A question over the ownership of a private gravel road slated for paving caused the continuance of John and Roger Gibbons’Notice of Intent during the July 9 Mattapoisett Conservation Commission meeting.

Neighbors who lay claim to ownership of various parts of the 658-foot long road had legal representation contesting the Gibbonses right to pave the road, and also defended the wetlands against “oils and chemicals” that he says could leach from the asphalt.

“I do not agree with the statement that this would be an improvement,” said Attorney Robert Feingold. “From a real human point of view, as well as a wetland value point of view, I believe it’s a step backward instead of a step forward.”

Feingold said Foster Street has been a gravel lane forever, given the “rural orientation” of that neighborhood. Feingold passed out photos and described the street as “rustic, bucolic, undeveloped”.

The main concern for Feingold’s client, Laura McLean, was the leaching components of the asphalt into the wetlands from stormwater runoff, but Conservation Commission Chairman Mike King argued that asphalt no longer contains the same unsavory host of ingredients it once did, adding that he knows this because he works in this field. Furthermore, according to King, even the Department of Environmental Protection, which has already issued a file number for the paving, prefers a paved road to a gravel one.

“I certainly can respect the rural character of the neighborhood,” King said. But as for gravel, any amount of rain, he said, sends sediment into the wetlands while a paver road does not. “As counterintuitive as it may seem to all of you, it is better from a resource perspective that it be paved, because there’s actually less filling in of the wetlands from the materials that continually get added to a gravel roadway.”

And from the DEP to the highway surveyor, King said, “They don’t like us to have gravel roadways. They would rather see paved road surfaces. … It’s kind of difficult, really, for us from a resource management perspective to be opposed to it based on those basises {sic}.”

But it was another neighbor’s concern over right of way ownership rights that continued the hearing for another two weeks, saying the deeds are “very clear”.

“I certainly don’t want to create a conflict if it’s not within my legal right to do so,” King stated, suggesting the commission seek an opinion from town counsel.

However, Attorney Peter Paul, on behalf of the Gibbonses, said the issue at hand that night was the effect on the wetlands, adding, “[The law is] overwhelmingly in our favor as far as our right to pave the road, but if you’d like to submit it to town counsel that’s fine.”

In other matters, the board gave a Negative 3 determination for a Request for Determination of Applicability for Susan and Leo Giguere, 15 Shore Drive, to install a 10’ x 15’ shed.

The commission approved a Notice of Intent for Dan Bungert, River Bend Lane, to constrict a single-family dwelling with driveway, utilities, and site improvements.

The commission issued Certificates of Compliance for: James Babbitt, Jr., 40 Marion Road; Judith Yard, 67 Wolf Island Road; and Michael Amaral, Harbor Road.

The RDA filed by Chris Jaskolla for a new dwelling and deck at 58 Crystal Springs Road was withdrawn.

The next meeting of the Mattapoisett Conservation Commission is scheduled for July 23 at 6:30 pm at the Mattapoisett Town Hall.

Mattapoisett Conservation Commission

By Jean Perry

Seth Pickering, the Southeast Region Green Communities Coordinator of Massachusetts, gave a presentation at the Rochester Planning Board meeting on July 10 to inform Chairman Arnold Johnson and the rest of the board on the criteria and benefits of becoming a Green Community.

In his presentation, Pickering highlighted five specifications to which Rochester would have to abide by in order to apply to become a Green Community: a zoning bylaw that would allow by-right siting of solar array fields in zoning-designated areas, and another “Stretch Building Code” bylaw with stricter energy efficiency requirements for new residential and commercial structures; performing an energy audit and establishing an energy baseline for Rochester that the town would have to reduce by 20 percent in five years; putting into place a fuel-efficient vehicle purchase policy; and the adoption of a stretch energy code that would have to be voted in as a bylaw at a town meeting.

Pickering went on to explain that it really is the Town’s choice to implement the Green Communities program.

“It’s your mandate,” Pickering said. “There’s no arm twisting from us.”

Pickering also highlighted the key points of the Green Communities program, explaining that there are 210 existing Green Communities, including Middleboro, Duxbury, Lakeville, and Acushnet, and that towns submit an application by October and hear back by December of the applying year to see if their application was successful. Marion is currently undergoing the process towards Green Community status, and Rochester would first be eligible to apply in October of 2019.

