Canton, Massachusetts · Saved source text

PB 11-2-11

Planning · Source meeting date: 2011-11-02 · Record 39692

Saved text from 8 of 10 source pages. Transcription and OCR may contain errors; verify figures and wording against the original.

PLANNING BOARD MEETING 
WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 2, 2011 
7:00 P.M. 
SALAH MEETING ROOM 
TOWN HALL 
 
 
 
MINUTES 
 
Chairwoman: Ms. Kristin Mirliani, Vice-Chair: Mr. Jeremy 
Members present: 
Comeau, Mr. George Jenkins, Mr. Gary Vinciguerra, Mr. Christopher 
Connolly 
 
Secretary: Winifred Smith 
 
Meeting came to order at 7:00 P.M. 
 
CITIZEN SPEAK: None 
PROJECT: 955 TurnPike St. Site Plan: Titanium/Addition to Car Wash 
 
Chairwoman Mirliani: 
 Call to order the Planning Board Meeting for November 
2, 2011 
 
First item on the Agenda: continued hearing of 955 Turnpike St 
. 
 
Mr. Jenkins 
: Madame Chairwoman, if I may have a moment, on another matter 
a former compatriot of ours passed away this weekend, Sheila Cheimets. She 
used to be a selectman in Canton; she was the first female Selectman. They 
spoke of her passing and her years of service. She was well liked and respected 
for her many good deeds and commitment to community 
 
Atty: Paul Schneiders 
: 
We have been before you many times with this particular thing hopefully tonight 
Mr. ConnollyMr. Comeau 
we will end up with a vote. We want to thank and for 
agreeing to meet with us and they gave us some directions. 
 
Mr. Brodmerkle: 
Primarily we talked about ways to make the traffic flow better around the site. 
We also looked at the directional arrows coming into the southerly side of the gas 
pumps and that’s the only side you can gas up on. So now we truly do have this 
one way pattern going through out the site. 
 
Mr. Jenkins 
 voiced concerns regarding the North Entrance:

Can there be a double sign there, no left turn- do not enter - by the north 
entrance staked on top of each other? 
 
 
Mr. Broadmerkle 
: 
Right now we have a do not enter sign and right turn only sign that deters people 
from queuing into the turning lane at that location we could put a sign on top of 
that facing the opposite direction. 
 
Mr. Comeau 
: 
The other issue and I didn’t hear you mention it, I wanted to ask you because we 
talked about it in the meeting you stated, allow or at least go along with the 
condition there would be no filling between certain hours. And I wanted to make 
sure it was still your intention and those hours were again (TBD) O.K. 
 
Atty Schneiders 
: 
No filling when station is open – 
We have no additional Comments Madame Chair 
 
Mr. Jenkins 
: 
Make a motion we approve the plan with the proviso that those two additional 
signs placed at the traffic island. Hours of fill of the gas tanks will be in non 
operational hours. That is to be determined 
Motion: Seconded: Vote 4-1 in favor 
 
Next Item: - Crisileo Way 
 
Mr. Crisileo 
: 
We want to ask for a bond release for Crisileo Way 
 
Mr. Jenkins 
: 
Bond release how about street acceptance 
 
Mr. Crisileo 
: 
It’s already been accepted 
 
Mr. Comeau 
: 
He has all the signatures and everything, it’s already been accepted 
 
Mr. Jenkins 
: 
If the street has been accepted we have no right to hold the bond. I’m just 
surprised you waited so long 
 
Ms. Mirliani 
: 
Do you know how much we have? 
 
 2

Mr. Crisileo 
: 
$13,500, they have a passbook that I left with the town 
 
 
Mr. Jenkins 
: 
It’s in the passbook, motion made to release the passbook account being held by 
Mr. Crisileo 
the town to in its entirety 
 
Motion: Mr. Jenkins Seconded: Mr. Comeau Voted 5-0 in favor 
 
Ms. Mirliani 
: 
Moving on to Rules & Regulations 2.5.16 
Other information 
 
Mr. Comeau 
: 
Plan B may require applicant to furnish such additional info as may in the opinion 
of the Planning Board be necessary to evaluate the feasibility of pro design in 
subdivision such information may include the results of any tests or copies, 
calculations used in design copies or agreements granting the developer rights 
essential to development of the land and construction work involved including the 
rights of access over existing ways and rights to easement across the land of 
others. 
 
Mr. Vinciguerra 
: 
May Sha 
If I may interrupt, here is the issue the word or should it be changed to ll 
include 
 
Mr. Jenkins 
: 
No: because it is not a requirement if you put shall than it is a requirement. 
May 
I know what bothered me it is so open ended… include the results of any 
test I mean that goes far beyond the subdivision rules & regulations in chapter 
80, results of any test. What are we gonna test for? It’s just to open ended. If we 
are going to require tests should we enumerate them that goes a long way? 
 
