Loading...
Dec 13, 2012 Minutes The Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals Zoning Board Minutes of Meeting December 13, 2012 City of Northampton Hearing Room 18, 210 Main St., Northampton, MA Members Present: Time  Chair, David Bloomberg  Vice Chair, Malcolm B. “Barry” Smith  Sara Northrup Bob Riddle, Assoc. Member Elizabeth Silver, Associate Member Staff:  Senior Planner, Carolyn Misch Planning Director, Wayne Feiden 5:30 PM. David Bloomberg opened the hearing on request for Comprehensive Permit by Soldier On Development & Management Co. & Soldier On Veterans Village II LLC for 44 residential units plus 16 bedroom facility at 421 N. Main St Leeds, Map Id 11-1. Tony Dosantos, attorneys representing the Soldier On described lease arrangement with VA and that it is 100% affordable under the criteria. Jim Scalese provided presentation and overview of program, described lighting on site and suggested that higher light levels under the pavilion in the courtyard would be closed in by surrounding buildings. Barry Smith asked where the closest abutter is. Scalese noted that there would be 132’ between edge of forest to the abutter’s property line. Smith noted that the light spillover would just be onto VA land. Scalese suggested maximum levels under pavilion could be 1.4. foot candles(fc) and 1.2 fc along the driveway. The lights would be mounted on 16’ poles. More poles would create more expense. There is overlap in front of the doors that cumulatively add up to 3 foot-candles+ even though individually they are less. Scalese described the requested waivers: Frontage, Open space (not permanent restriction or active recreation), lighting 1.4 foot candles on bollards at center of development (bollards would be removed if 1.4 is not allowed). No curbing in some areas to allow sheet flow. There is also a waiver requested for signage at each driveway. Smith asked if there are recreational opportunities for residents on the VA site? Sara Northrup asked for clarification of the lights-clarify that there are 6 uplights in 3 pavilion roofs? She asked about the height of the wall sconces? Scalese noted that they were 5.5’ above grade and the uplights were 12 in the peak of the pavilion. Northrup asked which lights were on 12’ vs. 16’ tall poles? Scalese clarified that the driveway lights were on the 16’ tall poles and 12’ poles would be on the perimeter, and in middle of lot. Sara Northrup asked where the fence is? Jim noted that lease line is 25’ from property line and fence is on the lease line. Sara Northrup asked if a light could be installed at playground. Scalese confirmed that the lighting is not in underground conduit. Sara Northrup asked why energy dissipater couldn’t take VA’s existing flow. Pat Goggins, Goggins Real Estate, representing Bear Hill residents noted that the neighborhood has worked with Soldier On for the project and that there is strong support from Bear Hill neighborhood. David Bloomberg asked about waivers and clarification on lighting. Soldier On Management Inc is the property owner and leaseholder. David Bloomberg asked for clarification about how we ensure that affordability is maintained. Board discussed Department of Public Works issues and concerns about timing for stormwater improvement and the following conditions: 1. To ensure these units are counted in the city’s inventory, as stipulated by DHCD: A regulatory agreement, the applicant shall formalize the regulatory agreement with the City and DHCD and record it prior to issuance of a building permit and received documentation from DHCD that the project is fully in compliance with the regulatory agreement prior to occupancy of the units. This permit is only valid to the extent that the affordability measures remain in full force an effect and in compliance with regulatory agreement. 2. No individual light fixtures shall exceed 1. 4 foot candles. (may exceed at entries and under covered pavilions). 3. Light shall be added to playground. 4. Approve requested waivers for open space, construction materials, frontage and signs. All sections of the Northampton zoning and other ordinances not specifically waived shall apply. 5. Consistent with MGL40B, this is a one-stop permit and this comprehensive permit shall be in-lieu of all zoning and stormwater permit approvals. 6. Prior to issuance of a building permit, dpw questions relative to drainage shall be answered including request for new test pits to verify subsurface soils to confirm the ability for infiltration to be accomplished as designed. 7. Prior to building permit, Department of Public Works shall be given construction documents to review consistency with permit plans. 8. The project shall meet the Northampton storwmater standards with no waivers. 9. The bypass stormwater line should incorporate some mitigation through energy dissipation and/or infiltration or other mechanism. 10. If Department of Public Works determines that additional level lip spreaders or rip rap is necessary to prevent erosion below the outlet structures, the applicant shall install such control measures. 11. Snow shall not be plowed to the detention ponds. 12. Annual stormwater maintenance reports shall be sent to Department of Public Works upon completion to ensure that the system continues to work as designed. Upon motion by Sara Northrup and second by Malcolm Smith, the board voted to close the hearing. Upon motion by Sara Northrup and second by Malcolm Smith, the board voted unanimously to grant the permit with conditions discussed. 7 PM David Bloomberg opened the request by Betty and Nicholas Duprey for Commercial Finding to change use at 375 South St, Northampton, Map Id 38C-20. Tom Lesser, representing the applicant, introduced team. The use as proposed is only for sales and no maintenance and no other retail uses. Smith, said there must be some repair? Nicky Duprey said the repair would be in Easthampton and there would be no servicing at this site. Annual traffic counts to show that the sales at peak trips are no greater than previous uses. Mark Darnold, representing the applicant, described proposed use. David Bloomberg asked if permit issued in the Spring was limited to 2 curb cuts. Staff indicated, yes. Sara asked which curb cut would go if 3 not allowed? Lesser suggested a chain or gate could go across the middle third curb cut. The curb cut could be 11’. Board discussed issues of the cut and Sara Northrup noted that there isn’t a 5’ grass strip or wider sidewalk. Betty Duprey noted that they met with Department of Public Works who told them to do it that way. Lesser noted they want to discuss change in use from office and retail back to auto retail. Sara Northrup not as concerned about use change because service/repair is not part of the request. Smith noted that the difference in use, cars will remain on site as opposed to going back. Use issues were noted not to be of concern to Board members. The Board discussed site changes from the previously issued permit. The option would be to meet previous requirements of landscaping, but allow a narrower sidewalk and grassbelt. Board discussed validity of the previous approval. Lesser asked for Board to amend the site plan to allowed the site plan based upon what is on the ground. The Board discussed a concern that the sidewalk is less than 3’ wide. David Bloomberg noted there is signage issue, lighting, and traffic. Duprey noted that they planned for “security motion lights” and lights on the lot until 11 pm. Upon motion by Sara Northrup and second by Malcolm Smith, the Board voted unanimously to continue to Jan 10 at 5:30 PM in Council Chambers. 8 PM, Upon motion by Malcolm Smith and second by Sara Northrup the board voted unanimously to adjourn.