HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-5-31ZB A Minutes for 1\1ay 31, 2019, adopted June 13
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
Public Meeting
2 Fairgrounds Road
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
«-ww.nantucket-ma.go,,-
Commissioners: ! ,' Chair), Lisa Botticelli (Vice chair), Susan McCarthy (Clerk), Nlichael 1. O'Mara, Kerim Ko,ratac
Alternates: Mark Poor, Geoff ThaN,er, Jim \londam
-- MINUTES --
Friday, May 31, 2019
4 fairgrounds Road, Public Safetv Facility Community Room -2:00 p.m.
Called to order at 2:09 p.m. and _Announcements made.
Staff in attendance: AIc'_'att 'I rude]. _administrative Specialist; Terra Norton, Town 'Minutes Taker
.Attending .\Iembers: I oo':c, Botticelli, 1lcCarthv, Thaler, 'Mondani
.Absent. O\lata, hoseatac, Poor
Town Representative: 1.d \I:trchant, 40B Advisor (b)- phone); George Pucci, K&P Law, P.C.
.Agenda adopted by unaninx>us consent
1. A131:111OVAL OF MINUTES
1. AIa)- 20, 2019: Held b- unan monis consent.
11. 01-D B[JSINESS
20-18 Surfside Crossing, I,LC Surfside Crossing 40B Havert /Reade
The Board will hair delihcir itions regarding the application for a Comprehensive Permit in accordance with M.G.L. Chapter 40B. The
Locus is situated at 3, d, -and 1) youth Shore Road and is shown on Assessor's Map 67 as Parcels 336, 336.9, 336.8, and 336.- and is shown
as Lots 4, 3, 2, and 1 on Plan Book 25, Page 50 as recorded at the Nantucket Registry of Deeds. The total lot area of the combined parcels
is approximateh 135 acres,. I' idence of owner's title is recorded in Book 1612, Page 62 at the Nantucket Registn of Deeds. The propem
is located in a Limitcd t-sc Genera! 2 (LUG -2) and within the Public \Wellhead Recharge District.
Voting Ttx)lc, 1)O-ncc11i, McCarthy, Mondani, Thaver
.Alternates Non, -
Discussion Toole - This is to discuss the 2°a iteration of the draft decision. He'll go through it page b%. page.
Marchant - On Page 2 at the top, insert a reference to the marked -up version of the architectural plans.
Pucci - I le gill include the comments on the plans, which are dated 4/11/2019, as conditions within the decision.
Toole - On Page 3, asked Mr. Pucci to include a narrative about the Town's efforts regarding affordable housing.
Pucci - N ormalh he would have bullet points resulting from agreements made with the developer, but this project didn't
go do,,x n that wi\-; therefore, he included a mixed narrative and findings explaining the Board's stance regarding the final
dcasion. 'phis draft includes :\Ir.'\Iarchant's input from our discussion yesterday (Jiav 30). If the Board thinks the language
is too argumentative, he can change that. If after this meeting a member sees something they want changed, he
recommends that come direct to counsel. He hopes to have a final draft to Board members by close of business on
V ednesd:t� , dune 5. You should anticipate the vote being Fridal-, June 7.
Toole - I Ie will bump the June 7 meeting to noon. Asked if there is room or reason to have a narrative or discussion
alma thi rclati, c units and/or bedrooms per acre (relative densin) as related to other developments.
Pucci - l cs, hc'd put it in this narrative section.
Discussion ahoM developments to which the density, of Surfside Crossing would be compared. Mr. Toole will send the
information to Mr. Pucci.
Toole - .Asked if something about traffic should be included given there was a lot of discussion and recommendations
from experts.
Pucci - I lc \v ould recommend having that in the narrative due to its importance to the residence of the South Shore Road
arra. 1 Jc mentioned there was information that wasn't provided but he doesn't want to overdue that point since it isn't
rcl,im, to the organizations that would be involved in an appeal.
Toole - I le didn't see much about the Zone 2 Watershed area; that's important as it colors the decision requiring gutters
discharging into their own subsurface recharge areas.
Mondani - I i also relates to the proximity of the abutters' wells to the property- line.
