Town of Sharon Planning Board

Meeting Minutes of 10/4/10

Amended and Approved on 10/20/10

Sharon Town Hall – Selectmen’s Room

Filmed by SCTV

 

Planning Board Attendees

Susan Price, Chair

Anne Bingham, Clerk

Eli Hauser, Vice Chair

Amanda Sloan - absent

David Milowe

Peter O’Cain, Town Engineer

 

Attendees

Bon Shelmerdine

Cheryl Weinstein

Robin Estrin

 

 

Chair Report

Chair Price read the Chair’s Report. Mr. Hauser agreed to attend the School Committee’s next meeting at the request of Jeff Cruzan. The Board changed the date of the January Planning Board meeting to 1/4/11 from 1/5/11 due to a scheduling conflict for one of the Board members.

 

Meeting Minutes

Mr. Milowe moved to accept the meeting minutes of 9/21 as amended. Mr. Hauser seconded the motion. The Board voted 4-0-0 in favor.

 

Ms. Bingham moved to accept the meeting minutes of 9/27 as amended. Mr. Hauser seconded the motion. The Board voted 3-0-1 in favor. Mr. Milowe abstained as he was not in attendance.

 

Capital Outlay Committee Representative

Mr. Milowe moved to nominate Anne Bingham as the second member of the Capital Outlay Committee. Mr. Hauser seconded the motion. The Board voted

3-0-1 (Ms. Bingham abstained).

 

Form A/Signs

None

 

P.O. Square Zoning

Ms. Bingham began the discussion by stating she has two comments to make. The first pertains to open space. She is concerned that the amount of open space is decreasing and feels it should be increased. She questioned why a set amount of open space cannot be required as per the size of the dwelling.

 

Ms. Price replied that she thinks the consultant reduced the minimum open space percentage to allow for more flexibility.

 

Mr. O’Cain said the MUOD has a minimum requirement of 15% coverage for open space.

 

Ms. Bingham replied that she wants to state for the record that 20% capacity is not enough. She wants to have a green community. She feels it is a mistake to get rid of having a certain amount of open space per dwelling unit size.

 

Ms. Price said this is a small compact area. The surrounding areas will be greener. We are proposing going from 30% to 20% which is still more than the MUOD.

 

Ms. Bingham said that comparing this to MUOD does not provide her with comfort. She thinks the MUOD density should be reconsidered not used as a template.

 

Mr. Hauser said that a 1,000 square foot building is the minimum that can be built. With 2 apartments on top of the store the minimum physical footprint is 20 times 50 or 1,000 square foot building with on site septic. This would end up being on a 7,000 square foot lot and yield 2,400 square feet of open space. Ms. Bingham disagreed with this presumption and feels the septic would have to be off site.

 

Ms. Bingham wants to reiterate that this is getting rid of the requirement that used to apply to all districts. She wants open space guaranteed and feels this proposal is eradicating open space not like the Wilber School which is good open space.

 

Mr. O’Cain said it is important to point out the regulations changed from a minimum of 1,000 -2,000 square feet of lot area required per apartment.

 

Ms. Bingham said not enough time was spent on the review of parking. She is concerned that the language in section 3111 is fuzzy, broad and discretionary language on permitting authority. If it gets a lot denser, parking will be an issue. 

 

Ms. Price commented that any redevelopment would have to provide the appropriate amount of parking. A two bedroom apartment requires two parking spaces.  There are no changes to residential parking. Ms. Bingham said she is uncomfortable setting density without setting up parking requirements.

 

Ms. Price reviewed the chart she created entitled “Major Differences, proposed zoning revisions for PO Square 10/4/10”. She read each of the changes aloud. A brief discussion ensued among the Board members regarding some of the changes and additional suggestions for modifications were made.  She described each change reflected in the draft from the Public Hearing to the article being posted. She also read an email dated 10/4 from Amanda Sloan regarding her opinion as she was not present at the meeting. Ms. Price also read the 10/2 email she received from Cheryl Weinstein.

 

Ms. Weinstein commented on her email. She stated she does not understand the specific 10 feet setback restriction. She wants more flexibility.

 

Ms. Price stated some other towns have similar or stronger restrictions.

 

Mr. Hauser commented that we all need to think we are dealing with 20 buildings on a pragmatic basis. There are 10 - 20 parcels in P.O. Square that could be developed. If there is a more unified look as the baseline there is more flexibility to change the setback through the ZBA. As we are only dealing with 10 - 20 parcels its limited. You have to create an environment that is stable, not arbitrary, that’s agreeable. These are avenues of differentiation. There is viability for specific requests.

 

Ms. Weinstein said she would like to see something good happen from this but would hold off presenting the article in November.