Once a town is designated as a Green Community, that town will receive a grant determined by its size and population. Pickering estimated Rochester’s initial grant as around $145,000, which would pay for lighting, installation, ventilation, air conditioning, and more.

Pickering explained the downside, which is that every new house construction cost would, on average, increase $1,500 to $3,500, but on the flip side, the Green Community plan would reduce future energy usage from 11 percent to 25 percent, a cost-savings in the end.

Pickering also went on to explain the details of the criteria Rochester would have to abide by. The biggest criteria point, the one having to do with the energy baseline, looks at all of the Town-owned buildings and facilities in Rochester, including the schools, traffic lights, and more. If Rochester didn’t hit the 20 percent mark in the allotted five years, there would be no cost penalty or anything of the sort, as the Green Communities Program would continue to help Rochester become more energy efficient, regardless.

In other matters, the Planning Board discussed the paving of Flag Swamp Road from High Street to the end of the road where seven housing lots have already been sectioned off. They estimated that it would be a year or two more before the binding is ready on the road and that the paving would also depend on the housing market and how fast the housing lots are sold. The decision on the paving is still pending.

The next meeting of the Rochester Planning Board is scheduled for July 24 at 7:00 pm at the Rochester Town Hall.

Rochester Planning Board

By Caleb Jagoda

Marion residents with concerns about Route 6 are strongly urged to attend an upcoming Marion Transportation and Circulation Task Force meeting in August to share their thoughts before the public comment period ends.

During the July 19 meeting of the Marion Planning Board, Town Planner Gil Hilario reported on the recent meeting of the Transportation and Circulation Task Force, a subcommittee of the Planning Board, during which SRPEDD (Southeastern Regional Planning & Economic Development District) provided a map of Route 6 and asked for input on improving the road.

Hilario encouraged the board and the concerned public to attend the next Task Force meeting, which will be scheduled for some time in August, as again SRPEDD will be seeking suggestions for the improvement of the major thoroughfare.

Planning Board Chairman Will Saltonstall noted that this was an opportunity for residents to talk about “hot spots the public may have concerns about”.

Hilario warned the board and the public that once the public engagement period is over, it would be hard to have any further input in the improvement project.

Hilario has also submitted a grant application for funding the estimates of the cost of the projects suggested for the town’s Complete Streets Program.

In other business, the FEMA flood zone maps will be available soon through the town website, which may be printed on a home computer. A couple of board members had expressed concern that the small scale aerial photos will be hard to read if a homeowner is looking for their individual property, but Hilario said that the town is broken down into “tiles” of photos that are at a larger scale and will provide the images a property owner would need to see their parcel. He will post the links to the maps once FEMA releases the final draft of the maps, and intends to provide the old maps as well as the new for comparison purposes.

The Town may soon be digitizing its historic town records as Hilario, along with the Sippican Historical Society, is applying for a grant called a “request for service” that would fund an archivist from the Boston Public Library to collect and digitize historical town documents and other historic objects such as paintings and coins. The project would begin with the old Town Reports. The digitized documents would be made available to the public online on a customized website.

Also during the meeting, William Madden of G.A.F. Engineering presented an Approval Not Required plan on behalf of Michael Rose, Lydia Freemen, and Claire Tucker, the owners of the property located at 16 Marvel Street.

The plan contemplates combining six individual lots into one conforming lot of approximately 60,000 square feet.

The lots are in the Residence A district, with a small portion in General Business. There is an existing residence in the center of the lots, and an old foundation in the rear of the lots that will be removed.

The question was raised as to what the zoning bylaws state regarding a lot spanning two zoning districts. Madden replied there is no plan to build on the new lot, therefore he had not investigated this question in any detail, but that the new lot conformed to the zoning in each zoning district. This seemed to satisfy the board; the board approved the ANR unanimously.

Board member Eileen Marum has been named to the SRPEDD executive committee that oversees the governance of the organization. In response to another board member’s congratulatory remark, Marum reflected on the appointment, stating, “Yes, it’s leadership. I’m thrilled.”

            The next meeting of the Marion Planning Board is scheduled for Monday, July 23 at 7:00 pm in the Marion Police Station conference room.

Marion Planning Board

By Sarah French Storer