9.13.2023 Planning Board

pursuant to the open meeting by law any person may make an audio of video recording of this public meeting or may transmit the meeting through any media attendees I therefore advise that such recordings or Transmissions are being made whether perceived or perceived by those present and are deemed acknowledgeable and permissible the city Charter section 9-18 mandates at all multiple member

bodies develop and adopt rules or policy for public comment we have adopted such a policy which Sean provides for citizen input on planning board specific matters at the end of the meeting there's a sign up sheet that is located in the back of the room I'm going to do a roll call Gloria pachico president Beth Andrew president Mario luciola yeah Mike farius president and myself John Ferreira president as

well from Four River TV government TV we have Craig Salvador I also have Dan aguiar city engineer president and Chris Perino the assistant planner along with Nina Kruger the administrative Clerk uh we'll go to the old business number one on Old business is Surety reduction Fieldstone Lane Brookfield Terrace and Stony Brook Circle if you want to discuss 30 reduction requests for Highland Farms 2 Fieldstone Lane

Brookfield Terrace and Stony Brook Circle Dan so board members for the last month and a half we've been working with the Consultants who are the contractors Bristol Pacific Homes who've constructed this portion of that for Highland Farms 2 subdivision we've recently received intramasable plans from their engineer there were some items that we asked them to address and to give us some

additional information basically to make sure water runs downhill in some of the pipes and some of the streets so we're we're at the threshold of that happening as soon as we get plans back in probably at some point this week so what I would recommend is that the board Grant a reduction and that for that final amount to be determined upon after my review of their updated as Bill plans and that

amount shall not exceed eight hundred thousand dollars so the reduction that you would be allowing would not exceed that I will review the as Bill plans go through their itemized requests and hold back any additional funds that I think need to be kept in in addition to what they're they're proposing to be released so we were originally we originally had a surety of I think of 1.1 million they

their initial letter came back saying that they felt there was 170 000 worth of work left so the 800 000 already gives us some wiggle room but I anticipate I was reducing it by even less than that so it would not be for an amount to exceed that I told CD 800 000 right the reduction so you can either allow that to happen or you can require that we complete this review and you can

deal with it at the next meeting but that would be another 30 days or a month away so however the board would like to proceed I'd be more than willing to uh to take on whatever task needed to get this result any input from the board members implementing on this for about like what almost a year now right on this for their reduction I'm no no for them it's I think it's maybe three or four months

of the month and then getting the exact figures but your estimates are that's for the board to decide yeah comments any other comments Mike just question on um so that it was 1.1 that they had uh originally allocated that's the security that's posted and so what are they requesting for money back right now a total they are requesting um for us to hold 100 and so of that we would only have remaining

up 170. they want us to hold they want us to hold back 171 000 and then we would just they would reclaim the rest of whatever that amount is uh yeah so they're they're bond from from the bank the letter of credit okay would be reduced by whatever number you decide upon yeah and then the new letter of credit would be remaining with whatever work needs to be done so my question to

you would be is how have they been in compliance up to this point there we've given them no money back so there's nothing this is the first release so this is the first shovel on the ground um they have the ability and it's usually if they have the financial ability to just get to the project went very quickly and they've sold out of the place almost immediately yeah um but

they do have you know they have top coat to do they've got some moment seating work to do setting bounds roadway as both and that stuff does add up again the numbers that they're proposing are just that they're their numbers and they're based upon the initial um numbers that were accepted as part of the subdivision Surety so that's what they're working from gotcha so once I get an Asheville plan and that's

complete yeah I can then go look at and say okay this catch Basin is not correct okay so we take that one off so I can itemize it to that degree yeah um but you haven't done that yet so no because the Advil plans that they've submitted or not are not complete I would just say at this point you know if if they can get this done in a month then they can

have this resolved that would be my again it protects you because at the end of the day you give that money to them and they haven't done it good luck trying to reclaim it I understand I I could go either way on it yeah okay anyone else so do we have a motion like you want to make a motion to uh yeah I would I would motion yeah table until next month until you

have the top the uh opportunity to review it and you feel comfortable with what you're going to release it's gonna be good and I'll come back second by Gloria all in favor hi any opposed okay go on to the next one Street redeeming Third Street request renaming of the portion of Third Street between Bedford and Warden Street as Gene Baptiste LePage Street referred by City Council on June 27

