Latest news with #PlanningBoard
Yahoo
14-06-2025
- Automotive
- Yahoo
Proposed self-storage facility on College Highway to restart permitting process at next Planning Board meeting
SOUTHWICK — When the Planning Board meets again, it will hold a public hearing to restart the permitting process for a proposed self-storage facility on College Highway after the developers withdrew its first request once it became clear it had little chance of being approved. The new application for the permit, sought by Southampton-based developers Jim and Ellen Boyle, offers the board a proposal that is a significant departure from its first site plan, which asked for permission to build a nearly 60,000-square-foot, two-story facility between O'Reilly's Auto Parts and Pioneer Valley Trading Co. The new facility proposed has two stories and each is 17,708 square feet for a total square footage of 35,416, according to the architectural drawings submitted by the Berkshire Design Group. On the first floor are 201 storage spaces and 113 on the second floor that range in size from 5 feet by 5 feet to 10 feet by 20 feet, according to the drawings. The portion of the building facing College Highway, which will be painted reddish to resemble a tobacco barn, will have nine doors for the 10- by 20-foot storage spaces. There will be an entrance into the facility with glass doors. The two-story facility uses an 'over/under concept' that would be fully sprinklered, meet all applicable building codes, and will have video surveillance cameras installed that cover every square inch of the facility operating 24 hours a day, according to the building's designers. It will also be built into a gentle slope at the rear of the property and have 10 parking spaces, five in front and five in back, with one designated as handicapped accessible. The facility's front will be a little over 300 feet from College Highway. The Boyles had wrestled with the Planning Board for months during its first request for a permit trying to meet the board's expectations. It came to a head in February 2024, which was when board members and the Fire Department made it clear they weren't satisfied with the proposal. The general complaint from the Planning Board for the first permit request was that the proposed facility would be too big for the 3.17-acre parcel the Boyles own on College Highway. Before that meeting, public hearings for the project had been open since May 2023. After the February meeting, the Boyles had informal discussions with former Town Planner Jon Goddard and other board members and floated the idea of renting out some of the spaces for contractors where they could conduct business. Because that would have changed the use of the building, the Boyles were told they would need to seek a new special permit and start over. Before they formally proposed changing the use, they withdrew the application in February. Goddard said this week that the new plans didn't include renting space to contractors. Also included in the request is the construction of a small office building with a square footage of 437, that would be located at the entrance to the facility. Between the office building and the facility is a wetlands area that will be crossed by the entrance road. The road will be built over the wetlands and a pipe installed behind it to allow water to move back and forth along it. Goddard said the developers will have the responsibility to adhere to state regulations for wetlands replacement. The public hearing will be held at 7:10 p.m., Tuesday, June 24. Read the original article on MassLive.
Yahoo
08-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Bunnell commissioners to consider request for approval of massive new development Monday
The Bunnell City Commission will meet Monday, June 9, at 7 p.m. to consider approval of a massive new 2,800-acre development known as the Reserve at Haw Creek. The project developer is asking for permission from the five-member commission to build between 6,000 and 8,000 homes, which would increase the population of Bunnell many times over. The 2020 census put Bunnell's population at 3,276 residents. The proposal has drawn controversy due to its sheer size. Commissioners will consider two items. The first is whether to approve rezoning the project acreage to a "Planned Unit Development District." City staff has recommended approval, though the planning and zoning board wants the total number of homes to be reduced to 5,500. The second item is a request from the developers to approve the development itself. City staff have declared the development agreement is "consistent with the City's 2035 Comprehensive Plan." Both agenda items will be read for the first time at Monday's meeting. The development is described as a mixed-use community including residential, commercial, light industrial, emergency support services, parks and recreation, and conservation. Housing types will range from affordable to market rate, and include single-family homes, townhomes, garden homes, and condominiums. A village center is proposed that will provide "a mixture of neighborhood and community services, retail and commercial spaces, parks and trails, public services, and amenities," according to the proposed plan. The applicant for the zoning change is Northeast Florida Developers LLC of Jacksonville. The property owner is JM Properties X LLC, of Palm Coast. The property is located between State Road 11, State Highway 100 West, County Road 302, and County Road 65. The development has drawn some pushback from neighbors, including Cheryl Trujillo, who lives on County Road 302, and spoke up at a public hearing on Jan. 7. While she said she is not against development, this proposal is "too much, too fast." "This isn't just somebody going to build a couple of roofs," Trujillo said. "You want to have Palm Coast in my backyard, and that's what it amounts to." "Where are you going to put all these people?" she continued. High on many residents' list of concerns is traffic. A traffic study has been completed, but was not included in the advance materials for the article originally appeared on The Daytona Beach News-Journal: Bunnell City Commission discussing Reserve at Haw Creek Monday night
