Skip Navigation
This table is used for column layout.
Planning Board Minutes September 8, 2014
September 8, 2014

These minutes are not verbatim – they are the secretary’s interpretation of what took place at the meeting. - Open Meeting Law, G.L. c. 30A§22.

Board Members:  Marc Garrett, Paul McAlduff, Tim Grandy, Malcolm MacGregor, and Ken Buechs
Planning Board Alternate:  Robert Bielen
Staff Members:   Lee Hartmann and Robin Carver
Recording Secretary:  Eileen Hawthorne

Administrative Notes:
Minutes*:
August 18, 2014

ZBA 3761 – Secret Physique Studio
        118B Long Pond Road, Map 88, Lot 55-21
        Special Permit to operate a fitness/dance studio
The Board received the following documentation* for this review:
Staff Report
Engineering Dept. Comments dated August 20, 2014
Locus Map and Site Photographs
Disposal system plan revised through September 25, 1988
Floor Plan and RCP dated August 1, 2014
The Board recommended approval to the Zoning Board of Appeals for Case No. 3761 subject to the following condition:
The existing building is served by an on-site septic system.  The applicant must get Board of Health approval that the existing septic system has the capacity for the proposed use.  

Form A Plans: None

Marc Garrett moved for the Board to approve the Administrative Notes as presented; Malcolm MacGregor, second; the vote was unanimous (5-0).  

Site Plan Review – Batch Coffee 
South Meadow Road
Warehouse and Office
The Board received the following documentation* for this review:
Staff Report
Locus Map and Site Photographs
Grading Plan dated July 8, 2014
Landscape Plan and plant list dated July 29, 2014
William Shaw, Associated Engineers, presented the site plan for a new 7,250 sq. ft. office/warehouse building on South Meadow Road.  The building is for the relocation of an existing business “Coffee Batch” that roasts and supplies coffee for wholesale distribution.  There will be 16 parking spaces on site and an oil and gas separator will be installed in addition to the existing drainage.  There will be a fenced dumpster area near the loading area.  There are two entrances to the site and there will not be any new curb cuts.
Jon Henson, Landscape Architect, presented the proposed landscaping plan including supplemental plantings around the existing signage, shade trees along South Meadow Road and in parking area, low canopy shrubs along the building to screen headlights shrubs, low canopy shrubs in loading area and ornamental foundation plantings.  
Marc Garrett asked if there would be any building enhancements to the proposed steel metal building.  
Ken Buechs asked where snow storage would be provided.
Jon Henson reviewed the areas in the parking lot and rear of property where snow would be stored.  
Michael Butts explained that the building will consist of 1,200 sq. ft. of office space and there will have stone veneer with windows along South Meadow Road.    
Paul McAlduff suggested adding a sign for “Deliveries Only” at the entrance to the loading area.  
Malcolm MacGregor moved for the Board to notify the Building Commissioner that the site plan complies with the minimum requirements of the Zoning Bylaw, provided that:
Prior to issuance of an Occupancy permit a Registered Professional Engineer must certify that the drainage system, drive ways, curbing and parking areas have been installed; and a registered landscape architect or other qualified licensed professional must certify that the landscaping has been installed; all according to accepted practices and in compliance with the Zoning By-law and the approved site plan.
Lighting is to comply with Section 205-65 Prevention of Light Pollution of the Zoning Bylaw. Compliance must be documented. Light poles should not exceed 15 feet in height.
The Town Engineer must approve the drainage design and system.
Three additional street trees shall be included along South Meadow Road, and three or four varying height shrubs shall be planted in front of the arborvitae to supplement screening of the warehouse parking area.
The height of the building and the location should be reviewed by the Airport Commission to determine that it doesn’t create a hazardous obstacle to air the height of the building and the location should be reviewed by the Airport Commission to determine that it doesn’t create a hazardous obstacle to air navigation in the vicinity of Plymouth Airport.
Petitioner to come back before the Planning Board with the final building design plans which include architectural detailing on the front and side building elevations.
Final Site Plan to include dumpster location with proposed screening of decorative fencing and/or landscape plantings.
Ken Buechs, second; the vote was unanimous (5-0).  

