HomeMy Public PortalAboutComprehensive Water Planning -- 2009-09-14 Minutes,.
O'i Q C 9~ij6~,r
A~f ~rt~ 7.
x m~
3 ~ ~~ a
/'//~/////iii F g R~ a RPaO~'..~~~\\\\\\\\\\\
Town Of Brewster
2198 Main Street
Brewster, Massachusetts 02631-1898
(508) 896-3701 ext. 133
FAX (508) 896-8089
Date approved with modifications: October 13, 2009; Vote: All Aye
TOWN OF BREWSTER MINUTES OF
COMPREHENSIVE WATER PLANNING COMMITTEE
REGULAR MEETING
Monday September 14, 2009 at 4:30 P.M.
Brewster Town Office Building
Comprehensive Water
Planning Committee
Pat Hughes convened the Comprehensive Water Planning Committee meeting at 4:35 pm in the
Brewster Town Office Building with members Joanne Hughes, Dave Michniewicz, Jane Johnson
and Elizabeth Taylor. John Lipman arrived at 4:45 and Amy Usowski arrived at 4:50 pm.
Also Present: Sue Leven, Jim Gallagher, Ed Lewis and Chris Miller.
1. Review minutes: July 13, 2009; July 27, 2009 and August 10, 2009
July 13, 2009 Minutes:
J. Hughes: Pointed out that the committee currently consists of 5 citizens and 3 Board/Dept.
members. The Board members are Joanne Hughes, Elizabeth Taylor and Amy Usowski. The
committee is actively looking for one more citizen.
J. Hughes motioned to approved with modifications. Seconded by Taylor. Vote: 7-0-1
(D. Michniewicz was not present at the meeting).
July 27, 2009 Minutes:
J. Hughes motioned to approve as written. Seconded by Taylor. Vote: 8-0-0
August 10, 2009 Minutes
J. Hughes: Motioned to approve as written. Seconded by Taylor. Vote: 7-0-1 (D. Michniewicz
was not present at the meeting).
2. Status report on RFP.
Leven: Provided an update. A preview meeting was held on the 9th. Jane and Ed were present
and there were approximately 20 people in attendance. There was not,a loin~f discussion. Some
of the comments received revolved around the fact the R6',~' ty~s vigcyrrovir'in scope and that no
alternatives were requested. The decision date would be driven by the number of proposals
received. All proposals are due 1 week from Friday (9/25/09).
09-14-09 www.TOWN.BREWSTER.MA.US Page 1 of 3
3. Other Business: Update on the Tri-town meeting:
Leven: provided an overview of the meeting held last week. It appeared that there were a lot of
questions asked but not resolved.
P. Hughes: Noted that Orleans was being upfront with the other towns. Felt that Orleans was
feeling pressure from the DEP but was hoping that Orleans could wait for Eastham and Brewster
to get caught up before they made any final decisions.
Leven: The meeting ended with the hope that Orleans would address the questions raised.
4. Natural Resource Protection Design by-law.
A further discussion and vote on Natural Resource Protection Design by-law occurred.
P. Hughes: Informed the committee that the Planning Board last week voted 7-0-1 to support the
bylaw.
Leven: Provided an update. The version before the committee today has incorporated changes
from Conservation, Planning, Board of Health and Town Counsel.
Johnson: Wanted to know where this bylaw came from?
Leven: Shutesbury had put this bylaw together to protect forestry. This NRPD has been modified
to protect water/open space for Brewster.
P. Hughes: Noted that the Metropolitan Planning Commission had put together a conservation
design/form that might be helpful for the committee to review. Pat would make that available for
members.
Johnson: Wanted to know what other Boards are doing with the proposed bylaw?
Leven: Had been to the Finance committee and they questioned the assessment value of
properties. Ms. Leven noted that there are no changes to the assessed value it is all the same.
Lewis: When he looks at the sample maps presented, he didn't feel that the value would be the
same as a grid or cluster. He would like to hear what developers had to say.
Lipman: Had seen studies that support a lower price for a cluster lot at the start. However, the
value will increase faster due to the open space. In addition, developers are more in favor of this
type of subdivision because there is a reduced upfront cost with lower pavement and less utilities.
Johnson: Concerned about the grid subdivisions development. She stated the recent
development on Winstead Road that has a long road and lots that aren't really designed probably
for the typography of the land. In addition, the requirements to have a million dollar home make it
difficult for someone to purchase. Due to this she is in favor of the proposal.
Leven: Provided an overview of the development. She noted that the type of home built is not a
decision by the Town. That was a neighborhood association agreement and the town has no
control.
Lewis: Who would determine where the build able area is on a lot?
09-14-09 www.TOWN.BREWSTER.MA.US Page 2 of3
Leven: The developer would work with an engineer and with the Town to determine the most
appropriate areas. The bylaw denotes the minimum open space and highlights the ways to
acquire additional units.
J. Hughes: What is the significant difference between the net and gross acreage and the grid?
Leven: Depends on the lot. But with the NRPD the area available includes the wetlands for
calculations. Under current zoning that area is taken out and you look only at the uplands. She is
putting together a slide or a map that highlights this for town meeting.
Lipman: Noted the key benefit for this type of development is that the developer looks at the lot
and then looks at the development.
P. Hughes: Is the committee ready to vote?
J. Hughes: Motioned that the Comprehensive Water Planning Committee recommend the
adoption of the Natural Resource Protection Design bylaw at Town Meeting. Seconded by
Taylor. Vote: 6-1-0
ROLL CALL VOTE:
Pat Hughes Aye Joanne Hughes Aye
Dave Michniewciz No Elizabeth Taylor Aye
Jane Johnson Aye Amy Usowski Aye
John Lipman Aye Dave Bennett Absent
J. Lipman left at 5:45 pm.
5. Continued Discussion: Other Business: Update on the Tri-town meeting
Paul Lucier, a concerned citizen: provided a history on the agreement and his impressions of the
Orleans meeting.
A brief discussion occurred.
6. Continued discussion: Status report on RFP.
The proposals are all due on the 25t". A discussion revolved around the need to have a sub-
committee that would handle the review process. Ideally everyone on the sub-committee would
review each proposal. Then the first meeting to discuss would occur and a group of candidates
would be selected. This meeting should occur the week of the 28t". A select group of candidates
would be chosen for an interview. The interview timing would be the week of the 19t" to the 23~d
P. Hughes asked the members to review their schedules to determine if they would be available
to be on the sub-committee.
J. Hughes: Motioned to adjourn. Seconded by Taylor. All Aye.
anne ci/Adminis rative Clerk
09-14-09 www.TOWN.BREWSTER.MA.US Page 3 of3