Sperry Proposes Storage Building

            The Marion Planning Board heard from Matt Sperry of Rochester-based sail supplier Sperry Fabric Architecture regarding the company’s plans for a parcel it bought in Marion.

            The continued Presubmission Conference held on Monday night at the Police Station for site-plan review for construction of a 30×90-foot metal storage building at 19 Marconi Lane (Map 24, Lot 13V) on property zoned as Limited Industrial focused the board primarily on roof runoff.

            “Stormwater management will be one of the most important things we want to look at,” said Planning Board Chairman Tucker Burr.

            Town Planner Doug Guey-Lee, attending remotely, asked about measures to deal with the discharge of water. Sperry anticipates a design that will include stone along the perimeter and runoff heading into a dry well.

            Sperry described the lot as “kind of … funny” and U-shaped but noted the lot is essentially clear, requiring removal of no more than a couple of small trees. It has been surveyed, he said, and is “tight but conforms to the setbacks.”

            The wetlands have yet to be delineated. The next step, Sperry said, will be to work on drainage and get the engineer’s plan.

            “We won’t be adding any workshop,” he said. “We’ll probably heat it, maybe a heated slab if we can pull that off.”

            The building will likely have a concrete foundation.

            Board members’ questions ranged from content in storage to activities on site.

            Sperry said the stored materials will be dried and prepared off site and be storage-ready upon delivery to the new building. “It’s our own stuff, mostly fabric and wood, in crates,” he said.

            Regarding flammability, board member William Dale Jones said the materials used in Sperry’s business are not a threat for combustion, and member Ryan Burke cited state regulations doing most of the work to ensure safety of the stored materials.

            “It all has to be approved by the state,” said Jones, insisting the materials stored are “not going to be flammable.” Jones went through his own permitting process and said “everything had to comply … I wouldn’t worry about the material. Everything now is made to conform, it’s tested.”

            Sperry said that he believes the building’s size does not trigger a requirement for a sprinkler system. Board member Jon Henry said the design will require approval of the fire chief anyway.

            Guey-Lee said the project “fits the criteria for major site-plan review, to be clear.” That noted, he also pointed out that the board can waive requirements from the roster of considerations, including a traffic study. Sperry said parking spots can be added on site.

            Board member Eileen Marum asked about the energy source for heat, specifically solar, heat pumps and roof and height and orientation. Marum noted that the town’s Energy Management Committee is trying to encourage people to use solar or heat pumps for any new construction.

            “Yeah, we would consider it. I’m a fan of solar,” said Sperry. “We’re happy to look into that. … Our building in Rochester has solar.”

            Guey-Lee encouraged the members to articulate any concerns and cover the questions.

            “If we haven’t asked for it tonight, we probably don’t want it or definitely won’t ask for it. That’s up to the board to decide,” he said. “A lot of it may not be applicable. It’s helpful for everyone involved to (establish) what we do want to see and take it from there.”

            One thing Burr thought appropriate – and the board voted accordingly – was to require Sperry to open a $500, 53G account for peer-review purposes should Marion need to bring in an expert.

            The subject of visual screening was briefly addressed, and Marum noted abutters include Sippican Health Care Center, Marion Village Estates and a couple of other private residences.

            Board member Alanna Nelson asked Sperry to inform the abutters and establish a layout of the access, a list of abutters and note on the site plan the location of the closest fire hydrant (they believe it to be on Atlantis Drive.) Sperry said he can access the lot from Atlantis Drive or through a set of stone pillars.

            The board intends to waive the environmental assessment and traffic study that goes along with major site-plan review.

            Citing the possibility of PCB’s (chemical compounds), Henry asked Sperry if he knew of any former building or use of the site, which he did not.

            The board unanimously voted to require major site-plan review and deposit of $500 in a 53G account.

            A 50-year-old permanent pier ramp and float at 35 Dexter Road will be replaced after the Planning Board voted to grant Sandra Peterson a Special Permit.

            Attending the meeting remotely, project representative Brian Wallace explained that the proposed 72×4-foot, pile-supported pier will be permanent with attached ramps and a float that will be removed seasonally.

            The Marion Conservation Commission issued an Order of Conditions for the project in October, and the Harbormaster approved the plan.

            Asserting that the new construction will pose no adverse impact on recreational use of waters and is consistent in its design with those attached to several abutting properties, Wallace explained that “float stops” will prevent the float from resting on the bottom of the river.

            “We’re completely avoiding any marsh,” said Wallace, explaining the initial proposal for a pier measuring 90.5 feet in length. He said going farther out minimizes the amount of dirt kicked up from the surface but that the location of boulders also affected the design. “We did an additional survey (to) make sure we weren’t causing any issues. The float stops are a very important part of this project.”

            Wallace added that the Harbormaster requested a donation to shellfish propagation, “So the applicant will certainly be doing this.”

            Pilings that will go 8 feet deep are likely to be made of non-pressure-treated wood, though Wallace said some aspects of the design have been “left a little open ended.” He did not rule out the use of fiberglass but said they would most likely be made of timber. “No Styrofoam material,” he said.

            Any deck material cut on site will be done on the upland portion of the site. The float will be constructed off site and hauled to the site.

            Marum asked about the dock’s geographical orientation, noting that an east-west layout causes “all-day shading” and “poor water quality for vegetation.” Wallace said there has historically been no natural grass in the immediate area, nor is there eel grass.

            Wallace described the layout as more “northeast-southwest … we kept it pretty consistent with the shape of the shoreline,” he said, adding that the pier deck is proposed at 6.5 feet in height with a high-water mark of 5 feet. Burke confirmed per the state’s Chapter 91 requirement that there will be a ¾-inch gap between panels to let light pass through.

            Nelson questioned the size of the float (12×20 feet) as compared to other neighboring floats. Wallace said 18 feet is a standard length.

            Nelson also asked for a change in Guey-Lee’s prepared decision to use the October 24 plan rather than that dated September 20 due to the revisions.

            Marum was less than pleased that she had not seen the decision in print until arriving for the public hearing and suggested the board take more time to look it over. Guey-Lee apologized for not giving more time and noted the board could vote to continue the case. “I think we’re still in our time frame to approve something like this,” he said, elaborating on the key components.

            Marum held to her contention that a decision was premature “because of these details that we really shouldn’t make this decision this evening. We may find other things that should be changed.”

            Burke said he was okay approving the project given the rigorous Chapter 91 requirements.

            Marum abstained from an otherwise unanimous vote of approval. Andrew Daniel was not present on Monday.

            At the request of developer Matt Zuker, the continued public hearing for a Special Permit and major site-plan review for 78 Wareham Road, Zuker’s “The Cottages” residential project off Route 6, has been continued to December 4 at 7:05 pm.

            In other business, the board voted to pay Field Engineering $4,500 for consulting work relating to 78 Wareham Road.

            The board also discussed a request by the Zoning Board of Appeals for comment on the case of Eric Winer and Nancy Borstleman at 18 West Avenue (Planting Island.) Guey-Lee said the project is headed to the Conservation Commission. The Planning Board offered no comment.

            The next meeting of the Marion Planning Board is scheduled for Monday, November 20, at 7:00 pm at the Police Station.

Marion Planning Board

By Mick Colageo

Leave A Comment...

*