Plainville Planning Board
Minutes of April 29, 2013
A regular meeting of the Plainville Planning Board was held Monday evening, April 29, 2013 in
the lower level of the Plainville Senior Center. Present were Chairman Stan Widak, Vice
Chairman Jim Throckmorton, Members: Mike Czarnowski, Bob Davis and John Mutascio,
Planning and Permitting Coordinator, Christopher Yarworth, and Secretary, Sherry Norman.
The meeting was opened at 7:00 p.m.
ANR – Water & Sewer Department –
Acceptance of Walnut Hill Estates Water Tank Lot & Easement Gift.
Tim Higgins, Edgewood Development, explained that as part of the original special permit, they
agreed to deed a lot and two easements to the town – for future potential water and sewer
connections. Jim Marshall, Water and Sewer Department, noted that this is the highest point in
town, and as such, an ideal location. Motion to accept was made by Mr. Throckmorton and
seconded. Passed unanimously 5-0-0.
Meeting status: Public Hearing
Time: 7:09 p.m.
Project: Edgewood Development – Saddle Brook Estates
Special Permit Affordable Housing
Special Permit Residential Cluster
Definitive Sub-Division Permit
Special Permit Earth Removal
Information submitted:
Subdivision Plans dated 04/04/2013 (11 sheets)
§500-21 Earth Removal Special Permit Request report dated 4/4/2013
§500-22 Residential Cluster Special Permit Request report dated 4/4/2013
§500-25 Affordable Housing Special Permit Request report dated 4/4/2013
§540-52 Definitive Subdivision Plan Request report dated 4/4/2013
Applicant/Rep Present:
Tim Higgins, Edgewood Development
Griffin Beaudoin, Atlantic Design Engineers
Discussion: Tim Higgins, Edgewood Development, provided an overview of the project. It is a
14 lot residential cluster subdivision – one will be an affordable unit. This is the first time a
project like this has come before the town since the zoning by-law change. They will also be
going before the Board of Health on 5/1/13. Griffin Beaudoin, Atlantic Design Engineers spoke
to the site design. The parcel is located at 66 High Street – currently a field. There will be two
large detention basins in front and another one in the rear. These will be landscaped with
vegetation. The proposed 10 acres of open space abuts Walnut Hill Estates open space. The
minimum required for the cluster subdivision is 7.3 acres. The applicant is working with the
National Heritage on a conservation restriction as there is an endangered species habitat in the
area. Mr. Higgins said he was not at liberty to identify the species.
Page 1 of 6
The affordable will be Lot 8. All of the lots are similar in size (approx. 20,000 sq. ft. with 100 ft.
frontage.) A LIP (local initiative petition) has been filed with the Department of Housing and
Community Development (DHCD) and the Plainville Housing Authority. This unit will be
counted towards the town’s 10% goal. They will partner with an organization that specializes in
fulfilling the regulations and who will handle the lottery and marketing. The home will be a 3
bedroom, 1.5 bath colonial with a two car garage. The price at this time (subject to market
fluctuation in 2014) is $229,500. There will be a deed rider and the DHCD determines
maximum incomes and limitations on resale. After the sale, the DHCD will also be the
regulating authority. A condition of the special permit should be to state when this unit should
be built in relation to the other houses. Mr. Higgins proposed that it be the 13th house built. Mr.
Czarnowski asked how they determined which lot would be affordable. Mr. Higgins said it was
a random decision.
Presently 1,100 feet of High Street drains directly on the project, hence the need for the large
detention basins at the front of the site. The flow will be piped over land to a 30” culvert under
Paddock Drive. In back, most of the roadway will also be piped to the same culvert.
The applicant is requesting several waivers, which are outlined in the submittal documents.
Mr. Davis asked where the drainage goes and was told the other side of Walnut Hill basin #3.
Mr. Davis expressed concern about existing flood conditions where the culvert crosses Warren
St. Mr. Higgins said he would look into this and report back to the Board. Mr. Widak said he
would want to look more closely at the specs regarding the plastic vs. concrete pipe request. Mr.
Yarworth questioned the need for a sidewalk in the cul-de-sac. The plan shows a vegetated island
which would be maintained by a homeowner’s association.
