On June 17, the Mattapoisett Planning Board once again opened the hearing on Scott Snow’s application for a Form C Definitive Subdivision Plan for five lots to be created at 6 and 8-8R Prospect Road.
At the previous Planning Board meeting held on June 3, the board was not prepared to make decisions on the application, citing that plans had not been received in a timely fashion. There was also confusion on the part of the applicant’s engineer, Richard Rheaume of Prime Engineering, and the members of the Planning Board regarding what plans were actually in hand. Snow was also told that without the approval of the Conservation Commission, the Planning Board couldn’t act.
Coming forward on June 17 – now with the Conservation Commission decision complete – with what he believed was all necessary documentation and approvals was Rheaume. But before he could even speak, Chairman Tom Tucker, exasperated, said the board couldn’t hear the case because, once again, plans had not been submitted in time for the board members to adequately review prior to the meeting.
“You had thirteen days,” Tucker began. “… Your office has continually done this. Last time you didn’t have the plans!” He said he was sick and tired of having abutters appear only to find that the applicant’s representative was not prepared. “I told you back in January you could withdraw without prejudice and come back when you were ready,” Tucker reiterated.
Tucker said that the latest round of paperwork had not been received in the Planning Board office until Friday, June 14, at 3:23 pm, a time when not only was the office was closed, but on the last day of the business week.
Planning Board member Janice Robbins concurred, saying, “When everything is settled and in final form then we can review. … I’d rather wait until everything is settled.”
Rheaume said, “Plans have not changed. I feel like I’m being chastised. Last time we got a few requests regarding the covenant but those were minor. … The plans have been submitted.”
Planning Board member Nathan Kettchel asked, “What about the drainage calculations?” He said that a final set of documents had not been received; instead, piecemeal documents had been provided, making it difficult to keep track.
“I think the board is getting lost in this project,” said Snow.
On another matter related to the project Robbins said, “We’re not set with the trust yet, and easement searches are not in or in the right form.”
There then ensued a discussion regarding surety. The board members had all believed that the five lots would be held until the roadway was completed. Rheaume said Lot 2 had never been part of that plan.
Robbins said, “I don’t see any justification in not including Lot 2 in the covenant, and I don’t like being held to a schedule for releasing lots.”
It was determined that the language for the covenant could wait, especially given that the hearing would once again have to be continued and the entire application extended. The extension was granted until July 15 and the case was continued until July 1.
When Snow returns, his team is to have completed and, in a timely manner, provided a trust, easements, covenant, operation and maintenance plans, and drainage calculations.
Before Rheaume departed the conference room, Tucker apologized for raising his voice.
In other business, Robbins will draft new language for a document that is part of an agreement between the developers of Brandt Point Village and the Town for payment conditions.
The board also discussed plans for resuming a review of rules and regulations governing subdivision of land.
The next meeting of the Mattapoisett Planning Board is scheduled for July 1 at 7:00 pm in the Town Hall conference room.
Mattapoisett Planning Board
By Marilou Newell