January 10, 2012 Planning Board Meeting

January 10, 2012 Planning Board Meeting

Postby Mary Wright » Thu Jan 26, 2012 8:03 pm


A meeting of the Planning Board was held on Tuesday, January 10, 2012. Mr. Marks called the meeting to order at 7:02 PM and announced that the meeting is being recorded and will be available on cable and on the website.

PRESENT: Ernest Marks (Chairman), Mark Mungeam (arrived 7:15 PM), Derek Brown, Eben Chesebrough, Robert Werme Jr., Michael Zwicker, Tracy Sharkey, Michael Greco (Associate Member), William Cundiff (Town Engineer), Stephen Zisk (Planning/Conservation Agent).

Mr. Zwicker recused himself.
Mr. Cundiff spoke regarding the drainage from Oak Street to Ms. Bedard’s property. An underground pipe needs to be installed to discharge water overland towards the rear of the property. Regarding the scenic road portion of the permit, there is a need to remove a 16’section of the stonewall and move it perpendicular to the road in order to put in a driveway for access to the pipe. A drainage easement and an access easement are needed. The access road would be paved, due to negotiations with the property owner.
Mr. Chesebrough noticed an error in the Notice of Public Hearing. Under scenic road by-laws, this permit would not be a special permit, but would be a regular permit.
Ms. Sharkey made a motion to close the public hearing and issue the permit for removal of the 16’ section of stonewall on 42 Oak Street. Mr. Brown seconded the motion. Mark Mungeam abstained. Vote 6 in favor. None opposed.

Mr. Zwicker rejoined the meeting.
Mr. Michael Weaver from Guerriere & Halnon, Inc. representing the applicant, Pyne Sand & Stone, joined the meeting. He presented new drawings and revised site and restoration plans. He reviewed previous questions raised in Graves Engineering, Inc.’s original comment letter.
Regarding the issue of truck traffic, Mr. Weaver does not feel truck traffic will be an issue as most trucks will be exiting the site to the left, heading east on Rte. 16 and, since most of the town lies to the right of the site, the traffic to and from the high school will be in the opposite direction.
Mr. Brown asked if there had been any objective traffic studies done. Mr. Cundiff suggested that Mass DOT may have some studies available on their website. Also, a few traffic studies were done in this area five years ago.
Mr. Weaver submitted new drawings showing that the road grade had been raised 10%, and the parking lot size had been reduced.
Regarding placing the structure at the front of the site, Mr. Weaver stated that the structure cannot be placed in the front of the lot due to the existing house. The structures and basin would be too close to the wetlands and would be in violation of the wetlands by-laws.
Mr. Weaver presented a new design for the driveway. Mr. Henry Lane of Lane and Hammer responded that the new plan for the driveway is too steep, would not be attractive to customers and would be bad for Coopertown’s business.
A discussion of the applicant’s eligibility of exemption of the 100’ requirement was begun. Mr. Weaver feels the 100’ requirement is not applicable because the excavation is intended for building purposes. Mr. Adam Costa, Town Counsel, stated that it is up to the Board to determine if the 100’ setback requirement applies to this project. If the board determines that the removal of 174,000 cubic yards of material goes beyond excavation for building purposes, then the 100’ setback applies. Counsel believes it is subject to the 100’ requirement.
Ms. Mary Sullivan of 439 North East Main Street, spoke in favor of the 100’ setback in protection of her abutting property.
Mr. David Gjeltema of 19 Monroe Street also spoke in favor of the 100’ setback.
Mr. Chesebrough asked if there was enough information about the building uses and activities with respect to the aquifer application. Mr. Weaver addressed these issues in a letter he handed out.
Mr. Andrew Smith of 21 Monroe Street asked if a gravel removal permit could be approved without any guarantees that the building will even be built. As an abutter he is nervous that neighbors will be left with a large hole. Mr. Marks replied that a permit could be issued with the intent to build. At this time, the Board is looking at the application to see if it meets the requirements of the by-laws of the Town of Douglas.
Mr. Smith also asked if this plan comes under the Farm Act. Adelle Reynolds, Building Commissioner, stated that it has not been completely determined that this project falls under agricultural exemptions. Discussion continued regarding agricultural use, exemptions, acreage of the site and zoning.
Mr. Jim Pyne of Pyne Sand & Stone Co., Inc. asked to use the plan that was submitted by Guerriere & Hanlon. The cost to revise plans is too expensive. Discussion ensued regarding costs and fees and the 100’ setback.
Mr. Keith LaFleur of 25 Monroe Street spoke in favor of the 100’ setback.
Mr. Chesebrough made a motion to continue the public hearing for Coopertown Realty Trust Application for an Aquifer Protection Special Permit & Application of an Earth Removal Permit, 34 & 36 Davis Street to the next Planning Board Meeting on January 24, 2012 at 8:00 PM. The motion was seconded by Mr. Mungeam. Vote unanimous.
At this time, a five minute recess was called.