Toole - -\sked if there should be a condition about going through the Massachusetts Natural Heritage process; it was part
of rhe discussion and we were stonewalled in terms of access.
Mondani - Aoticed that language was deleted which specificaUN- related to those regulations.
Thaver -- Part of the Zone 2 discussion should include that the landscaping packages should conform to the 'Mass DEP
and local fertilizer and pesticide regulations. There should be some sort of management plan.
Toole - ADrew.
Page 1 of 6
ZBA 'Minutes for -lay 31, 2019, adopted June 13
Pucci - That would be tied to the Zone 2 section narrative. There is a 1�
-j_.: come from the <_hessiA
recommendations.
Mondani - On the force main failure, he'd like that beefed up some because
- _hlic health issue And the
reason for the Board supporting the gravin. line recommendations from t'-_
, _ , - ment. There is nothlnF
addressing the Town water's permit.
Pucci - He does intend to deal with that in the placeholder under additional _
:ng to water. There avere
definite concerns about water withdrawal capacity- even at the point of the nex
__ .. _ _ _ Nantucket has A umque
situation (the sole-source aquifer). Sometimes people have a litigation strategy
_ lething to cause a dela.:
that isn't a good strategy normally used by any of his clients, i.e. this Board.
Toole - acting as the Water Commission, we could require clarin . A 4()A de--ek ---•:
_ a water hook-up perMIT
Pucci - If there isn't a reasonable chance of your condition being upheld, v ou r_
_._- -_ l__ :: _sing _appeal (o.=nnTee
(I IAC) making the decision instead.
McCarthy - She would like a little more narrative about the failed force main.
Toole - We are into the section on waivers and exemptions. Nr. 3 talks about T.;
:.__-: -::nation for requesting the
waivers. Eligibility mostly has to do -with legal requirements.
Pucci -Those conditions are coming from Ed Marchant.
Toole - On page 10 Nr. 9 allows 60-days for the ZBA to review plans and do-
zet these documents T-A-ri
days before a meeting, they- can't be discussed until the following meeting. he w
Next, we get into site specific conditions.
Pucci - Ile was tn•ing to put in what types of housing buildings and dimension- _.
_ _-_ ::_.-.. . _tuber of units. Normal.
you would approve a set number of units with dimensions on the buildings. you
a redesign of the proiect
that way leaving the developer options on the number of and n•pes of buildings :..:__
: :: ,- -_ _:uirements.
Marchant - On Page 11 under "H" insert the word "stairway" after "exterior.'
Z .: n• A bulkhead to quahf._
Toole - The plans show exteriors stairs, not bulkheads. _asked if the plans arc _:
- _ _ --:sure all houses get -tatr-
instead of bulkheads. They agreed to the exterior stairs.
Pucci - Some redundancy is good so exterior basement stairs should be men-:
___ _ __ _ _cision he doesn't
refer the any plans other than the comprehensive permit plans.
Toole - He thought the decision was no air-conditioning units (_', C; or mec __-
:- '.caTed on the stree -ir��n
elevation.
Marchant - 11.Z3.I, it should be four parking spaces for each fourplex.
Toole - We decided 3 spaces per unit with sig: spaces per duplex.
Botticelli -They have to be on the duplex lot; that should be noted.
Marchant - In C.4 minimum parking, it states - spaces for each fourplex build_-- _
Botticelli - The same note would be on the "H" units.
Toole -Lot 41 is the only lot permitted to have less than 30-foot frontage. The
-hat this is a 2-acre z j=. _,
district and we are allowing lots as small as 5,000 square feet. Looking at the Ian_
-_ -_ -.ith sheds. •; ou can
fit the shed in.
Botticelli - Increasing the frontage would increase the lot sizes and reduce the c
Marchant -The he past standard was 8 units per acre including the roadway: �,�-��
_ _ = Is a lot size Nan^rckct
has used before and it requires fewer changes in this site plan; recommends keen--_
_ iping the 3-bedrXjr: _ --
up to 6,230 SF and 50-foot frontage. Under 10.F, embellish the statement about 1.-
-_ -------ble due to disurg >:unz
market-rate units.