Public Hearing: (cont. from 7/28/14)
        B591 – Little Herring Pond Road VOSD, Map 122, Lot 10P-1022B
        Special Permits for VOSD, Adequate Facilities and Inclusionary Housing in order to create 10 residential lots with open space and associated infrastructure
The Board received the following documentation* for this review:
Handout:
Letter from Withington and Betters dated September 5, 2014 requesting continuance
Malcolm MacGregor moved for the Board to continue the public hearing for further technical review until September 29, 2014 at 7:30 p.m.; Tim Grandy, second; the vote was unanimous (5-0).  

Executive Session:
Paul McAlduff announced that the Board would go into executive session in order to release and approve minutes from previous meetings and would then return to open session.  A roll call vote was taken:  Marc Garrett – yes; Tim Grandy – yes; Malcolm MacGregor – yes; Ken Buechs – yes and Paul McAlduff – yes.  

The Board left the room to enter into Executive Session.  

The open session reconvened at 7:30 p.m.

Public Hearing:
        417 Sandwich Road VOSD, Map 26, Lots 5-1 and 6-1
        Special Permits to divide and create 5 residential lots with open space and associated infrastructure
The Board received the following documentation* for this review:
Staff Report
Submission letter from Flaherty and Stefani Inc., dated July 25, 2014
Environmental Impact Statement dated July 25, 2014
Site Plan Review Guideline narrative dated August 6, 2014
Conservation Planner comments dated August 18, 2014
Fire Dept. Comments dated August 6, 2014
Engineering Dept. Comments dated August 26, 2014
Beals & Thomas Comments dated August 15, 2014
Locus Maps and Site Photographs
Preliminary VOSD Subdivision Plan dated June 29, 2014
Conventional Subdivision Plan dated June 29, 2014
Definitive VOSD Subdivision Plan dated July 23, 2014
Paul McAlduff read the public hearing notice and opened the public hearing.
Seated:  Marc Garrett, Tim Grandy, Paul McAlduff, Malcolm MacGregor and Ken Buechs
Mark Flaherty, Flaherty and Stefani, Inc., presented locus map and identified the site which is located near Bramhall’s Corner.  A seven unit “by right” subdivision could be created on the site through the creation of a cul-de-sac with two 35,000 sq. ft. lots with duplexes and three single family lots.  This subdivision would require significant land disturbance.  The proposed Village Open Space Development (VOSD) would create five single family house lots (two with existing dwellings), a shared driveway for the three new dwellings and open space.  Mr. Flaherty read a narrative from the potential developer, Eric Pontiff, regarding compliance with Site Plan Review Guidelines.  
Atty. Robert Betters handed out language regarding modifying open space that the petitioner would like added to Condition No. 1 of the staff report.  The language reads as follows:  
“and by formal modification of this Special Permit, the Planning Board may allow such modifications to the open space configuration on lots then owned by Petitioner or its successors and assigns (as opposed to lots for which homes have been conveyed to end-buyers) in order to accommodate open space delineation or access onto abutting or adjacent properties which the Planning Board determines, in its discretion, is appropriate.”  The language would allow future modifications to the open space.  
Marc Garrett expressed a concern when the open space is owned by the individual lot owners.  Mr. Garrett suggested that a homeowner’s association and or easements should be created to oversee protection of the open space.   
The other Board members agreed with Mr. Garrett regarding open space protection.  
Malcolm MacGregor suggested providing an easement along Sandwich Street for a future bicycle path.  
Ken Buechs suggested that sidewalks should be added to the development for pedestrian safety.  
Mr. Flaherty explained that there is a sidewalk across the street and a crosswalk could be installed in front of the development.
Atty. Betters – attempting to say that a possibility to come back to make minor adjustments to open space for accommodations of open space on abutting properties – still want to protect the open space through an association
Public Comment:
John Moran asked the Board how the public could make comments without being able to view the site plans.    
The Board suggested taking a short recess so the plans could be presented to the interested public.  

