Had Rochester Zoning Board of Appeals members not recalled some pertinent details they witnessed during a recent site visit at 3 Bernards Way, Duarte Raposa might not have walked away with his two variances for a shed on September 13. But luckily for Raposa, no continuation of his public hearing was needed, despite his plans omitting some important information – contour.

Raposa sought two variances, one to place a shed in the front yard of his property and another to place it within 40 feet of the side property line.

In order for the board to issue a variance, the applicant must satisfy the three requirements – evidence of hardship, unique land topography or features, and zero detriment to the neighborhood, and, for the board, he easily demonstrated two of those requirements – the hardship being the location of an underground gas line, and no detriment to the neighborhood. That third one, however, Raposa said was because one section of the property features a steep drop-off; however, his plans did not reflect this feature.

“The engineer didn’t do you any favors by not showing any contour lines,” said ZBA Chairman Richard Cutler.

Still, other members who attended the on-site visit recalled that steep drop-off and said they could vouch for Raposa.

“I’m familiar with that area … and the challenges in that area,” said ZBA member David Arancio.

The board pointed out, for Raposa and for the good of all Rochester residents, that a feature such as contour should be marked on a construction plan when coming before a town board for a permit or variance.

“If you go for a variance, you really need to have some topography,” stated ZBA member Kirby Gilmore.

“They should’ve shown the gas line going through there, too,” said Cutler.

Raposa’s was the only item on the agenda for that night.

The next meeting of the Rochester Zoning Board of Appeals is scheduled for September 27 at 7:15 pm at the Rochester Town Hall.

Rochester Zoning Board of Appeals

By Jean Perry

One last-minute zoning bylaw article made it onto the Fall Special Town Meeting warrant in the nick of time, just as the Marion Board of Selectmen was about to close the warrant on September 18.

Resident Sherman Briggs, in his efforts to construct a new housing development on his Spring Street property, hit a snag the prior evening during the Planning Board meeting when he was told he would need to seek setback relief from the Zoning Board of Appeals if he wanted to proceed with his plan for 27 units placed within 10-15 feet of the property setbacks. Instead, Briggs decided to submit a bylaw amendment article to reduce the side and rear setbacks for District Residence E from 20 to 10 feet.

As the selectmen pondered the article, Town Administrator Paul Dawson was unsure the last minute add could be done.

“I don’t know: I’ve never seen that,” Dawson said.

Selectman Jon Waterman commented that the only way the article could make it onto the warrant is if the board allows it. This article, in Waterman’s own words, would avoid a similar situation experienced by another business owner in Marion, Dan Crete, whose road on which he travelled with the Planning Board was long and winding.

“I think we owe it to Mr. Briggs to find an expeditious way of moving this ahead,” said Waterman; otherwise, it couldn’t be addressed until the Annual Town Meeting next spring.

Selectmen Chairman Norm Hills said he might have an alternative solution to Briggs’ problem; however, he hadn’t had much time to consider it or talk it through.

“You certainly can add it to the warrant,” Dawson said. He just isn’t confident in the logistics. Of course the Planning Board would have to advertise for two weeks before holding a public hearing, Dawson said, “And, frankly, I don’t know if there’s enough time to complete [it].”

But it could be possible, Dawson stated.

“It’ll be tight, but I think it can be done,” said Hills.

And, if for some reason the Planning Board is unable to meet the deadline, Dawson added, “It would just have to be passed over at Town Meeting.”

Selectman Randy Parker agreed to add Briggs’ article to the warrant, saying to Hills that, should he come up with a viable alternative, the article could simply be passed over.

The October 22 Fall Special Town Meeting warrant features 12 other original articles as follows: Article 1 is to appropriate $500,000 for a “borrowing authorization” for water pollution facility projects – repair, replace, upgrade failed septic systems (The town would lend the money to qualifying residents, which would be paid back to the Town).

Article 2 is for $65,000 for the Water Department to buy a new 4-by-4 pickup truck with plow (This article was passed over at the Annual Town Meeting due to a misprint in the sum).

Article 3 appropriates $55,000 to purchase the electric vehicles currently leased by the Town.

Article 4 allows the Department of Public Works to buy a new $160,000 10-wheel dump truck with plow and sander.

Article 5 is for $50,000 for the DPW to buy a used six-wheel dump truck with plow and sander.

Article 6 would adopt the Marion “Stretch Energy Code” regulating the design and construction of buildings for energy efficiency. This bylaw adoption is a requirement for the Town’s “Green Community” status.

Article 7 would insert new Adult Use Marijuana Establishment regulations into the general bylaw.

Article 8 inserts Adult Use Marijuana Establishments into the zoning bylaw table of uses.

Article 9 would amend the Code of the Town of Marion to insert a section for the Adult Use of Marijuana.

Article 10 amends the dog kennel bylaw by changing the definition of “hobby” kennel to five to 10 dogs that are housed, groomed, bred, boarded, trained or sold, and also change the definition of a “household” kennel to a collection of up to four dogs that are maintained as household pets, not for breeding purposes, as well as several other amendments.

Article 11 would add “commercial kennel” and “hobby kennel” to the Code of the Town of Marion table of uses.

Article 12 adds “commercial and hobby kennel” to the uses authorized by a special permit in the Code of the Town of Marion.

In other matters, the board denied Catherine Brodeur’s request for an aquaculture license for a site at Mitton’s Flats.

Brodeur requested a half an acre to cultivate oysters just north of the recently approved site for Shea Doonan’s Mitton’s Flats aquaculture farm, a location that Harbormaster Isaac Perry said is a suitable site for an aquaculture farm. Having said that, though, Perry could not recommend granting the license because, in his opinion, the project would be a detriment to those who fish for shellfish as a recreation in Marion – a major concern, Perry said.