Toole -Under 11.13.4 it should state no living space in the duplex basement. If tl_ _
__ uzld-out in the l,_crn- :n
they don't get to build it out.
Discussion about the fourplexes, their floor plans and basement bedrooms.
Pucci - If your concern about the fourplexes is the impact on abutters, green_ -
buffer zone. that =.-,c-
^mac-should
should be consistent with the possible increase in the number of single -family ui -
Marchant- lie's no fan of the fourplex units particularly -with the basement are:-_
_ thing Is It provides
housing choices in terms of studios and 1-bedroom, 2-bedroom, and 3-bedrooi
__ _ ._: cost S1M or mere '.
could stipulate they can't be on one big lot, but he doesn't know how to say th._
_ _ _ --1t Today. �. ou_ll be airur_;:
about the number of units; the fourplexes make it easier to approve the higher
ie doesn't kno•a if.T
help to put them on separate lots; for him the design is the basic problem.
Toole - If we deny this or wholesale redesign it, that shifts the burden of proo=
_ _ .. doesn"t think the Blur-'
-wants to go that route.
McCarthy - We are requiring all other units to have parking on the lot and mads -__
- ___ _- .or the 4- and 3-1)edroom
houses; we should make the lots larger for the fourplex buildings.
Toole - You have to allocate a certain amount of propem- for the fourplex and :<. _
__ _ - ng on that hit: 1 l-
is reasonable; it's four houses in one.
Page 2 of 6
ZBA :Minutes for May 31, 2019, adopted June 13
Marchant — You are allowing 1500 SF per bedroom; he thinks that's reasonable. The distinction on the fourplex is those
arc condominiums; separation between buildings or having parking within "Y" feet of the unit and a certain amount of
open space around each building makes sense.
Fourplex buildings to be on a lot with a minimum size of 88,000SF and no more than 7 fourplexes and a
minimum separation between buildings of at least 30 feet and total of 27 parking spaces on the lot.
Toole -- Ile thought it would be adequate to reference the plans and note that the buildings can't change shape or size.
the% cant :idd garages or a 6 -bedroom unit; though they can come back for modification to the comprehensive permit.
Pucci — I Ic doesn't like documents with an excessive number of attachments; it becomes confusing. You need to be clear
whir pl;ul \ ou are referring to and it should be attached to the decision.
Marchant —Suggested a table stating the groundcover for each building could be included in the decision with a condition
that there v,ill he no expansion of these buildings.
Toole — `,A"c r.tiked about the recreation building; his only comment is that the recreation buildings in all other
do vrlopmcnrs arc tiny by comparison: Nashaquisset is 1,800 SF; the others are 900 SF. _asked if members think 1,300 SF
is "Utficicnt. Its still huge compared to any other building in the development. Suggested cutting it down more: 1,000 SF
Oil the ground :ind in the basement and 800 SF useable 2nd -floor space.
Thayer —The parking calculations for the recreation building don't make sense; this isn't a commercial building. He thinks
8 parking :paces is sufficient.
Toole — 1 he 14 ; Trees are listed or shown on the plan, but the plant list has 111; there should be 143 street trees as sho--n
Oil the l:uhd>cape plan 01 in the comprehensive permit plan. The trees must comply with the zoning bylaw regarding caliper
and rhe non-iin lisive species list.
Botticelli — _Asked under 1?.13 to add "... prior to start of work."
Thayer — There should also be an attachment showing the location of the silt fence during construction.
Pucci — '1 har is referenced.
Toole — There were no major concerns about the maintenance barn except the height; our discussion reduced it to 23 feet
and no 21 floor windows. Lighting must comply with Town Code. The buffer zone we've talked about and the split -rail
fence. Parking, asked if the 188 spaces refers to parking that is not on the building lots; he'll get that information. The
applicant agreed TO the gutters and subsurface drainage — ref. page 13 Nr. 20. The house plans don't show gutters, but the
site plan shoe,- rhe individual sub -surface discharge. He wants the condition included but the -wording to indicate it xvasn't
imposed by ns hur part of the applicant's presentation.
