MONSON PLANNING BOARD
MINUTES APRIL 18, 2006
MEMBERS PRESENT: Craig Sweitzer, Paul Hatch, Tara Hengeveld, Kevin Haley and Karen King.
7:30 The Planning Board reviewed an ANR plan submitted by Pauline Habel to divide property on Lower Hampden Road into two lots. The Board denied the plan because it did not clearly demonstrate that it met the requirements of the Zoning Bylaw. The plan did not show that it met the requirement of 60,000 square feet of land not regulated by 310 CMR 10.
The Board reviewed an ANR plan submitted by Danielle Ironfield for property on Childs Road. The back portion of 20 Childs Road is to become an integral part of abutting property owned by Haggerty. The Board endorsed the plan but commented that when a reference is made from one lot to another it should be referenced by Book and Page number where available not by lot numbers.
Karen King removed herself to avoid the appearance of a conflict.
Leo Cortina and John Arooth submitted an ANR plan revising Lots 11A Macomber Road and 1A, 2A and 3A Upper Palmer Road. Following a review of the plan the Board denied the plan because of reserved land that takes away frontage from the lots.
8:00 Leo Cortina met informally with the Board to discuss property he owns on Macomber Road. Currently he is paying taxes on land assessed as building lots on Macomber Road that he believes the Planning Board would not approve. The Town abandoned maintenance of Macomber Road at a point 1,250 feet from the intersection of Macomber Road and Upper Palmer Road. The property he owns is beyond that.
The Board stated it would not approve lots beyond the point that the Town abandoned maintenance and would send Mr. Cortina a letter to that effect.
8:00 Paul Bourbeau Lower Hampden Road met informally with the Board to discuss the possibility of a windmill on his property to generate power from wind energy. He owns approximately 19 acres of land on Mayhill and Lower Hampden Road and has done extensive research into this alternate energy source. The self-supporting tower would be approximately 100 feet high.
Chip Lapointe, Zoning Enforcement Officer stated he received a letter from Mr. Bourbeau regarding the windmill but there is no language in the Zoning Bylaws to specifically allow this type of structure. It is not an accessory building in the strict sense of the word and in any event an accessory building is limited to a height of 40 feet.
Kevin Haley questioned the length of the blades?
Paul Bourbeau stated they are generally 8 to 10 feet from the center out.
Craig Sweitzer questioned the noise level?
Paul Bourbeau stated he did not find them noisy.
Kevin Haley questioned if the power generated by the windmill would go into batteries?
Paul Bourbeau stated batteries were an option but he preferred to tie directly into the grid.
Paul Hatch stated he believed it was an excellent idea but the Town would have to develop a bylaw to cover it. Some of the issues that come immediately to mind are districts they are allowed in, noise measured at property line, setback from property line, maximum height and minimum acreage.
Kevin Haley stated he believed the visual aspect would be important.
Paul Bourbeau stated he had some samples from New York State and believed the biggest issue for them was the minimum acreage on which a windmill was allowed.
Paul Hatch questioned the average height?
Paul Bourbeau stated a minimum of 80 feet anything lower than that cuts down on the efficiency.
Craig Sweitzer asked Mr. Bourbeau to give the Planning Board some sample bylaw language. He stated any application for a windmill should require a special permit from the Planning Board.
8:25 Leslie Duthie CPA Coalition met with the Planning Board to discuss the Conservation Preservation Act. She stated the Coalition is made up of thirteen members that include representatives from the Historic Society, Parks & Recreation and Conservation Commission. Although a surcharge is not a popular way to go the positives outweigh the negatives. Currently the State matches 100% of the monies collected by the Town. The Coalition is pursuing a 3% surcharge with the first $100,000.00 valuation of a property exempted. Low income and senior citizens would also have an exemption. The money collected must be used for specific purposes such as the renovation of historic buildings, recreation and open space it does not go into the general fund and become swallowed up in the day to day
operation of the Town. The issue of a Conservation Preservation Act will go before Town Meeting and the voters will decide whether to put it on the ballot or not.
Craig Sweitzer questioned who decides how the money is spent?
Leslie Duthie stated ultimately the residents of the Town at a Town Meeting. A Committee would be formed and the requests for money would go before them. The Committee would then have to take it to Town Meeting for the residents of Monson to vote to appropriate the money.
Kevin Haley stated a possible conflict because they sell New England Wood Pellets at Squier & Co.
8:35 Bethany Road Charles Niebling, New England Wood Pellet, Inc. met informally with the Board to discuss a facility they would like to site in Monson. The company was founded in 1992 in Jaffrey New Hampshire and to keep up with the demand for its product need to increase its distribution sites. The property on Bethany Road owned by Bethany Road Realty Trust is ideal because of the rail access. The location is good for their customers in central and southern New England.
Craig Sweitzer questioned what exactly would happen at the facility in Monson?
Charles Niebling stated the product would arrive in bulk by rail and the Monson facility would bag the pellets and distribute by truck.
Craig Sweitzer questioned approximately how many trucks a week would be expected at the site?
Charles Niebling stated approximately 70 trucks.
