NORA, the organic standard for golf courses. She asked that the developer make changes to go with those standards.
Rita Alpert of Coach Lane requested the vote be postponed because of unknown answers to many questions.
Paul Vitali of 17 Valley Road asked if the Rattlesnake Development Corporation has a development plan for the additional land. Town Engineer Peter O’Cain stated that the Rattlesnake Development Corp. does not own additional land. Mr. Vitali also asked what the vision for the development was. He wanted to see pictures. Mr. Cohen stated this is a zoning article and every issue is a factor to be considered by the ZBA who issues the permits. It is not a by right project. This is a zoning change only. Mr. Vitali also asked about the garage underground and Mr. Rainer, of Brickstone said the underground garage access is through the front. There is a small surface area for parking near the nursing home. Mr. Vitali also asked if an impact study was performed on the underlying study and Mr. O’Cain replied no. Mr. Hauser stated they just need to file a standard permit.
Kyla Bennett of Easton asked why this was not considered spot zoning. Mr. Gelerman replied that spot zoning does not apply here.
David Wluka of Massapoag Avenue stated that the change in houses will happen regardless of this project and that concerns about school children moving out of their house due to moving to this development do not apply.
Mr. Houston stated it is permitted to place an on site well for purposes of irrigation but not affect the property line.
Dick Levine, Chair of Stoughton Board of Selectmen asked where the MWRA emergency connection that were discussed would be hooked up and Eric Hooper replied there are 3 locations – Cobbs Corner, Plain Street and Violet Circle but nothing is set. He also asked what the plans are for alterations to Bay Road and the type of permitting for the Town of Stoughton. Mr. Houston replied that the development agreement and zoning bylaw require the proponent to obtain all required approvals and various authorizations from Sharon and Stoughton. Some segments are in Stoughton’s jurisdiction. Both BOS would need to approve. The zoning bylaw and development agreement force the proponent to obtain permits. There are areas of construction proposed by the proponent such as installation of traffic signals at East Street and Plain Street and to widen the pavement at the entrance for a turning lane. Mr. Levine stated that cooperation from Stoughton should not be expected.
Mr. Fleming of Briggs Pond wants phosphorus loading put into the warrant which is the state standard. He feels Briggs Pond will be algae filled. He said that phosphorous and nitrogen is the biggest issues under permit by right. He feels the Town is rushing to judgment.
Mr. Gelerman clarified that a special permit provides for more discretion and a site plan review is not without the authority to impose reasonable conditions above what is contained in the zoning.
Mr. Houston replied that 1 milligram per liter of phosphorus is in the bylaw and this is the standard for phosphorus when effluent is discharged directly into the surface water. The discharge in this property is to discharge to the ground. It is unlikely the DEP would impose restrictions on phosphorus put into the ground. Soil can absorb phosphorus. To be within ultra protective of resources include 1 millimeter per liter. It’s an unnecessary level of protection.
Rita Corey of Mountain Street stated:
2. Is 40B or 88 homes an option? Mr. Gelerman stated both are a possibility.
3. Regarding borders why is 10 feet listed as the buffer? Mr. Houston stated that 10 feet was written to address the length of the access road to minimize the impacts of the wetlands. It is not a no cut zone.
4. Presentation by Brickstone included building a fire substation; was this decided. Mr. Gelerman replied that the developer agreed to accommodate a 2 bay fire station but before this happens it had to go before the Town Meeting for equipment.
5. Ms. Corey questioned the amount of $900,000 given to the Sharon Housing Partnership. Mr. Hauser said we do not have inclusionary zoning. For every 10 homes built we need one affordable home. With an exposure of 624 condos, 36 are to be built through Simpson.
6. Selectmen waived Town regulations regarding water regulations for Avalon Bay and Sharon Commons. Will the same thing happen?
7. Why is the developer against using a special permit process? Chris Rainer of Brickstone replied this is a significant development regarding the gift of land and they wanted certainty of site plan approval.
8. She said 600 signatures were presented to the Selectmen to postpone the meeting.
Alan Lurie of the Sharon Housing Partnership talked about the $900,000 to go to the Sharon Housing Partnership Trust. The funds are used to convert placing deed restrictions on Sharon residents so when you sell a home it takes less upfront payment from the trust. The property is deed restricted for affordable housing. Mr. Schwartz questioned why the number went from 1 million dollars to $900,000 and Mr. Gelerman said it was a negotiated total and the difference was placed somewhere else.
Mr. Schwartz said a comment was made that the towers were visible all over Town and he wanted to know the results of the balloon test. Mr. Fyler of Highland Street said he looked at the balloon test and could not see if from Mountain or Bay Road. Ivers Apse, a 37 year resident stated the balloon was caught in the branches and the demonstration was ineffective. Bill Fleming said he saw the balloon from Briggs Pond and Kyla Bennett from Stoughton said the balloon was clearly seen at 105 feet and was visible from other places in Town. She has photos. Jerry McDonald of Stoughton asked about the size of the balloon and Bob Daylor said it was a small red balloon which is 4 feet wide.
Meeting Adjournment
Mr. Cohen moved to close the public hearing at 11 PM for both articles and Mr. Schwartz seconded the motion. The Board voted 5-0-0 in favor of closing the Public Hearing.