February 26, 2008
MEMBERS IN ATTENDANCE: |
Doug Moglin, Chairman |
|
Roz Terry, Vice Chairman |
|
Bob Johnson |
|
Sam Santaniello |
|
Cal Chunglo |
ABSENT: |
Richard Utzinger, Associate |
OTHER: |
Marcus Phelps, Town Planner |
The regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning Board was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mr. Moglin.
TOWN PLANNER’S REPORT: 7:00 p.m.
1. Attended the Valley Development Council meeting at the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission (PVPC) office on Feb. 14. Received an update on Smart Growth projects in the participating communities and status of the zoning reform study. PVPC staff person will be preparing a newsletter on subject matter of interest to the region.
2. Received a Preliminary Subdivision plan from R. Levesque Associates for a 33 lot subdivision on South Loomis Street. This plan is to be reviewed and acted upon within 45 days. It has been scheduled for March 25 to meet this deadline.
3. Prepared a handout for the Planning Board listing of the assessment criteria used by the DPW for evaluating potential sites for the DPW facility.
4. Did a phone interview with Chris Putz from the Westfield Evening News on the College Highway rezoning. Article published in the Feb. 18 newspaper.
5. Contacted Steve D’Ambrosio at Baystate Environmental Consultants as follow-up to the Williamsburg Estates public hearing. Advised him to provide an opinion on the subdivision road width and the need for a traffic study of the project.
6. Reviewed sign applications for 622 College Highway (Grist Mill Motors) and 797 College Highway (Carfinders.)
7. Prepared a PowerPoint presentation on the proposed College Highway rezoning for the public hearings to be held on March 11 starting at 7:15 p.m.
8. Had a conference call with Jeff Neece and Town Attorney Ben Coyle on February 26 regarding the status of the Erosion and Sediment Control for Stormwater Management bylaw. Because the text of the bylaw was not revised in response to the four page comment letter from Bacon and Wilson dated August 29, 2007, the attorneys will not put the bylaw to form for inclusion on the March 15 Special Town Meeting.
PUBLIC COMMENTS: 7:10 pm.
There were no public comments.
APPOINTMENTS:
7:10 p.m. - Jarry Drive Public Hearing Continued
Mr. Moglin read a letter dated February 5, 2008 from the Rosewood Estates Condominium C/O Atrium Property Services, Inc. that the Association voted unanimously not to expand Rosewood Estates and that it has no interest in presenting to the community with regard to the proposal to as it currently stands.
Mr. Moglin read a letter from R Levesque Associates dated February7, 2008 addressed to the Selectmen copied to the Planning Board. The letter to serve as a formal withdrawal to the zone change request dated November 6, 2008 for Lot 2 on Jarry Drive. A MOTION was made by Mrs. Terry and seconded by Mr. Johnson that the withdrawal of the zone change for lot 2 on Jarry Drive be accepted. The vote was unanimous.
Mr. Moglin instructed the secretary to send a letter to the Board of Selectman that the Planning Board had accepted the withdrawal.
7:15 p.m. 797 College Highway Site Plan Review & Sign Review
Mike Werman said he is planning to rebuild the structure that was damaged by fire on the same foundation. He also plans to demolish the barn. The Board reviewed the site plan. Mrs. Terry was concerned about the number of parking spaces. She said he has changed the parking spaces. If he makes changes then he needs to apply for a modification of the Special Permit. Mrs. Terry said that the easiest way is to use the same plan that had been approved previously. Mr. Werman said he was not changing the site plan and would follow the original plan that was approved. Also, Mr. Werman submitted a sign plan for review.
Mr. Moglin asked if the sign was illuminated. Mr. Werman replied no.
A MOITION was made by Mr. Santaniello and seconded by Mr. Johnson to accept the sign as presented. The vote was unanimous.
7:30 p.m. Conservation Commission Discussion
Representing the Conservation Commission was Mr. Dennis Clark (Conservation Coordinator), Mr. Dave Sainsbury and Mr. Mahomet Mizanoglu for a joint discussion on Williamsburg Estates. Mr. Clark asked if the Board had received a copy of the letter dated January 28th to D. L. Bean. Mr. Moglin replied that the Planning Board had received the letter. Mr. Clark stated that the developer has been reminded that they need to file for a Federal Water Quality Permit. He stated that the approved monitoring schedule would be more of a daily monitoring schedule. They need to have somebody out there to be sure that all the safe guards are in tact and in compliance. They are waiting on the results of the infiltration basins, and wetlands and buffer areas. When the test results are in for the detention and infiltration basins they are going to
select an engineering firm at Mr. DePalma’s expense. An Operation and maintenance plan will have to be developed for the cleaning of the detention basins. Mr. Clark stated that if the Planning Board decided to grant a waiver on the infiltration basin it is very important that the infiltration basin is cleaned out. Mr. Moglin asked if this would become a problem when this becomes a town road. Mr. Clark replied that storm water structures, overland, infiltration and retention basins all need to have a maintenance plan or they will deteriorate. Mrs. Terry asked if the Planning Board required a maintenance schedule be attached to the Permit is DPW required to follow the schedule when it becomes a Town Road. Mr. Moglin said that DPW would acquire the maintenance schedule. Mrs. Terry said that the Planning Board has control only until all of the bond is released and has no enforcement powers after that. Mr. Moglin said that the reason for the meeting is that there should be some
areas of common concern. This project seems to have some special intricacies that, especially the wording of Open Space. Mr. Clark said that the formal definition of Open Space is such that the plan for Williamsburg Estates does not meet the requirements. It was suggested that the spaces used as a buffer better fit the definition of Natural Space. Natural Space could be a buffer, untouched and left alone. Mr. Moglin said that the Board has the option of calling the buffer Open Space. There are three options. The first option is Natural Space, option 2 within Chapter 315-18 there is Open Space on any subdivision type. We could require D. L. Bean to delineate that area and show the true Open Space. The third option is to eliminate it completely and put it with lots. The Board did not want to use option three. The Open Space conservation restriction would have to be approved by the Conservation Commission and agreed to use the term Natural Space. One of the concerns of the
