WEST BRIDGEWATER PLANNING BOARD
4/3/13
PRESENT: H. Hurley, H. Anderson, G. Stetson and J. Noyes
ABSENT: A. Kinahan
The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m.
1. West Meadow Woods: Robert Fox was present.
Mr. Fox submitted a Form J Lot release for consideration. He stated that the Board had already released several lots for the subdivision located on Walnut Street. He stated that there were five (5) remaining lots in Phase I of this development. Mr. Fox stated that the septic was done, and only the sidewalks and the finish work on the road was left to do. He stated that of the fourteen (14) lots, eight (8) were already sold and he expected that they would be moving on to Phase II very soon. Mr. Fox stated that he would like to have Lots 7,8,12 and 13 released leaving only Lot 14 left. Mr. Stetson stated that the road is holding up well, especially considering the recent weather.
A Motion (GS) was made to release Lots 7, 8, 12 and 13 of the West Meadow Woods subdivision located at Walnut Street. Second (HA). Vote: Unanimous of the four (4) members present.
2. Teresa Road: Robert Fox was present.
A Form A and plans were submitted by Mr. Fox of TCB Oreo 1 LLC for review. The purpose of the plan is to reconfigure Assessor’s Map 13, Lot 3 into one new Lot 3A and Lot 3B. Parcel 3B will not be a buildable lot under current zoning requirements. It was noted that there would be no change to the frontage or buildable area of the lot. Mr. Fox explained that they were trying to reduce the wetlands, and make the lot smaller so that it would qualify for Fannie Mae financing. Mr. Hurley noted that the required One Hundred (100’) foot squares have not been put on this plan. Mr. Hurley suggested that Mr. Fox reclaim the plan without prejudice, have it corrected and resubmit it to the Board. Mr. Fox agreed to do so.
3. 475 West Center Street/Family Dollar: Present on behalf of the Petitioner was James Burke, Esquire, Gregory Driscoll and John Holmgren of John Holmgren Engineering Associates, Steve Findlen of McMahon Transportation, and prospective owner/proponent Anthony Ruscilo. Also present was Barbara Murphy, Darshan Robbins, Susan Todd, April McDermott, Susann Packard, Joanne Holyoke, Peter Mello, Marilyn Raleigh, Harry Raleigh, Lisa Wyman, Steven Wyman and Benjamin Goode.
Public Hearing continuation 7:40 p.m.
Mr. Hurley reconvened the public hearing. He gave a brief review of the project thus far and outlined the procedure for the meeting. He requested that all questions be directed through the chair, and that those in attendance would have ample time to voice their concerns.
continued:
West Bridgewater Planning Board
Minutes of 4/3/13
Page 2
Attorney James Burke stated that proponents have heard the concerns of the Board and abutters and made definitive changes to the plans which include the widening of Friend Street up to the proposed building site, widened the access and egress from the Honey Dew Donut site, increased the road width to allow for 2 vehicles passage and redesigned the entrance to accommodate WB-50 tractor trailer delivery trucks so that they will not cross the center yellow lines on West Center Street. Mr. Burke stated that these improvements will lessen the traffic issues. Mr. John Holmgren reported that the widening of Friend Street and the exit at the Honey Dew Donut now have more than ample room for vehicles to access and egress on both sides of the site. He noted that Friend Street has been widened from the south end to West Center Street, and will be graded to the existing catch basins. Mr. Holmgren stated that there would be no increase in the flow or runoff on the site.
Mr. Hurley reported that the Highway Department Superintendent, Len Graf, has requested that Right Turn Only signs be installed. He also requests that the sidewalks be increased to five (5’) feet in width and also made ADA compliant. Mr. Hurley noted that there were no cross sections shown on the plan and requested that they be added. Proponents agreed to make these changes.
Stephen Findlen of McMahon Transportation stated that the revisions made to the roadway also include widening the driveways between the Family Dollar site and the Honey Dew Donut site and the new widths will allow two-way traffic and allow delivery trucks to access and egress the site safely. A lengthy discussion was held regarding options for better directing vehicles off the site. Mr. Noyes suggested that proponents use a scored concrete to better channel the vehicles. Mr. Findlen stated that landscaping can further narrow the curve so that no encroachment will occur.
Several of the abutters to the property expressed their concerns which include the increase in traffic volume, access to and from the site, truck sizes, delivery schedules, dumpster pickups, an increase in accidents, types of deliveries to be made, safety to area children and surrounding roads being used as a cut through to avoid the traffic on Route 106/West Center Street. Mr. Hurley stated that proponents had demonstrated that access and egress has been addressed to the Board’s satisfaction. He noted that while this area is very congested the minimal increase in traffic from this store would not make much of an impact. The abutters were most concerned that their roadways that surround this site would be used as a cut through and were not designed to handle an increase in traffic. They were also very concerned for the safety of their children. Mr. Holmgren noted that proponents can’t do anything about the traffic situation, and reiterated that this store would not add any significant increase to the current volume or congestion.
Ms. Packard questioned whether smaller trucks mean more deliveries and for a better description of the trucks to be used. Mr. Hurley stated that they would be WB-50’s which will be the large tractor trailer size. Ms. Packard stated with this new layout, the trucks would pass
continued:
West Bridgewater Planning Board
Minutes of 4/3/13
Page 3
directly in front of her mother’s home. She briefly described a recent accident and noted that if the store had been open at that time, the vehicle would have ended up inside the store. Mr. Hurley stated that while he understood her concern, it wasn’t really relevant to this hearing. Ms. Packard also questioned if the State were to widen Route 106, where would the land be taken from. Mr. Hurley stated that, at this time, he did not know of any definitive plan to widen this road. Mr. Stetson noted that none of them would still be alive when this happens.
