MONSON PLANNING BOARD
AUGUST 15, 2006
MEMBERS PRESENT: Paul Hatch, Craig Sweitzer, Karen King and Kevin Haley
MEMBERS ABSENT: Tara Hengeveld
Craig Sweitzer convened the regular meeting of the Monson Planning Board at 7:30 P.M.
The Board endorsed the following ANR plans:
Old Wales Road, 2 lots property owned by Sheldon Getchell.
Woodridge Road property owned by Joanne Cortina.
East Hill Road property owned by Westview Farms Inc.
Paul Bourbeau met with the Board for an informal discussion regarding a draft bylaw to regulate wind energy structures.
Craig Sweitzer questioned if the windmill structure would be restricted to a monopole?
Chip Lapointe stated the draft bylaw does not restrict the design to a monopole.
Craig Sweitzer stated he believed the proposed bylaw would work for a small windmill.
Paul Bourbeau stated the proposed bylaw keeps the structures on the small side.
Craig Sweitzer and Paul Hatch stated the Board had a long discussion regarding the height limitations that should be imposed. It had to balance the effectiveness for those wishing to install a windmill against the affect on neighboring properties. To mitigate the affect on neighboring properties the Board addressed noise and setback from property lines in addition to height restrictions.
Craig Sweitzer questioned who would check the noise level?
Chip Lapointe stated he would go to the site to check the noise level at the property lines.
Craig Sweitzer questioned what the typical decibel rating would be in a residential area?
Chip Lapointe stated he believed it was typically in the 55 to 65 range. With regard to the height limitations the Zoning Board of Appeals has the authority to give dimensional variances so the door is not completely closed at 120 feet. However the standards for a variance are a lot higher than those of a special permit and concerns of abutters weigh heavily.
Craig Sweitzer questioned if there were reasons to have more waivers or variances available?
Paul Hatch stated he felt the only variances that should be considered were dimensional because they are provided for in the Monson Zoning Bylaws. To make it clear it should be spelled out in the windmill bylaw that the Zoning Board of Appeals has the authority to grant a variance from the height and setback limitations.
7:55 Roland Arsenault met with the Board to discuss his written request for the Board to waive the requirement for site plan approval for property he owns on Main Street. He stated the building was formerly a barbershop and he wanted to replace the large windows with smaller window openings.
Craig Sweitzer questioned if Mr. Arsenault had any plans or documentation because the Board did not want to give a carte blanche.
Mr. Arsenault stated he did not have any plans but he only proposed putting in smaller windows.
Kevin Haley questioned the size of the new windows?
Mr. Arsenault stated 4 x 4 picture windows.
Craig Sweitzer stated Mr. Arsenault would be obliged to abide by the building code irrespective of any waiver from the Planning Board.
Paul Hatch moved to waive site plan approval as long as the new windows are 80% of the size of the existing windows.
Kevin Haley seconded the motion.
It was so voted unanimous.
8:00 The Board received a letter from Atty. Paul Maleck requesting on behalf of his client Bethany Road Realty Trust to withdraw without prejudice the application for Site Plan Approval for a Maintenance Station on Bethany Road.
Chip Lapointe stated there are a couple of issues that still need to be addressed. The retaining wall has been constructed but the fence at the top has not been installed. The other issue is the area that has been created by the earth removal. Lydall are parking trucks there and it is an impervious surface. The Board went back and forth with the applicant on this issue.
Craig Sweitzer stated even though the applicant has requested to withdraw the application the concerns of the Board always were and always will be safety and parking. Whatever changes have been made to the property must meet the bylaw and not create a parking or safety hazard.
Paul Hatch made a motion to approve the request to withdraw without prejudice.
Karen King seconded the motion.
It was so voted unanimous.
Paul Hatch removed himself to avoid the appearance of a conflict.
The Board received notification that Westview Farms Inc. was removing approximately 33 acres from Chapter 61 and selling it at a purchase price of $330,000.00.
Karen King moved to recommend that the Town waive its right of first refusal.
Kevin Haley seconded the motion.
It was so voted unanimous.
Paul Hatch returned.
8:10 The Board discussed the final landscaping for the McCray Subdivision. The plans called for trees to be planted at regulated intervals but the underground electric utility line has been installed 10 feet off of the road and the water line 1-2 feet off of the road. If trees were to be planted they would interfere with the utility lines and on the other side of the road would cause a problem with the sidewalk.
Craig Sweitzer questioned the type of trees?
Chip Lapointe stated red maples were proposed but the question is do they have to go in? The Water & Sewer Department and Highway Department have concerns with maintenance of the utility lines and sidewalks. If the trees go in it is preferable that they are installed on private property.
Craig Sweitzer stated the trees were for the benefit of those that live there.
