MONSON PLANNING BOARD
MINUTES NOVEMBER 17, 2015
MEMBERS PRESENT: Paul Hatch, Kevin Haley, Karen King, Tara Hengeveld, Marilyn Gorman Fil and Craig Sweitzer.
ALSO PRESENT: Dan Laroche.
Karen King recused herself to avoid the appearance of a conflict.
The Planning Board endorsed ANR Plans for:
Property located on Bogan Road owned by the Estate of Stella Furgal.
Property located on Moulton Hill Road owned by Margaret Marcotte.
Karen King returned.
Property located on Hovey Road owned by the Estate of Raymond Miller.
Karen King recused herself to avoid the appearance of a conflict.
The Board reviewed notification from Kathleen M. Finnegan, representative for the Estate of Stella Furgal that the estate intends to remove a 30 +- acres parcel located on Bogan Road from Chapter 61A.
Paul Hatch moved to recommend to the Board of Selectmen that the Town waive the right of first refusal.
Kevin Haley seconded the motion.
It was so voted unanimous.
Karen King returned.
Paul Hatch moved to approve the minutes of October 20, 2015 as presented.
Karen King seconded the motion.
It was so voted, unanimous.
Paul Hatch disclosed that he sits on the Board of Directors at Monson Savings Bank but would not realize any financial gain should the Planning Board approve the Site Plan and did not believe there would be any conflicts if he voted on the application.
7:15 Craig Sweitzer reconvened a public hearing for a Special Permit as provided by Section 4.2 Water Supply Protection District, 6.19 Stormwater Management and 7.4 Site Plan Approval of the Monson Zoning Bylaws, for property located at 354 Main Street owned by Levesque Properties, LLC.
Donald Frydryk stated in a letter dated October 26, 2015 he addressed comments in a letter from David Loring, Tighe & Bond dated October 20, 2015. The responses and revised plans were sent to the Planning Board and David Loring.
David Loring questioned the open gravel storage area? Donald Frydryk responded the open storage area was discussed at the public hearing and believed the Planning Board was comfortable that this area will meet the requirements of the Water Supply Protection District.
David Loring commented that the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan was for the construction of the project and a Long Term Pollution Plan should be in place. Donald Frydryk responded the operation and maintenance plan has been revised to include a LTPP including specifying snow and snowmelt management.
David Loring questioned if the Best Management Practices meet the requirements of the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook? Donald Frydryk stated the proposed Best Management Practices have been revised:
- A sediment forebay is included in the list of Pretreatment BMPs in Table CA 3 Standard 6. This project utilizes two forebays in series to provide the 44% TSS removal required prior to the infiltration BMP. Labeling of these chambers has been revised to be consistent with the nomenclature in Table CA 3 of Standard 6.
- Grading of the site has been revised to meet the one foot of freeboard requirement. The revised infiltration basin #1 has a calculated 100-year peak storage of 440.99 and an embankment crest elevation of 442.0. The detention basin has a calculated 100 year peak storage of 442.19 and an embankment crest elevation of 443.25. Infiltration basin #2 has a calculated 100 year peak storage of 442.35 and an embankment crest elevation of 443.35 towards Conant Brook. Infiltration basin #3 has a calculated 100 year peak storage of 442.04 and an embankment crest elevation of 443.35 towards Conant Brook. If an emergency situation for basin #2 and #3 arises, the one foot of freeboard for these basins will be achieved since the overflow volume is made up across the site towards basin #1 and the
detention basin.
- The grading of the site has been revised to increase the depth of the sediment forebays to a minimum of 9 inches. The Operation and Maintenance Plan has been updated to include inspection and maintenance of the sediment forebays every two months to ensure the overall capacity of the forebays and basins are maintained.
The Board received a letter from David Loring, Tighe & Bond, dated October 27, 2015 stating the revised submission and the comment response letter received from the applicant’s representative Sherman & Frydryk, Land Surveying & Engineering dated October 26, 2015 addresses the comments previously provided by Tighe & Bond. Mr. Loring also states that the stormwater management system for the site includes one detention basin and two infiltration basins each preceded by a double sediment forebay configuration. The shallow depth of both the basins and forebays provide limited sediment storage volume and will require attentive monitoring and meticulous maintenance to safeguard their function and longevity.
Donald Frydryk submitted a rendition of the proposed building.
Craig Sweitzer questioned the color of the building and roof color?
Donald Frydryk stated the building would be a darkish green with brown roof, he also submitted a cut sheet of the proposed lighting.
Craig Sweitzer questioned if the lighting was on sensors?
Craig Levesque stated the lights were on a timer and set for 8:00 P.M. to 6:00 A.M.
Craig Sweitzer questioned the hours of operation?
Craig Levesque stated it was difficult to give a definitive answer to that because many things can affect the time trucks get back at night, traffic, weather and breakdowns. He proposed work hours outside such as unhooking trailers, loading and unloading etc. between 7:00 A.M. and 10:00 P.M.
Craig Sweitzer questioned the typical operation?
Craig Levesque stated he moves equipment from one place to another and that involves leaving early in the morning and back late at night. All of the work on the trucks would be done inside the building.
Craig Sweitzer questioned if this would include hooking onto a trailer after 10:00 P.M.?
Craig Levesque stated he will not be able to get a truck with a trailer inside the building. He stated he can install external switches on his trucks to shut off the back up alarm whilst the vehicles are on site and then turn the alarm back on after they leave the site.
Craig Sweitzer questioned if the only vehicles on site would be the applicants?