Mike Rudman questioned what guarantees there would be that the existing trees in the proposed open space areas would be retained.  
Lee Hartmann explained that the open space will be identified on the recorded plans and the trees within them are to be preserved.  However, if the trees are diseased or damaged they might need to be removed.  
Betsy Hall, Open Space Committee, was concerned with insuring protection of open space.  
The Board continued the Public Hearing to later in the meeting in order to allow the public a chance to view the plans.

ZBA 3762 – Best Chevrolet, Inc.
264 Cherry Street, Map 102, Lot 8A-6
Special Permit to change from one non-conforming use to another in order to operate an automobile sales, display, service and repair business
The Board received the following documentation* for this review:
Staff Report
Locus Map and Site Photographs
Site Plan dated August 14, 2014
Handouts:
Engineering Dept. Comments dated September 8, 2014
Building Renovation Plan dated August 29, 2014
Atty. Robert Betters presented the request for special permits in order to utilize an existing industrial site for a temporary automobile dealership and service station franchise.  The intention would be to subsequently apply for special permits in order to build a new dealership at Colony Place.  The proposed site is 3.7 acres and is located 300 ft. east of Commerce Way.    The existing buildings will have some cosmetic upgrades and the existing eastern curb cut will be utilized as the main ingress/egress.  Atty. Betters stated that the petitioner has no objections to the conditions in the staff report.  The project will be presented to the West Plymouth and North Plymouth Steering Committees this week and go before the Zoning Board of Appeals on September 17th.  
Lee Hartmann explained that the Board could recommend that the use and concept are acceptable and any comments of the steering committees would be incorporated into the site plan review process.  
Marc Garrett and Tim Grandy felt that the project should be reviewed by the Steering Committees before the Board makes any determination.  
Tim Grandy suggested that the right turn only egress have an island or some other physical impediment to prevent vehicles from attempting a left turn.  
Atty. Betters stated that they would look into providing some means of impediment.  
Gerry Seelen, Roth and Seelen, Inc., presented the interior layout of the existing building that is already divided into two areas.  One area will be used to service vehicles and has existing floor drains and an exhaust system.  The other portion of the building will be utilized for a showroom and office space.   The building will be painted, the landscaping will be cleaned up and a canopy will be installed for a vehicle drop off area.  Final architectural and site plans will be presented at a later date.  
Malcolm MacGregor moved for the Board to recommend approval to the Zoning Board of Appeals subject to the following conditions:
The vehicle sales use must be discontinued on this site within three (3) years after the date hereof, or such later date as the Board of Appeals may approve after an informal hearing.
During that three year period, no more than 250 vehicles may be displayed or stored for sale on the property.
Any comments and concerns raised by the North Plymouth and West Plymouth Steering Committees will be addressed to the satisfaction of the Zoning Board of Appeals.
Final site and architectural plans will address all comments raised in the Department of Public Works Engineering Division review letter dated September 8, 2014, and shall be presented to the Planning Board for review and to the Zoning Board of Appeals for approval.
Ken Buechs, second; the vote was (3-2) with Marc Garrett and Tim Grandy in opposition.

