Minutes of August 8, 2006

 

Present were: Marilyn Richards, Acting Chair; Donald Anderson, Clerk, Thomas Morrissette and Michael Przybylowicz.  Louis Calabrese was not present.

 

ANR - Tamarack  Drive

 

Ms. Richards read a request for an extension of time from Attorney Lawrence Levine in which to vote on the ANR for Tamarack Drive for an additional 30 days.  Upon motion duly made and seconded, the Board voted unanimously, (4-0) to extend the time limit until September 1st, 2006.  

 

Tom Sweeney – Problems with Rollins Drive

 

The members welcomed Tom Sweeney who resides on Rollins Drive and was appearing before the Board to discuss the problems with the condition of the road.  Ms. Richards explained to him that she had talked with Ms. Macdonald regarding his issues and asked Mr. Sweeney to review his concerns about Rollins Drive with the Board.

 

Mr. Sweeney said that Rollins Drive is a mess and it is unsafe and his children cannot ride their bikes or go into the street.  He said that the builder walked away from the project and the insurance company is not paying on the bond and it seems to him that none of the departments in the Town are communicating with one another and the homeowners are stuck holding the bag.  Mr. Sweeney also said that the Town required a bond and he cannot find out why it was required in the first place just to end up letting it lapse - he ends up with a street that has not had anything done to it and it is a mess.   Mr. Sweeney said when he went to the Board of Public Works they said that it would cost more money because the base coat was not put down correctly and the only ones taking responsibility for the street are the people who live there.   Mr. Sweeney also said that no one is doing anything but just sitting back and waiting and the homeowners are tried of waiting and he really does not care what the Town or Planning Board thinks, he is taking it personally because he lives there with his family. 

 

Ms. Richards said that she went to look at the street that evening before the meeting and she said that he was right that the street is a mess that no one is arguing that and the homeowners do deserve a safe road.  She said that the concern extends from the Planning Board and what is in its power to control at this point.  She asked Ms. Macdonald, for the Boards’ benefit, to explain the circumstances through a time line.

 

Ms. Macdonald explained that she and Mr. Miorandi met with Mr. Sweeney and they agree that the road is a mess.  However, Attorney Donahue has told the Town not to touch the road because it is a private way.  Ms. Macdonald explained that there is an insurance bond in place.  Further, in 2005 she (the Town) put in a claim through Town Counsel who informed her that the insurance company denied the claim.  She also wanted the members to know that the bond had not lapsed as indicated by Mr. Sweeney, and the matter continues to be in the hands of Town Counsel.

  

Ms. Macdonald said if the bond is collected then the town can use the money to start to fix the road and at that point, when the street is taken by the town,  chapter 90 money can be used to complete the repairs.  Mr. Morrissette asked what the amount of the bond was?  Ms. Macdonald said $38,000.00.  Ms. Richards asked if that was enough to cover the need, Ms. Macdonald said no.  Mr. Morrissette asked if the original bond had been  reduced following completion of certain aspects as normally occurs?  Ms. Macdonald said yes, up until a certain point Ron Decoteau was doing the work he was supposed to. She added that at the last reduction it was for the installation of the base coat, which, at that particular time, was fine.  She said over time and weather, and the road not being finished, it has deteriorated.  Mr. Anderson asked if it was a street that has been accepted and never taken?  Ms. Macdonald said no it was never finished, that Mr. DeCoteau never applied the top coat and the catch basins need to fixed, potholes need to be filled, the berm is destroyed and DPW is afraid that the pipes underneath the road may be in need of repair.  Further, she added that there never was a request for acceptance.

 

Mr. Anderson asked why the Town cannot get involved and take care of it?  He also asked whether there is a time line and if the Town provides the repairs,  the Town would reserve the right to keep the bond money.  Ms. Macdonald said touching the street while it is still private would void the bond.  She reiterated that, according to Attorney Donahue, the town could not collect on the bond if any work is done by the Town. 

 

Mr. Morrissette asked when was the bond requested?  Ms. Macdonald said in October 2005.  Mr. Morrissette asked if the events needed to take place to default on it and for us to collect take place had taken place?  Ms. Macdonald said yes however, the insurance company is claiming that the Town did not notify them in time.  The representative feels that Mr. DeCoteau’s last work was in 1999, which is not the case.  She said there are other communications, bills and inspections that went on past 1999 and the Town Clerk’s Office up until 2 months ago was still communicating with him regarding monies that were due. 

