SCENIC ROADS AND DRIVEWAY CURB CUTS

In recent months there have been multiple efforts by homeowners to relocate and/or expand driveways, especially to create circular driveways. In some cases, it appears that they are unaware that there are rules governing such actions. One of the features that makes Sherborn a great place to live is its rural and historic character. One of the primary contributors to this character is the preponderance of heavily treed scenic roads lined with stone walls.

There is a state law called the Scenic Roads Act that is designed to allow local governments to protect its scenic roads. When a Scenic Road is designated, trees within the street right-of-way cannot be removed and stone walls within the right-of-way (or on the property line) cannot be altered without a hearing before the Planning Board. Such hearing must be advertised in the newspaper for two consecutive weeks and abutters within 500 feet must be notified of the proposed action and the place, time  and date of the hearing. For new or moved driveways, there are specific rules pertaining to design (including width) and there is a rule that allows only a single "curb cut" (meaning any vehicular connection with the street) per lot. This means that  circular driveways are not allowed because they require two curb cuts.

The Rules and Regulations for Scenic Roads can be found in the Planning Board Rules and Regulations just after the rules pertaining to subdivisions. They are posted on the  Planning Board web site. The application form for applying for a Scenic Road hearing can also be found by clicking on  "Forms"    on the front page of the web site. 

What if you are not on a designated Scenic Road? Or what if you are on a Scenic Road but there are no trees or stone walls in the way? There are also Community Maintenance and Development (CMD) rules pertaining to connecting driveways to public ways. Those rules also limit such connections to one per lot.

EATON APOTHECARY STAYING!

According to a story by Kathleen Moore in the "Community Briefings" section of  Globe West on December 6, 2009, Walgreen's has decided to keep Eaton Apothecary open. The store will now be called "Eaton Apothecary - a Walgreen's Pharmacy."

EATON APOTHECARY CLOSING

As you may have heard, Walgreens has purchased the Eaton Apothecary chain and is apparently planning to close the Sherborn store on North Main Street. When I first heard the news of the sale, I was hoping that Walgreens might expand the apothecary into the entire first floor of its building, because I knew the 2500 square foot size of the current Apothecary is way too small for Walgreens. However, obviously even the entire floor of about 5000 square feet is too small for them since their normal size is about 12,000 to 15,000 square feet.

Obviously, this is another blow to efforts to improve the Town Center. The first floor retail space of the building at 19-23 North Main has been half empty since the building was completed in 2006. Now the entire first floor will be empty, at least for some period of time. The septic capacity of the building precludes types of tenants that use lots of water, like food establishments.

I have heard that there is some sort of petition being circulated asking, I believe, that Walgreen's not close the store. I am not sure how effective that will be. In any case, feel free to leave any comments here.

ACCESSORY APARTMENTS: IS SHERBORN TOO RESTRICTIVE?

Sherborn’s Zoning Bylaw currently has a very limited provision for accessory apartments. In essence, they are allowed only to house up to three persons related by blood, adoption or marriage or by up to two domestic employees of the family residing in the main part of the dwelling. Rent is not allowed for such units. There are various other restrictions that include limiting the area to the greater of 30% of the gross floor area of the dwelling or 800 square feet; the design must be such that the facilities of the accessory apartment can be readily removed or reintegrated into the main dwelling, and approval in the form of a special permit from the Board of Appeals must be obtained.

There is one other option that does allow the collection of rent: if the accessory apartment qualifies as a “Low or Moderate Income Unit” under state law. Among other requirements is that the unit must be fairly available to all eligible persons, and this usually means they must be selected by a lottery. In this situation the owner is not able to select the tenant. Other requirements are similar to those presented above but the unit size is allowed to be as large as 1200 square feet. This bylaw was adopted in 1991 and no one has ever taken advantage of it.

