Facilities Manager Andrew Daniel was at the Rochester Board of Selectmen meeting on February 5 to describe the renovation plans for the new ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) accessible restroom at the Town Hall that will be fully funded by a state grant. Although he received approval to move ahead with the building permit for the project, Daniel’s plan received some opposition from Selectman Naida Parker.

The drawing that Daniel had on display showed an open area of the meeting room near the inside entryway being used as the location of the new handicap accessible bathroom because the existing women’s and men’s rooms are too small to comply with the space requirements for wheelchair access.

Parker right away asked Daniel where the file cabinets and audio-visual equipment for ORCTV would be relocated, to which Daniel replied he did not as of yet have a plan for the file cabinets, but a closet would be built for the equipment.

Parker wondered why Daniel couldn’t just use one of the existing bathrooms and expand it.

“Because of the space requirements I have to have for an access bathroom,” said Daniel, he would have to build a new bathroom in the only space available. The design of the restroom requires minimal distances from toilets and sinks, which equals to about a 6.5-foot by 7-foot area – the average size public ADA accessible bathroom, he said. Next to it the audio-visual equipment would be housed in its own 5-foot by 4-foot ‘closet’ space, in which the ORCTV equipment operator would sit during meeting recordings.

Also, Daniel added, the walls would be sound proofed for “bathroom” sounds such as toilet flushes and sinks running through the construction of double walls.

The new bathroom would be a unisex handicap accessible restroom that will replace the existing women’s room located in another location in the Town Hall. The existing women’s room would be transformed into a storage space, Daniel suggested.

“There’s no way to take the two existing bathrooms and combine them into two unisex?” Parker asked him.

Daniel said the Town Hall, by law, must have two bathrooms.

“You know, that makes no sense in a building that’s predominantly female,” Parker said. ”This is the building where the women occasionally have to wait for the bathroom.”

Daniel replied, “This one will be much nicer than the one you’re using now. There’s still going to be two bathrooms.”

Selectman Greenwood Hartley suggested that Parker and the other women could use the men’s room if there was a wait, which led to a ‘no I can’t; yes you can’ exchange.

Hartley asked Daniel what would constitute a ‘unisex ‘ bathroom, and Daniel said, “Just the sign and policy.”

“We’ll put a sign up that says ‘unisex’ then,” said Hartley.

Town Administrator Suzanne Szyndlar said she was going to suggest making both restrooms unisex, which Hartley liked.

“[The ADA compliant restroom] was the biggest thing on our list,” said Hartley. “It really takes away a lot of liability that we have.”

“We’re not one hundred percent, but it’s a big chunk,” said Daniel.

“It’s a step in the right direction,” commented Chairman Brad Morse.

When it came time to grant Daniel permission to seek the building permit, both Morse and Hartley voted in favor.

“I’ll abstain,” said Parker. “I don’t like doing it. I have concerns about the audio-visual equipment.… It’s still claustrophobic for people and that equipment has to be ventilated. I strongly urge that you work with ORCTV so that we don’t create a problem with that.”

In other matters, the board signed the inter-municipal water agreement with the Town of Middleboro for the water line extension on North Avenue for water service to the Annie Maxim House that was discussed during the January 22 meeting.

The board also approved four fundraiser events for the Rochester Country Fair at the fairgrounds for May 12, June 9, October 20, and November 3.

The next meeting of the Rochester Board of Selectmen is scheduled for February 12 at 7:00 pm at the Rochester Town Hall.

Rochester Board of Selectmen

By Jean Perry

On a cold, clear February 6 night, the members of the Rochester Conservation Commission came out to conduct the important business of upholding state and local wetlands protection regulations.

Coming before the commissioners was Evan Watson of Prime Engineering, flanked by other members of his engineering team and representatives from Clean Energy Collective LLC, with a request for an amended order of conditions for a solar array planned for 248 and 268 Mattapoisett Road.

Watson said that after further on-site review it was found that the plan previously submitted and approved by the Planning Board and conditioned by the Conservation Commission needed to be revised.

Watson said that an additional site survey exposed current conditions that required this newest application. Further, Watson explained that peer review consultant Ken Motta of Field Engineering had also requested that the plans be modified to accommodate site conditions and include new drainage calculations.

Of particular note was a shallow 2-foot berm noted by both Motta and Conservation Agent Laurell Farinon as being insufficient and that over time would not perform well.

Watson presented a new set of engineering plans that updated the berm height and provided the new topography report, erosion controls, and drainage calculations.

While the changes required a great degree of new technical documentation, Watson said that the scope of the project had not changed. Location of solar panels, limit of work, drainage patterns, and drainage calculations would all remain essentially the same.

Watson then said that he hoped to receive any additional input from the commission deemed necessary to the new plans so that final drawing could be submitted to the Planning Board for an upcoming review of the project.