Public Input:
Jay O’Reilly, 61 High St., asked why the detention basins were so large and was told that this
was due to the high ground water and the elevation of High St. Board of Health regulations were
cited. James Roberts, 82 High St., expressed concerns about the density of the project and
increased traffic and demand on water, sewer and schools. Patty Hoyceanyls, 5 Birchwood Dr.,
asked who maintains the stormwater drains and was told the Town. She said that this doesn’t
happen in her neighborhood where there is flooding during high storms. Christina Easterbrook,
75 High St., asked how deep the basins were and was told 2.5 ft. She expressed concern about
stagnant water breeding mosquitoes and was told that even in a 100 yr. storm the water drains
out within 2-3 days. It was also explained that this would be an improvement over existing
flooding conditions and that quality as well as quantity would be improved. The audience
disputed that there was flooding now. Bruce Kates, 79 High St., asked if there was going to be a
guardrail and was told no, it would be a shallow swale. Safety concerns were raised and
neighbors felt there should be fencing and signs. Lynn Krasnauskas, 61 High St., asked about
impact on wells and was told that water infiltration would be the same as existing conditions.
Dan Scannell, 60 High St., asked if any other plans were considered besides the cluster zoning.
He was told that a 14 lot conventional plan would have been OK since they were on sewer. He
also asked how high the water tank would be and was told this would be determined by the
Water Dept. but it would likely be similar to the one on Sharlene Lane (low profile 40-50 feet
concrete holding tank ). Mr. Marshall said there were no immediate plans to build a tank and it
Page 2 of 6
would have to go before Town Meeting for approval. He also said there were no plans to extend
water and sewer beyond this project – and that this was partially determined by the water
agreement with North Attleboro. Jay O’Reilly, 61 High St., stated that this was an opportunity to
service the 10 homes on this section of High St. Mr. Widak encouraged the residents to work
with the Water & Sewer Dept. as this was beyond the scope of the Planning Board. Mr.
Yarworth said he will work with Mr. Marshall to get a preliminary answer before the next
meeting. He will also get input from the reviewing engineer for the next meeting.
Motion to cancel the May 6, 2013 and reschedule to May 13, 2013 was made by Mr.
Throckmorton and seconded. Passed unanimously 5-0-0
Motion to continue to May 13, 2013 was made by Mr. Throckmorton and seconded. Passed
unanimously 5-0-0
Meeting status: Continued to 7:00 p.m., May 13, 2013
Meeting status: Continued Public Hearing
Time: 8:10 p.m.
Project:
High Rock Development, 101 Madison Street
Special Permit Site Plan Review/Development Permit
Special Permit Earth Removal
Information Submitted: None
Applicant/Rep Present:
David Simmons, Angle Tree Consulting
Richard Friberg Jr., PE, TEC
Discussion:
Hearing continued from May 8, 2013. Mr. Czarnowski has reviewed the proceedings on tape
and filed a certification with the Board. AECOM has not finished the peer review. Since the last
meeting, the applicant has filed a special permit request with the ZBA and filed a Determination
of Applicability with the Conservation Commission. They go before the Board of Health on
5/1/13 for drainage review. They have met with representatives from the Wrentham Sportsmen’s
Club and are working with them to resolve their driveway issues. Mr. Yarworth noted that
Madison St. does not lie within its layout and that there was not much detail on the plan as to
proposed improvements. Mr. Simmons said the road is not completely on town property.
Additional plans will be needed detailing roadway improvements and possible land conveyances
to the Town. Question as to whether just paving the road was adequate or if additional
reconstruction is required. Mr. Yarworth asked if a short term easement waiving liability until
Town Meeting was needed. Mr. Simmons said they can discuss that and he will address if
necessary. Two large signs have received a building permit already. Plans showing directional
signage on-site were not provided, and may need to be submitted. Mr. Marshall told the Board
that the Water and Sewer department support is subject to final review by their engineer. He said
that some changes needed to be made and he will handle that directly. Mr. Czarnowski asked if
the Mass Highway MEPA review would hold up construction and was told that there was
potential for that. Mr. Simmons noted that there is a pipe on the site that carries a stream from
the Wrentham Forest inlet under Route 1 that will have to be rerouted. Mr. Simmons will file an
extension to June 1st but may not need it.