Yahoo
30-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Decision deferred on high-rise student tower blocks by Deptford Creek
A decision on whether two high-rise blocks of student accommodation by Deptford Creek will be built has been deferred after councillors voted for a site visit. Greenwich Council's Planning Board discussed the contentious plans—which garnered 294 letters of support and 251 objections—for nearly two-and-a-half hours on Tuesday evening (May 27). Luxury student accommodation business YourTRIBE and development and investment company Redington Capital first applied for planning permission to demolish three low-rise residential buildings in Greenwich Quay and replace them with 20-storey and 15-storey student tower blocks in December 2023. These plans were reduced earlier this month, bringing the 20 storeys down to 17 and shrinking the number of beds from 700 to 598. This reduction in part was because Maritime Greenwich had objected to the plans due to the height of the development and its potential visual effect on the nearby UNESCO World Heritage Site. Maritime Greenwich withdrew its objection after the height of the tallest tower was reduced. Cllr Majella Anning, speaking on behalf of Greenwich Creekside ward where the development site is located, stated that the student provision in Creekside would increase to around 20 per cent of the ward's total population if the proposal was approved. She said: 'I am in favour of the provision of student housing in my ward. What I object to is the scale of what is being proposed and the lack of a mixed housing offer, in particular social housing for local Greenwich residents.' Cllr Anning also likened the development to a 'cash cow' and claimed that developers would pay a lower community infrastructure levy in Greenwich when compared to other London boroughs. She also called the height of the buildings 'completely inappropriate' and described them as looking 'ugly'. She added: 'Student-only tower blocks do not offer any relief to the 28,000 people on our Greenwich Council [social housing] waiting list. These are blocks of temporary accommodation, by their very definition.' Cllr Anning's fellow Creekside ward Cllr Calum O'Byrne Mulligan also spoke in opposition to the proposal. He said: 'I urge the committee to reject this application as the scale and mass of the buildings not in a tall building area go against existing council policy. 'I fear that this development risks the intangible strategic asset that we have in the world heritage site and jeopardises protected views, going against our local plan.' Scott Fitzgerald of the Millennium Quay Residents Association (a residential development nearby the proposal site) said: 'The public consultations held by YOURTribe have repeatedly failed to address reasonable concerns.' The concerns he focused on were those of access to the site via Clarence Road which measures 3.5 metres wide, and fears that the site does not have adequate space if an evacuation was needed. He said: 'This development is about short-term economic gain, not long-term community diversity… It prioritises financial return over inclusive, sustainable living and would turn Greenwich Quay into a de facto student dormitory, not a diverse residential neighbourhood.' Another Greenwich resident opposed to the plans, Charlotte Kiddie, said: 'Who benefits from this proposal? Not those on the social housing register, not local residents, not London which risks losing one of only four UNESCO sites, not Greenwich Council, unable to generate council tax, nor even the students who are being overcharged. The only party that benefits in this is the property developer.' Phoebe Juggins, senior planning manager at YOURTribe, spoke in support of the application. She said: 'We expect that through delivering 590 purpose-built student accommodation units, we will free up the equivalent of 236 homes in Greenwich, and will importantly mean that students are living in a well-managed and supportive environment. 'We want this scheme to not only invest in the education of the next generation, but to the local area, delivering £7.3 million annually to the local economy, 43 full-time jobs plus over 500 construction jobs.' Ms Juggins also responded to queries brought up by councillors and objectors, assuring that all the necessary hoops had been jumped through to ensure the development has a robust fire safety and evacuation strategy. Planning committee member Cllr David Gardner asked what students would actually be able to afford this accommodation, calculating that other rent prices offered by YOURTribe in London exceed the maximum student loan for living costs. YOURTribe director Nick Lawrence responded: 'I think it's a misnomer that all students are poor. We are having high demand for our accommodation, and in conjunction with the universities we set the rent.' Cllr David Gardner proposed a site visit because he thought the committee needed to look at 'the impact on the neighbouring development Millennium Quay'. This was seconded by Cllr Olu Babatola, who thought a site visit would help him assess the fire safety concerns raised at the meeting. The committee voted for this site visit proposal, and a final decision on whether planning permission will be granted has been deferred until after a visit has been made.
