MONSON PLANNING BOARD
JUNE 21, 2011
MEMBERS PRESENT: Paul Hatch, Kevin Haley, Paul Hatch, Craig Sweitzer and Karen King
7:00 Tara Hengeveld moved to accept the minute of April 19, 2011 as written.
Kevin Haley seconded the motion.
It was so voted, unanimous.
Richard Smith contacted the Board regarding his property at 59 Main Street. The current use is a wellness center and Dr. Smith would like to expand the use and establish a commercial kitchen at the property and produce Italian ice to sell wholesale.
Craig Sweitzer stated it is a change of use and would require Site Plan Approval. The bylaw allows for a waiver of the regulations and the applicant should make a written request for the waivers.
7:15 Public Hearing for a Special Permit as provided by Section 4.2.6.(c) 3 of the Monson Zoning Bylaws for Lot A Bethany Road. The applicant is Universal Structures and the property is owned by Autumn & Jeremy Bailey. The applicant proposes to construct a single family home, driveway and parking area that will render impervious more than 15% or 2500 square feet, whichever is greater.
Donald Frydryk, Sherman & Frydryk Land Surveying & Engineering gave a presentation stating he had prepared a plan for groundwater recharge in accordance with the provisions of the bylaw.
Craig Sweitzer questioned if this was a newly created conforming lot.
Donald Frydryk stated his company was not responsible for the survey or division of the property.
Craig Sweitzer questioned the total area of impervious surface that was being created?
Donald Frydryk stated the foot print of the proposed house is 2700 square feet and the total amount of impervious surface on the property is 8000 square feet.
Paul Hatch questioned why the reason for such a large paved area and parking spaces?
John DeMont, Universal Structures stated the residents of the home need special care and services.
Craig Sweitzer stated the only issue for the Planning Board is the Water Supply Protection District.
Donald Frydryk stated the impervious surface is larger because of the need for those special services.
Paul Hatch stated the By-law provides a special permit to address the infiltration of run off but part of the Planning Board review is to keep the amount of impervious surface to a minimum. It is a valid question why is this much impervious surface required and why this many parking spaces?
Dave Carmen Universal Structures stated their client specified the number of parking spaces.
Paul Hatch stated the idea is to reduce the amount of impervious surface as much as possible, if these spaces are needed tell the Planning Board why how the number of parking spaces was determined.
John DeMont stated they did look at a gravel driveway and parking area but that would not work for the residents of the house.
Craig Sweitzer questioned the percentage of impervious surface on the lot?
Donald Frydryk stated it would be 33% over what is allowed by the bylaw, but the special permit process allows an applicant to create more impervious surface with an infiltration system. The system that has been designed will infiltrate 4 times more than what would normally be infiltrated. The usual standard is to design for 3 inches over the impervious surface and multiply the surface area by .06. The system that has been designed handles well over than and the calculations have been included to demonstrate that.
Craig Sweitzer stated based on this design twice the area of impervious surface stormwater will be captured and handled on site. Mr. Sweitzer questioned the size of the impervious surface?
Donald Frydryk stated it is just over 24,000 square feet.
Craig Sweitzer questioned if the property would be tied into the public water and sewer system?
Mr. DeMont stated it would.
Kevin Haley stated he was confused as to how the property was identified, is it a single family home?
Mr. DeMont stated the State Building Code states that it must be treated under the building code as a single family home, it is not congregate housing.
Craig Sweitzer questioned the exterior lighting?
Mr. Carmen stated there would be no illumination leaving the site.
Robert Salmon 41 Bethany Road questioned if any type of planting was proposed to shield the view of the vast expanse of paving?
Mr. DeMont stated they would be open to discussion maybe some arborvitaes.
Mr. Salmond stated he was particularly concerned about the rear of the property.
Mr. DeMont stated they would be willing to discuss visual screening.
Daniel O’Conner Bethany Road stated that he has a right of way through this property and questioned what would happen to that right of way if this project is approved?
Mr. DeMont stated that Mr. O’Conner should have his attorney contact Universal Structures attorney.
Craig Sweitzer questioned if this was the only access to that land?
Donald Frydryk stated his company was not responsible for the survey, but he did believe there was an alternate access.
Mr. O’Connor stated there is a driveway that leads to his building that is located behind the property under discussion this evening.
Mr. DeMont stated this is a single family residence and the question regarding the right of way should be directed to Universal Structures attorney.
Al Lyons 43 Bethany Road questioned if this was a health care facility with nursing staff?
Mr. DeMont stated that staff would be in and out taking care of the needs of the people living there.
Mr. Lyons questioned if the clientele would change and if the people living there were related?
Mr. DeMont refused to answer the question stating it was a violation of people’s rights.
Craig Sweitzer stated the only concern for the Planning Board is the amount of impervious surface that is being created. The Board has no authority with regard to who lives there.
Craig Sweitzer questioned if Universal Structures were prepared to request a continuation of the hearing to provide the Board with additional information?
Paul Hatch stated the intent of the bylaw is to allow an applicant to exceed a certain threshold but under the framework that the amount of area that exceeds the limit set in the bylaw is kept to a minimum. It is important that the Board is provided with good solid information that justifies the amount of impervious surface that is proposed.
Donald Frydryk stated he has designed a system that infiltrates more than the requirements of the Water Supply Protection District.
Craig Sweitzer stated the Board accepts that but it still must be absolutely certain that this much pavement is absolutely necessary.
Mr. Carmen stated the amount of impervious surface was dictated by the needs of their client.
Mr. Salmond questioned if this single family home would have any affect on property values in the neighborhood.
Mr. Carmen stated he would provide a copy of the requirements of the State Building Code and would also discuss with his client how the number of parking spaces required was determined.
Mr. DeMont and Mr. Carmen requested a continuation for one month to Tuesday July 19, 2011 at 7:15 P.M. to allow time to provide the additional information requested by the Board.
Craig Sweitzer stated as one member of the Planning Board he was concerned with the amount of pavement that is proposed and would like something in writing from the applicant that explains how the amount of impervious surface was determined, similarly he would like a copy of the language from the Building Code that would allow him to comfortably vote on this proposal.
The Board voted to continue the hearing to Tuesday July 19, 2011 at 7:15 P.M.
Paul Hatch stated in view of the destruction caused by the tornado the Planning Board should review the section of the Zoning Bylaws that deals with emergency trailers. He suggested a change to the language that addresses the location of trailers to the effect that in the case of insufficient land the trailer may be sited on property in Monson belonging to another. The trailer shall be removed after a period of one year from the issuance of the permit for the trailer.
Paul Hatch moved to adjourn at 9:00 P.M.
Kevin Haley seconded the motion.
It was so voted, unanimous.
Respectfully submitted,
Linda A. Hull
| 