There has been some discussion that the accessory apartment requirements may be too restrictive and should be loosened somewhat to allow occupation by non-relatives and to charge rent for such apartments. One argument in favor of this position is that many older persons who have lived in Sherborn for many years would like to stay in town but are not comfortable in their large houses due to property taxes, maintenance issues or other reasons. An accessory apartment would provide some income and would also provide another person in the house who might be available to assist with household tasks or in the event of an emergency.

On the other hand, there is concern that allowing accessory apartments could change the character of Sherborn by converting single family homes to “duplexes.” Also, creating additional housing units could result in more school children, thus increasing costs to the Town.

Of course, the impacts depend to a large extent on how an accessory apartment bylaw were structured. If allowed only by special permit, the Town would retain much control. Also, the bylaw could specify maximum size of the unit, require that the single family character of the residence not be altered, and it could even limit the total number of such units that could be created.

It should be noted many similar towns, including Dover, Carlisle, Lincoln, Weston and Wayland all allow accessory apartments. Their restrictions differ, but they all allow occupancy by non-relatives as well as the collection of rent.

SHERBORN ZONING HISTORY

The first Zoning Bylaw in Sherborn was adopted at a Special Town Meeting on June 7, 1937. It established two classes of districts – one for Residences and one for Businesses. It required a minimum of 1 acre in the Residence districts and at least ½ acre in the Business districts. [Unable so far to find a zoning map and there is no reference to one in the Bylaw].

A major change in the Zoning Bylaw was adopted on December 13, 1954. That Bylaw put in place the major features that remain the essence of the Zoning Bylaw to this day. It established three residential districts requiring minimum lot sizes of one, two and three acres, respectively.

There was a single type of Business district, but there were five separate locations to which it applied. One of those locations was essentially what is now the Business-General (B-G) district along North Main Street, with the exception that the Sherborn Inn property was not yet a part of it. Also, what is now the Business-General district along Washington and South Main Streets also existed except that the portion on the east side of South Main Street extended from the Split down to the Pilgrim Church property. This district has since been reduced.

There was also a district on the south side of Kendall Avenue. Except that a portion of this was rezoned to EA in 2001 (resulting in the development of Sherborn Meadows), this district still exists. The other districts, which have since been repealed, include the 4 corners at the intersection of Western Avenue and Washington Streets, and a strip along the railroad tracks just north of Forest Street.

The next significant zoning change impacting the Town Center occurred in 1983 when the Business-Professional (B-P) district was adopted for an area on the east side of North Main Street. This change allowed the construction of the office building known as 20 North Main Street in the mid-1980’s. Since that rezoning also included the Clark House, it also led to the restoration of that property and its adaptive reuse as an office building. Another significant change occurred in April 1984, when Town Meeting voted to extend the Business-General district across Powderhouse Lane. This allowed the construction of the Sherborn Inn in the late 1980’s.

At the 1998 Annual Town Meeting in April, the Town adopted the Planned Unit Development (PUD) provision of the Zoning Bylaw. This bylaw did not make any changes in the business district boundaries. However, it does allow for business development to occur on parcels with at least 25% of its area within the B-G or B-P districts, by special permit. The PUD bylaw allows more flexibility than the B-G or B-P with regard to setbacks and other provisions, but it also requires significant public amenities and provides for greater Town control than the B-G and B-P districts require. The PUD bylaw limits the size of any retail outlet to 2500 square feet, exclusive of any kitchen, storage or mechanical space, and promotes traditional, pedestrian-friendly Town Center development. No development has taken place under the PUD bylaw. In 2008 and 2009, the Planning Board proposed amendments to the PUD bylaw to allow a single retail outlet to exceed the 2500 square foot limit and to allow residences as part of a PUD. These proposals fell short of the necessary 2/3 vote needed for approval.

At the 2000 Annual Town Meeting, the B-G district was extended slightly on the east side of North Main Street to encompass the entirety of the parcel on which Rose Automotive is located. For the rest of the east side of North Main Street, the B-G district extends only 150 feet back from North Main Street. No expansion has taken place as a result of this extension of the B-G district.