Craig Sweitzer stated he was happy industry was interested in coming to Monson but safety is an issue when reviewing a site plan. The increased truck traffic of approximately 10 trucks a day was a potential problem.
Paul Hatch stated another problem to address would be the perennial stream that runs in the back of the property.
Craig Sweitzer stated as described by Mr. Niebling this is a permitted use with site plan approval from the Planning Board but there are issues that must be addressed. Once a plan is submitted the Board would schedule a public hearing and notify abutters. He advised Mr. Niebling to be sure the site plan submitted complied with the required site plan content and addressed the traffic issue. The more complete a picture given by the applicant the better including visual aspects of the building, colors and materials.
Charles Niebling stated there would be no noise associated with the operation. In addition to the building there would be a silo to store the pellets.
Paul Hatch questioned if New England Pellets owned the trucks or used private haulers?
Charles Niebling stated they own the fleet of trucks that operate in Jaffrey, New Hampshire but thought it would be private truck owners in Monson.
Mr. Hatch stated the Board is currently reviewing a site plan for Lydall on Bethany Road and one of the biggest problems is Lydall cannot control the trucks with regard to parking because the trucks are privately owned.
The Board stated what is proposed is appropriate for the zone in which the property is located but the applicant would have to address the traffic issue.
Charles Niebling questioned even if it was a previously developed site?
Paul Hatch stated the Board must keep safety in mind and an increase in truck traffic would have an impact on the surrounding residential neighborhood.
8:50 The Board reviewed an ANR plan submitted by Northtree LLC for property on Old Reed Road and Beebe Road.
Tara Hengeveld questioned the condition of Beebe and Old Reed Road?
Michael Parsons, Kelly Granger & Parsons stated Beebe Road and Old Reed Road are roads maintained by the Town.
Robert Scerbo stated Beebe Road is partially paved and in the area of the stone wall they have cleared back to the wall to improve the line of site. He stated he received positive feedback from the Highway Superintendent.
Craig Sweitzer questioned the traveled width of the road?
Michael Parsons stated it was a maximum of 16 feet.
Robert Scerbo stated the road varies in width but would agree the widest portion is 16 feet.
Craig Sweitzer stated he had never seen an ANR plan with so many lots and had concerns that the existing grades, widths and surfaces of Beebe Road and Old Reed Road was suitable for the proposed construction. For him personally the question is a matter of safety and is he comfortable signing a plan that will result in probably 200 extra trips a day on these roads.
Robert Scerbo Northtree LLC stated he does not build homes he develops property and sells individual lots. The lots would be developed over a period of time so there would be no immediate increase in traffic.
Craig Sweitzer stated even during the construction of homes there is going to be safety hazards no matter how the property is developed. Well drilling vehicles, concrete trucks and trucks delivering materials will have serious impacts on the road. This is a matter of safety and the Board would like to work together with the developer maybe putting in a cul-de-sac and making improvements to the road.
Robert Scerbo stated he shared the same concerns and thinks probably some improvement to the roads are necessary.
Michael Parsons stated if the Board looked at the frontage and acreage it could see they have not attempted to max out the property.
Craig Sweitzer stated what is proposed results in heavy traffic on what are marginal roads.
Paul Hatch stated he concurred with Mr. Sweitzer. He stated he took a drive to familiarize himself with the area and while he would agree the clean up makes the property look better his concern was not looks but safety. He questioned if the existing conditions could support emergency vehicles; do the roads have suitable widths and grades?
Craig Sweitzer questioned if a fire truck and a car could pass safely on Old Reed Road?
Michael Parsons stated no.
Paul Hatch stated where Old Reed Road gets steeper in the area of the stone wall it gets narrower. There is nowhere for a vehicle to go.
Michael Parsons agreed the road would deteriorate.
Craig Sweitzer stated the Board could deny the plan because it believes the width and grade of the road is not suitable for the development of 30 lots. The Board also recognizes that this could end up in litigation and be dragged out for a couple of years waiting for a judge to make a decision. The concerns of the Board are valid there are safety issues involved with endorsing a plan that creates numerous lots on a marginal road such as Old Reed Road. He questioned if the applicant was willing to do any improvements to existing road?
Robert Scerbo questioned what kind of improvements?
Craig Sweitzer suggested a meeting of the Planning Board, the applicant, the Fire Chief and Highway Superintendent at the site to look at what improvements are needed and what the applicant feels he can do.
Depending on the availability of the Fire Chief and Highway Superintendent a site visit was set for Friday April 21, 2006 at 8:00 A.M.
Chairman Sweitzer asked the Clerk to post a special meeting for the Planning Board for 9:00 A.M. Friday April 21, 2006 at which time a decision would be made on the plan.
9:31 Paul Hatch made a motion to approve the minutes of March 21, 2006.
Kevin Haley seconded the motion.
It was so voted unanimous.
Chip Lapointe, Zoning Enforcement Officer discussed minor changes to the language of existing bylaws that he would like the Board to consider.
9:55 Paul Hatch moved to adjourn.
Craig Sweitzer seconded the motion.
It was so voted unanimous.
Respectfully submitted,
Linda A. Hull
Clerk
Cc: BOH, BOS, Building Dept., Conservation Comm., Town Clerk & ZBA
| 
