MONSON PLANNING BOARD
MINUTES JANUARY 13, 2015
MEMBERS PRESENT: Craig Sweitzer, Paul Hatch, Kevin Haley, Tara Hengeveld and Karen King.
ALSO PRESENT: Dan Laroche, Town Planner
7:00 Dan Laroche stated Evan Carrara contacted him to request a continuation of the public hearing for an Estate Lot on Cote Road in order to respond to concerns raised regarding run off from the proposed driveway onto Cote Road.
Tara Hengeveld moved to continue the public hearing.
Kevin Haley seconded it was so voted, unanimous.
Paul Hatch moved to accept the minutes of December 16, 2014.
Kevin Haley seconded.
Voting aye: Craig Sweitzer, Paul Hatch, Kevin Haley and Tara Hengeveld.
Karen King abstained.
The Board discussed the possibility of adding an Associate Member to the Board who would attend the meetings, participate in the discussion and vote in the event that five members of the Board were not in attendance.
Paul Hatch questioned if the Planning Board could vote on this tonight.
Dan Laroche stated it could.
The Board felt that if Marilyn Gorman was interested in becoming an Associate Member of the Planning Board she would be the best candidate, as she has represented the Town of Monson at the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission meetings for the past few years.
Dan Laroche stated if the Planning Board was agreeable he would work on developing Rules & Regulations for the Board to address peer review, consultant fees, what a complete application etc is.
Dan Laroche stated he worked on draft language to change the Cell Tower bylaw to bring it into compliance with State law.
Paul Hatch questioned if the Ground Mounted Solar Facility bylaw should be looked at especially where such facilities are located in a residential area.
Dan Laroche cautioned that State law allows the siting of solar facilities by right with Site Plan Approval. He stated he would look at both bylaws.
Paul Hatch stated site plan review should have enough detail for approval.
Dan Laroche stated the Board must ensure during the process that developers are not allowed to skirt requirements such as screening, parking and access. The project on Macomber Road was a learning process and the Board will go into any future solar project with more understanding and insight.
Craig Sweitzer stated the Planning Board has no authority to rescind approval with the Site Plan Approval process and to withhold the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy is not realistic.
Dan Laroche stated site plan review is an administrative process, but the issuance of a building permit can be held back until certain conditions are met. When the Planning Board issues its decision the conditions must be very clear and a letter sent to the Building Inspection as to the conditions that must be met prior to the issuance of a building permit.
Tara Hengeveld stated that the security fencing and screening are usually the last things to be done. The developer is not going to spend money on trees and plantings only to have them destroyed during the construction of the racks and panels.
Paul Hatch suggested increasing the amount of cash security. However the Board cannot rely on the proponent to come up with a figure, it should hire the services of a consultant.
Kevin Haley stated there is no incentive for the developer if the cash security is set at the cost of the plantings. The security should be double the cost of the plantings.
Dan Laroche stated the Board cannot do that because it would be cause for a challenge through the courts. The Board can set the cash security at retail price not industry price.
It was the general consensus of the Board that the best way was to make it monetarily painful for the developer not to follow plan.
Craig Sweitzer questioned if the conditions were enforced in housing court?
Dan Laroche stated if there is an appeal through the court system it is usually superior court. Site Plan review is not a strong process but bonding the work and cash securities gives Boards some leverage.
Craig Sweitzer stated to recap, the Town Planner is going to work on Rules and Regulations for the Board, and tweak the Cell Tower bylaw and Ground Mounted Solar Facility bylaw.
The Board discussed at length the dates for the February and March meetings. At the February meeting there would only be four members present and at the March meeting only three members present. Evan & Karen Cararra requested a continuance of the Special Permit for an Estate Lot and the Board has no problem with that but it is getting a full Board together that is the problem.
Paul Hatch stated when the Board first approved the Estate Lot in 2007 he abstained from the vote because of his concerns that the water from the driveway was running onto Cote Road. If the plan has not changed he held the same concerns as those in 2007.
John Morrell wrote a letter to the Board stating his concerns that in certain storm events water would be running onto Cote Road.
Dan Laroche stated he would contact Mr. Cararra and tell him the Board did not have enough information regarding the driveway drainage.
The Board set the next meeting date for Tuesday March 10, 2015, because that appeared to be the only date for the next two months that five members would be available.
Paul Hatch moved to add one Associate Member to the Board with full voting rights, in the event that a Member was not in attendance or recused his or her self.
Tara Hengeveld seconded the motion.
Craig Sweitzer stated as long as the Board could legally do this it was so voted, unanimous.
8:00 P.M. Paul Hatch moved to adjourn.
Kevin Haley seconded the motion.
It was so voted, unanimous.
Respectfully submitted,
Linda A. Hull
| 
