These minutes are not verbatim – they are the secretary’s interpretation of what took place at the meeting. – Open Meeting Law – Section III.
Board Members: Marc Garrett, Malcolm MacGregor, Paul McAlduff, Larry Rosenblum, and Bill Wennerberg
Staff Members: Lee Hartmann and Valerie Massard
Recording Secretary: Eileen Hawthorne
Administrative Notes:
Minutes:
December 15, 2008
Malcolm MacGregor moved to approve the minutes of December 15, 2008 as presented; the vote was unanimous (5-0).
B437 – Cobblestone Plan Endorsement – Plan approved 11/24/08
Paul McAlduff moved for the Board to endorse the plan for B437 – Cobblestone in the Pinehills; the vote was (4-0-1) with Bill Wennerberg in abstention.
Marc Garrett recused himself from acting on the guarantee releases for B495 and B479. Malcolm MacGregor, Vice Chair, presided over the next two items on the agenda.
B495 – Mary B. Lane – Guarantee Release
Paul McAlduff moved for the Board to approve a release of $6,046.06 plus accrued interest for work completed in the B495 – Mary B. Lane subdivision; the vote was (4-0-1) with Marc Garrett in abstention.
B479 – Robert J Way – Guarantee Release
Paul McAlduff moved for the Board to approve a release of $6,033.84 plus accrued interest for work completed in the B479 – Robert J Way subdivision; the vote was (4-0-1) with Marc Garrett in abstention.
Marc Garrett resumed Chairing the meeting.
Site Plan Review
59 Armstrong Road, Map 101, Lot 43G
Paul McAlduff moved for the Board to notify the Building Commissioner that the site plan as presented complies with the Zoning Bylaw based on the following finding:
Section 205-17 D 2 & 3 of the Bylaw was modified in 2002 through Town Meeting to allow for more than one building on a lot in the Light Industrial district if the Planning Board makes a determination that the entire lot and structures are planned and designed as a unified complex and appropriate provisions are made for shared parking, access, drainage and utilities. At a regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning Board on January 5, 2009, the Planning Board voted unanimously (5-0) to make this finding. The ‘building connection’ is no longer necessary.
The vote was unanimous (5-0).
Public Hearing (cont. from 9/9 and 10/20) (VM)
B516-2 – Gunning Point
Valerie Massard read a letter from the applicant that requests that the petition for B516-2 – Gunning Point VOSD be withdrawn without prejudice.
The Board accepted the petitioner’s request to withdraw the petition.
Paul McAlduff moved for the Board to adjust the agenda in order to hear BOA 3513 prior to the scheduled Fire Presentation; the vote was unanimous (5-0).
BOA 3513 – Energy Committee (VM)
Long Pond Road, Map 77A, Lot 7
Patrick O’Brien presented the request by the Town’s Energy Committee for the installation of a temporary Meteorological Tower and associated access, grading and utilities on the Plymouth South Middle/High School site. The 164 feet tower would be erected for not more than eighteen months and will collect data on temperature, wind speeds and direction and related variables in order to explore the feasibility of wind turbines to generate electricity.
Paul McAlduff moved for the Board to recommend approval to the Zoning Board of Appeals subject to the following conditions:
The tower shall not be installed until:
- A recommendation from the Plymouth Airport Commission is provided to the Board of Appeals, and
- The recommendations of the Plymouth Airport Commission shall have been determined to be met to the satisfaction of the Board of Appeals.
Access to the site will be constructed in such a manner as to minimize land disturbance.
The proposed tower shall be dismantled within eighteen (18) months from the date of erection.
Any areas of disturbance shall be loamed with six (6”) inches of loam, raked and seeded with an appropriate wildflower or other approved mix prior to October 1 of the year in which the tower is installed. Any areas of disturbance shall be similarly treated by October 1 of the year in which the tower is removed.
The data, raw and otherwise, collected from the installation of the MET tower subject to this special permit shall be provided to the Town of Plymouth Planning Department and the Town of Plymouth School Department within six (6) months of the removal of the MET tower.
The vote was unanimous (5-0).
Presentation
Fire Prevention
Larry Rosenblum presented a short video on the installation of residential sprinklers. Mr. Rosenblum would like to see the Board negotiate with developers who are requesting waivers to include residential sprinklers in new residential construction until such time as the sprinklers are required in the State’s Building Code.
In the video, fire personnel and homeowners who had suffered the experience of being displaced because of the structural damage and the loss of personal belongings due to a fire spoke in favor of installing residential sprinklers. Residential sprinklers save lives and property and control public safety. In areas where residential sprinklers are required, the cost to the developer on average is 1 to 1.5 percent of the building cost. The residential sprinklers consist of a network of piping with at least one sprinkler head in each room used as living space. If a fire occurs, only the sprinkler head closest to the fire is activated. Accidental discharge of sprinklers only occurs in 1 of 16 million cases. There is less fire and water damage in a house that has a residential sprinkler system. Damage to a dwelling without a sprinkler system could include holes cut in the roof and broken windows to vent the gasses that have built up as well as extensive fire and water damage.