2023 and I know at the last meeting we had discussion on this with family members and such yeah so um just quickly the city was already in the process of determining an appropriate location for for the renaming for for this gentleman and and some others and we are attempting uh looking towards adopting a locating an area within the Route 79 Corona to rename some areas for them that process is going to take a little

while as we discussed last time so there's nothing new to add um from Beyond what happened at the last meeting it was fine waiting yeah it would be a sufficient space form I mean it might make sense rather than to keep this tabled just to remove it from the agenda and then we can place it back on and we can invite all the parties back at that time to let them know that

we'll be taking it back up again and we can send a letter to the council telling them the same if that's if that's what's important like a question too Mike I thought you were going to email me the proposed area that you had suggested along Route 79 for these kinds of yeah it so I can do it too yeah that's fine yeah that's not that's not Mike's job so we I don't want to overstep we

can do this because I'm working for Mass DOT on the project yeah and so but the city has everything and so they can send it to you we can do that Nina make a note of that and you and I can and Chris to make sure we get her over a copy of the plan and that those areas haven't changed since the initial design yeah until now right it would be nice to know

and any other subsequent you know memorials and they pop up they're also what we had done is given caveat to the city of representation of where the signages are going but it would be up to the city to design them and figure out exactly what the end product is and so um Dan and I have talking about unspoken about that as well uh whether we we would get involved to help facilitate that in the future so

that's it okay anyone else so do I have a motion to remove this from the uh from the agenda I'm not saying to make a motion to remove motion by Mario so I get my bath all in favor all right all right closed okay first item of the new business proposed amendment Florida waterfront urban renewal plan if you would discuss proposed amendment to the 40 Waterfront urban renewal plan the amendment would hold two properties

to the original Urban renewable plan list of 48 properties for potential acquisition this position and Redevelopment they're used to properties uh the Turner Street lot 0-22-0009 located on Duval Street south of Turner Street and the MS gas lines Services gas station 0-23-0004 located at 431 Duval Street

isn't I don't know there's anybody here for that you know I mean if they weren't here to represented them we'll find her I don't know maybe that gentleman which project are you here for just so that we can make oh okay great thank you okay I have nothing to add to it no I mean I recommended the endorsement and the approval this is um these are two properties that originally when and I

don't want to steal Sarah's presentation but when the initial plan was put together these Parcels technically would not have been available um or added to this area but since this since some development opportunity has increased specifically with one of the developable parcels in between these two uh it would make sense to include them in this plan okay please leave me a state your name and address for the record

Sarah page River Redevelopment Authority and I live um at six Winslow Street in Somerset input on this yes so I have a PowerPoint here uh I realize you can't see that we can't behind you that's right so 23.

yeah really so um our board which is listed uh in the PowerPoint uh approved this amendment at their August meeting and um we are asking you tonight to to take two votes to confirm that this amendment is based on a local survey and that it's consistent with existing planning documents for the area and I'm going to cover those two items so this board approved the urban renewal plan in May of 2018 and then it was

finalized with the state's approval in 2019 and this amendment is based on the survey that was done at that time which included a Citizens Advisory Group to public workshops an open house a survey of building conditions and an analysis of assessors data among other things and so our amendment is really based on that original survey but in the amendment process we updated maps with changes in

the neighborhood and really looked at the new development plans which as Dan said really lead us to this suggestion so these are the urban renewal Massachusetts laws that encourage communities to revitalize disinvested and underutilized neighborhoods and redevelops substandard decadent and blighted areas which we think this part of Duval Street um is part you know fulfills that and to undertake a range

of public actions to address these conditions to create environments needed to promote sound growth and attract and support private investment so this amendment is consistent with those purposes and it really is consistent with the goal that the Duval Street area become redeveloped as a vibrant Waterfront which is very much in the midst of planning with Route 79 coming down and so much happening in that area

so this is where we are in the amendment process the Fall River Redevelopment Authority had a public Hearing in September they voted on the amendment now we're here asking for your vote we'll be going next to the city council at their next meeting and then we'll send it to the state for their approval so here are the two properties and we're at we want to add them to the urban renewal plan for potential

acquisition disposition and Redevelopment and they're in an area that is being redeveloped and these two make sense to add to the urban renewal plan at this point one is the MS gasoline Services site and in other is an old um uh Liberty Utilities property and those are the two properties and here's a picture of the plans that these this amendment is consistent with the Fall River Master Plan and the 2019 Fall

River urban renewal plan so this outlines um many of the parcels that were in the original urban renewal plan the blue are potential Acquisitions the green are potential Rehabilitation Pink Spot clearance and then the red are the two small sites that we want to add

so the original urban renewal plan responded to mass Dot's plan to de-elevate and realign Route 79 which will reconnect the Waterfront with the rest of the city and create 19 new developable Acres and this um part of the Waterfront plan really focuses on Route 79 in Duvall Street and that's why we want to work consider these Parcels so to give you an update on what's happened with

the implementation of the urban renewal plan to date we now have a request for proposals out to find a master planner to work with the Redevelopment Authority and the city on a master plan for that 19 acres and developments of City Pier which we're very excited about and private development of the residents at River's Edge are right in this area that we're talking about we're looking at an acquisition of the

purchase of 45 anawan Street which is part of the original urban renewal plan and clearances have happened along Duval Street to remove blighted buildings so all of that is in process and new multi-family development the one that we just looked at includes 49 units that have been built and 120 are planned so this amendment is consistent with redeveloping redeveloping blighted spaces for commercial residential and