 

Mr. Przybylowicz asked if there was any indication on what it would take to restore the road?  Ms. Macdonald said no.  Mr. Sweeney said that the Board of Public Works told him $22,000.00 and then some said with the top coat $30,000.00 and someone else said now you have to redo the base coat because there is grass growing through it because it was not put down properly.  He said that someone in the Town signed off on it and someone made a comment “well that’s the Planning Board for you”. 

 

Mr. Anderson asked the last time Attorney Donahue took any action on the matter?  Ms. Macdonald said about 3 or 4 weeks ago. Mr. Anderson said he would like, by their next meeting, a status report from Attorney Donahue.

 

Mr. Sweeny said the DPW driver got a very good shock last year when he hit one of the potholes with his plow during a snow storm.  Mr. Anderson asked if the situation was that the insurance company needs to take pictures of it?  Ms. Macdonald said that they have pictures.  Mr. Anderson asked what is the reason that it cannot be done, does the insurance company want to reinvestigate it ?  Ms. Macdonald said that they are saying that they were not notified in time.  Mr. Anderson said but we are still negotiating with them, so it does not make sense; and, if they have already looked at the site, why cannot the Town try to patch what they can? 

 

Mr. Sweeny said he asked the Board of Public Works if they could patch it and worry about it later, they said no because that issue is between you and the insurance company.  He said what if the bond does not pay off and if it does not pay off that means if the Town does something wrong then there is a lawsuit on your hands.  Mr. Anderson said by the next meeting he wants something form Attorney Donahue.  Ms. Macdonald asked if they would like him to come in.  Mr. Anderson said please.  Mr. Sweeney said his only concern is what if Attorney Donahue says that DPW cannot fix it and it goes on for 6 years?  Ms. Macdonald said if the bond is absolutely over and the insurance company is no longer negotiating with the Town then the Town will have to take the road over.  Mr. Sweeney asked how long would that be and he does not want to wait 6 months to a year to find out.  Ms. Macdonald added that it was not any help to Mr. Sweeney or his neighbors, but about 10 years ago the Town realized insurance bonds were not working out for anybody and now the only kind of bonds accepted are cash bonds.  She further explained that if anything happens and the developer does not respond within 30 days, the town notifies them that the Town is going to use their money and fix the street.  Mr. Anderson asked Ms. Macdonald to ask Town Counsel to be at the next meeting to discuss this matter.  Mr. Sweeney said that he would like to be present also, the Board said that he was more than welcome, that Ms. Macdonald would notify him. 

 

Request for Waiver of Site Plan Review – Douglas White, 245C Shaker Road

 

Ms. Macdonald said Douglas White Electrical Services would be doing contracting electrical work and the Board requested a parking plan.  Ms. Macdonald requested that  someone be present in case the Board had any questions and Mario Cavolinale, Treasurer was present.  Clerk, Donald Anderson read the request for waiver stating that signage would be requested at a later date.

 

Mr. Cavolinale said their intention is to use the space for storage for tools and maybe some overstock of electrical supplies.  Mr. Morrissette asked how big the garage was.  Mr. Cavolinale said that it is 30 x 32. 

 

Mr. Przybylowicz asked if there was going to be an office or phone line.  Mr. Cavolinale said no, that they are starting off on a shoe-string budget and his partner has a home office at his house and he will be taking business calls there and they will be using cell phones for now.   

 

Ms. Richards said basically it is going to be for your people going back and forth and no customers will be going to that location.  Mr. Cavolinale said correct if they are there four times a month, that will be a lot.

 

Mr. Morrissette asked will there be any vans?  Mr. Cavolinale said no that the vans would be parked at his partner’s home.   With no further discussion, and upon motion duly made and seconded, the Board voted unanimously (4-0) to approve the request for waiver of site plan approval.  The Board reviewed the parking plan presented and approved it for the use.