Page 3 of 6
Public Input:
Marcia Benes, 56 Taunton St., stated that she is happy with the project. She also said she didn’t
think streams should be piped. Mr. Widak said that the runoff from Route 1 would be better
treated going through the stormwater management system. Mr. Yarworth noted that an
operations maintenance plan is required as part of the EPA permit. Chris Murphy, 18 Bacon Sq.,
asked about the proposed use and was told it would consist of three retail buildings: two main
and a smaller one. Rick Hamilton, 7 Appletree Drive, wanted to get an idea of the size of the
largest building and was told it would be a little bit smaller than Lowes.
Motion to continue to May 13, 2013 at 8:00 p.m. was made by Mr. Throckmorton and
seconded. Passed unanimously 5-0-0.
Meeting status: Continued to 8:00 p.m. May 13, 2013
Meeting status: Public Hearing
Time: 8:45 p.m.
Project:
Plainridge Race Course, 301 Washington Street
Amendment to Special Permit
Information Submitted:
Plan Set dated March 28, 2013 (116 sheets)
Development Impact Statement March 2013
Note: Appendix C: Stormwater Report & Appendix E: Traffic
Impact Study are bound separately.
Applicant/Rep Present:
Larry Tilton, Tilton and Associates
Attorney Robert Krouse, Krouse and Hummel
Mr. Widak opened the hearing at 8:45 p.m. and gave the audience 10 minutes to review the
presentation boards. Mr. Throckmorton read the legal notice.
Discussion:
Robert Krouse, an attorney with Krouse and Hummel representing Ourway Realty, LLC
introduced a number of people from their team. He announced that at this meeting they would
focus on civil engineering and site plan information. A second hearing would be dedicated to
traffic and at least a third would be necessary to address other issues. He explained that a special
permit was issued in 2010 and that an amendment was needed for change of use for proposed
slot machine gambling.
Larry Tilton, provided an overview and history of the site plan. It consists of 88.9 acres at the
southeast corner of the intersection of Routes 1 and 495, a 56.000 sq. ft. building, live racing
track, barns and a parking garage – permitted in 2010 that is currently under construction. A 76
ft. expansion was added to the building with minor changes to utilities. Water and sewer was
moved to the other side of the building. A natural gas line from Mirimichi St. is under
construction. There have been slight changes to the drainage system as well. Paving over a
gravel parking lot was cut down in size. The building modification includes an addition of an
approx. 30,000 sq. ft. breezeway to the garage. The 22,500 sq. ft. administration building will
have a 30 space lower parking lot. The main parking lot will have 192 spaces plus 5 for buses.
Page 4 of 6
The horseman’s lot – for 24 trailers – will be relocated near the barns and will remain gravel.
Drainage will tie into the existing system with 100% recharge to the center of the track. A couple
of new Stormceptors were added since 2010. An overview of lighting and landscaping was also
presented. Mr. Yarworth expressed concern about the engineering review estimate given that the
site work was minimal. It was agreed to table the 53G discussion.
Public Input:
Rick Hamilton, 7 Appletree Dr., asked if the trailers could be seen from Route 1 and was told
there is a forested screen from the on-ramp to Route 495. Jess Rock, 9 Harness Path, asked if the
parking garage could go higher than three levels in the future and was told by Russell Page,
Ourway Realty, that it is structurally at its limit. Mary-Ann Greanier, 19 Mirimichi St., asked if
the noise from the HVAC on the breezeway was directed out towards the neighborhood. Mr.
Widak asked Jim Murphy, the architect, to do his presentation and answer this question. Mr.
Murphy said that the HVAC units were on the roof hidden by screens. Mr. Davis asked about
the noise. Mr. Page explained that in 2010 they hired sound engineer consultants who
determined that there would be minimal impact on abutters and neighbors. He said that they will
make tweaks as they go forward to reduce sound and vibration. Barbie Ryan, 8 Haynes Rd.,
asked to quantify the decibel change and was told it would be no greater than ambient (traffic)
noise. Ms. Greanier said that the walls surrounding the units reflect noise and she didn’t buy the
design. She asked if there was going to be a peer review and Mr. Widak said yes. Mr. Page
noted that the current units are bigger and older than those proposed. He said he would provide
the previous noise report and recommendations.