McCarthy — Suggested, ".... as presented to the Board by the applicant." They agreed to it.
Pucci — I Ic'h include it, but it doesn't legally preclude them from challenging it.
Thayer — lira, ken's stormwater report clearly- states that roof runoff will be discharged into individual subsurface dn-u-ells.
Toole — \\ 'ii keep it as a redundancy-. On Page 14, Nr. 24, no boats, commercial vehicles, and unregistered vehicles are
to he parked in rhe development; he has commercial plates on his truck and thinks they should be allowed to park their
personal \v ork vehicles.
McCarthy — She did a draft condition that she will give to fir. Pucci.
Toole — A\ e should also include snow removal can't be dumped in the buffer zone. For additional conditions related to
buildino heights, he'll send annotated architectural plans about the building to'\fr. Pucci.
Firc stun is ctkcn from the Fire Chief-, no members are disputing it.
V c then ,cr into the Public Sewer.
Pucci — \\ liar's in the draft is the preferred alternative and related conditions from Weston and Sampson; we need to add
Da\ -id Gra_\`i-narerial about how it will be conditioned.
Toole — A\ e talked about going with the Town's preferred gravity, sewer system.
Marchant — \\ eston & Sampson initially submitted 4 options: options 1&2 were nixed, option 3 was a dedicated force
main with :t pump station on site, option 4 was the gravin-. Suggested language that allows the dedicated force main option
as an :tlternariT e subject to approval of the Sewer Department or the Town's Engineer; that would make this decision
marc rcason:thle since a 40B can't be treated differently from a 40A development. If we end up 'With an economic
argumenr, rhe would be more expensive.
Thaver — i to thinks that is reasonable since an on-site force main with a pump to the Surfside Treatment Plant would be
a normal request but note that the Town's preferred option is the gravity.
Toole — C;ir-ing Them the option is better; the sewer connection fees are not waived but they can go to the Select Board
to ,ret the rocs V,aived. We've talked about water already-.
Pucci — .1 lot of this draft decision is a combination of a format followed for 4013s and revisions suggested by _lir.
;Marchant.
Toole — I tic ortlh- comment is Page 19 Item 63 addressing profitabihn-, profits to be returned to the Town: in the past
wc'\-c stated ani profit is to be used to further the Town's efforts to address affordable housing.
Mondani — l-nder marketing, asked if this falls under the Housing and Urban Development JT D� interstate land fail
act.
Marchant — I lc doesn't know anything about that. They have to sign a HUD agreement for affordable sales.
Toole — Conditions on commencement of the project: final plans with 90 days to review them.
Page 3 of 6
ZBA 'Minutes for :\fat- 31, 2019, adopted June 13
Marchant— Under 66A third line "without" should be "with." _asked if the Bo,-._-'
21) copies of the pisns: it
depends on who would get a copy-.
Pucci — It's not just for the Board members; copies are needed for other entine-
Toole — In his estimation, you submit review plans for the Board members to .:
_ ... are the final plan -
Marchant — The final plans will reflect changes resulting from your establishes
-,e of the uncenainr, and
premature closing of the hearing, we didn't reach the point of an agreed-upon r1.:--
Toole — The regulatory agreements will be reviewed by 'Massachusetts Hou-:-__
_ __ -_ I`. APDL_' _StormA-ater
Pollution Prevention Plan, it doesn't say who approves the plan.
Pucci — He will check on who approves that plan and include the name.
Toole — Page 22 now G, it just asks for a submittal of the landscape with nothin
-ig them.
Pucci — It says, "review- and approval."
Marchant — _asked if the Town will accept responsibihn- for the water or sewer .. _
_ - _- , :__ remain pnvate.
Thayer — Ile thinks the Town takes over that, but the maintenance of the road-:.
---.-ate.
Pucci — That came up under _'fir. 93 on page 31; he lists what will remain pnva-_
_-__ __: -. --__ ceholder about the -.,,iter
and sewer.
Toole —lie doesn't think the Town should have to takeover sewer and water, es:- _ ___
__ __ __ _ _ _ _ a pump station ins: oh ed.
.Nlr. Gray- said the Town would take it over, but he thinks it should be left as a ch(_:_.