 

Ms. Price stated that if you bring in nicer apartments, it will generate more need for commercial businesses because there will be more people living in the area. She said there was a Marketing study done as part of the Land Strategies report which stated P.O. Square should be a local destination not a regional destination. This article isn’t rezoning land. No development project is proposed. It’s a package of revisions to the bylaws. Obviously she said, waste water is a big issue but it is better to fix the zoning now and it will be in place for the time when the waste water is resolved. She fears the Land Strategies Study which was completed in 2009, and the research was done in 2008, is almost two years old. If we wait for waste water to be resolved, then the studies would be considered outdated by some.

 

Ms. Bingham said we have proven time and again when someone is hot on a project, changes are done fast. It should not be “build it and they will come” philosophy. She said she is not in favor of putting this zoning on the warrant in November as things are still unclear. She wants the septic solution before allowing an increase in density or there will be Board of Health pressure.

 

Mr. Hauser said it is important to make a pragmatic decision. This is open ended. People should look at what’s been added. We are defining a lot of things that are open ended making it a more clear and coherent document. He is in favor of what’s been done. The owners need to step up. The baseline waste water study was good. At the end of the day, out of 40 owners maybe 20 parcels could be developed. He does not think the Town should sponsor waste water design for 3 business owners. The Board of Health is knowledgeable of what needs to happen and he thinks this should happen in parallel. There is a lot of information on the table and he does not feel it is rushed.

Ms. Price said that as opposed to when a developer comes in with a zoning request, this has been a long and thoughtful process. The recent changes to the draft came about due to comments made at the public hearing, a meeting with the Finance Committee and when the new Planning Board member had to get up to speed.

 

Mr. Milowe said the revision allows for more uniformity. Flexibility is found with ZBA tools available to make changes if needed.

 

Mr. Hauser moved that the Board advocate that the draft posted today in article form, Article 1, be recommended to Town Meeting.  Mr. Milowe seconded the motion. The Board voted 3-1-0 (Ms. Bingham voted no).

 

Ms. Price and Mr. Hauser commented that they would be meeting with both the Board of Selectmen and the Finance Committee next week.

 

Bella Estates

Mr. O’Cain provided the Board members with his September 10, 2010 memorandum entitled Initial Bond Recommendation for Bella Estates. He then stated that there are currently two bonds on the property. The first is the Mirrione bond which has not been released. The second bond refers to the original plan. Mr. O’Cain wants the language to refer to the new plan.

 

Mr. Hauser moved that the Planning Board sanction the 428K surety recommended by Peter O’Cain’s email dated 9/10/2011 subject to completeness of Form F. Ms. Bingham seconded the motion. The Board voted 4-0-0 in favor of the motion.

 

Ms. Estrin came before the Board again to discuss her fence issue. She was promised a 130 foot fence from the original developer, Mr. Mirrione. At the May, Planning Board meeting, Mr. Shelmerdine indicated he would correct the fence issue and provide her additional fencing to the current 96 feet she has. She has been waiting a long time and Mr. Shelmerdine agrees that she has been patient and apologized that he doesn’t have a commitment from his client. He will commit by the next Planning Board meeting when the extra 40 feet can be added. His goal is by early November to have it installed. He will call Ms. Estrin by this Thursday. Mr. Shelmerdine will come back to the 10/20 meeting to report.

 

Mr. O’Cain discussed the historic wall and fence problem of Ms. Sheila Griffen who was not in attendance. Mr. Shelmerdine said he knows that plantings, a fence on the property and fieldstone needs to be replaced before the Certificate of Occupancy on house lot #2.

 

Mr. O’Cain said they have until the Certificate of Occupancy is complete. Mr. Shelmerdine will report back on the 10/20 meeting as well.  He will also check on the status of the $4,000 check for the Thomas’. Mr. Milowe confirmed that the $5,000 is due to be placed in an account as per the Homeowners Agreement by November 22nd.

 

Sharon Commons

Mr. O’Cain said the start for this project is now 2012 instead of 2011. It is before the ZBA. They are requesting a change from the lifestyle center to big box format. A brief discussion ensued.

 

Traffic Study

Mr. O’Cain commented that Mr. Houston will have a traffic report as relates to P.O. Square to hand out at the end of October.  Mr. Hauser wants Mr. Houston to present his report to the Selectmen.

 

Brickstone

Mr. O’Cain had no information.

 

Housing Production Plan

Mr. O’Cain reported that he received an email from Ben Puritz that the Town received a grant to update the Housing Production Plan. Mr. Hauser said he will speak to Jenny Raitt regarding the updates.

 

 Next meeting dates

10/20, 11/3, 11/17, 12/11, 2/15 and 1/4.

 

Adjournment

Mr. Milowe moved to adjourn the Planning Board meeting at 10:00 PM. Ms. Bingham seconded the motion and the Board voted 4-0-0 in favor.

 

Attached Documents

1. October 4, 2010 – Major Differences – Proposed Zoning Revisions for Post Office Square

2. October 4th, 2010 email from Amanda Sloan.

3. October 2, 2010 email from Cheryl Weinstein

4. September 10, 2010 Memorandum from Peter O’Cain entitled Initial Bond Recommendation for Bella Estates.