Rochester’s Zoning Board of Appeals on November 14 approved the installation of an at-home machinist business at 84 High St.

            Devan Spellman, who owns a machinist shop in Acushnet, has a purchase and sales agreement with the High Street property’s current owner. He requested a special permit to install a similar shop in a 1600-square-foot garage at the Rochester address. 

            Spellman said his operation in Rochester would include him, two other part-time employees, and his wife who is a nurse by trade and his accountant. He has no plans to expand his business, he said. His machinist work will be done mostly off-site, but he needs the Rochester shop for some of that work. He added that he will have few visitors, and he does not store any materials outside. 

            To the point that the property also includes cranberry bogs, Spellman said, “I’m looking to do more farming.”

            He explained that what he does is make machine parts out of metal.  He started making automobile parts for classic cars.  Now he’s branched off to other clients such as the machinery for a box making company.

            Asked about the noise his business generates, Spellman noted he has no complaints from neighbors about his Acushnet shop.  He keeps his shop doors closed and plans to insulate the building.

            Board member Richard Cutler asked what his plan is for the entire 6.55-acre property.  “We hope to do more than cranberries,” Spellman said.  “But we plan to keep it as a farming use.”

            An abutter at 66 High Street asked how far the business will be able to expand. Board Chair David Arancio answered that the need for a road or other expansion would require Spellman to return to the board.

            The board granted the special permit for the 84 High St. machinist shop with the condition that any expansion would require a new permit.  Also, there shall be no more than three full-time employees.  Hours will be restricted to Monday through Saturday 7:00 am to 8:00 pm.  All parking shall be on-site.  No materials shall be stored outdoors.  Shop doors will remain closed. The property’s existing special permit for an Airbnb shall be null and void when the machine shop opens.

            Next, the board reviewed a request for a variance from the town’s front setback requirement for the construction of a 16×24-foot storage shed in the front yard at 324 High St.  This hearing was continued to the board’s next meeting on December 12 after board members spotted an area on property owner Stephen Cobb’s plans that would allow him to place the shed to the side rear of his property rather than in front of his home, a location town bylaw does not permit.

            Cobb said placing the shed there does not provide easy access for his grandchildren’s play area and is too close to his property line abutting wetlands.  He said he has eight grandchildren, and four of them visit every day. 

            Arancio, however, echoed his fellow board members.  “I like that alternative site better,” he said. “It goes better there.” Arancio instructed Cobb to check with the Conservation Commission agent as to whether placing the shed at the board’s preferred location would be a wetlands bylaw violation.

            He also asked Cobb to return with a design plan stamped by a Professional Engineer to certify the shed’s proposed location. To the latter point, Cobb, an engineer with D.W. White, said he did not want the expense of getting the plans stamped until he was sure the board would approve it but will do so now.

            The Zoning Board of Appeals’ next meeting will be Thursday, December 12 at 7:15 pm at Town Hall, 1 Constitution Way.

Rochester Zoning Board

By Michael J. DeCicco

Rochester’s Conservation Commission Tuesday, November 19 began its meeting by approving a one-year extension of the Order of Conditions for a project at 109 Neck Road to design and install additional screening for a canal canopy and ground-mounted solar array filed by Renewable Energy Development Partner LLC.

            The vote came after Renewable Energy representative Sarah Stearns told the commission the project is essentially complete but out of an abundance of caution the extension will allow time to react to the Planning Board’s possible requests for more screening.

            Next, the commission granted a Negative Determination to a request for a Determination of Wetlands Bylaw Applicability for the Marion Department of Public Works’ Mary’s Pond Road project to furnish and install a backup generator, propane tanks, chain link fence, buried gas piping, buried conduit, concrete pad, and associated work adjacent to a Combined Chemical Feed station. Wetlands regulations do not apply to this project. This was followed by approval of a Notice of Intent for a plan that is part of the same project by the Marion Department to install a new propane-fueled emergency generator and propane tanks on Wolf Island Road.

            The board then approved a Certificate of Compliance for the satisfactory completion of the construction of a single-family home at 512 High Street.

            Next, the board saved its biggest project hearing for last. As abutters continued to raise concerns about how the project will affect flooding, natural resources, and wildlife in their neighborhood, the commission re-opened its hearing of five separate Notices of Intent to build single family dwellings with attached garage, driveway, and associated clearing, grading and utilities installation on two-acre lots at 0 High Street.

            Only one proposed lot, Lot 4, received the board’s approval after project engineer Brian Wallace said he has taken steps to address concerns by reducing the length of the driveway. One abutter asked what will stop a future homeowner from turning the proposed gravel driveway to less impervious pavement. Commission Chair Chris Gerrior said the board attempts to educate builders and homeowners alike on wetland laws. To the concern of potential basement flooding, Wallace noted most new homeowners and abutters will have sump pumps to counteract the problem.

            The hearings on three of the High Street lots were continued to December 3, as they are within the jurisdiction of state Natural Heritage Foundation protections and Wallace has yet to hear the agency’s response to how those lots should be handled.

            Discussion of Proposed Lot 10 was also continued to December 3 after abutter Jeremy Saccone, who said his property near County Road frequently floods because of the bog and will flood even more when a house lot is built near him, introduced the input of his own engineer, Joshua Bows, who attended the meeting via Zoom. Bows said he disagreed with Wallace’s hydrological calculations and re-calculations regarding how this lot might affect flooding his client’s property. Wallace said he has revised the plan after a site visit with Conservation Commission members. He said he has placed the driveway further from the lot’s low point and added a PVC drainage pipe. Bows said he would like to review those new calculations “to have the opportunity to protect my client.” The commission agreed to the continuance to allow both Bow and Wallace to review the Lot 10 plan.

            The next Conservation Commission meeting will be December 3 at 7:00 pm, at Town Hall, 1 Constitution Way.

Rochester Conservation Commission

By Michael J. DeCicco

On November 18, the Mattapoisett Planning Board once again took up the matter of Accessory Dwelling Units as defined by a new state regulation effective in February 2025. The board agreed that rather than simply allowing the state regulations to become Mattapoisett regulations, new bylaw(s) with explicit language was necessary.

            For about an hour, the members discussed the pros and cons of what will become more expansive use of land for residential units. They agreed that one of the major stumbling blocks will be various set-backs. Other clarifications needed will be lot coverage, maximum size of ADU, whether or not multiple units can be built on a single parcel, and clarification of zoning districts.

            Local businessman David McIntire lent his voice in this matter with a written statement used to direct the hearing’s topics of discussion. He stated, “…language needs to be clearly written,” and reminded the board that, “…ADUs were part of the Master Plan.”

            Member John Mathieu offered that set-backs should return to their original measurements and member William Wennerberg said he didn’t want the board to become the “taste police.”

            The board will continue discussions and asked the public to offer their suggestion as the board begins the task of crafting language for bylaw(s) changes. Contact Town Planner Victoria Alfaro in the Planning Office with your comments.

            In other business, three filings for Approval Not Required were granted to Jeffrey Dunn, 83 Angelica Avenue, Maureen McQuillan, 5-5R Meadowbrook Lane, and, Colin Labrie, 7 Holly Woods Road.

            The next meeting of the Mattapoisett Planning Board is planned for December 2.

Mattapoisett Planning Board

By Marilou Newell