Yahoo
28-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
City Council and Planning Board review zoning changes for ‘higher and better use'
WESTFIELD — The City Council and Planning Board are reviewing zoning change requests to allow property owners more options for use of their properties in Westfield. The requests will be reviewed in the Zoning, Planning and Development Committee chaired by Karen Fanion. Rob Levesque of R. Levesque Associates presented a request by Alice Wielgus to the City Council on May 15 to amend the zoning map at 14 and 170 Main St. from Rural Residence and Residence B to Residence C for a portion of the property. Levesque said the family is requesting that approximately 8 acres on Main Street, where they sell roses for Mother's Day, be rezoned to Residence C, and leave the approximately 30 acres in the rear, which is in the floodplain, as Rural Residential. Levesque said the family understands there has been interest over the years in the rear portion of the property for ball fields, and they generally like the idea. He said the Main Street portion of the property abuts a townhouse style condominium community that is zoned Residence C, and they would like to be able to utilize the front in similar way for condo development of multi-family townhouses, which he said would also be meeting the need for housing in the state. Levesque said the change in zoning would help them to think about what they would like to do with the property in the future. During the discussion in the City Council, there were questions of where the access to the property would be, both the front and the rear. Levesque said the corner of Noble Street which leads into a farm road would be the most logical place. Councilor Kristen Mello raised floodplain concerns, and said the GIS plan shows it coming up into the building area in the front. Levesque said the stormwater infrastructure would get into a bit of the flood zone. The hearing at the City Council was continued for a review by the city engineer. At the Planning Board on May 20, Levesque said the zoning change to Residence C would be for someone, likely not the family, to turn into housing similar to the adjacent condominium project in the front ten percent of the property, and leave the 50-plus acres in the rear property as Rural Residential. He said after the discussion at the City Council, they pulled the front portion further away from the flood zone, and made a sketch of a potential townhouse style residential project that could go there. Asked whether the access on Noble Street would be for both the rear property and for the housing development, Levesque said that would be preferable, but if not, there would be plenty of access points to the housing development on Main Street. Planning Board chair William Carellas said he was happy that they were not requesting spot zoning, as there is plenty of Residence C in the area, before the Planning Board made a unanimous positive recommendation to the City Council for the project. The Planning Board also positively recommended three other zoning change requests that came before the City Council, and were referred to the Zoning, Planning and Development Committee. The second zoning change request was by Mike Ventrice, owner of TV Realty & Development to change his 17-acre property on Lockhouse Road from Industrial A to Residence C, for future housing development of 25 duplexes. Ventrice said his property is 75 feet from Arch Road, with frontage on Lockhouse where the road is one-way with the one-lane railroad bridge. He said he has a meeting on June 3 with the Traffic Commission to discuss reverting the road back to two-way. Robert McKay of 27 Ridgeway Ave., an abutter on the other side of the railroad tracks, said many years ago, that section of Lockhouse that is one-way used to be two-ways, but he said it was changed for safety reasons to one-way. 'It was nice when it was two-way, but there were a lot of accidents at that bridge.' 'His property is a lot farther away from the bridge. I guess that becomes a traffic issue,' said Carellas after the unanimous positive recommendation from the Planning Board. Also recommended was a petition of Michael Sajewicz, the owner of Arrow Pharmacy to amend the zoning map at 66 Holyoke Rd. from Residence B to Business B (portion). Levesque, also representing Sajewicz, said the purpose of the zoning change would be to extend Business B from the pharmacy on a contiguous piece of property, to allow them to utilize the property for a similar or related use. The house on Holyoke Road, which is part of the property being requested for a zoning change, would remain as residential, and in the future be separated as a residential lot. Sajewicz owns the three contiguous lots. Asked what the plans are for the rear lot, Levesque said the first stop is to get the back rezoned, but there is no specific project at this point. 