Ms. Mirliani 
: 
You think we should have specific tests is that what you are saying? 
 
Mr. Jenkins 
: 
May 
 require information, I just think it is very open ended. 
 
Mr. Houston: 
The only comment I might make is it could be abused by a person but right now 
and in my tenure working with the board I don’t remember burdensome 
Mr. 
information typically being requested, and I think although I agree with 
Jenkins 
 100% it’s very broad potentially it could be abused. I don’t know if you 
could come up with a list of anything you might need in a particular instance. It 
 3

might actually be germane to the planning boards’ decision. I agree, it’s very 
broad and it could be abused. 
 
 
Mr. Jenkins 
: 
Suggestion, how about knocking the thing out cause we reserve the right to test 
for requirements 
 
Ms. Mirliani 
: 
I agree but, Mr. Houston was saying if we come up with a list than we are going 
to be unable to order a test, it’s not on the list. So I tend to think we need this, as 
opposed to that list. Maybe we can strengthen the language so it is more 
germane to what we are doing. 
 
Mr. Houston: 
If we had a statement that didn’t list anything but was more definitive, the 
Planning Board may require the applicant to furnish such additional info as the 
planning board has determined is necessary to evaluate the feasibility of the 
design of the subdivision. 
 
Ms. Mirliani 
: 
Do we want to be limited every time to requesting a review from the Historical 
Commission. Procedurally we need to discuss how we want to proceed with 
these, which is if someone needs to draft something obviously when we come 
forward to the hearing we have something specific we are talking about. We can 
say this is what we are proposing. 
 
Mr. Comeau 
: 
2.5.17 I think in certain circumstances, we would vote on the subdivision and 
then it goes to the Conservation Commission. We don’t get a report from Con 
Com before we vote and if the plan changes at the Con Com it needs to come 
back to us. The problem with this section is it requires the Con Com to give a 
report to the Planning Board before we vote, but I think it’s another process 
issue. 
 
Ms. Mirliani 
: 
It’s not mandatory it says may seek, we do seek sometimes we seek from the 
Fire Dept. and Police Dept. regularly. 
 
Mr. Comeau 
: 
I think it’s a process issue, I guess I’m more referring to Public Works and 
Conservation. These two are major issues and I don’t want to say that the others 
aren’t, but we regularly receive letters from Fire Dept, more importantly we don’t 
get anything from Public Works or Conservation. So again I think it’s a process 
that we don’t receive information from them, and I think, especially from the 
Conservation Commission. 
 4

I’m saying there seems to be a disconnect and maybe we should have some sort 
of process. I’m saying once a developer comes in we get a update from the Con 
Comm, if they are going before the Con Com maybe we do seek something from 
the Public Works because it is so vital we have info from the Public works 
 
Mr. Jenkins 
: 
MayShall 
How about if you change the word from to 
 
Mr. Comeau 
: 
May Shall 
I think that might work changing the word to 
 
Ms. Mirliani 
: 
Shall 
My only remaining concern is if we change it to than we probably want to 
remove also the Historical Commission. Because we don’t want to have to 
consult the Historical Commission about every definitive plan. 
 
Mr. Jenkins 
: 
In that one instance you signify that one’s not absolutely necessary. 
 
Mr. Comeau 
: 
I think this is the beginning of a process you look at the list you say do you want 
something from the Board of Health, the Conservation Commission we want one 
from them, we want one from them, no we don’t need one from the Historical 
Commission. Because it’s not applicable at that point. 
 
Mr. Jenkins 
: 
Like Mr.Comeau said if you don’t require it and we approve the plan and they are 
not happy they go to somebody else to the Conservation Commission which has 
happened in the past and they change a plan do we have to re-advertise do we 
have to rehear if you have it as a part of the program to begin with, there is no 
chance of that, that’s the only reason Turtle Creek we were fortunate the 
Conservation Commission weighed in on it. On the front side they did the same 
with Cedar Crest Extension. So that is put behind you before you go into (inaudi) 
A review of the plan off it goes they change it and back it comes. More review. 
 
Mr. Comeau 
: 
It’s almost like and expedited permitting in a way 
 
Mr. Jenkins 
: 
Exactly 
 
Mr. Comeau 
: 
It allows the process to be contained to a shorter period of time I would think 
 
Mr. Connolly 
: 
We can do all that now we just have to ask for it, it’s a process. 
 5

Mr. Jenkins 
: 
We could throw the whole book away, and we may ask for that, we just write a 
book, 
We may ask for everything we need 
 
Ms. Mirliani 
: 
But it doesn’t say everything we need. It contains a specific list of options. 
 
