The Rochester Planning Board is in the middle of the permitting process for what will soon be the town’s largest-scale solar farm, an 8.81-acre, 4-megawatt solar energy field on Rochester Farms, LLC’s agricultural land on Marion Road, Route 105. On July 9, the board reviewed plan details as they continue to develop and issued a few demands of the solar developer, SWEB Development USA, LLC.

            SWEB’s representative, Sarah Rosenblat, said she’s received approval from the Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program regarding the site’s box turtle habitat, and also from the Massachusetts Historical Commission confirming there is nothing of tangible historical value at the site.

            As the discussion over sight line results got underway, Planning Board Chairman Arnie Johnson pointed out that the board’s prior orders for sight line origination points were not completed as requested.

            “I believe we requested that you take the sight lines from the front steps of the abutter’s property across the way and you took them from the edge of the roadway layout,” said Johnson.

            “We followed the example … they’re just not from the front door,” Rosenblat replied.

            “You need to back up and you need to get the elevation from their front steps,” Johnson told her, specifying that the sight line should be taken from that abutter’s deck to ensure the solar panels will be hidden from view. “That’s what we’ve been asking everyone (other solar developers) to do – shoot them from the front steps,” said Johnson. He added that a section of fence must also be placed so that when board members arrive for a site visit then they can easily determine whether or not the panels are completely screened from the public.

            “Craig (Craig Canning, owner of Rochester Farms, LLC) doesn’t actually want us to put a section of fence up,” said Rosenblat. “What we’re going to do is put a flag up instead with an actual 8-foot pole with flags so you can see it.”

            The board was not satisfied.

            “Craig can’t have everything here,” said Johnson. “[If] he wants this project to move forward, then he’s got to give a little bit, and the fence can go up and then it can come down once we see it.”

            Rosenblat tried to persuade the board by saying Canning is currently actively farming where the board wants to see the fence, but the board disagreed.

            “Where this line is, that is actually being farmed,” said Rosenblat. “There are crops there; I have been out on site.”

            “It’s all rye grass,” Johnson replied.

            “I can do my best to ask him for a fence there,” said Rosenblat, but then after said, “There’s crops right there, so that’s – no, I can’t ask him for this …”

            “You can ask him; we’ll tellhim,” said Johnson. “It don’t matter to us. … This guy’s trying to put a project on the property here – we need some things here to get some more information out that some of the abutters have requested. So, he can pick – a project or a couple heads of cabbage.”

            Johnson reiterated that the fence does not have to be permanently installed at this time, just present so the board can review it during the visit.

            Rosenblat then reviewed a decibel level analysis done at the site, stating that the noise level from the inverters, at 3.28 feet away, would not exceed 61.6 decibels at full capacity during the day.

            The inverters will not function during the night.

            The noise level then drops by 6 decibels for every doubling of distance from the inverter.

            Planning Board member Ben Bailey, using a free phone app for recording decibel levels, clocked Rosenblat’s voice at a range of 59-69 decibels, saying, “Your voice is about as loud as those things are gonna be if you were 10, 15 feet away.”

            Rosenblat said there will be 32 inverters at the site, “But they’re split,” adding that the closest inverter houses to any abutting property line would be 215 feet away at a decibel level of 25.6, “Which is actually classified as a ‘quiet, rural area,’” she said.

            Town Planner Steve Starrett commented that wind blowing through trees on a windy day is about 67 decibels.

            The board also discussed some details about rainwater runoff and grass planting once construction is complete. The solar developer will also need to submit easement language prior to rendering a decision and a permit from the fire chief before any blasting.

            “I appreciate all the points that we brought up before that were addressed,” said Johnson, “[but] there’s still a couple little fine-tuning to do on that. … We just need to get the fence section put up there … and then we’ll come out for a site visit and you can stake it and he can take the fence down again.”

            Rosenblat said she would have updated sight line results by July 17.

            The hearing was continued until August 13.