The lighting engineer explained that this was a “dark sky compliant project” meaning that no
there will be no light spillage off the property. The landscape architect explained that the current
plan is similar to what was approved in 2010 – in compliance with zoning by-laws. The parking
lots are more heavily landscaped with a variety of native plant material. There will be a slope in
the back with a double row of evergreens 8-10 ft. high at planting. Ms. Ryan, 8 Haynes Rd.,
asked if there would be a berm or fence in back. Mr. Page explained that the 1997 plan had the
parking lot 20 ft. higher and in 2001 the Planning Board had the berm removed due to instability.
There are no plans to fence, other than with natural landscaping. Ms. Ryan said there is a short
stockade fence on her property that will be removed after construction. She would like to see this
remain and continued to buffer other neighbors and provide added security. Mr. & Mrs. Rock, 9
Harness Path, agreed. Mr. Hamilton, 7 Appletree Dr., asked about plans for the “wasteland”
rock outcropping along the driveway at Route 1. Mr. Tilton explained that this parcel (13-14
acres) is undeveloped for now but would be permitted as a separate site plan. Mr. Page stated
that this was their “gateway”, and would dressed up accordingly. Mr. Yarworth asked that a
landscape plan for this area be provided. Marcia Benes, 56 Taunton St., asked why they were
planting red pine – as this species was better adapted to a warmer climate. The applicants said
they would address the concern. Ms. Greanier raised concerns about noise and light issues for
the future development on Haynes Rd. Mr. Burpee White, 4 Haynes Rd., said there are two large
security lights that shine into his yard – and that he has been dealing with this for several years.
He would like to see a natural berm constructed. Mr. Page said that the landscape plan that is in
place now will shield them completely. He said a berm is not practical but that he would work
with abutters and consider a fence. Ms. Ryan asked if this was immediate or future growth. She
was told the tree size has been increased 2 ft. to provide immediate screening. Mike Ryan, 8
Page 5 of 6
Haynes Rd., asked how the cliff in the back was to be landscaped. Mr. Tilton said he would
bring 3-D plans to next meeting. The Board may also conduct a site visit. Mr. Czarnowski asked
about the bus parking – and how they would control the trips. Glenn Ofcarcik, Tilton and
Assoc., said they would address this more completely at the next hearing but they would work
with GATRA and the local councils on aging on scheduling. Mr. Mutascio said it was
unacceptable that neighbors have had to wait so long to have their concerns addressed. Mr.
Widak stated that questions needed to be answered sooner than later.
Discussion about next hearing: traffic and to determine if the infrastructure shown is sufficient
for the change of use. Mr. Yarworth wanted to get clarification on the 53G funds and what
engineering work was being done by the respective boards. He would like to give a specific
scope to AECOM before the next meeting so that the project is not delayed.
Motion to have Mr. Yarworth work through Mr. Widak and the applicant on the
preliminary scope was made by Mr. Czarnowski and seconded. Passed unanimously 5-0-0.
Motion to continue to May 13, 9:00 was made by Mr. Czarnowski and seconded. Passed
unanimously 5-0-0.
Meeting status: Continued until May 13, 2013 at 9:00pm
General Business
Motion to accept the minutes of January 14, 2103 (as amended) was made by Mr. Davis
and seconded. Passed unanimously 5-0-0.
Motion to accept the minutes of January 28, 2103 (as amended) was made by Mr. Davis
and seconded. Passed unanimously 5-0-0.
Motion to accept the minutes of February 11, 2103 (as amended) was made Mr. Davis and
seconded. Passed unanimously 5-0-0.
Motion to table acceptance of the minutes of February 25, 2013 pending addition of more
information was made by Mr. Davis and seconded. Passed unanimously 5-0-0.
Motion to accept the minutes of March 11, 2013 (as amended) was made by Mr. Davis and
seconded. Passed unanimously 5-0-0.
Motion to accept the minutes of March 25, 2013 (as amended) was made by Mr.
Throckmorton and seconded. Passed 4-0-1.
Motion to accept the minutes of April 8, 2013 (as amended) was made by Mr. Davis and
seconded. Passed unanimously 5-0-0.
Motion to adjourn was made by Mr. Davis and seconded. Passed unanimously 5-0-0.
The meeting adjourned at 10:40 p.m.
Page 6 of 6