 

Ray LaPlante – Discussion for zone change at 94 Maple Street

 

Present was Ray LaPlante and Rich Gale.  Mr. Gale explained that they were looking for some feedback from the Board as far as what they are proposing.  He said they would like to put up an office building that would be residential looking and are looking to submit a request for a zone change to a commercial zone.  Mr. LaPlante said that the building elevation would fit and it would be about 5,600 square feet.  Mr. Anderson asked if the only tenant would be the LaPlante construction company and not any other commercial uses?  Mr. LaPlante said that they would like to occupy the 1st floor and rent the second floor to other types of commercial businesses.     

 

Mr. Anderson said first of all he agrees that site is an eyesore as it stands and he thinks it would be absolutely beautiful, but the hard part is the commercial zone situation.   He said once it is rezoned commercial then it opens the property up to every type of commercial use - even if you get the town’s people to approve it then it has to be approved by the Attorney General’s Office.  Ms. Richards asked what the size of lot was.  Mr. Morrissette said that it was almost an acre. 

 

Mr. LaPlante said what he would like to do is to talk with Quinn about the 20 foot easement and try to do something so they could use it to access the parking lot and put up a nice buffer area between the residential properties.          

 

Mr. Przybylowicz asked what would be stored in the parking area.  Mr. LaPlante said it would be strictly be their offices and cars would be in the parking lot – no commercial vehicles.

 

Ms. Macdonald said one of the good things about the commercial zone compared to the industrial zone, is that the commercial zone is really limited in the uses allowed - most of which are office uses.

 

Ms. Richards said that the Board knows that she has talked with Ray LaPlante regarding this particular option and if you look at the way our zoning map is carved out there are sections in town where the commercial district is used to separate the business zone from the residential zone and is often a buffer.  She said the problem is the size of the parcel and the fact that there is a parcel below that is equally multiple zoned and, depending on what happens on this parcel, might potentially direct a request on that parcel to do the same thing. 

 

Mr. LaPlante said if you look at the zone line he guesses that portion could be left industrial.  Ms. Richards said right now it is and said she sees what he is saying.  Mr. Morrissette said that this is spot zoning and the board and town could endorse it 100% and still be turned down by the Attorney General because it directly impacts or helps you more than it helps anybody else.  He said it does not help the Town, it does not help anybody but you.

           

Mr. Laplante said he spoke with Attorney Beglane and he talked with Town Counsel and from what Attorney Beglane  says it is not considered spot zoning.  Mr. Anderson said get them an opinon, bring us some language because we have our own research that Ms. Macdonald has been doing and we are citing cases that tend to differ with that opinion.               

 

Mr. Przybylowicz said that they have kicked this property around several times, that many people like you approach us and ask what can we do with this property and we have always been stonewalled with it being zoned what it is and possibly being converted to commercial and we have always come across that spot zoning issue.

 

Ms. Richards said that Ms. Macdonald has supplied the Board with some valuable information about spot zoning and the criteria that the Attorney General would be using for this kind of request, and it is really difficult.  She said it is a difficult battle to fight as a town to say that we really want that piece commercially zoned and the only thing that she keeps looking at is that the town could tear down the building, we could throw grass on it, if that is what the town is willing to do, and right now it is not in the best interest of anyone.  Ms. Richards said that the grass is high and she is sort of resentful of the property owner who lives in East Longmeadow, who lives in a beautiful neighborhood and he is allowing this piece of property to exist in this condition. 

 

Ms. Richards also said that she knew why the owner was allowing it, because the worse it gets, the more aggravated the town will be and the more motivated we will be to do something, which is finically beneficial to the property owner.  She said that they were caught between a rock and hard place because this is a main road in town and we want it to look nice and that would look absolutely beautiful.  Ms. Richards said that one way that they could get by the spot zoning issue if we could defend that this change is in the best interest of the community as a whole, simply by removing the existing building.

 

Mr. LaPlante said that it was a perfect transition from industrial to residential and he thinks that would provide a benefit to the town.  Ms. Richards asked Mr. LaPlante if he had some kind of purchase and sale agreement?  Mr. LaPlante said that he has a deposit on the property at the listed price.

 

Ms. Macdonald said worst case scenario if you end up not getting rezoned to commercial you could always construct a house on the lot.  She said that she is really interested in what case law Attorney Beglane has to allow the Board to at least see both sides of it before you put money into the engineering necessary for the plan.