Paul McAlduff stated that new National Guidelines are expected in 2011 and he hopes that Massachusetts will adopt the guidelines. He also stated that there is a town in western Massachusetts that requires residential sprinkler as part of a special permit process.
Tim Travers, National Fire Sprinkler Association, Inc., gave a presentation on fire sprinklers for one and two family homes and manufactured housing. Mr. Travers explained the process of pyrolysis, where things heat up, emit gas, and start a fire. He used a candle flame as an example. He explained that residential sprinklers have a small heat transfer device which activates quickly to dispense water to cool the flame, which then converts to steam and prevents flashover. The use of residential sprinklers allows time for occupants to escape the building. Mr. Travers explained the different types of residential sprinkler systems that can be installed either inside or outside a dwelling. Statistically, a fire occurs every six seconds; one person dies every 153 minutes; and the death rate from fires can be
reduced by 82 percent with residential sprinklers. Mr. Travers presented a short video of test fires in two buildings in the Marble Mountain Townhouses. The structures were identical with the exception of one having residential sprinklers. The fire damage to the structure without the sprinklers was extensive. The protection is worth the additional cost. Mr. Travers stated that ordinances need to be in place and adopted by the State in order to reduce the costs. He is hoping that the requirement of residential sprinklers for new construction will be included in the next review of the Building Code.
Larry Rosenblum asked what the Board could do to be more proactive about residential sprinklers instead of waiting for the State to act.
Mr. Travers thought that the Planning Board and the Zoning Board of Appeals could require residential sprinklers through the special permit process. Inclusion of residential sprinklers will allow developers to increase the space between hydrants, reduce road widths, and remove cisterns. The cost for this area is approximately $2.00 per sq. ft. in this area for new construction as long as there is no exorbitant cost for the water connection. The long-term benefits are that a body has never been taken out of a building with a sprinkler system.
Lee Hartmann stated that requiring residential sprinkler systems could be negotiated by increasing the density of a project or granting waivers for a project. It would have to be a mutually acceptable negotiation between the Board and the developer. The sprinklers would have to be installed by a contractor that is licensed by the State.
Marc Garrett thanked Mr. Travers for his presentation.
BOA 3514 – Balboni LLC (HC)
Nicks Rock Road, Map 32, Lot 22-3
At the request of the Attorney and the Engineer for the petitioner, the review of BOA 3514 has been rescheduled to January 12, 2009.
Other Business:
Plymouth Rock Studio (LH, VM)
MEPA letter
Marc Garrett informed the Board that he had reviewed the draft letter and made some editorial changes and tightened up the language before it was copied for this week’s agenda packets.
Mr. Hartmann stated that the draft letter supports the Phase One waiver for the access road. The access road will allow construction traffic to access the Plymouth Rock Studio (PRS) site without having to travel on Long Pond Road. Language was added that recognizes the road is in a rural area and should have a boulevard entrance and berming to buffer the neighbors. Traffic peer review comments will be attached to the letter before it is submitted to MEPA.
Malcolm MacGregor was not sure if he agreed with granting a Phase One waiver.
Mr. MacGregor suggested adding language that would require a bridge or system for pedestrian and wildlife safety over Route 3 at Exit 3. He wanted to insure that the trail system to the east of Route 3 could be connected to the west of Route 3 if possible. Mr. MacGregor was also concerned with nitrogen loading that may affect the Eel River Watershed.
Bill Wennerberg felt that the Town is well protected with the waiver and the agreements that are currently in place.
Mr. Hartmann suggested adding the language that is currently in the MOU regarding nitrogen loading to the draft letter.
Larry Rosenblum shared Mr. MacGregor’s concerns with the Phase One waiver. He was also concerned that there was not enough information on how things would play out.
Mr. Garrett was comfortable that the MOU, the MEPOD bylaw and design guidelines provide protection for the Town. He was supportive of the Phase One waiver.
Paul McAlduff moved for the Board to approve the draft MEPA letter as submitted.
Malcolm MacGregor moved to amend the letter to include language regarding the wildlife and pedestrian corridor and nitrogen loading.
Marc Garrett was supportive of adding the language regarding nitrogen loading and suggested that the language regarding the pedestrian and wildlife corridor requests that the proponents consider installing the corridor.
Larry Rosenblum stated that he was not comfortable with supporting the Phase One waiver and would abstain from the vote.
The vote was (4-0-1) with Larry Rosenblum in abstention.
Mr. Garrett reminded the Board that the site visit for Clark Estates would take place on Saturday, January 10, 2009 at 9:30 a.m.
Executive Session
Paul McAlduff moved for the Board to go into executive session to discuss pending litigation.
Marc Garrett announced that the Board would not reconvene in regular session after the executive session.
A roll call vote to enter into executive session was taken: Bill Wennerberg - yes; Larry Rosenblum - yes; Malcolm MacGregor - yes; Paul McAlduff - yes; and Marc Garrett - yes.
At the conclusion of the executive session, Paul McAlduff moved to adjourn at 9:20 p.m.; the vote was unanimous (5-0).
Respectfully Submitted,
Eileen M. Hawthorne Approved: January 12, 2009
| 