Paul Hatch stated the developer is responsible for whatever is on the plan. The Board would accept written certification from each individual property owner stating if they want a tree planted on their property or not.
Craig Sweitzer questioned what would happen with those lots not yet sold?
Paul Hatch stated any lots still remaining in the ownership of the developer must have trees planted.
Karen King excused herself to avoid the appearance of a conflict stating she would not return to the meeting.
8:25 PUBLIC HEARING FOR A PRELIMINARY SUB-DIVISION PLAN KNOWN AS QUARRY HILL ESTATES ON PROPERTY OWNED BY JOHN M. & JAMES E. AROOTH.
Craig Sweitzer read the legal notice, as it appeared in the Republican Newspaper the weeks of July 31, and August 7, 2006.
Craig Sweitzer stated one of the Planning Board members has recused herself and another is absent leaving 3 members to vote on the petition before the Board. The applicant must gain the approval of all three members. He questioned if the applicant Leo Cortina wanted to proceed or continue for another month to have four members voting?
Leo Cortina stated he would continue with three voting members.
Greg Henson, Sherman & Frydryk described the project stating this was Phase II of a sub-division to be known as Quarry Hill Estates to construct 12 single family homes on approximately 11 acres of land. The property is zoned both Residential Village and Rural Residential and is owned by John & James Arooth. Mr. Henson stated they proposed two new intersecting roads to be known as Arooth Road and Cortina Road. Arooth Road also intersects with Macomber Road and Cortina Road with Upper Palmer Road. The design of all intersections is 90 degrees and both Arooth and Cortina Roads would be 24 foot wide bituminous. The applicant is seeking two waivers from the requirements of the Monson Sub-Division Regulations.
A waiver is requested from the side walk requirement. There are no sidewalks on Macomber Road or Upper Palmer Road.
A waiver is requested from the requirement that the vertical grade of either intersecting street shall not exceed a slope of 3% for a minimum distance of 100 feet from the intersection. The applicant is proposing the vertical grade shall not exceed 3% for a minimum distance of 50 feet on Cortina Road in order get coverage over drainage pipes and a manhole.
Mr. Henson stated it is proposed that the sewer line would come along Cortina Road through lots 15 & 16.
Craig Sweitzer questioned much earth work was proposed?
Greg Henson stated he had not done calculations but there is a great deal of fill to be brought in.
Craig Sweitzer stated it would appear to be five feet in some areas.
Greg Henson stated there is a lot of fill to be brought in for the roadway and lots.
Craig Sweitzer questioned how much work on the stormwater run off, drainage calculations and site distance at intersections had been completed?
Greg Henson stated none at this stage.
Craig Sweitzer questioned the existing condition of Macomber Road?
Greg Henson stated it has a paved width of about 18 feet.
Craig Sweitzer questioned if the applicant proposed any improvement to Macomber Road as the new roads have been designed with a 24 foot paved width?
Leo Cortina stated he would do whatever Town wanted.
Paul Hatch stated the Board does not have the full picture with the plan submitted. In order to make a fully informed decision the Board must have a plan showing the entire build out not just Phase II. The applicant can build in phases but the design for the project must be complete.
Rosemary Taft 3 Macomber Road expressed concern that the construction of the new homes would exacerbate existing problems with water pressure. She stated the water pressure at her home was around 14lbs of pressure making it impossible to bathe and have a washing machine or dishwater running at the same time. The water table in the area is very high and this year Ms. Taft stated she was unable to plant a vegetable garden because of standing water. What affect would the huge amount of fill necessary for this project have on that? Lastly Macomber Road is not wide enough for two cars to pass now the new roads and homes will mean a significant increase in traffic.
Craig Sweitzer read a letter dated July 10, 2006 from Craig Jalbert, Water & Sewer Superintendent stating among other things that the proposed Quarry Hill Estates Sub-division could not be serviced by the municipal water system. Present conditions in the system dictate that the water pressure in the proposed subdivision would be below the Town’s standard of 35 psi.
Leo Cortina stated he met with Water & Sewer Department and it was his understanding that as long as the elevation is less than 600 feet the lot can be serviced by Town water.
Craig Sweitzer stated the letter from the Water & Sewer Department emphatically stated that the sub-division could not be serviced by the municipal system at this time. Prior to any decision by the Board with regard to the preliminary sub-division plans it would need a letter from the Water & Sewer Superintendent supporting Mr. Cortina’s statement. Mr. Sweitzer stated the purpose of a preliminary plan is to give an outline or overview of the project without having to go into specific details that are required in a definitive plan. The plan submitted by the applicant does not give an overview of the complete project and is missing a great deal of basic detail. There are many issues that have to be addressed, the availability of water, can the existing sewer collection system handle the
additional loading not only of what is shown on the plan but what is going to be proposed down the road and is not shown on the plan.