-n. On Page 23- he doe -n t
see the "review and approval" language under "K".
Pucci — Ile will include "... to be reviewed and approved by the Board or its de-
Marchant — Page 24 S, asked about the binder core for the road.
Thayer — Planning Board usually- requires as 1.5 -inch binder and 1.5 -inch top:,A-, -_:
-- -..c iet}ung more sub-to^n,i:
2.5 -inch binder and 1.5 -inch top.
Toole — Where's a placeholder about irrigation by private well: questions if it is .a :
_- ~.,-- _ -.diiion.
Thayer — Feels it more responsible to require they produce their own irrigation
Toole — He doesn't know- how to stipulate protection of the sewer line running _ .
_I,_ - L_
Thayer — Thet- need to come up with some method that protects the sewer __
_ -__:-_.._ ander the prope-r.: thea
management plan should be approved by the Sewer Director and or Town End _--
Toole — Protection of private wells during construction speaks to filtration fenc--
7- vater on the proper7.
They've offered up an organic fertilization plan. _asked if it's reasonable to ha-,,
tat notes what the-.
offered up as self-imposed conditions.
Marchant — That's helpful for the building inspector so he knows what's requi__ _
- _ nce of a buil du ;: pt:fn_.-
69._\, asked if ZBA wants to be involved in even. building permit.
Toole — In Rugged Scott, the ZBA Chair had to sign off even- building permit _---_._
- ; _: - �uldn't come back e
Board.
Marchant — As long the building inspector and Zoning Enforcement Officer see ~:
_: : _ --_ - with the Compre:^.en=i v e
Permit, theN- can sign off-, if it doesn't, they- come to the Board.
Pucci — It pertains only to the first building permit, "...on which the first permi-
and before it i- }-sued.
Toole — At the end of construction, the HDC signs off on the building permit: w }_
chem's Path. -A-C a--igned
that task to the HDC Compliance Coordinator. _asked that it sac-. "...the B,
-ignee."- \est is building
construction in general: in a normal subdivision, a certain number of lots are _--___-_
_ ;__ _.--one: wants the form 1
language included; 11s..lntonietti has to get that to Mr. Pucci. Asked what a ret>
_;-cc_ -ie escrow might r,e.
Marchant — Sachem's was $500,000 or $12,500 per unit-. the landscaping for th-
-ate. The PEI_ no -ed ��'•`
for the 155 -unit plan.
Toole — We'll go with $12,500 per units; that's a total of $1_'-1. Explained --.
_ __ - - _ the event the de:e:,,_er
abandons the project and landscape isn't finished; the escrow will cover fimshing __
__ _.ring. I,et's go 7'•I
The developer is responsible for the Homeowner's _association (HOAduties -_
_- __:- __ ; ,. _cs are sold: the _-achem s
Path owners had issues with the developer toward the end, but he prefers the de. _.
_ ved until the vtr. e^d-
Marchant — It's good to keep the applicant on the hook; the Board doesn't war
__ __ ... - _ : HO_i and h jn-_er,-.,-r.er-.
.is it is written for Sachem's Path or Rugged Scott is good language.
McCarthy —Sachem's Path Condition 18 addresses the HOA establishment al-_ _
- . completion of -he
of the first 16 homes..." it was formed at fust then, but it didn't take over
roads. open space. and
mailboxes until after all the infrastructure was completed. It became responsible
_ -nainta>mng roads of -he
homes in place at its establishment.
Toole — We have no say --so in the plans for this. With Sachem's Path we had sor _
_ -: - -_ .._ Phase II. , e dont %--in,
people paling to repair roads being used by heavy equipment.
Marchant — That might be the language; we spent a long time talking about thi
-hould be re-pri -i1r)ic f r
am- issues that come up. Control over decision making will be defined in the I
-mriium trust: 'At need t
establish how• costs will be allocated between those tw-o entities and allocated
7 ble homes. until prnec-
completed. Most developers want to maintain control as long as possible.
Page 4of6
ZB A Minutes for May 31, 2019, adopted June 13
Toole - -\,kcd it all this stuff can be done by Tuesday morning so that \1r. Pucci has adequate time to incorporate it. -Mr.
