by Frank Schroth
At the December 15th meeting of the Planning Board, they approved two articles for annual town meeting, declined two, and kicked another down the road. There was also a continuation of the hearing on Hendries and an update on the plans for a new apartment building at Milton Hill House. It was a long night.
Two articles were approved for annual town meeting. The first, written by a member of the Planning Board, Mr. Whiteside, didn’t have a proponent. The party, Corvo Construction which stood to possibly benefit from the article, did not show up. Corvo Construction was selected by St. Elizabeth’s to develop the property on Randolph Avenue. They proposed to build 12 units of housing; the current zoning allows for only six. There is also an issue with the existing structure which the Historic Commission wants preserved. Alex Whiteside has drafted an article for town meeting that would request for an historic overlay. The article is written specifically for that property, and it would allow for 8 units of housing assuming the existing building is preserved. However, the developer did not appear at the session, and therefore the board was left questioning whether it made sense to move forward with the article since there was no proponent. They decided in the affirmative: it is “an intelligent” way to develop the property and allows for historic preservation and open space.
Two other articles had proponents but didn’t move forward. Attorney Ned Corcoran was proposing an article to increase the current limit on home occupancy businesses from 400 square feet to 1,000 square feet. He preserved the existing language of zoning regarding this, changing only size, use of contiguous property or accessory structures, and need for a special permit. Members of the board expressed concern about the size and the issue of contiguous property. What, for example, would prevent someone from buying an adjoining property to their home, living in one house and operating a business out of the other? The amount of space, 1000 sq ft, concerned both Duffy and Whiteside: such a permit could essentially allow commercial operations in a residential zone; a space that size could result in parking issues. Jackson noted that an exercise studio, for example, might have 20 people and 15 cars. He also expressed concern over such permits competing with commercial developments that could house such businesses (e.g. 131 Eliot, 39 Central). The board did not approve the article.
Attorney Bob Sheffield was seeking to put an article before town meeting that would allow for assisted living facilities. His proposal suffered the same fate. Part of the board’s concern was akin to that of Corcoran’s proposal. It would put a commercial business in a residential area. Sheffield pointed out that people would be living in these buildings. Mr. Whiteside expressed concern that the size of the buildings would not fit well at least not at Horseplay Stables, one of the sites identified. Both Whiteside and Duffy expressed the need to see more concrete plans of what was being considered. Jackson said he could not support anything like this without any benefit of public input. As with Mr. Corcoran’s article proposal, the board did not take a formal vote but agreed the article was not in a form they were comfortable recommending to the Selectmen for inclusion in the warrant.
The board also unanimously approved an article to request an appropiation to update the Town’s Master Plan. The master plan helps guide land use and development. The Planning Board conducted a survey in 2009 to solicit resident input on land use issues such as commercial development and to understand what features and qualities of the town (e.g. open space, historic buildings, community pride) mattered. You can find a write up of the survey responses here and a report that of the actual responses here.
Other board business included:
The ongoing hearing for the Hendries building. Progress is slow. Two letters were read into the record. One from Milton resident Ellen DeNooyer took Connelly Construction to task for their failure to maintain the building and allowing it to deteriorate further. She asked that the board suspend any further hearings and approvals until the owner takes the building down. Whiteside noted the there isn’t anything the board can do though they are sympathetic to DeNooyer’s concerns. Connelly does not own the entire property. The parking lot is owned by the town. The second letter, from J.P. Plunkett, was in support of the development and looked forward to timely completion. The landscape architect, Bill Fleming, presented his plans for plants, shrubs, etc. around the property. The “signature tree” in the public area would be a sweetgum. He explained that he did not choose a black oak because of its weak root system. Connelly however, has offered to plant a black oak at a location of the town’s choosing. The nettlesome issues remain. Jackson expressed disappointment about the public area; he was expecting more. The question of a FAR bonus is still unresolved. And lastly, Jackon stated and Whiteside concurred that there are aspects of the design that are not in compliance with zoning bylaws.
The owners of Milton Hill House appeared with their architect to present their plan for another apartment building that would consist of 27 units. Several neighbors appeared as well and, though it was not a formal hearing, Chairman Innes gave permission for interested parties to speak. Not surprisingly, the key issue was traffic. One resident stated that a comprehensive traffic study for the Central Ave./ Eliot St. area is warranted given that there are four signficant projects either in planning stages or completed: 2 Adams Street, 131 Eliot, 39 Central, and the new addition to the Hill House. While they may not have a big impact individually, in total they are going to add a lot of cars to the area.
The fourth article for town meeting that got kicked down the road pertained to bed and breakfasts. When Chairman Innes recommended postponing until November town meeting, a small cheer went up. By this time, the meeting had entered its third hour which for a Planning Board meeting can sometimes feel like the third level of Dante’s Inferno. Innes had noted earlier in the session that consideration is being given to a town meeting that will be regularly scheduled in November and that zoning articles would be a standing agenda item for these meetings. They would replace the special town meetings that occassionally take place. Actually, special town meetings have become somewhat routine which is why consideration is being given to having an official fall town meeting on the calendar.