John Morrell, Highway Superintendent stated the Town drainage system has no more capacity to take more water from both Upper Palmer Road and Macomber Road. He stated he would be looking for an independent stormwater drainage system.
Craig Sweitzer questioned where water flows now?
John Morrell stated on Macomber Road it goes into an existing silage pit on what is being proposed as Lot 22.
Craig Sweitzer questioned if the drainage on Upper Palmer Road was insufficient?
John Morrell stated it is not insufficient but has all it can handle. There is an earthen berm there now that acts as buffer and the water runs where the petitioner proposes to put in a retention pond.
Paul Hatch stated there is no question that no more water would be allowed to enter onto Town Roads.
John Morrell stated on the plan Arooth Road ends just beyond two proposed catch basins in order to facilitate maintenance the road should be continued or the basins moved back.
Paul Hatch stated that is one of the problems with the plan it does not show the full build out and it is to be assumed that Arooth Road would be continued.
Craig Sweitzer questioned if Mr. Morrell had a concern with the waiver requested for 3% for 50 feet instead of 100 feet?
John Morrell stated that was not a problem. A much bigger problem for Mr. Morrell is that Macomber Road only has a 14 foot paved width and he would like the developer to widen it to 24 feet with the work to be done on the north side of the road. Additionally the amount of fill that has to be brought in for the road and lots is also a big concern because the elevations will be changed and additional water will flow onto the road.
Paul Hatch stated drainage would be required to put the water back onto the property because no increased flow would be allowed onto Macomber Road.
Joan Payne questioned how many phases were proposed after this and how many houses?
Leo Cortina stated he could not answer because it would depend on demand.
Craig Sweitzer questioned how much land remained?
Leo Cortina stated 40 buildable acres.
Rosemary Taft questioned if she understood correctly that Macomber Road was to be widened and resurfaced?
Craig Sweitzer stated that is what the Highway Superintendent would like to see.
Arnold Beaton Upper Palmer Road questioned if the work was already underway for the project because trucks were going up and down Macomber Road all day long.
Leo Cortina stated they were removing topsoil on the farm and bringing fill in and stockpiling.
Craig Sweitzer questioned if any other Board had issued any permits?
Leo Cortina stated the material was coming from the building project on Palmer Road.
Chip Lapointe stated he under the impression Mr. Cortina was going to come forward with permit applications for the removal and/or filling of land.
Leo Cortina stated he was in the process of filing for permits.
Craig Sweitzer read a letter from David Loring, P.E. Tighe & Bond regarding his review of the plans on behalf of the Town. His comments echoed those of the Board that the entire parcel of land and complete project should be shown to better understand the adequacy of existing infrastructure to support the development. Pavement widths of Macomber and Upper Palmer Road should be shown. A geotechnical study should be provided with the definitive plans. The utility easements proposed across Lots 1A, 2A, 3A, 4A, 7 and 16 should be discussed to ensure adequate access to these locations at various times of the year for maintenance. Also if the drainage and sanitary systems are to be maintained by the Town future property owners would be restricted in the activities permitted in the area.
Greg Henson stated the plan anticipates the widening of Macomber Road and reflects a reserve strip along the lots on Macomber Road for that purpose.
Craig Sweitzer questioned if the reserved strip was to be deeded to the Town?
Greg Henson stated it becomes the new Right Of Way.
Craig Sweitzer stated there is a substantial amount of information missing and the Board cannot get a feel for what the development is to be. The biggest issues are, the capability of the Town to provide water to the development; given the huge amount of filling proposed keeping the stormwater on site and the capability of Macomber Road to handle the increase traffic because of its existing 14 foot paved width. Additional issues such as the maintenance of the existing earthen berm, the pavement ending too close to the catch basins on Arooth Road and the comments from David Loring should also be addressed.
Kevin Haley stated there is also the issue of earth filling and earth removal to be addressed.
Paul Hatch stated the plans are deficient and without a build out showing the complete development and some kind of response to some of the more glaring issues he would find it difficult to approve the plans. He questioned if it would be possible to look at coming between Lot 15 & 16 with the pipe because that would eliminate the need for a waiver from the 3% elevation for 100 feet on the proposed Cortina Road?
Greg Henson stated he would look at that.
Leo Cortina requested a continuance to September 19, 2006 at 7:45 PM.
Paul Hatch moved to approve the continuance as requested by the applicant.
Kevin Haley seconded the motion.
It was so voted unanimous.
At 9:25 P.M. Paul Hatch moved to adjourn.
Kevin Haley seconded the motion.
It was so voted unanimous.
Respectfully submitted,
Linda A. Hull
| 