            Also during the meeting, the board closed the Site Plan Review public hearing for Sofia Darras, 565 and 0 Rounseville Road for the removal and abandonment of the existing drainage system, and the installation of a new drainage system that includes new deep sump catch basins, drainage manholes and piping, proprietary treatment structures, and subsurface infiltration.

            It also continued the Special Residential Development Special Permit public hearing running in tandem with Darras’ hearing for REpurpose Properties for an age-restricted residential development on Rounseville Road next to Plumb Corner Mall, and the Special Permit public hearing until August 13.

            REpurpose Properties anticipates a groundbreaking of the project by June 2020.

            The board voted in favor of the Approval Not Required application filed by Gibbs V. and Patricia Bray, Trustees and Patricia A. McArdle for Sophia Darras, 565 & 0 Rounseville Road for the division of land next to Plumb Corner Mall.

            The next meeting of the Rochester Planning Board is scheduled for July 23 at 7:00 pm at the Rochester Town Hall.

Rochester Planning Board

By Jean Perry

            On July 11 at the meeting of the Rochester Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA), David Fletcher of 42 Old Tuck Bog Road stood before the board and those who attended to hear the proceedings for his request for a Variance and a Special Permit to continue running his home-based business at his residence.

            Acting Chairman Davis Sullivan asked Fletcher to explain the reason for his applications.

            “I just want to keep what I have now – nothing more, nothing less” Fletcher began.

            Fletcher explained that for over 20 years he had operated his excavation business from his home without any issues with the neighbors. What few issues had arisen were quickly corrected, he said, because he “respected the neighbors.”

            As a fuller picture of Fletcher’s business and his permits, or lack thereof, with the Town of Rochester were explored, several abutters complained about noise emitting from his property, while one abutter vehemently supported the manner in which he conducted his business.

            The ZBA asked whether the Rochester address was Fletcher’s legal and/or primary residence, whether or not he had a valid business license issued by the town, if stockpiling of sand and stumps was taking place on the property, if there were at least 14 unregistered vehicles on the property, and if loud loam screening operations disturbed the peace of the neighborhood.

            Fletcher said he lived in “multiple locations” and that he was not a registered voter in any of the towns in which he owns property, but has continuously lived in Rochester for six months. It surfaced that a business license with the town he once held had since expired and had not been renewed. He supported this lack of action by indicating he had a right to run a business from his private residence and a license was not required.

            Fletcher also acknowledged that he had received notification of non-compliance from the Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program because a large portion of the more than 20 acres he owns was mapped as critical wildlife habitat, and some activities on the site could threaten the resource area.

            Fletcher then went into detail explaining that his registered GMC trucks need parts that were now obsolete and therefore he used the unregistered vehicles as “donors” for the registered ones.

            When it came to the stockpiling of scrap metals, sands, and stumps, Fletcher said that in the past some materials had been stored at the site, but as of March 2019 all had been cleaned up with the exception of the occasional small pile of sand and some stumps that were on the property when he purchased it 26 years ago.

            As for loam screening activities, Fletcher said that when the level of noise created by his actions was brought to his attention, he immediately stopped and had never returned to screening at the Rochester location.

            One abutter took severe umbrage to Fletcher’s business.

            “When I gave him rights to cross my road it was to build a house, not run a business,” exclaimed Ron Belrose. “I’m 100-percent opposed. He runs seven days a week, trucks coming in at full speed, full of stumps …” He said that the screening produced horrific noises and that he often hears truck doors and tailgates slamming.

            “This is a vast exaggeration,” said Fletcher. “The trucks leave in the morning and return at night, never back and forth. Not one load of stumps has been dumped in 15 years.”

            In a long continued rebuttal, Fletcher said he had made mistakes in the past, but not since 2013. He said he had a legal right of way over Old Tuck Bog Road according to state regulations. With directness he said that Belrose was “lying.”

            Rochester’s legal counsel, Blair Bailey, said that Fletcher had been advised that he needed a permit to run a business from his home. The permit would require one employee be a relative who must live on the property, and one outside employee would also be allowed. Fletcher explained that his brother did work for him, but lived in Wareham, and that other workers were, except for one, independent contractors.