Mr. Stephen O’Connell, Andrews Survey Engineering, Ed Liston of DG Clean Power and George Germano of ConEd Development joined the meeting. Mr. O’Connell began by addressing the concerns from the last meeting. Approval and sign-off from the Water Superintendent has been received.
Mr. Liston has met with the Fire Chief and addressed the request for lighting. Motion lighting will be added to provide light to the transformers.
Regarding washing of the panels, washing of the solar panels is not necessary in New England as snow generally slides right off. No revisions have been made to the plans since the last meeting.
Mr. Mungeam opened discussion about a decision as to the size and height of the fence. Mr. O’Connell and his team are satisfied with a standard 6-foot fence. National Grid’s standard is a 6-foot fence. A substantial increase in cost is incurred by using an 8-foot fence. Mr. Marks agreed that a 6-foot fence would be adequate.
Mr. Mungeam asked how decommissioning would occur. Mr. Liston explained that to decommission the plant would cost $25,000. DG Clean Power will grant the surety.
As the property will be leased, Mr. Greco asked what would be the Town’s responsibility upon decommissioning. DG Clean Power would be required to restore the land to the condition it is in now.
Mr. Liston stated he has met with both the Fire and Police Chiefs and is preparing emergency procedures for shutdown. A draft will be finalized in 1-2 weeks. Emergency contact information will be posted.
Mr. O’Connell agreed that warning signs would be posted every 100 feet.
Mr. Liston stated that the Town would have access to monthly reports. The board asked for an annual report to include quarterly reports regarding breach of fence, breakdowns, etc.
Discussion continued regarding ground water levels and the types of posts and foundations to be used, which will be determined after the post test is done.
Mr. Zisk listed the following six conditions:
1. Annual report,
2. $35,000 surety (an increase in the surety was requested by Ms. Sharkey),
3. Lighting as requested by the Fire Chief,
4. Emergency procedures for shut-down,
5. Emergency signs in the front, and
6. Warning signs every 100 feet along the fence.
A motion was made by Mr. Zwicker to close the public hearing for Douglas Solar, LLC project at 9 Brookline Terrace. Seconded by Mr. Chesebrough. Vote unanimous.
A motion was made by Mr. Zwicker to approve the Douglas Solar, LLC project at 9 Brookline Terrace with the order of conditions. Seconded by Mr. Chesebrough. Vote unanimous.

Ms. Sharkey recused herself.
A discussion began regarding the parcel of land shown as “owner unknown”. Guaranteed Builders, Inc. is shown as the owner of the land according to the most recent tax list, however Mr. Lane states that Douglas Property owns the land according to the existing deed. Mr. Lane states that the Assessor’s records are wrong. Mr. Lane stated that since the Board has already voted to approve the plan, then the requirement to list the names of the abutters “as they appear on the most recent tax list” has been waived. Mr. Lane has been to Land Court.
The Board decided to give Mr. Lane the mylars; no vote was taken.

Ms. Sharkey rejoined the meeting.
Mr. O’Connell presented a plan to create a separate 1.25 acre parcel “A”. The parcel needs to be conveyed to Ms. Mary Bedoin from Gilboa Properties, LLC so she can retain ownership while Gilboa Properties, LLC gives some land to the subdivision. The land is still in the name of her late husband, Harry Bedoin. Nothing will be built on this parcel.
Mr. Mungeam made a motion to endorse the plan. Ms. Sharkey seconded the motion. Vote unanimous.

1. FY2013 Budget: Mr. Cundiff presented a memo from Mr. Guzinski asking that all department heads level fund their expenses where possible. CMRPC dues are the only variable.
2. Brookside Drive/Conservation Drive: Icing Issues: Per Mr. John Furno, the icing on Brookside Drive is due to a drainage pipe on private property which drains into the road. There is not much that can be done. Perhaps the property owner can be asked to help mitigate the problem.
The icing issue on Conservation Drive appears to be due to natural water that flows out to the road. There is not much that can be done about this issue.
3. Road Acceptance Bids: Mr. Zisk handed out a chart. Only one bid was submitted. Mr. Cundiff said procurement requirements were satisfied. Mr. Zwicker made a motion to accept the bid presented by Spatial Data & Design for Shady Knoll, Colonial Estates, Springmeadow and Brookside Estates. Seconded by Mr. Chesebrough. Vote unanimous.
4. Letter from Mr. Guzinski, Town Administrator: Zoning: Mr. Cundiff stated that originally, there were inquiries to the Board of Selectmen regarding the RC2 district, which has more stringent single-family home requirements now than they used to have. Mr. Cundiff suggested this topic be discussed more at the next meeting. Mr. Chesebrough asked Mr. Zisk if he could prepare zoning maps for each Board member before the next meeting.

10:20 PM MINUTES: 11/8/11 & 12/13/11
Ms. Sharkey made a motion to approve the minutes of the November 8, 2011 Planning Board Meeting as amended. Mr. Chesebrough seconded the motion. Vote unanimous.
Mr. Mungeam made a motion to approve the minutes of the December 13, 2011 Planning Board Meeting as presented. Mr. Zwicker seconded the motion. Vote unanimous.

Ms. Sharkey made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 10:26 PM. Mr. Chesebrough seconded the motion. Vote unanimous.

Respectfully submitted,

Mary Wright
Recording Secretary
Mary Wright
Posts: 609
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2012 8:56 pm

Return to 2012 Planning Board Meetings

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest