Minutes of the Hancock Planning Board Meeting
October 6th, 2010
Members present: Tom Bates, Carolyn Boland, Steve Froling, Rich LeFebvre, Roberta Nylander, Mark Stevens, Ellena Weston-Zimmerman, and Linda Coughlan, Recording Secretary
Others Attending: John Champ, Kevin Delaney and Richard Voci from Industrial Tower & Wireless
7:00 P.M. Froling called the business portion of the meeting to order. The minutes of the September 15th meeting were accepted as presented.
Froling referenced several items of correspondence that had come in for the Board since the last meeting. They were the September issue of Town and Country from LGC, a booklet concerning the annual conference in November sponsored by LGC, a note on the Annual Fall Planning & Zoning Conference to be held on November 13th, a publications catalog for fall 2010 from LGC, a notice for ordering 2011 Planning and Land Use Regulations Manuals from SWRP and a notice for a cell tower hearing on that was held on October 5th in Fitzwilliam.
Froling began the deliberative session by referencing the reply he had sent to Walter Waterbury after the last meeting which he had circulated to the Board for approval.
Froling said there was a preliminary question to address before the Board moved on to discuss the draft Decision and draft Notice of Decision concerning the application of Industrial Tower & Wireless for a Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review for a wireless telecommunications facility. He said since Weston-Zimmerman and Stevens had missed hearings, he wanted to ask if they felt they had studied the records well enough to be able to vote. Both Stevens and Weston-Zimmerman answered by saying they felt they would be OK to vote.
The Board next moved on to discuss the draft of the Notice of Decision and of the Decision that Froling had circulated to the Board. Froling said he had asked Bart to review the drafts and said he had approved the form. He said he had recently attended lectures given by the Local Government Center at which the lecturers had strongly recommended that decisions in cell tower cases be full and complete in their reasoning. Froling added that a comprehensive decision would assist in upholding the decision in court, if needed. Froling asked the Board if they had any comments on the draft Decision. The Board commented that it was well written and reflected the prior discussions of the Board. No changes were suggested.
On the draft Notice of Decision, Froling suggested one amendment dealing with a bond and removal of the cell tower upon abandonment. He said the bond is to be negotiated by the Select Board so he had deleted that provision requiring a separate agreement.
Froling asked the applicants if they had any comments or questions on the drafts. John Champ had a question on whether Bart Mayer had approved the driveway maintenance agreement since he hadnt seen a response yet. Froling said Bart had seen the language in the draft Decision which covered the substance of the driveway issue (page 7) but would still have to approve the agreement when it was presented to him by the Applicant.
Froling went on to discuss the fees and expenses that had been incurred. He said the fee for Mark Hutchings had been $2,500 and was the only fee incurred to date. He expected that the town attorney would render bills for reviewing documents and that he would like to provisionally allow $200 for that review; no amount would be bill for legal advice to the Board. The Applicant accepted that provisional allowance. Accordingly, of the $5,000 put in escrow by the Applicant, $2,300 could now be returned to ITW, and an additional refund may be allowed depending on the fees for the attorneys legal review.
There being no further comments or questions from the Board or the applicant, the Board entertained a motion (Bates moved, LeFebvre seconded) to adopt the draft Decision and the Notice of Decision as amended as the decision of the Board. . The Board voted unanimously to adopt the drafts. Froling said he believed that the decisions both protect the town and serve the applicants well.
Froling said regarding the subdivision application that had been submitted, he had a couple of issues that he wanted to bring up so that the Applicant would be prepared to address them at the Hearing on October 20th.
First, he noted that RT 202 is a limited access highway and under the definition of Frontage in the Zoning Ordinance, this would not be allowed as Frontage for subdivision purposes. He suggested that the Applicants consider Article 15.6.12 in the Zoning Ordinance which deals with rights of way for new back lots but would require an application to apply to the ZBA for a Special Exception.
Second, Froling called to the Applicants attention Article 10.3 dealing with Lot Size Determination. At first impression, the proposed Lot may comprise more wetlands than this article allows. If that is so, the Applicant may wish to consider applying to the ZBA for a variance.
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 7:30 P.M.
Hancock Home Page – Town Documents – Planning Board Minutes