Retail uses and will better integrate Route 79 with the adjacent neighborhoods or as part of that whole effort and then consistent with the master plan we're investing in the Waterfront addressing persistent blight in building out the Route 79 Duval Street Boulevard so it's consistent with those schools as well so that's what we're planning and asking you to support so you're looking for our support and

bring it over to the city council yes and to specifically take a vote that this is consistent with a local survey and that it's consistent with plans the city's existing planning documents for the area board members any questions yeah I have a couple of questions this so I'm looking at the document that we received here and it's just table 2-2a Amendment uh one parcel the acquisition and disposition of it and

this is just for those two Parcels that we're speaking you know the the ones that are on the Wall Street and 431 which is the gas station so my one question would be is I originally um the the development parcel was the Liberty utility was going to be allocated for the stormwater sewer treatment facility that's no longer going to be there it's going to be mixed use and that's in another parcel of land and around that

area yes okay and so the um the CSO portion of utilization of that parcel has now been moved into one of the internal Parcels of uh the undevelopable portion of the 79 project and then uh so and then basically you're trying to do mixed-use residential commercial I'm assuming first floor was a commercial and a residential above and that's what you're proposing um on those two parts of the land so

it's called the developer is Wars and trying to do um I mean Authority the potential to acquire that additional um two pieces of parcel dead um was not initially in the private developers plan but could be advantageous okay any other comments one quick question just just process wise did we did we receive any comment from either of the landowners no no about being added because I think they

were notified because I I did get a call from one of them the gas station owner who actually passed client of mine and I had explained to him what the process was and could actually be beneficial to him and um because he's been trying to sell the property for a very long time so that was it I just didn't know if they went to the meeting or if they had any comments or called anybody okay

and being familiar with the project as well the only other question I have is knowing what the flood zone is and in and around that area especially the gas station um I'm all for this uh the acquisition of this of these parts of land especially for those uses it's advantageous for the entire Waterfront and development um but one of those things what would be is the uh that is it's in a flood zone area

and whoever whatever you end up doing you're going to own it and do something with it whatever that might be but you should be just aware of that yeah I mean and I know you we've had these discussions about you know build building codes and what we would need that's a that's more of a site plan review issue than than this issue here yeah for the protot record Ken phiola um Executive Vice President president

Bristol County Economic Development Consultants that's that's a separate issue per se because in the event that the development plans come forward for the Apostle that's currently there or the addition of these these two Parcels that'll all be uh reviewed on the site plan review and they'll have to adhere to not only site plan reviewing all the developments right yeah as well as in

other stands Clint what this clearly is doing here this is just gives the Redevelopment Authority the potential uh or the it allows to be the Development Authority to purchase these properties if necessary it doesn't mean that they're going to acquire him it doesn't mean they're going to take them by imminent domain but it just gives them the power to move in that direction if it's absolutely necessary I think we

would all agree that um eminent domain is some of the tool of Last Resort and hopefully you know people can negotiate friendly purchase and sale agreements that are based upon reasonable valuations as opposed to escalated valuations and this site here is if you've gone by there you can see it does meet the definition of blight and decadence because it's just overgrown and really not producing anything of any

value to you know to that corner located on the ball in Pierre Street itself any orgasms can you know if either piece has any uh like environmental yeah I know it could be resolved as part of all this well I know that there's been a release notification form filed for the Turner the Wall Street property with dep so yeah just being a gas station you have to assume that there's something

there but you know it also gives the opportunity to resolve those matters so that's a good thing any other comments sure did you want to comment on just just basically comment I just want you invited to see who took it on would they be liable for any pollution on those sites yeah so so yeah my name is John yeah typically how that would work is if typically how that would work is so when

we when we took the um property by eminent domain for the atmc center on Latin Street remember the old Carmel property which you essentially do is before there's any takings of the property get on a site you identify what the contamination contamination is the level of contamination and what the remediation cost would be and sudden you'd take that and you juxtapose those costs against whatever mock evaluation

the property would have and you hold that money in advance until the land is actually cleaned up so at no point in time would the Redevelopment authority of the city be responsible for taking on that sort of work and then even by law you know it goes back to the property owner for the um as being the cause of the contamination so I think you know we in this case here it's well documented