Farinon said that she was concerned about a vernal pool on the property that might be affected by the clearing of trees that had taken place, and she wondered aloud about a need to address wildlife habitats and migrations.

Watson’s team reported that vernal pools are home to wood frogs and spotted salamanders, but that those species needed a dense shaded forest floor with thick leaf matter in order to thrive. It was noted that, with the absence of an overhead tree canopy and open landscape, the animals would not migrate to the pool any longer. It was further stated that the project had been permitted with this knowledge.

Laurene Gerrior asked about the possibility of including seeds in the landscape plans that were pollinator varieties. Watson agreed to include seeds of that type and that planting would take place around the bordering edge of the solar field and service roadway.

The public hearing was continued until March 6.

Also coming before the commission was a request for a Certificate of Compliance from Philip and Suzanne Lecuyer, 2 Thistle Lane. Farinon said that the homeowners had done a good job maintaining landscape boundaries. The request was approved.

A Chapter 61A Notice of Sale and Right of First Refusal for property on Alley Road, part of the estate of Mary Gayoski, was discussed. Farinon said that the two lots in question totaled approximately six acres with the recorded purchase price for one lot set at $160,000. The commissioners agreed with Farinon that a letter should be forwarded to the Board of Selectmen suggesting the town decline the offer.

The next meeting of the Rochester Conservation Commission is scheduled for February 20 at 7:00 pm in the town hall meeting room.

Rochester Conservation Commission

By Marilou Newell

Whether you are in favor of or against a moratorium until December 31, 2018 on the sale of recreational and medical marijuana in Mattapoisett, you need to attend the Special Town Meeting planned for February 12 at 6:30 pm in Old Rochester Regional High School Auditorium.

That was the message delivered by Town Administrator Michael Gagne during the February 6 public hearing held by the Mattapoisett Planning Board.

Among others in the state, Mattapoisett and Marion have planned special town meetings during which voters will be asked to support a moratorium on adult-use marijuana retail establishments until local planning boards can establish zoning bylaws that would limit placement of such establishments. The moratorium acts to slow down the April 1 state launch date that would allow retail establishments to legally sell marijuana after securing licenses and permits until local municipalities could form their own regulations.

In the absence of local zoning bylaws specifically addressing marijuana establishments, the state’s minimum regulations and the town’s own existing zoning bylaws would apply.

Gagne said, “Zoning articles require a two-thirds vote to pass, so people have to turn out for town meeting.”

“The Board of Selectmen is in favor of a moratorium.… It would give the Planning Board time to review zoning options,” said Gagne.

Gagne continued, “We are not prepared with zoning as it currently exists.” He said it is critical that the moratorium be put in place to give the town time to drill down. He said that while federal laws still prohibit such sales, there was no assurance that those regulations would trump individual state laws that allow marijuana sales.

Massachusetts voters in 2012 approved the legalization of medical marijuana and approved the legalization of recreational marijuana use in 2016. Mattapoisett residents rejected in Question 4 the legalization of marijuana by a relatively narrow margin.

“Whether you’re for or against it, we need time to write zoning articles,” Gagne said.

Speaking in favor of a moratorium, Joyce Almedia said, “We need to slow down and dig deep into our moral conscientiousness.” While she said she had no problem with medical marijuana use, she said she was concerned with the wellbeing of the children in the community.

Also speaking in support of the moratorium was Mattapoisett Zoning Board of Appeals member Colby Rottler. Rottler said, “A moratorium is very important,” adding that he believes, because it would be a cash-only business, it could increase criminal activity. “A zoning requirement should be reviewed carefully.… We need time to think about this.”

Gagne said that any new zoning bylaws regulating marijuana establishments in Mattapoisett that might be written during a moratorium could then be presented during the Fall Town Meeting. He said new zoning bylaws could contain anything from a total prohibition to regulations on where such establishments might be located and hours of operation.

Towns like Mattapoisett that voted ‘no’ on recreational marijuana could ban adult-use marijuana establishments through zoning bylaws, but towns like Marion that voted ‘yes’ would have to seek the ban first through a town meeting vote and then a subsequent town-wide ballot vote.

The Planning Board moved to support the two moratorium articles, clearing the way for presentation of the warrant at the Special Town Meeting.

The Mattapoisett Council on Aging can arrange pick up and drop off service for any voters needing a ride to the Special Town Meeting. Call the selectmen’s office at 508-758-4100 ext. 4 to sign up.

In other business on this night, Paul Valiquette, 49 Long Plain Road, sought and received approval for a Form A – approval not required application for the subdivision of his 15-acre parcel into two lots. Also coming before the Planning Board, David McIntire’s request for acceptance of a performance bond and release of seven lots in the Shagbark neighborhood of the Bay Club development was also approved.

The next meeting of the Mattapoisett Planning Board is scheduled for March 5 at 7:00 pm in the town hall conference room.

Mattapoisett Planning Board

By Marilou Newell