The Board resumed the Public Hearing for B592 – 417 Sandwich Street VOSD.  
Malcolm MacGregor suggested that presentations to the Board should include a PowerPoint option to be shown on the Smart Board for the audience and the public.
Robin Carver noted that the neighbors were supportive of the direction of the project and the location of the open space.  
Atty. Betters stated that the proposed open space is now shown as part of the lot configurations and can be covenanted for protection.  He offered to withdraw the proposed additional language for Condition No. 1 if the Board was not supportive.  
Lee Hartmann stated that based on the Board’s comments, they would prefer that the open space be separated from the lot configuration, not as an easement.  
Public Comment:
Jim Benedict, Plymouth Center Steering Committee Chair, requested that the plan be presented to the steering committee again before the Board votes on it.  He agreed to contact the committee members to schedule an early meeting.
Mr. Flaherty stated that they will review the Engineering Dept. comments in order to address any issues/concerns outlined in the report.  
Malcolm MacGregor moved for the Board to continue the public hearing to September 29, 2014 at 7:45 p.m.; Ken Buechs, second; the vote was unanimous (5-0).  

Public Hearing:
        Fall Town Meeting Article
        OSMUD modifications to include Transfer of Development Rights
The Board received the following documentation* for this review:
Draft Amendment language
Handout:
Letter from Withington and Betters dated September 8, 2014 requesting no action.
Paul McAlduff noted that the Board received a letter from the petitioner requesting that no action be taken on the proposed amendment to the OSMUD.