Mr. Jenkins 
: 
May 
No! that’s what I’m saying if is good enough. All I’m saying is none of the 
May 
books require it. All its says is we 
 
Mr. Houston: 
If I could share some of the thought process back from 98 this is part of the 
approval process of the definitive. Currently the subdivision control Law says 
that the Board must seek the opinion of the Board of Health. Here the list was 
expanded to kind of give the Planning Board a tickler file, who should get copies 
of the plan. There is a provision in the subdivision control law which precludes 
you requiring prior submission to other boards, so these submissions aren’t 
made by the applicant. They give us copies but the Planning Board, determines 
which of these agencies if any, except for the Board of Health, which other 
May 
agencies get copies of the plan. I think that the word and the fact that there 
are a list of agencies is just to refresh the Boards memory, who should we send 
this plan to. I think that’s its only significance. It’s not mandatory; it doesn’t 
impose a burden on the applicant. Once the Planning Board as the lead agency 
on this process asks the applicant to send or provide additional copies so they 
can research, it would be up to this board to do that it would certainly be prudent 
to do that. 
 
Mr. Jenkins 
: 
Here is my point – I buy a piece of land in Canton and I go by the book and I 
MayMay 
study it O.K. It says I , well whats mean. Do I build my subdivision plan 
and I give it to them then they’re gonna tell me I want this, I want that. 
 
Ms. Mirliani 
: 
They are directed to do what we at the Board meeting say, not what the 
developer says, whether we ask the Chief of Fire or Chief of Police to weigh in on 
a plan it’s irrelevant as to how someone develops their plan 
 
Mr. Jenkins 
: 
Absolutely not. 
 
 6

Ms. Mirliani 
: 
Whether or not we are going to ask for a review from the Chief of Police? 
 
 
Mr. Jenkins 
: 
If I’m developing a plan, these things I have to know to incorporate in my plan if it 
says you may seek. 
 
Mr. Comeau 
: 
When was the last time we asked public works to weigh in on a subdivision or do 
we do that at the beginning of the process? No, and don’t you think that is 
important to have the input from the Public Works, especially since the Public 
Works has the roads we rarely have the reports from the Public Works. I think 
that it’s important to have something in writing from the Public Works, before 
hand (inaudi), 
 
Mr. Connolly 
: 
We should get a check list as a reminder 
 
Mr. Houston: 
It may be an administrative thing; Suzanne is the one who would require these 
distributions. I don’t know if we have recently reviewed with her who she should 
typically send plans too. But I think that would address the issue just to indicate 
to her ever time we get a plan send it to these people and the rest of them 
consult with the Chair. 
 
Mr. Jenkins 
: 
Just one last statement if you consider this an administrative function wouldn’t it 
be better to take that responsibility away from the Board and require the 
applicant to do it. That’s all 
 
Ms. Mirliani 
: Anything else on this one? 2. 5.18 
 
Mr. Comeau 
: 
I think this is maybe another process issue where it talks about two years from 
the date of application, once an extension has been granted by the Board. We 
have no real process of following when developers two year deadline is up, I 
think we need to start doing that. I think it’s important for all applicants and 
subdivisions to follow this. 
 
Ms. Mirliani 
: 
So what are you proposing as a modification 
 
Mr. Comeau 
: 
Well I’m not quite certain there needs to be a modification, the other thing was, 
fully complete all subdivisions within the specified period shall automatically 
 7

rescind approval while there are certain subdivisions that have not been 
completed without an extension. They have not technically been deemed they 
have been rescinded, I’m not saying we should do that but the wording is in 
there. I think. 
 
Ms. Mirliani 
: 
Are you suggesting that it shouldn’t be in there? 
 
Mr. Comeau 
: 
I’m not saying it should or should not be there, again I think it’s a process. 
 
Mr. Jenkins 
: 
# 1 we have a tremendous amount of subdivisions right now that are in 
rescission that are still going, what it’s saying is we are failing to do our duty. 
automatically 
What I would do is, take out their word and put down “By a Vote of 
the Board” – rescission – not automatically. That is a very powerful paragraph 
there. In my time here I think we have rescinded one or two subdivisions, but to 
say automatically, what does it mean? Completed does it mean accepted at town 
meeting? 
 
Mr. Vinciguerra 
: 
So you’re saying we remove the word automatically and replace it with “By a 
Vote of the Board”. 
 
Ms. Mirliani 
: 
That makes sense 
 
Mr. Jenkins 
: 
When people come in for an extension I always look for an extension of a 
covenant as well because that has more power than the bond. 
 
Ms. Mirliani 
: 
Anything else on that one? O.K. we will go to 2.5.20 
 
Mr. Jenkins 
 
That is taken right from chapter 80, that’s a requirement what is it even in there 
for? 
 
Ms. Mirliani 
: 
Clarification for people who just pick up our book we just want to make sure they 
Mr. Jenkins 
know what they are building we don’t want to mislead anyone. 
We can move on. It was published in the paper. 
 
Mr. Vinciguerra 
: 
Canton Center Design Review Board to the Canton Zoning By Laws and the 
Canton Planning Board will be appointing five members and one alternate to the 
 8