-\Lirchanr -,gill turd the right HOA language. Page 27 Nr. 73, no lots sold to 3rd partbuilders and no sale of empn lots.
Thayer - \ r. -1 talks about the hay bales and erosion fence; they should submit an erosion control plan before any work
takes place. \\ e want the limit of work identified and the split rail fence installed along with siltation fence and wattles.
Pucci - I Ic will address all of that in paragraph 71.
Toole - 1'wc 2S '-sir. 78, stormwater management must meet Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection
reg ul:iti(,n,; a,�i;cd if the Zone 2 should be referenced there.
Pucci - I lc"i make sure.
Toole - P.igc 21) Nr. 86, the HDC Compliance Coordinator would sign off prior to issuing a Certificate of Occupant.
Pucci - Ar. 56 is about submitting the roadway as -built plans; it isn't talking about the CO.
Toole - Ar. 8- No temporaCOs. Page 30 Nr. 88, states the applicant must comply with all Zone II water protection
ry
recluircmcnr,_ v ould like more language, "...as defined in (X-YZ)." Under ADMINISTRMVE page 30 Nr. 89 the
stucmcrtr of cost and who pays it, noted that in the Milton decision that was thrown out.
Pucci - "11ie \iilton Decision is an HDC ruling, not binding precedence.
Toole - Ar. `) everything stays private.
Marchant - \sked if there should be something about the sewer and water lines, "...unless accepted by the Torn."
Pucci - 1 Ic has a lot of commentary from the hearings on this; he'll be working on it.
Marchant - On Nr. 96, the three years is not reasonable because the project won't be done in three years; you can keep
the three r car, but should add that it can be extended without cause for a reasonable denial. On Nr. 94, if the Torn is
goirng to icccpi , ater and sewer, asked if inspections should be included here.
Thayer - :hc Planning Board representative would normally inspect all that; it should be included somewhere. The
de.eloper doe, get charged for those inspections.
Toole - \\ e nerd to add language about an engineering inspections escrow-. Page 32, all construction vehicles etc. are to
be limited to the site and can't park on a public way.
Marchant - In 101, it should be mentioned the cross-countn- sewer easement.
Toole - i hc-, ,houldn't be stockpiling any hazardous materials; they shouldn't be on top of the easement; that's all part
of the protccnorn plan we need to see.
V c heed to ,tdd the HDC compliance at the end; other than that, we're pretty much through.
Pucci - I Ic has the HDC Compliance Coordinator in Para. 105 or 106.
Toole - Ler's talk about the number of units. None of us are comfortable with the fourplexes but...
MCCarthv - She isn't comfortable with the fourplexes but doesn't want to be unreasonable and put it in jeopardy.
Toole - It would be good to have the maximum unit number in the decision-, it can be further described by building type.
Anorlhcr thing we need to figure out is the amount of green space shown on the 92 -unit plan now and condition that it
cannot he ie,s: he thinks in that case we have to reference the plan.
Di,cu„ton shout the maximum number of types of units: 8 duplexes-, 4 fourplexes; 40 single-family units.
Toole -'I "heir matrix is heavily weighted to the 5 -bedroom units; asked if a certain percentage has to be 3 bedrooms.
Marchant - 1 i i” o have to be 3 -bedrooms; the state has a requirement for 3 -bedroom units. As long as they don't reduce
the amount of green space and meet the separation requirements, they can build 72 units.
Thaver - I Ic ahyays felt that would be the final number of units. The developer made it clear he felt the 5 -bedroom units
art imporr.inr.
Toole - I li. �_)-Ledroom houses are not pro rata; there are no affordable 5 -bedroom units. We need to order that 25',, of
each r.pc i, offered for affordable; we've been adamant about that from the beginning.
Pucci - It is less bad for them to require 25% of the 5 -bedrooms be affordable than eliminating them completely.
Toole - i we are going to allow a 4 -bedroom house, one bedroom should be in the basement.
Botticelli - \\ e did not allow basement bedrooms in any other developments. If they don't have bedrooms in the
basem.,u, ncc l-estion becomes the need for exterior stairs; bulkheads are okay in the event of no basement bedroom.