Ms. Murphy questioned how close this lot would be to the drive up window at Honey Dew, and if this area would be widened. Mr. Holmgren stated that there were no plans to widen this area at this time. He noted that it is adequate for truck traffic. Ms. Murphy stated that there is not enough room for two way traffic, and questioned what happens when the delivery trucks come in. Mr. Holmgren stated that there would only be one delivery a week and it would be done during normal business hours. Ms. Murphy asked about the concrete wall at the front of the site and if that would send the truck drivers out onto Crescent Street instead. Mr. Holmgren stated that the delivery drivers would be instructed not to exit onto Crescent Street. Mr. Hurley noted that Mr. Holmgren had demonstrated that he can fit the trucks safely, which is what the Board has asked for. Mr. Hurley agreed that there were a lot of accidents in this area and expected that it would still occur.
Ms. Wyman stated that she lived directly behind the church on High Street and was concerned that the traffic would increase there and on High Street when drivers decided it was too difficult to get onto West Center Street. Ms. Holyoke stated that while this might look really good on paper, the reality is that it will just create more problems.
Mr. Wyman asked whether the back of the lot was open onto High Street. Mr. Holmgren stated that there is a barrier along the rear of the property and does not have an opening at High Street. Mr. Wyman stated that he was also concerned that traffic would increase on High, Beacon and Crescent Streets as more vehicles try to avoid Route 106 especially affecting the evening traffic. Mr. Holmgren stated that he can’t do anything about the traffic volume, and reiterated that this store will not cause any significant impact.
Mr. Mello stated that, based on the data, there will be a significant increase in the volume of traffic. He stated he was concerned that no traffic study has been done specifically for this development. He stated that the volume will also increase on each of the surrounding streets as everyone tries to avoid Route 106. He stated that the traffic is exceptionally bad and is one of three “bottleneck” areas of concern according to a recent OCPC traffic study. Mr. Mello suggested that the Board deny this project as the traffic congestion is intolerable, the store is too big for the property, and that no development should be allowed until there is a plan to widen Route 106 in place. Mr. Mello also stated that in reviewing the Section of the bylaws regulating the special permit conditions for approval that none of the practical issues have been addressed. He noted that even the Board of Selectmen voiced considerable concern with allowing this project to go forward.
continued:
West Bridgewater Planning Board
Minutes of 4/3/13
Page 4
Attorney Burke stated that proponents have submitted substantive facts on the hydrology, traffic, and improvements to be made. He stated that this site is in a business zone, will have a minimal traffic impact, would not impact the Water Resource Protection District and meets all of the requirements of the bylaws. He stated that proponents have made every attempt to resolve each issue that was raised by the Planning Board.
A brief discussion was held regarding whether a traffic study was actually done for this site. Attorney Burke stated that this site is raw land, so a study of this exact site was not done, but an analysis for like and similar uses was done. Mr. Noyes stated that most traffic reports are based on Industry Standards and apply a footprint for every type of development. He noted that if a traffic study had looked specifically at Route 106, the development of this site would possibly add a negligible one (1%) percent of additional vehicles to the traffic counts. Mr. Noyes also stated that there is no mitigation for such a small increase.
Mr. Goode stated that these tractor trailers are packed with deliveries to several different sites and questioned that if they were only allowed to exit onto Route 106, what happens if they have a delivery to make at the other West Bridgewater store on Route 28. It was suggested that the delivery truck could make this site its last delivery and get right back onto Route 24. Mr. Hurley stated that the Board had asked the proponents to show them how they would get the trucks on and off the site, and that is what they have done. He stated that they have no control over the delivery routes.
Ms. Murphy asked how the trucks that empty the dumpsters will get in. Mr. Holmgren stated that he assumed it would be the same as they currently do. Ms. Holyoke suggested that the Board come and sit at her place and see how it takes twenty-five minutes for her to exit Friend Street onto Route 106. Mr. Hurley noted that the whole of Route 106 is like that. Ms. Holyoke asked why, if there is already one of these stores in West Bridgewater do we need another one. Mr. Hurley stated that, “we don’t get to decide that.”
As to the delivery concerns, prospective owner, Anthony Ruscilo, stated that there would only be one delivery truck per week to this store and it would be made during normal business hours. He stated that he expected that trash pick-up would be regularly scheduled as done by the Honey Dew Donut store. He noted that this area will be fenced in to contain any trash on site. Mr. Ruscilo also stated that this is not a “destination” store, but an “impulse stop,” and would not have a negative impact on the neighborhood. Mr. Holmgren noted that there is a retaining wall planned for both the front and rear of the property that should keep vehicle traffic to a minimum and on site.
Mr. Mello stated that he was still very concerned that the surrounding roadways such as High, Crescent, Beacon and Friend Streets would all be impacted as vehicles try to avoid Route 106/West Center Street. He stated that the plan doesn’t show how it will impact the other streets. He reiterated that these surrounding streets have road surfaces that will not accommodate the high volume increase. There were no other questions or issues raised.
continued:
West Bridgewater Planning Board
Minutes of 4/3/13
Page 5
A Motion (GS) was made to close the public hearing. Second (HA). Vote: Unanimous of the four (4) members present.
The public hearing was closed at 9:35 p.m.
Mr. Hurley reviewed the traffic reports submitted by McMahon Associates, Hydrogeological Evaluation from Fuss & O’Neill, and a summary of the issues from Attorney James Burke in detail. He also reviewed the report submitted by Stantec, who was hired by the town to review the project, and who concurred with the findings as presented. The reports were placed on file and become part of the official record.
Mr. Hurley reminded the Board that pursuant to Section 7.5.3.1 of the West Bridgewater Zoning Bylaws, in order to grant the Special Permit, they must make the following findings:
a. The specific site is an appropriate location for such use, structure or condition;