The Marion Planning Board meeting on Monday, January 8, proved consequential in clarifying Town policy on the question of mandatory municipal water hook-up.
The issue of whether the applicants, Tad Wallenhaupt and Alexander Urquhart, at 111 Wareham Street were required to hook up to town water, despite there being a well on their property, had been raised at a previous Planning Board meeting by David Davignon of N. Douglas Schneider and Associates, the applicants’ representative.
Board member Norman Hills, who is also a selectman and therefore a water commissioner, researched the question and presented his findings at the meeting.
After consulting with a number of town officials, Hills discovered that while it was “common practice” for all businesses and residents to hook up to town water, it was not documented as written policy.
In the special conditions listed in the draft permit for the Wareham Street application, the Planning Board was requiring the applicant to provide adequate potable water to the site, describing the water pipe size and flow volume. Board member Chris Collings took issue with these details, suggesting that it was the board’s responsibility to require the applicant to abide by all town policies and regulations, but that it was redundant to specify how the applicant must fulfill the requirement of water supply.
“We want him to have adequate potable water … but it is the decision of the water commissioners and the building commissioner to determine what an adequate water supply is,” said Collings.
Hills was adamant that the applicant must hook up to town water, noting that only in extreme cases – “…which this is not one,” Hills stated – an exception should be made for the requirement.
Hills’ research exposed a hole in Town policy, which prompted Planning Board Chairman Eileen Marum to suggest the issue go before the By-Law Codification Committee in order to close this loophole.
In the meantime, the board voted to approve the current application for 111 Wareham Street with two special conditions: the applicant must provide a “Trucks Entering” warning sign to face westbound traffic on Route 6, the location of which must be approved by town police, DPW, and the Massachusetts Department of Transportation; and the applicant shall provide an adequate supply of potable water in accordance with the policies of the Town of Marion and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
Hills was the only dissenting vote.
Also during the meeting, the board held a public hearing on the Complete Streets Policy presented by board member Jennifer Francis.
The policy was drafted by the Transportation and Circulation Task Force, a subcommittee of the Planning Board, in collaboration with Town Planner Gil Hilario.
While the policy does not require the Town to do anything, it signals to the State that the Town will adhere to MassDOT guidelines when planning any road projects and allows the Town to apply for grant funding through the program.
Francis was quick to point out that the policy only applies to local roads, not to any projects pertaining to Route 6, which is a state road.
Hilario noted that there are currently 179 municipalities participating in the program, which requires towns to promote pedestrian-friendly design in their roadway planning.
Marum congratulated Francis on the policy, saying, “This shows that Marion is serious about having the roads available to everyone.”
While the Planning Board is not required to approve the policy, Francis felt it was important that the board weigh in on it and indicate its support. At the suggestion of Vice Chairman Stephen Kokkins, the board voted to recommend that the Board of Selectmen approve this policy.
There will be a public hearing on January 22 regarding the possible moratorium on marijuana sales proposed by the Planning Board for a special town meeting in February. Marum indicated that, with the state Cannabis Control Board issuing its guidelines in mid-March and accepting applications for licenses on April 1, she felt the Town did not have adequate time to develop its own bylaws for regulating recreational marijuana, also known as adult use of marijuana.
By implementing a moratorium until December 31, 2018, the Town would have time to develop a bylaw and bring it to Town Meeting in the fall.
Hilario stated that currently, if a town does not pass a moratorium and does not have a bylaw in place, the Cannabis Control Commission, in reviewing applications, would consider the application as a Similar Use proposal.
In Marion’s case, an application would be considered as a General Business proposal.
Collings expressed concern that completing a bylaw this year adds considerable work for the board and wondered aloud if the Medical Marijuana bylaw would suffice in the short term.
Board member Will Saltonstall thought Collings’ concept was interesting, but held inherent risk, and Saltonstall made the case that there was little harm in putting the moratorium in place.
In other matters, Hilario reported that another multi-board meeting would be scheduled to discuss the proposed zoning change for Spring Street. Kokkins noted that the discussion at the previous meeting was quite animated surrounding the question of whether the proposed development at Spring Street would follow town Bylaw 8.12 with regard to mandatory inclusion of affordable housing units.
Hilario indicated that the intent was to follow the existing bylaw, but did not rule out the possibility of modifying it in the future, adding that “Only recently was there any discussion or interest in modifying [Bylaw 8.12]. Change must be very measured.”
Kokkins added, “Voters are not going to be asked to change a zoning bylaw, to my knowledge.”
The next meeting of the Marion Planning Board is scheduled for January 22 at 7:00 pm at the Marion Town House.
Marion Planning Board
By Sarah French Storer