'In a perfect world … symbiotic uses that would work well with the pharmacy. Looking at it, it made sense to try to revamp the back of the property,' Levesque said. He said right now, they are separate parcels, and the idea would be making it one contiguous property, that would allow for 'higher and better use than what we could do on the property there now.' Also under discussion in both bodies is to amend the zoning ordinance to expand uses allowed in the Industrial A district. City Planner Jay Vinskey spoke at the Planning Board meeting on behalf of Councilor Brent Bean. He said during the last discussion, the board recommended some uses to be added to Industrial A, and that list was proposed to the City Council. He said the only change the Planning Board recommended that didn't make it through the committee was to only allow Commercial A uses in existing buildings in Industrial A, in order to avoid new shopping centers being built. 'I would agree — only for uses in existing buildings,' said Carellas. Planning Board member Richard Salois said one of the biggest concerns he had was that they build a strip mall. 'There is a reason for the use of existing buildings there,' he said. 'I believe back in April, that was not the intention, but to use empty warehouses that could go in a Commercial A district, or conversion or expansion of a building or a portion thereof for the new uses,' said board member Cheryl Crowe. Among the Commercial A uses that would be permitted by-right in Industrial A are neighborhood retail store not in excess of 750 feet; service-oriented stores such as a barber shop or beautician, but not laundry or dry-cleaning; retail service or custom stores, but no booth or restaurant facilities; branch bank, medical or dental clinic. Read the original article on MassLive.
Yahoo
28-05-2025
- Lifestyle
- Yahoo
Lake Norman-area homes with public park, fishing pond approved by town planners
The Huntersville Planning Board endorsed a national homebuilder's plan Tuesday night for a 259-home community east of Interstate 77 that would include land donated for a town park and 10-acre public fishing pond. The board voted 4-2 in favor of a rezoning for the project proposed by NVR Inc., the parent company of Ryan Homes. Three members abstained. The town Board of Commissioners, which has final say, is scheduled to vote on the request June 17. Nine open spaces totaling 23 acres also would include pickleball courts, a recreational field, butterfly gardens, fire pit, dog park, a half-basketball court, a shade structure, splash pad and a playground with swings, Sean Paone, principal of project consultant Bolton & Menk, told the Planning Board. Natural wildlife corridors would cut through the 106 acres east of the intersection of Hambright Road and Everette Keith Road. NVR proposes a mix of housing types: 76 townhomes north of Hambright Road; 75 cottage homes south of Hambright; 99 homes near the southern and eastern parts of the property; and nine larger home lots beside Dogwood Lane, according to NVR's rezoning application . The development would include eight affordable housing units, or those affordable to teachers, police and firefighters. NVR also would extend Hambright Road, its application shows. 'We like to create great communities,' Scott Munday, Charlotte-based general manager of land for NVR/Ryan Homes told the Planning Board. 'We believe this community fits that bill exactly. 'It's highly amenitized, it's highly planned, and we think it would be very attractive to owners,' Munday said. 'And we believe it has a lot of benefits to the town as well.' NVR/Ryan Homes has developed 15 to 20 communities in the Charlotte metro area over the past five years totaling 5,000 lots, and 'each are to this level of detail and plan,' Munday said, referring to Everette Keith Residential. Board members who voted to recommend the rezoning said they liked the amenities and said the development appears to be a good fit with its surroundings. Board members against the rezoning sided with town planning staff concerned that the number of homes conflicts with zoning plans for the area.
