MONSON ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
MARCH 22, 2007
MEMBERS PRESENT: William Donovan, Nicola Gioscia, Frank Carey, Roger Pelletier, Kevin Biermann, David Beaudoin and Tere Hrynkiw
MEMBERS ABSENT: David Jarvis
Chairman William Donovan convened the meeting at 7:30 P.M.
David Beaudoin moved to approve the minutes of February 27, 2007 as presented.
Nicola Gioscia seconded the motion.
It was so voted unanimous.
The Board received a request from Rick & Kathy Garner, 146 Wilbraham Road to renew the special permit that was issued March 16, 1999, D – 1999 for three years to raise dogs for show purposes.
Chip Lapointe stated Mr. & Mrs. Garner have complied with all requirements and he was not aware of any complaints from abutters or residents of the area.
David Beaudoin moved to renew the licenses for three years.
Nicola Gioscia seconded the motion.
It was so voted unanimous.
The Board signed the bill schedule.
The Board voted unanimously to ask the Board of Selectmen to include on the warrant for the Town Meeting an article adopting M.G.L. Chapter 39, Section 23D. The adoption of this section would allow a member of any municipal board or commission when holding an adjudicatory hearing to vote on a matter in spite of missing one session of the hearing. It does not allow a member to miss more than one and the voting member must certify in writing that he/she has examined all the evidence received at the missed hearing by means of audio or video recording or a transcript.
Chip Lapointe stated that he reviewed plans for a new home in Monson that showed kennels with interior and exterior runs as an integral part of the plans. Mr. Lapointe stated he was looking for some direction from the Board. The prospective homeowners have 8 dogs and do not intend to operate a boarding kennel. One of the owners is a judge for the husky breed of dog and that is the breed the couple own. The Monson Bylaw allows a use for keeping livestock but the States definition of livestock excludes cats and dogs. The bylaws provide a way to raise dogs for monetary gain with a special permit. This situation is not clear cut with regard to the bylaw. The word “kennel” has a certain connotation and the plans for the new home certainly include facilities that could be
used in a professional way Mr. Lapointe questioned how the Board would like to handle this?
David Beaudoin stated he believed this was similar in nature to Rick & Kathy Garner, Wilbraham Road who raise and show collies. They applied for and were granted a special permit.
William Donovan agreed stating the Board issued Mr. & Mrs. Garner a special permit with conditions and there have been no problems.
Chip Lapointe stated he would inform the property owners that a special permit application must be filed with the Zoning Board of Appeals.
7:48 A – 2007. CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR IN LAW APARTMENT AT 374 MAIN STREET, SANDRA ADAMS.
Members voting: William Donovan, Nicola Gioscia, Roger Pelletier, Frank Carey and David Beaudoin.
Ms. Adams stated she did not have a revised plan to submit and after discussing the situation with the builder the cost of making changes to the construction that is already in progress is prohibitive therefore the decision was made to leave the application as it was submitted. Although the proposed apartment does not have direct access into the existing home there is entrance or exit through the garage and a back exit on the second floor. Ms. Adams requested the Board reconsider the proposed plan for the in-law apartment stating that what was proposed was in character with the neighborhood. The proposed construction retains the overall look of a single family home.
Frank Carey stated he would have preferred to receive this information prior to the meeting this evening. After the meeting in February he was under the impression that the applicant intended to submit revised plans. He stated speaking as one member he would like to review the original plan and the letter submitted this evening by the applicant.
William Donovan questioned if Ms. Adams would consider requesting a continuance to allow the members to review the letter and original plans?
The applicant made a written request for a continuance.
Frank Carey moved to continue to April 26, 2007 at 7:45 P.M.
Nicola Gioscia seconded the motion.
It was so voted unanimous.
8:00 PUBLIC HEARING FOR A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR EARTH REMOVAL ASSOCIATED WITH THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SUB-DIVISION ON PROPERTY LOCATED OFF OF BETHANY ROAD. BEDROCK FINANCIAL LLC.
B-2007
Members Voting: William Donovan, David Beaudoin, Frank Carey, Kevin Biermann and Nicola Gioscia.