Craig Levesque stated during the nighttime hours yes, occasionally a client will come in during the daytime hours.
Craig Sweitzer stated the Board as much as is possible would like to protect abutters from obnoxious noise.
Paul Hatch questioned if Mr. Levesque would be renting a bay?
Donald Frydryk stated no decision has been made at this time, but the applicant wanted to put it out there in case circumstances change.
Craig Levesque stated if he did rent a bay any activity would take place during the hours of 7:00 A.M. to 10:00 P.M.
Dan Laroche stated the Board could include a condition in its decision that if the applicant decides in the future to rent a portion of the building/site he must come back to the board for modification of the Site Plan.
Craig Sweitzer stated any activity after 10:00 P.M must meet the noise bylaw similarly during the daytime hours any activity must meet the bylaw. He questioned the frequency of night activity?
Craig Levesque stated the business operates in all weather, and in the winter time weather can affect the times the trucks get back.
Paul Hatch stated the letter from the Building Commissioner indicates that the applicant meets the threshold of noise levels in the Zoning Bylaws.
Christopher Kibbe 5 Wales Road stated at the present time the tree buffer blocks out a lot of the noise. He submitted photographs illustrating the existing buffer and stated if it is cut the noise level would increase at his property.
Donald Frydryk stated the buffer that will remain after the cutting meets the requirements of the Zoning Bylaws.
Christopher Kibbe stated the elevation of Wales Road means that his property is above the applicants and if the buffer is reduced the pinning or unpinning of trucks will be much louder during the night time hours.
Paul Hatch questioned if the activity on the site would be any different from what happens now?
Craig Levesque stated no.
Jim Haynes 23 Wales Road stated part of the applicants’ property is in the Residential Village zone.
Donald Frydryk stated the trees are to be cut down where the fuel bay is.
Craig Sweitzer stated whatever the activity it must meet the bylaw. The Bylaws indicate the decibel ratings for different zoning districts and also for different times of the day.
Christopher Kibbe stated so far the applicant has been a great neighbor but if the tree buffer is cut that will significantly impact the noise level at his home. Sometimes the trucks are left idling longer than is allowed by State law. He questioned if the proposed building could be moved to avoid cutting any trees?
Craig Levesque stated the building would give extra protection from any noise, additionally he did not want to move the building further into the Residential Village zone.
Craig Sweitzer stated it is not within the Planning Boards’ authority to redesign the project, but can include conditions in its decision.
Donald Frydryk stated the assumption is being made that Mr. Levesque is violating the noise bylaw. It is impossible to monitor every minute of every day, but when the Building Commissioner took sound levels at the site, the activity conformed to the requirements of day and night time levels. Donald Frydryk stated all of the operation takes place in the General Commercial zoning district.
Craig Sweitzer stated to address the issues raised by the abutters he would suggest more sound levels be taken from all property lines while the trailers are hooked and unhooked, the brakes are set and released, the engine is running and reeving, chains are thrown onto a flatbed and the trucks are backing up.
Dan Laroche reiterated the use is currently permitted and the applicant is operating his business at this time. He is asking to expand the use with the construction of a building, and the issue is how to do that and meet the regulations. There appears to be some issues with noise how can the project be moved forward and can the project improve some of those issues?
Craig Sweitzer stated the bylaws call for a buffer strip usually a mix of trees and shrubs. The Board can also look at walls or fences in lieu of plantings.
Christopher Kibbe stated a wall or fence would not help him, as his property sits above the applicants and if the tree buffer is removed it will take away the natural sound barrier.
Craig Sweitzer stated a thirty foot setback is required and the applicant is providing one hundred and fifty feet. A landscape buffer strip is a visual barrier and cannot be expected to completely block the activity from view. In this case with the elevation difference between Wales Road and Main Street no amount of plantings, fences etc. can block the view of residents of Wales Road.
Paul Hatch stated the applicant is providing five times the required buffer width.
Craig Sweitzer stated members of the Planning Board would make a site visit Monday November 30th, 2015 if the applicant was agreeable, with Building Commission B.J. Church and Town Planner Dan Laroche. The Board will request the Building Commissioner measure sound levels at the property lines at a height of four feet while performing the previously mentioned truck operations.
Christopher Kibbe questioned what a visual buffer meant?
Craig Sweitzer stated a visual screening softens the appearance of a project, it is unrealistic to expect that a commercial building will not be visible to abutters. The Board is asking the applicant to meet the bylaws not to hide his building completely.
Craig Levesque stated he was not trying to do something he would not be proud of. He is a lifelong resident of Monson and has a similar building on Palmer Road.
Jim Haynes questioned how the business was permitted to be there?
Craig Sweitzer stated it was allowed as a private garage for the maintenance and garaging of vehicles owned by the property owner. The only item remaining was the containment unit for the fuel tank. He stated the applicant has to meet the requirements of the Water Supply Protection District bylaw and the Fire Department requirements.
Paul Hatch suggested the Planning Board condition its decision with regard to the fuel tank that the containment area meet the approval of the Building Commissioner/Zoning Enforcement Officer and Monson Fire Department.
Craig Levesque made a written request to continue the public hearing to December 15 at 7:15 P.M.
Tara Hengeveld moved to approve the request to continue.
Karen King seconded the motion.
It was so voted, unanimous.
The Board will work with the Building Commissioner and Town Planner to make a site visit on November 30, 2015.
Kevin Haley moved to adjourn at 8:45 P.M.
Karen King seconded the motion.
It was so voted, unanimous.
Respectfully submitted,
Linda A. Hull
| 