 

Mr. Morrissette said that there was no doubt in his mind that the town would be better off with a new building on the property and having Mr. LaPlante as an owner/tenant  because it is going to look nice forever.  He said if his questions was whether the Board would support a zone change he is not sure how they would go about supporting it, we could use the same argument that we have been using that it would be better for the town.  He said it still would go against the zoning by-laws of the town and how does the Board support something that goes against the zoning by-laws for the town?

 

Ms. Richards said she would like to see what Attorney Beglane has to say and have him give something to Ms. Macdonald and then she could forward to the Board.                

 

Request for Site Plan Approval – Ron Bretta, 603 North Main Street

 

Ms. Richards said for the record with regard to the 7:00 public hearing on a Site Plan Approval for Ron Bretta, the board received a written request to continue the hearing until August 22nd at 7:15 p.m.  Therefore, upon motion duly made and seconded, the Board voted unanimously (4-0) to continue the hearing to that date and time. 

 

Request for Waiver of Site Plan Review – Mildred Colon, Computer Gig, 21 North Main Street

 

Clerk, Donald Anderson read a request for waiver of site plan approval to open a computer sales, repair and service office in an existing building located at 21 North Main Street, East Longmeadow.  The hours of operation will be Monday through Friday from 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. and by appointment only on Saturday.  This site is an existing site for retail businesses and has an approved parking plan on file which has been previously dated and signed by the Planning Board.

 

Upon motion duly made and seconded, the Board voted unanimously (4-0) to approve the request for waiver of site plan approval.  The Board reviewed the parking plan presented and approved it for the use.

 

Miscellaneous

 

Ms. Macdonald told the Board that Chris Grazino had called her to find out if he could put up a 3’x8’ banner on the fence at the Center Field for a school fundraiser for 30 days.  Upon motion duly made and seconded, the Board voted unanimously (4-0) to allow the temporary banner for 30 days.

 

Mr. Morrissette asked if the Board approved a “Now Open” sign for Starbucks?  Ms. Macdonald said she told them that they could put it up for the weekend and if the Board had a problem she would let them know.

Ms. Macdonald told the Board that she has a meeting with the manager of Walgreen’s on Thursday because the trucks are continuing to unload on Crane Avenue on the sidewalk and Dave Gromaski has called the police 5 times.  She said that she talked with Jayson Falcone. Ms. Richards said that Jayson had told her the last time she talked with him that he was going to copy a letter to the Board that he sent to them and we never got it.  Ms. Macdonald said she was going to write a letter and when she meets with Kevin, the manager, she will have something in writing and will send it to the Board members for review.

 

Mr. Anderson asked what Attorney Larry Levine wanted to talk to the Board about at the next meeting.  Ms. Macdonald said that he wanted to talk about the prospect of DeNardo’s moving onto Shaker Road.  

 

Subdivision Plans - Apple Blossom Lane

 

Mr. Anderson explained that Attorney Donahue submitted something in writing regarding Apple Blossom Lane deed restriction and the Board endorsed the subdivision plans. 

 

ANR – Benware, Gates Avenue 

 

The Board reviewed the ANR for Gates Avenue submitted by Karl & Tina Benware of 200 Gates Avenue for the creation of two lots, Lot G having 10,000 square feet and Lot F having 10,000 square feet.  Lot F is not a building lot and will not be until Flower Street is improved and water and sewer is brought to the lot, all as shown on Plan dated July, 2006.  Lot G has proper frontage on a public way, namely Gates Avenue and Lot F, on Flower Street, as required by the Subdivision Rules and Regulations.

 

After discussion and upon motion duly made and seconded, the Board voted unanimously (4-0) to approve the ANR.

 

           Minutes

 

The Board reviewed the minutes of June 13, 2006 and upon motion duly made and seconded, voted unanimously (4-0) to accept them with edits.   

 

The Board reviewed the minutes of July 25, 2006 and upon motion duly made and seconded, voted unanimously (4-0) to accept them, with edits.   

 

Therefore, with no further business and upon motion duly made and seconded, the Board voted to close the meeting at 9:45  p.m.

 

                                                                        Very truly yours,

 

 

 

                                                                        Donald J. Anderson, Clerk