ZBA 3751- Kingstown Trucking
        Long Pond Road, Map 88, Lot 54
        Special Permits subject to EDC for gravel removal in order to construct a solar field on County land    
The Board received the following documentation* for this review:
Staff Report
Excerpt from the Minutes of December 17, 2012
Earth Removal Status as of July 16, 2014
Fire Dept. Comments dated July 8, 2014
Beals & Thomas Comments dated September 4, 2014
Letter from Blue Wave Capital dated July 24, 2014
Environmental Impact Statement dated June 9, 2014
Drainage Calculations dated June 6, 2014
Locus Maps
Site Permitting Plans dated August 18, 2014
Handout:  
Engineering Dept. Comments dated September 8, 2014
Atty. Robert Betters began the presentation of a request for a special permit in order to remove approximately 250,000 cu. yds. of gravel on the 106 acre parcel owned by Plymouth County.  The proposed gravel removal is in preparation for the installation of a solar field.  The petitioner has agreed to provide a ten cent ($0.10) per cubic yard donation to the Town and is requesting two waivers:  a 6:00 a.m. start time instead of 7:00 a.m. and a 2:1 slope instead of a 3:1 slope.  The access to the project would be through an existing commercial area and the closest dwellings are approximately 1,600 ft. from the proposed site.   
Bill Shaw, Associated Engineers, presented the site plan for the proposed gravel removal.  The site consists of an existing cell tower, dirt road, wooded areas and a power line easement.  A ten acre area will be disturbed with a maximum cut of 41 ft. and have a 100 ft. buffer from the abutting lot line where there is an existing solar array with a 50 ft. buffer.  Mr. Shaw stated that any run off will be captured within the site and the retention areas have been designed to meet the 100 year storm requirements.  He noted that after five acres have been excavated, the area will be loamed and seeded before the excavation continues.  He stressed that currently Kingstown Trucking has vehicles leaving the site on a daily basis.  Mr. Shaw also noted that the project is up-stream from the existing trout hatchery.
Lee Hartmann noted that the request for a 250,000 cu. yd. gravel removal operation is mid-range when compared to other operations and that DPW is comfortable with the 10 cent donation.  The Board should consider whether there is a reasonable expectation that the end use will be built.   
Malcolm MacGregor expressed his concern with removing trees and gravel to install a solar array and the run off from the panels that will collect and percolate into the ground given the proximity to the Eel River Watershed.  
Mr. Hartmann noted that based on the Beals & Thomas peer review, a number of conditions have been added to the staff recommendation that address construction phasing, the hauling schedule, documentation of soil conditions and stabilization measures.  
Tim Grandy requested that if the special permit is granted, a bond be held by the Town that would reflect the end use value and include stabilization funds.  
Marc Garrett was concerned with capturing the run off and de-stabilization under the panels during a storm with torrential downpours and sheeting rain.  
Ken Buechs asked how many truck trips would be generated per day.  
Mr. Shaw stated that there would be 40 truck trips per day and that the trucks owned by Kingstown Trucking already leave the site on a daily basis.  He noted that the 6:00 a.m. start time was coordinated with the school dept. in order to time the truck leaving the site earlier than the busses would be arriving at the school.
Tim Grandy expressed his concerns with the number and timing of truck trips and the effect of the 6:00 a.m. start time on the residential neighbors in close proximity to the site.   
Betsy Hall, Open Space Committee Chair, asked what the total expected income from this mining operation would be.
John Moon, Kingstown Corporation, could not give a definitive answer, but estimated that the profit margin would be minimal.  The price per cubic yard is $18 to $20 per cu. yd., but by the time the gravel is screened, trucked off site, federal regulations/taxes and other business costs are factored in, it could be as low (or lower) than a 10 percent profit margin.  
Ms. Hall asked if the solar field could be installed with no or less gravel removal and whether the residents of the abutting Tall Pines neighborhood would be notified of the proposed project.  She also expressed concerns that the ground water may be impacted by the project.
Mr. Shaw explained that if there was not gravel removed, the site disturbance would be significantly larger.  
Mr. Hartmann noted that abutters will be notified of the Zoning Board of Appeals’ public hearing.  
Malcolm MacGregor suggested that a Conservation Restriction be placed on the remaining County land.
Marc Garrett noted that the County could develop the land for some uses without Town approvals.  
Malcolm MacGregor moved to for the Board to recommend denial to Zoning Board of Appeals based on the following reasons:
The proposed sand and gravel removal activity is allowed by special permit in this zone, but is not appropriate for this specific site.
The Petitioner has not adequately demonstrated that the amount of material to be removed is “incidental to and required” to be only the amount of material reasonably necessary to allow a use or a structure or subdivision road to be constructed in compliance with the applicable legal requirements for such use, structure, or road.
There will be hazard to pedestrians and school busses from truck traffic entering and exiting the site.
The Petitioner has not adequately demonstrated that the removal of 250,000 cubic yards of material is the minimum necessary to construct the proposed solar facility or that no other feasible finish grade alternatives exist that will reduce the amount of material required to be removed.
IF GRANTED THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE RECOMMENDED:
The Petitioner has agreed to donate $0.10 a cubic yard for road maintenance and repair on public roadways due to the weight and number of trucks that will impact the roadway for the proposed use.  
Prior to the Issuance of a Building Permit, the Plan shall be revised to:
  • Delineate the 50-foot no cut area and the 100-foot buffer in areas with cuts of more than 15 feet;
  • An erosion control and stabilization plan, which addresses both wind and water erosion, shall be submitted for approval by the Building Commissioner.  Said plan shall include a staging plan for work that will require stockpiling of soils on a temporary basis, and shall include both temporary vegetation, mulching, or other protective measures must be provided for areas that will be exposed for one or more months.  These temporary measures must be applied immediately after disruption, and permanent site stabilization measures for any portions of the site that are not under construction after site clearing and grading activities have ceased for a period of six (6) months;
  • A Municipal Lien Certificate shall be provided to the Building Commissioner as evidence of payment of any back taxes, fees or penalties owed to the Town, if any;
  • Evidence of recording of this Special Permit at the Plymouth County Registry of Deeds or the Land Court shall be presented to the Building Commissioner, and the plans shall be recorded with the Special Permit;