Also Present: Donald Frydryk, P.E. Sherman & Frydryk and Al Joyce, Bedrock Financial LLC.
Following the comments of Chairman William Donovan regarding the powers and purpose of the Zoning Board of Appeals, the manner in which the hearing would be conducted, the rights of all concerned and introduction of the members of the Board, David Beaudoin read the legal notice as it appeared in the Republican newspaper the weeks of March 5, & 12, 2007.
The petition before the Board is for a special permit for earth removal associated with the development of land on Bethany Road identified on the Assessors maps as Map 112, Parcels 10 E, F & G.
Donald Frydryk stated the earth removal is associated with the development of the property to include a 600 foot long cul-de-sac road with nine house lots. The total volume of material is 30,000 cubic yards of which 10,000 cubic yards is to be used on site leaving 20,000 cubic yard to be removed.
The material will be removed with loaders, excavators, bulldozers and dump trucks, if any blasting were required an additional plan for this method of removal would be submitted to the Board before any blasting occurs. No temporary structures are proposed for the project and earth removal would take place between the hours of 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M. Monday through Friday. No work is proposed on holidays.
William Donovan stated he had questions regarding the depth of the test holes and the applicants’ assertion that based on soil testing to date no ledge is anticipated on this site? Certain members of the Board have personal experience that soil borings do not always accurately reflect conditions encountered on a property once work starts. He stated he was thinking specifically of the project off of Palmer Road and the noise that abutters have been subjected to over an extended period of time because of unanticipated ledge encountered at the site.
Donald Frydryk stated there would be no excavation for the roadway below the depth of the test borings. Soil borings were performed in front of and behind the large bank of material on the site. The material on either side of this large mound is gravel and the assumption is there is gravel within the bank. Test pit #4 went down 10 ½ feet that is 8 feet below the deepest cut for the roadway. Test pits #3 and #4 are at elevation 357 and that is well below the profile of the road. Test pit #1 is closest to the elevation of the roadway at around 376. The deepest cut for the roadway is 29 feet and that will occur near the centerline station 1+60. The maximum fill depth of 14 feet will occur on proposed Lot 2.
William Donovan questioned if Mr. Frydryk could give some assurances there is no ledge?
Donald Frydryk stated John Morrell gave him some historic background on this piece of property because at one time the Town removed gravel from the site. The proposed roadway is going through the steepest slope.
Al Joyce stated all four test pits indicated the material was sand and gravel.
William Donovan stated if the applicant finds that he must blast or split rocks on the site he must come back to the Board.
Frank Carey questioned what the applicant meant in the supplemental information that if boulders were encountered they would be split on site by mechanical means?
Donald Frydryk stated they would have to reduce the rock to a manageable size.
Al Joyce stated within the sub-division there would be a number of retaining walls and the rock would be utilized on site.
Chip Lapointe stated the vegetation on this property is similar to that of the Haley property on Palmer Road pine trees. The earth removal on the Haley property has not had any problems with rock or ledge it is all sand and gravel unlike the property owned by Bukowski Construction on Palmer Road. The property owned by Mr. Bukowski had a lot of oak trees and once site work commenced they hit nothing but ledge and rock.
William Donovan stated the applicant would have to come back to the Board if any blasting or splitting of rock on site is found to be necessary and at that time the Board would certainly limit the times that would could occur.
William Donovan stated excavation is proposed within 10 feet of the rear property line of Lot 9 but the Board would not allow excavation closer to 10 feet.
Donald Frydryk stated excavation would not occur within 10 feet of the abutting property line. The excavation to create a 3:1 slope at the front of the property along Bethany Road is to provide improved sight distance and will be approximately 5 feet from the street.
William Donovan questioned on which lot would fill occur closest to the property line?
Donald Frydryk stated they would fill within 6 feet of the property line on Lot 6.
David Beaudoin questioned if all of the run off would be contained on the applicants’ property?
Donald Frydryk stated the sub-division plans are also under review by the Planning Board. The Planning Board sent the plans to David Loring, Tighe & Bond and he has not indicated that he disagrees with the calculations or the assessment that the pre-construction flows and post construction flows are balanced. The slopes proposed are 3:1 with the exception of a 2:1 slope on Lot 9 that is necessary to preserve an existing driveway that belongs to the abutting property owner. Erosion control netting and planting with crown vetch is proposed on the 2:1 slope.