Marchant - It ir's an issue of uneconomic, not being allowed basement bedrooms will become a huge part of their
ar-umcur.
Botticelli - Suggested requiring affordable pro rate of building types but allow them to have basement bedrooms. Then
the hascrrmrrnr access is required as shown. The plans show the number of basement bedrooms. We restricted the size of
the ,vindovv wrll, in the undesignated spaces, so they can't be used for egress.
Toole - A\ c art limiting the maximum number of 5 -bedroom SFUs to 16, 25',o of which must be affordable. This assumes
you c.itt ui c.er,thing in with all the other criteria. The density is 17 bedrooms per acre, which is still significantly higher
than :uta orlher development He thinks this is a reasonable consideration-, it's a 100jo reduction from the original plan.
Al'('I1111 _(;"1 ! -hF.
Botticelli- -The Fourplex from and HDC perspective, we can say these are approved except for the right elevation; the
45 foot long facade is inappropriate, and the little gable detail is inappropriate.
Toole -'11 he. could do like the hospital and add a pergola to break up the elevation; it still allows light to reach the w-indow-
we11.
Page 5 of 6
ZBA Minutes for \lav 31, 2019, adopted June 13
Page 6 of 6
Bottieelli —They could add out a roof. This has cottage comers; it should have -:
"__:-:z:,_ --, nd a pergola on the righT
elevation would break up the facade. We didn't have the design for this bui -._
-_ - _ hearing was closed: her
assignment will be to work on it.
Mondani — He hasn't made his decision but feels like throwing up his hands: c__•
-_ anng, incomplete pisn-"
etc. He wants to talk about which way the Board will vote. This developer -s prec_ �_:=
�: �__. - nroiects isn`t the greatest.
Pucci — Burden of proof for a denial falls on the ZBA and is ven- different.
Toole — To him, den} ing this would be personally easy-; however, the ultimate re=i_-:
�: _ worse than an ippro% al
with conditions.
_h
Mondani — He thinks we might have a better chance at winning a I L\C appear ~
- _ k: cited his reasor n
Pucci — The burden of proof for a denial couldn't be sustained as it stands ur_ ��-
_ _ 30n't have to prove :our
conditions render the project uneconomic. If H_\C rules in their favor, they w•il'
-i .: ,_ _ _ _'yeloper wants. Granting
with conditions gives you a fighting chance to litigate your local concerns. The __ ::.
:,-_:�� -, _, certainn, of derual is that
HAC will condition the permit and you won't like what they permit; they woulc
plan, which i a complete
application.
Toole — .\ local -concern smoking gun for denial might be that the wastewater r _
3oesn't have the ca^ae.r.
to meet the needs of this development.
Marchant—He thinks the proposal as discussed is reasonable. You've ,, orked h�,7
-_-: _ -._ e sr best iudgement, a hsct
is all you can do. The alternative is to put I-L-�C in control.
Toole — asked for a draft decision for an approval with conditions as well as a _ -..:
_ _:-_ :: >r a denial. ',L-. K j>ca?ac
has missed a number of the deliberations; he's comfortable with the members a _r
_:-. _ _rng the v otinW r:,tm`)er_.
McCarthy — She thinks a denial would be irresponsible given the risk.
Bottieelli — She agrees.
Toole — Asked if ant -one wants to entertain the notion of another meeting to di" _ _-
- :: • _ - -peciticall:.: almos- , ^r -
vote.
Pucci — It would be hard to get it noticed in time. Besides, that's what the nea ;
for.
Toole — Reminded even -one to get their stuff to Pucci _-�S_�,P.
\lotion
Motion to Continue to June 7, 2019 at 12:00 p.m. at 4 Fairgrounds Road, the
Public Safery Facility- Communitv
Room. (made by: Bottieelli) (seconded by: 'Mondani)
Votc
Carried unanimously
1. bone
Motion to Adjourn at 6:24 p.m. (made by: McCarthy) (seconded by: 'Mondani) Carried unanimous]\
Submitted by:
l errv' l.. Morton
Page 6 of 6