  • An initial deposit in the amount of $2,000 shall be deposited with the Board of Appeals for retainer of a consultant as described below in condition 6 below;
  • A performance bond determined by the Building Commissioner, and directly tied to the restabilization of the work site, shall be required in an amount equal to a documented, verifiable estimate of cost to vegetatively reclaim the work site according to the site plan and existing conditions site plan.  The estimate shall include an adjustment for projected inflation or other predictable factors over the term of the permit plus one year; and
  • A Zoning Permit must be issued.
The side slopes associated with the access roadway shall be stabilized during this gravel removal period.
A construction phasing plan shall be submitted to the Board of Appeals for approval.  The plan shall identify the progression of the removal operation.  Appropriate details shall be provided as to where and in what manner the excavated materials will be deposited or stored.
A gravel hauling schedule shall be submitted to the Board of Appeals for approval.  Said schedule shall indicate the limitations of the time of day, days of the week and number of trucks per day, etc.
The Applicant is required to develop a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and obtain coverage under the 2012 Construction General Permit (CGP).  The Petitioner shall submit a copy to the Zoning Board of Appeals of the SWPPP for the Administrative Record, along with certification that this coverage has been obtained prior to construction.  A Long-Term Operation and Maintenance (O+M) Plan shall also be prepared and submitted for the Administration Record.
Prior to construction the soil texture shall be verified via test pit information.
The plan shall include measures for the immediate stabilization of the slopes with materials other than seed mix.  
Prior to site grading in preparation for the work conditioned herein, the Petitioner shall provide the Building Commissioner with the name and contact information for the individual(s) overseeing the work at the site.
Installation of site stabilization measures as shown on the erosion control and stabilization plan must be performed in a timely manner, and failure to do so shall be reason for the Building Commissioner to issue a cease work order until such time as the erosion control and stabilization measures are installed according to said plan.
  • No excavation shall be larger than five (5) acres for earth removal, storage, and/or processing at one time.  No more than five (5) acres of the entire sand and gravel operation and associated earth removal activities, shall be exposed at any time.  Prior to the commencement of excavation of any subsequent areas, the preceding five (5) acre operation the preceding five (5) acre operation shall be stabilized either temporarily or permanently.
  • The Petitioner shall permanently stabilize any portions of the site that are not under construction after earth removal activities have ceased for a period of six (6) months.
  • Planting required for stabilization shall occur no later than October 31st.
Minor modifications to the design and location of excavation may be allowed by the Building Commissioner (aka Director of Inspectional Services) to accommodate reasonable and/or necessary field conditions which modifications do not amount to a substantial modification of the plans.  Such changes as substituting a particular plant material or number of shrubs or trees where it is impractical to do something, or move a structure or machinery in a manner which does not materially change the project, or slightly reconfigure a drainage area or parking space may be allowed.
All stationary on-site mechanical equipment shall be placed as far away as possible from existing businesses and residential dwellings during its operation.
The Petitioner shall provide for the costs, if any, for the Town to retain a review consultant on an as-needed basis for review and construction administration services, including monitoring of ongoing activities and reporting related to this gravel removal special permit (and previous phases as granted through previous permits on the subject property) and any associated National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Construction General Permit (issued by Environmental Protection Agency for earth disturbance over a certain square footage) at the subject property as the Building Commissioner’s duly authorized agent.
Evacuation of materials shall be allowed for a period of two (2) years from the start of excavation.  The Petitioner shall notify the Building Commissioner prior to the commencement of work.  Upon completion of the two (2) year period, the Petitioner shall have sixty (60) days to submit a written request to the Board of Appeals for an extension of the excavation period.  The Board of Appeals may deny the request for the extension for any of the following reasons:
  • Violations of any of the conditions of this special permit;
  • The work site has been deemed abandoned by the Building Commissioner;
  • Proper stabilization methods are not maintained; and/or
  • Documented violation of agreed up truck routes.
The excavation and trucking of material and/or noise generated by the excavation, operation, engine start-up and trucking of materials shall be limited to Monday through Friday.  No excavation activities shall be permitted on holidays.
The Petitioner shall be responsible for the clearing of any sand that accumulates on the heavy equipment route as a result of the excavation of material on a daily basis.
The Petitioner shall provide an “as-built” survey which verifies that no more than 250,000 cubic yards of material were removed.
Prior to site grading in preparation for the work conditioned herein, a Zoning Permit must be issued, and the Petitioner shall provide the Building Commissioner with the name and contact information for the individual(s) overseeing the work at the site.
The Petitioner shall provide temporary signs warning traffic of truck entry for safety, as determined by the Police Department and will be approved by the Director of Inspectional Services, if needed.
A limit of 40 heavy equipment trips per day will be the maximum allowed for earth removal operations for the projects.  Every effort shall be made to phase the heavy equipment trips with other local projects.   A heavy equipment trip is defined in the Bylaw as a total of one heavy equipment vehicle entering and exiting the site (Section 205-18G6).  
The Building Commissioner or its duly authorized agent shall have access to the excavation site at all times in order to inspect the site to insure compliance with the approved site plan and conditions of this special permit.
Monthly statements are to be submitted to the Building Commissioner from a Registered professional Engineer stating that the conditions of the Special Permit are being followed, and providing tallies of earth removal to accurately determine the amount of gravel being removed.  Haul slips shall be kept for each load of material being removed.  The slips shall have the truck number, volume, and time of departure, and originals shall be submitted as part of the monthly statements.
If any or all of the above noted conditions are not adhered to, the Building Commissioner may cause all excavation work to cease until the problems identified are corrected.
Ken Buechs, second; the vote was (4-1) with Marc Garrett in opposition.  