Nicola Gioscia questioned the length of the 2:1 slope?
Donald Frydryk stated it was a limited slope.
William Donovan questioned whose responsibility it was to maintain the slope when the lots are sold?
Donald Frydryk stated the slope within the Town property would be maintained by the Town. Any slopes on private property would have to be maintained by the property owner.
Frank Carey stated the back of 74 Bethany Road is a 3:1 slope is it going to make it worse with 2:1 slope at the back of Lot 9?
Donald Frydryk stated they have to meet the road alignment for the sub-division.
Frank Carey questioned if it could be moved to the west?
Donald Frydryk stated that would then move the road away from the 90-degree angle.
William Donovan stated one of last earth removal permits detailed the bushes, trees and seeding to be used, is there anything on the plan detailing plantings etc?
Donald Frydryk stated the reestablishment of the grades would be as shown on the design plan, additionally the plans show provisions for temporary drainage as well as the permanent closed drainage system. No trespassing signs are proposed along the frontage on Bethany Road along with construction fencing. Dust will be managed with watering of the site and/or use of an environmentally safe dust control agent.
William Donovan stated the Board would like to see something for the plantings.
Nicola Gioscia questioned the elevation of the new road in relation Bethany Road?
Donald Frydryk stated the new road rises 2-feet in the first 100 feet up to 20 feet at the cul-de-sac.
William Donovan stated David Loring commented that the historic high groundwater elevation was not included in the application and the geotechnical information provided was limited to soil test pits excavated to a depth of 10 feet.
Chip Lapointe stated test pit #2 shows ground water at 5 feet.
Donald Frydryk stated he would check that. Test pits #3 and #4 go down to 114 inches and show no modeling, and test pit #1 was 60 inches. Test pits #3 and #4 are 10 feet below the road elevation.
Nicola Gioscia questioned test pit #1?
Donald Frydryk stated modeling was observed at 60 inches at elevation 370 the elevation of the roadway is at 376 that is 6 feet above groundwater.
Chip Lapointe stated he found it helpful on the Bliss Street project to have a tape around the project.
Nicola Gioscia stated he was curious about using boulders for the retaining walls?
Donald Frydryk stated they would be used for landscape walls mostly.
Al Joyce stated on the house lots with retaining walls around the house he would not use boulders the retaining walls would be four feet and a series of terraces to make it more usable for the homeowner. Boulders would only be used in the steeper areas.
Chip Lapointe questioned if there would be water on site for the dust control?
Donald Frydryk stated the biggest cut is at the entrance to the property the slopes would be constructed and then move to the back. The property will not be exposed all at one time.
Chip Lapointe questioned if the house lots would be seeded with rye if they remain undeveloped for a period of time?
Donald Frydryk stated any areas that are open for 60 days without being worked on have to be stabilized.
Nicola Gioscia questioned the time frame for the earth removal?
Al Joyce stated he did not have a time frame.
Donald Frydryk stated his best guess would be if the work started in June the road would be constructed by the end of the year.
Frank Carey questioned if Mr. Joyce would construct homes on one side of the street and then the other?
Al Joyce stated that was correct and he would probably start on the higher side of the road.
Nancy Kida was present and stated she lives at on North Lane and her concern was safety and noise. Ms. Kida stated vehicles speed down Brimfield Road and the curve would make it difficult for motorists to see the trucks removing the material until the last moment. Also the huge trailer trucks from Lydall are going along the road all hours of the day. Ms. Kida stated there are a lot of people who walk and jog in the area and safety was a big concern for her.
William Donovan stated he was sure there would be police department input.
Donald Frydryk made a written request on behalf of the applicant to continue the hearing.
David Beaudoin moved to continue the hearing to April 26, 2007 at 8:00 P.M.
Nicola Gioscia seconded the motion.
It was so voted unanimous.
David Beaudoin moved to adjourn at 10:10 P.M.
Nicola Gioscia seconded the motion.
It was so voted unanimous.
Respectfully submitted,
Linda A. Hull
| 