as to what the contamination is um and now it's just a matter of a cost of identifying what the cost of cleanup is all right so do we have a motion you want to do both at the same time you could no just one would you rather have some separate votes so my question I only have one more question so there's two on the docket here one is the transfer of the land or

the approving that and the other one was the documentation of the actual Maps themselves is that correct is that what you were looking for as well no it's the survey that it was based on a survey but surveys

okay yeah I I haven't seen any of that that's only I'm saying and I see the list here that's why I've been vote on something I want to know yeah the survey and word is not a survey plan yeah sure it's based on the whole survey done as part of the urban gotcha okay thank you first motion will be to uh to the acquisition portion well no it's Sarah won't you read them

one at a time how you would like it to be working great so it's to confirm the amendment is based on a local survey period promotion another motion promotion make a motion that we confirmed that the amendment proposed is a Conformity of the local survey second a second on the 32nd all in favor aye aye opposed okay that's first then the second is that the amendment is assistant with existing planning

documents for the area do I have a motion to accept that the motion inside second hand okay all in favor aye any opposed no we'll go there we're good thank you thank you very much for coming keep up the good work thank you that was for Sarah that's for everybody make it better okay number two on the uh on the agenda on the new business form a application for endorsement and plan

believe not to require approval and our plan of land file number 23-1558 owner applicant Dan Quintel senior and Dan Quintel Jr property location 42-44 Tecumseh Street assessors map i-14-0036 So the plan meets the requirements for endorsement the only comment that I could really make was that there's a notation which we require that they put on the plan if the plan is subject to a

granted variance or special permit this was actually a special permit but the note references the word variance not a big deal I wouldn't uh they do give the book in page number of the the zoning relief so I I wouldn't make them go back and make a change on that we have a motion to improve emotional proof motion by Mike second second by Gloria all in favor all right opposed okay second form a application for

endorsement apply and believe not to require approval and our plan of land file number 23-1559 owner applicant Maria a Renato property location 19 Manning Street and 380 East Warren Street assessors map j-20-0017 zero zero one nine and zero zero five eight so again this plan meets the requirements for endorsement what they're proposing to do is to create that narrow sliver of a parcel that you

see there and then convey that parcel to the smaller lot which is to the right of the plan that you're looking at so taking out that sliver from the larger lot conveying it to the smaller lot no zoning issues they um they still far exceed the the setback to the existing structure on the on the larger a lot so may I ask what was the purpose of conveyance of that land I'm assuming

that somebody wanted some additional land they don't they don't provide that information they could have been an encroachment they could have been a fence over the line it could have been maybe they're selling it and this is an opportunity to sell a little strip to somebody and make a few extra dollars I don't know that okay thank you okay do I have a motion to approve make emotionally approve it

motion by Gloria second second it second by Mike all in favor aye aye aye opposed okay last form a application for endorsement of plan believe not to require approval and our plan of land file number 23-1560 on our applicant Rainey Realty LLC property location 17-27 Wilcox Street assesses map g-26 -0018 so again this plan meets the requirements for endorsement it is subject to a special permit granted by

the zoning board of appeals that allows the subdivision of parcels when there are two residential structures in existence prior to 1954 which is the subdivision control law here in the city I think John you're probably okay with this one this one this one this one's a little bit more conventional and just you know I mean through that process we ensure that that everybody gets separate

utilities there there are no issues with any cross-easements or anything like that this one's about as simple as as you get and for the record I was happy with the last one as well for whatever reason the one for the first one yeah I understand so may I just have a quick question this is so because this is grandfathered and it it's probably a non-conforming lot they are correct they are both non-conforming

they're non-conforming Lots but those are existing buildings that are on here yep and so what are we actually doing just subdividing yes providing so we have is very we have a special provision uh 6423b I think it is off the top of my head that allows residential structures that are on a symbol on Sim one lot can be subdivided gotcha um in a manner like it goes to the zoning board of appeals and

there's a discussion of why did you put the line here setbacks and driveways and utilities so but and in this one they tried to make both of the Lots about the same size make sure that everybody had the same amount of access at least around one side of the house so each of the houses is kind of pushed to the left hand side and that would provide adequate access along the right hand

side okay that's all very good thank you questions do I have a motion to improve I make a motion to approve Mario second Beth all in favor all right opposed all right next there'll be approval of the minutes of the August 9 2023 meeting I believe everybody was here last meeting do I have a motion that's motion to approve second all right I'll make motion a second Mario second all in favor aye I opposed

five seven no citizens input okay I'll go check

okay do I have a motion to adjourn a motion to adjournment because of motion towards yes all right opposed eyes have it thank you thank you good night