            Charles Morgan, another abutter, asked where the vehicles were actually registered. Fletcher said addresses other than Old Tuck Bog Road.

            Sandy Keese, 23 Looks Mill Lane, Fletcher’s closest abutter, was also his biggest advocate.

            “I’ve never seen more trucks than what David said,” Keese stated. “The trucks go out in the morning and come back at night.” She said that anytime she did have an issue with Fletcher, he was receptive and respectful. Keese said she also works from home and is home all day; therefore, she’d know if there were issues at Fletcher’s location. If the operation increased, she added, that might prove to be problematic, but as things stood now, she found no problem with the business.

            Building Commissioner Jim Buckles confirmed that the site had been cleared of tires, scrap metal, sand, and other landscape materials. He provided photos to support his observations and said he had no problem with the site at this time.

            After an hour and 15 minutes, the public hearing closed.

            By 8:40 pm, the ZBA had rendered its decision.

            The majority granted the Variance (with member Kirby Gilmore dissenting), which will allow for up to 14 unregistered vehicles, a nod to Fletcher’s need for donor vehicles to keep his registered vehicles operational. The board added the condition that no operation of vehicles be inconsistent with a Special Permit, and restricted the Variance to the current property owner.

            But on the matter of granting a Special Permit for the business, the board unanimously denied the request.

            Before rendering their decision, Gilmore and ZBA member Tom Flynn concluded that Fletcher had more than one outside employee and was therefore running an unpermitted business from his residence. The other board members agreed.

            The next meeting of the Rochester Zoning Board of Appeals is scheduled for July 25 at 7:15 pm in the Town Hall meeting room.

Rochester Zoning Board of Appeals

By Marilou Newell

            Tri-Town school districts are switching their outsourced custodial services and agreed to restructure their Bristol Aggie transportation on July 11 during a meeting of the Marion, Mattapoisett, and Rochester School Committees, voting to allow the administration to seek less costly quotes from various bussing companies.

            Facilities Director Gene Jones told the school committees that several years ago the school districts made the move to outsource custodial services, but the company they chose “didn’t work out well.”

            According to Jones, some of the contracted services weren’t being performed regularly, and creating a checklist to enforce custodial procedures was unsuccessful.

            “The schools were clean, but not in accordance with the scope of work that we hired them for in the contract,” said Jones.

            The committee approved a one-year custodial contract with FM & M (Facilities Management and Maintenance), a non-profit, union-represented custodial firm. The districts will also be able to renew that contract for another two years if they are satisfied with FM & M.

            At the request of the committees, Jones will provide regular reports on progress with the new company “… and they will provide an opportunity to make the environment clean and safe for our students,” said Superintendent Doug White.

            As for Bristol Aggie transportation, Business Administrator Paul Kitchen (resigned effective September 24) explained that the three towns currently transport their students to Dighton using two different companies and two different routes.

            Mattapoisett students participate in a combination run stop at the Fairhaven Stop & Shop using Whaling City Transit, while Marion and Rochester share a combined route with Braga Transportation.

            Kitchen said he found Mattapoisett’s daily cost of $290 to be “a little expensive” and proposed the Tri-Town seek bids to use one company for a combined Tri-Town route.

            “It (the route) wouldn’t be as long as what the Fairhaven one was,” which leaves Fairhaven and then travels to Lakeville, Freetown, and Dighton, said Kitchen. He said he’s seeking the most effective and efficient method of getting Tri-Town students to the agricultural high school.

            Transportation to Bristol Aggie falls under each individual town’s budget, and Kitchen said organizing to create one contract with one company is “the most efficient way to get kids there without putting the ugly burden on the K-6 budget.”

            Kitchen did add that bussing Tri-Town students to Bristol Aggie could require two vehicles due to the distance between students in each of the three towns.

            “I’m just trying to minimize the cost because the cost is not broken out separately from your elementary expenditures,” Kitchen said.

            Kitchen said he would have a final quote for approval by the end of July.

Marion, Mattapoisett, and Rochester School Committees

By Jean Perry