“Since we have just permitted [Doonan’s site] 70 feet south, if [Brodeur’s project] moves forward, it would eliminate the majority of the area that is available for recreational shellfishing,” said Perry. ”We just feel that … if this one were to move forward it would be obviously in the favor of the applicant, but a little bit to the detriment of the people who purchase shellfishing licenses.”

Brodeur expressed frustration over Perry’s comments, asking him why he would tell her that the site was ideal for an aquaculture farm, and then that night recommend that the selectmen not approve it. Adding to her frustration is the fact that this half-acre site is the last viable spot for an aquaculture farm left in Marion waters.

The board asked Perry what he would do if the decision were his, and he replied, “If it were up to me – it’s just too much in the favor of the applicant. It would effectively squeeze out what little recreational shellfishing we have in the area.”

Brodeur argued that there was very little shellfish in that area available for recreational shellfishing, saying that the last time she went out there to dig for shellfish she came up with “just a large handful of quahogs.”

The selectmen considered allowing a public hearing nonetheless just to hear from neighbors and residents, but ultimately decided against it.

“I don’t want to drag someone through a public hearing if the harbormaster isn’t in favor of it,” said Parker.

Also during the meeting, the board approved David Davignon’s request for one of two subdivided lots off Beach Street to connect to municipal sewer.

The board also approved acting Department of Public Works Superintendent Jon Henry and Fire Chief Brian Jackvony’s proposal to add one additional fire hydrant to the aforementioned Beach Street subdivision’s plan.

The next meeting of the Marion Board of Selectmen is scheduled for October 2 at 7:00 pm at the Marion Town House.

Marion Board of Selectmen

By Jean Perry

On September 4, Marion Conservation Commission Chairman Jeff Doubrava joined the Mattapoisett Conservation Agent Elizabeth Leidhold at the site of the former Aucoot Cove Marina, now known as Indian Cove.

Ruth Nicolaci, a resident of the waterfront neighborhood, had contacted Marion’s ConCom with concerns over the widening of a footpath leading to the water’s edge. The officials, upon their site visit, also found a boardwalk and floating platform that had been constructed over and in marshlands without permits. Doubrava contacted Leidhold after he determined that the majority of the area in question was, in fact, located in Mattapoisett.

During the September 10 meeting of the Mattapoisett Conversation Commission, Leidhold presented photographic evidence of the offending structure that included a wooden walkway leading to a floating dock and a wide footpath.

Mattapoisett Conservation Commission Chairman Mike King said, “This is not in compliance and is a hazard.” He said that a storm could easily dislodge the wooden structures, sending them sailing through the air or floating further into the sensitive marshlands.

King asked Leidhold to send a letter to the Indian Cove Association asking them to appear before the Mattapoisett ConCom to discuss removal of the unpermitted structure and damage to the marshlands from the expansion of the footpath and to file a Notice of Intent.

In other business, Alan Ewing of Ewing Associates, along with attorney Peter Paul, representing John and Roger Gibbons, returned to the commission with a new plan for record for the paving of Foster Street, a section of which the applicants own.

Ewing presented plans for the replacement of an inadequate stormwater drainage system under the roadway and the placement of rubberized speed bumps.

King said he had visited the site concluding, “I saw nothing that would give me concern in doing my job,” as he continued to support the filing.

During previous meetings, King stated that blacktopping the historically gravel roadway would aid in protecting wetlands in the area versus harming them as several homeowners had suggested.

Ray Silveira, 4 Oakland Street, an abutter to Foster Street, said that the Gibbonses had, over many years, conducted unpermitted widening of the roadway, filling in some areas, and using materials on the roadway that were inferior. “How are they getting away with filling in wetlands? Everything is swept under the rug.”

Leidhold asked if anyone had ever contacted the conservation office. Silveira said not until this summer.

“It’s in everyone’s best interest for improvement to the drainage system,” said King, going on to say that changes north of Foster Street – changes along Route 6, including the development of the Bay Club and commercial businesses, had all impacted stormwater flow along Foster Street.

The commission conditioned the Notice of Intent filing that included Leidhold performing an on-site review of the drainage system before and after new pipes are installed.

After the hearing closed, abutter Laura McLean lamented of the hearing: “We waited too long.”

Also during the meeting, Elizabeth Inglis’ Request for Determination of Applicability filing for the construction of a new entranceway for property located at 104 Aucoot Road received a Negative 3 determination allowing the project to move forward with notice to the conservation office before commencing.

A Notice of Intent filing by Chase Canopy, 117 Fairhaven Road, for the construction of a new 8,000 square-foot storage building was continued until September 24. While the commissioners did not have any questions or concerns when informally polled regarding their acceptance of the project, a pending review by the Massachusetts Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program (NHESP) required the application to be continued.

Robert Field of Field Engineering representing the applicant asked if the commission would send written confirmation to the Zoning Board of Appeals that, barring any negative review by the NHESP, the commission would condition the project, thus allowing it to continue forward in the permitting process. The site includes a residential structure that Field said would have to be subdivided from the commercial-use parcels. The commission agreed to that request.

Leidhold had requested that the applicant be required to hire a peer review consultant, given the wetlands surrounding the site. However, King told the commission, “Bob is hired by the town as a consultant. It’s a little disingenuous [to ask for a peer review consultant] since the town hires him.” The rest of the commission agreed with King.

The commission agreed to cancel the October 8 meeting of the Conservation Commission due to the Columbus Day Holiday. The next meeting of the Mattapoisett Conservation Commission will be held on September 24 at 6:30 pm in the town hall conference room.

Mattapoisett Conservation Commission

By Marilou Newell