BICYCLE RACKS COMING

Thanks to a program administered by the Metropolitan Area Planning Council, Sherborn will soon have several additional bike racks to encourage and facilitate bicycle use in Town. MAPC has $898,000 available to distribute among its 101 cities and towns. The funds are distributed by population, but with a minimum allocation of $3000 per town. Being one of the smaller towns in the MAPC region, Sherborn is eligible for the minimim of $3000. Installation and shipping ($400) are not included.

There are three vendors participating in the program with several styles available. After reviewing what is available, I selected a style called "Hi Roller" from Dero Bike Rack Company located in Minneapolis. This style consists of a series of "humps" with the "humps" bent for greater stability.

We have ordered two 7-bike racks and six 4-bike racks. They will be installed by CMD at Jameson and Fessenden Fields, Laurel Farm Fields, Town Hall and the Library, and Farm Pond.

ARTICLE 10 - PUD AMENDMENTS

As noted below, the Planning Board is again sponsoring a warrant article to amend the Planned Unit Development provision of the Zoning Bylaw. One of the posts below is in "question and answer" format and it addresses most questions that may arise. However, I also wanted to present this map because many have the mistaken impression that the PUD bylaw is for the benefit of a single property. The map above indicates the properties (outlined in blue)that are eligible for a PUD right now (because they meet the minimum size requiremnent of 60,000 square feet, as well as the location requirement). However, ALL of the properties within the Business General and Business Professional zoning districts are potentially eligible if they were to collaborate with their abutters to meet the minimum size requirement. The Planning Board wishes to encourage development under PUD because it provides more flexibility and more Town control. In fact, it allows the type of development that was most preferred by residents who attended two forums sponsored by the Planning Board last year, while the regulations of the Business General and Business Professional district actually prohibit that style because they require a 60 foot front setback which guarantees parking in front of any building.

As is the case with the proposed adaptive use special permit discussed below, there is currently no protection for any historic structures that are in PUD-eligible locations (except for the Clark House, which is eligible for PUD and is within the local historic district and subject to the regulation of the Historic District Commission). One of the express purposes of our PUD is to "preserve historic buildings by providing economically viable uses for them." Thus, PUD adds some protection of historic resources where none is currently in place.

Also, the article last year would have allowed a single retail outlet to be as large as 7500 square feet, excluding storage, kitchen and utility space. The proposal this year is to allow only one retail outlet up to 8000 square feet GROSS (including storage, kitchen mechanical and any other space). Thus, Article 10 is roughly the same as last year's article.

It is important to note that Planned Unit Development is not by right. It is only by special permit from the Planning Board. In order to approve a special permit the Planning Board must find that the project meets certain standards. Among these are the following:

-- "building designs that are complementary in scale and style to those of abutting properties and that are, in general, appropriate for a small New England village;

-- significant public amenities on or off site which may include, but are not limited to the following: landscaped open area with walkways, benches, fountains, monuments, and/or other features; bike racks and/or separate bicycle access; hitching posts and/or separate horse access; drinking fountains; awnings or pavilions; or other suitable amenity;

-- pedestrian linkage(s) with abutting properties that is (are) well defined and of a design and quality that will encourage significant use;

-- vehicular linkage with abutting properties.

These are in addition to the dimensional requirements that must be met. Also, among the submittal requirements in the application is a written statement comparing the effect of the proposed PUD to a conventional development that could be built on the parcel in terms of expected impact on tax base; town services; traffic; wetlands; groundwater; views from public ways and lands; historic structures; recreational wildlife, agricultural and forestry uses of land, and other relevant and applicable subjects.

These standards are already in the PUD bylaw. The only changes that Article 10 would make are to allow ONE retail outlet to be up to 8000 gross square feet and to allow residences to be part of a PUD project.

Please feel free to contact the Planning Board office at 508-651-7855 if you have any questions about Article 9 or 10.