Other Business:
“Topics not reasonably anticipated by the Chair 48 hours in advance of the meeting.”
Discussion – Randy Parker:
        Petitioned Town Meeting Article – Amend TDR Zoning Bylaw to include Flood Zones and Private Open Space
The Board received the following documentation* for this discussion:
Comments from Atty. Elizabeth Lane dated September 5, 2014
Randy Parker, Petitioner, stated that Town Counsel made a comment that the proposed amendment was inconsistent with the intent of the Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) within the Zoning Bylaw.  Mr. Parker stated that the petition was drafted in order to provide protection for the sensitive resource areas (Flood Zones) within the Town. He also noted that if the transfer of development rights for privately held open space were allowed, the income generated from the TDR sales from Saint Catherine’s park would provide needed income for the Simes House.  Currently the Zoning Bylaw only allows Sending Parcels to be located in the RR zone and the proposed amendment would allow Sending Parcels to be located anywhere within the Town.  Mr. Parker stated that he is looking for assistance in crafting an article that would be acceptable to the Board and approvable through the Town Meeting process.  
Lee Hartmann noted that the public hearing for the proposed article was scheduled for Sept. 15th.  Mr. Hartmann stated that although this is a creative idea, the impacts of the proposed article have yet to be determined.  He expressed a concern with directing more development into rural areas of the Town; there is no criteria defined for creating certificates within the flood zones and privately held open space and it is unknown how many certificates could be created.  
Marc Garrett agreed that the concept was interesting and it needed further exploration before being presented to Town Meeting.  Mr. Garrett volunteered to work with Mr. Parker to determine if the concept would be feasible.   
The other Board members agreed with Mr. Garrett regarding the timing of the proposed article for Fall Town Meeting.  

The Board discussed projects that should be presented to the Steering Committees and how information should be disseminated to the community.  
Lee Hartmann noted that the public hearing process is designed to notify abutters and to give the permit granting authority sufficient information to make decisions.  Multiple meetings on a project can be an issue for the community.  
Marc Garrett stated informing the community has been an ongoing issue, but the Town does a reasonably good job of making information available through notifications, newspaper advertisement, and website postings and subscriptions.  
Paul McAlduff noted that some of the steering committees advertise their agendas in the newspaper.  
Tim Grandy agreed with Mr. Garrett and stated that Steering Committee members should get the word out to the community.  

Tim Grandy moved to adjourn at 10:44 p.m.; Malcolm MacGregor, second; the vote was unanimous (5-0).  

*On file with the Office of Planning and Development in project case files.

Respectfully Submitted:





Eileen Hawthorne                                                Approved: September 29, 2014
Administrative Assistant