Conservation Commission is that when the peer review for the Planning Board comes in from Bay State and changes have been made the plan will have to come back to the Conservation commission again. Mr. Moglin said that that report is due within the next three days. The Planning Board will voice some concerns to them on some areas of special attention. They may have them redraw the plans. If that happens, the Board will have to review the plans again. The reason we wanted to go with a Conventional Subdivision with this plan was we wanted to make a road connection. It cannot be done with a Flexible Subdivision. We took the best part of the Flexible plan which would be the Natural Space and end up with standard lot sizes, the same number of lots you would have under Flexible Residential Development. Natural Space will be owned by a Home Owners Association with a conservation restriction. Mrs. Terry said that the Board tried to take the best of both plans. She also stated that
there are some concerns about the waiver on the detention basins and the infiltration basins. Mr. Clark did mention about the roof drains so that the water was infiltrated right off of the houses. Mr. Clark said that another concern that Conservation has is that there is no grading shown on these plans. If every one grades their lots the way they feel like it and develops problems. The Board is concerned about the waiver for grading plan. The Board is also concerned about the storm water. Mr. Moglin mentioned that the Board was told that a contractor had been working on the property and had been ticketed and that the fines were not paid. Mr. Clark said that indeed someone had been ticketed from the Conservation Commission for damage done on the property. Mrs. Terry asked if they have the right to perk test on the property. Mr. Clark replied that they can as long as they do not disturb the wetlands. Mrs. Terry asked if there were any other issues. Mr. Clark said that the Corps of
Engineers were involved with the project. The Planning Board is continuing the Public Hearing on March 25 at 7:30 p.m. The Conservation Commission will meet on the plan before the next Planning Board meeting. Mr. Moglin asked Mr. Clark to inform the Board of any changes, and thanked the Commission members for attending.
8:00 p.m. DPW Discussion
Mr. Phelps gave the Board a handout with the criteria that DPW used in evaluating 13 sites they looked at for the DPW Garage. A discussion followed.
8:15 p.m. 92 Davis Road CHO
Michael Massarelli applied for a CHO permit to have an office in his residence for a business called Southwick Enterprise Computers. He stated that there would be no customers on the premises, no business sign, no trucks or heavy duty equipment and no additional employees. A MOTION was made by Mrs. Terry and seconded by Mr. Chunglo to approve the CHO application as reviewed. The vote was unanimous with one abstention.
8:25 p.m. 22 Knoll Road CHO
Ms. Wendy Barbour applied for a CHO permit to have an office in her residence for a business called Falling Leaves Jewelry Design. She stated that there would be no customers on the premises, no business sign, no trucks or heavy duty equipment and no additional employees.
A MOTION was made by Mrs. Terry and seconded by Mr. Chunglo to approve the CHO application as reviewed. The vote was unanimous.
8:30 p.m. 622 College Highway Sign Review
T.J.Welch applied for a sign review for a new sign for Gristmill Motors. There is an existing free standing sign that will not be changed. He was asked if the sign was to be lighted and he said that it would not be lighted. A MOTION was made by Mrs. Johnson and seconded by Mr. Chunglo to approve the sign application as reviewed. The vote was unanimous.
ROUNTINE BUSINESS: 8:35 p.m.
A MOTION was by Mr. Johnson and seconded by Mr. Chunglo to approve the Planning Board minutes for January 22. The vote was unanimous.
8:40 p.m. Southwick Inn Discussion
Mrs. Terry presided as Mr. Moglin recused himself. Mrs. Terry said that there were three applications before the Board but it appears like two projects still it has to be addressed as three separate projects. . There are three owners and three separate applications. Attorney Buckley laid out the points of the project. There is also a list of 15 things they are actually applying for. What we have to do is divide those points between the three applications. KAYDUB has a variance for a set back and can physically grow. We have a decision to make. Do we physically let them grow? They already have the right to entertain outside. That is not a new use. Because the patio is not a structure they could a year from now add on a deck and probably do what ever they wanted to. We need to make a decision on whether we want to allow it and put
conditions on it or disallow it. There is a parking lot plan and we need to make sure that there are directional signs, the pavement is marked. She asked if the bridge had a walkway and Mr. Phelps replied that it does. Mr. Chunglo said that the bridge is for one way traffic to the second parking lot. Mrs. Terry said that the lighting is on the plan. Mrs. Terry located the dumpster on the plan. The Board might want to recommend some screening. Mr. Phelps said that under Special Permit the Board could look at control of noise and how it fits in with the neighborhood. Mrs. Terry said that if the Planning Board grants it then they could put in some restrictions. We do have some control at this point for the outside. If we deny the patio it could happen with no controls at all. Mr. Chunglo felt that we could make recommendations to the Licensing Board. Mr. Johnson disagreed with placing restrictions. Mr. Chunglo said he would like to recommend that they replace the stockade fence with a
white poly fence. Mr. Chunglo suggested the Board makes a recommendation to the Liquor Board.
Being no further business to be brought before the Board, A MOTION was made by Mr. Johnson, SECONDED by Mr. Santaniello to adjourn at 9:00 p.m. Vote was unanimous.
Respectfully submitted,
Ruth Preston
Recording Secretary
| 
