Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAboutPlanning Board -- 2010-06-09 Minutes\~~~\\\\\\\\\\1111~1tE IJ~!!S%/ii////i~~i ~~ 4 ~Y}~ o~R rF ''~. o ,,,, o : ~,,~~ _ ; ~ ~~ 3 J f ~ r ~ ~<~.y ~/Y~ ~/NCtkna;axean`~ ~~~~~~`` //////~/~///~~~~ll~~~~~ ~ ~ ll l}1~1111111\\\\\\\\~~~\ is •' .+~ 1 ,`,::1 i ~ -.` ~ -. .J:: , .:a ; Brewster Planning Board 2198 Main Street Brewster, Massachusetts 02631-1898 (508) 896-3701 ext. 133 FAX (508) 896-8089 Date Approved as written July 14, 2010: Vote: 7-0-0 TOWN OF BREWSTER MINUTES OF PLANNING BOARD REGULAR MEETING Wednesday, June 9, 2010 at 6:30 P.M. Brewster Town Office Building Chairman Taylor convened the Planning Board meeting at 6:30 pm in the Brewster Town Office Building with members Barnard, Kuzman, McMullen, Collum and Leaning. Absent: Bugle Also Present: Sue Leven, Town Planner Other Business: 1. Informal Discussion with Chamber of Commerce to discuss the sign bylaw Present: Kyle Hinkle, Executive Director of the Chamber of Commerce Hinkle: Wanted to clarify that Harwich is not opposed to A-frame signs. Harwich supports business and will assist in anyway they can. She also noted that there appear to be contradictions within the Brewster sign by-law. The Chamber is ready to work on this issue and is ready to work with the Town Planner on this by-law. Ms. Hinkle attended a seminar in late March and learned about concepts that help to create successful signs. Ms. Hinkle shared some of what she learned about how to use your signage correctly. The Chamber would like to work with the Planning Board and the Historic District Commission. The Chamber would like to first provide a revision to the bylaw that addresses A-frames and then in the Spring work on the whole sign by-law. On June 24th at 7:30am a meeting is being held to help people understand ways to have effective signage -the look, color, what works and what doesn't and design concepts that need to be taken into consideration when developing signs. Ms. Leven will be in attendance and the Chamber felt it was the first step in the right direction. Taylor: Any comments from the Board members? Planning Board Meeting Page 1 of 14 06-09-10 McMullen: Without getting into the mechanics of this which will be addressed later on, A- frame signs need be removed and used only when the business is open. Collum: What kind of issues will we have with HDC? Hinkle: She has learned that the HDC would like to see the sign noise cleaned up. It is her understanding that HDC would have final approval over the sign. First step is that they get the by-law approved and then the 2"d step is to have HDC approve the requirements for an A-frame sign. Staley: It is important that the HDC is part of the whole discussion. You don't want to pass the by-law and then put the whole burden on the HDC. Kuzman: Needs to be consistent across the whole town. Barnard: When you pass through Brewster from the Ice House to Orleans it is looking shabby and it is not a look that is what he thinks of as Brewster. Mr. Barnard challenges the Chamber and the Planning Board to find a way to allow signs that look attractive. Hinkle: People need to think about what is a readable size for a sign. How does the sign fit into the streetscape and the surrounding environment? Barnard: How effective are the signs in the state right of way? The state could take those signs if they wanted. Leaning: No comments Leven: She has had many discussions with Ms. Hinkle and has found that if everyone is willing to work on this issue then it can be moved forward. Taylor: Knows the by-law needs work. The Town has to control the signs and find a way to make it work for the citizens. In addition, we need to work with HDC. No further comments were made. CONTINUED LEGAL HEARING -Corridor Overlay Protection District - COPD #2010- 09 Applicant: Robert Evans, A & E Architects, Inc./Club Dry Dock -Owner: New England Fire Museum -Property is 1439 Main Street and shown on Assessors' Map 24; Parcel 1. The applicant proposes to change of use: gift shop to meeting house, add two (2) handicapped parking spaces to rear of building and handicapped ramp. Present: Robert Evans, A&E; Bill Murphy, Trustee with Dry Dock Taylor: Noted that the revised plans were only submitted this afternoon and the Board really hasn't had a chance to review. She also pointed out that Mr. Bugle was not present therefore the Board did not have 5 eligible members present for the hearing. She wanted Planning Board Meeting Page 2 of 14 06-09-10 to make sure the applicant was aware and that they would agree to allow Mr. Bugle to review the minutes from the meeting and sit in at the next meeting. Evans: Apologized for the delay -they are all volunteers. He pointed out the 3 main issues that were outstanding from the last meeting: 1. Parking spaces: They needed to be delineated (stripes and wheel stops); 2. The overflow parking: they have added 5 new spaces in the grassy area at the building level; 3. Buffer -Unsure what the buffer would be but they felt they would do what the Board requested. Dry Dock would hope that the Board would keep in mind that this is anon-profit entity and they don't have a lot of money. The other issue mentioned was smoking and the noise at night: There are no smoking signs around the property and felt they had address. The trustees continue to inform the attendees to respect the neighbors and keep the noise down. Murphy: The rules and regulations are posted on the premises. To understand, Club Dry Dock has rules for the facilities but they do not hold the meetings. Taylor: First let's deal with the plan, which she realizes the Board just received and the Board may not have had a chance to go out and visit. Murphy: Informed the Board that they were welcome to go into the facility for the next Trustees meeting on July 13th at 6:30pm all are welcome to attend. He has passed out the flyer to several neighbors and Mr. Murphy will send out a notice to the abutters McMullen: what is the capacity of the building? How many parking spaces are provided? What is the SF? Evans: 64 people; 43 parking spaces are provided. Most facilities don't have a matching number; 850 SF. They base the occupancy load on 640 SF and that is how they get to the 64 person capacity. McMullen: Concerned that when he drives by the parking lot and it is full. What happens with the overflow? Murphy: They don't want to turn away people in need. Club Dry Dock is trying to address this issue and that is why they have expanded to the back parking lot. For them this is lighting speed. They are a Board of Trustees that meet only once a month. The noon time meeting is when they are the busiest. Meetings are usually 1 to 1 %2 hours and run from lam and 9pm. Collum: no comments. Kuzman: Still concerned about the parking. Taylor: Drove by recently -they had the 2 rows and there were people parked down the middle. Isn't that a safety issue? Planning Board Meeting Page 3 of 14 06-09-10 Murphy: They do make announcements during the meetings regarding what is allowed on the premises. Evans: When they stripe the parking lot they do plan to put in "no parking" areas. Staley: Thinks that people recognize that everyone comes and goes at the same time and the middle parking isn't as much of a concern. Barnard: Drove up there today -Was unsure on how the cars are going to get to the back parking lot. Murphy: They will have to excavate but want to know what the Planning Board requires before they start doing something. They will proceed based on the Boards requirements Barnard: It may be appropriate to have a site visit. Leaning: His question is that given the popularity of the facility -anyway to use the back warehouse? Murphy: They technically only rent the "gift" shop area. There are other available places on the property but they are not allowed to use them. Evans: If they are able to get use of the other areas on the property then they will. Leven: Is this considered a place of assembly? If so then, public assembly requires 1 space for every 3 people and this use meets the bylaw requirement. The Planning Board can't require them to do more then what is required in the regulations/by-law. Also, wanted to make sure the railroad ties would be secured. Wanted to know the distance of the parking spaces to the lot lines and requested additional information on the screening. She understands that the applicant has limited resources. A sign for handicap parking should be included. Do you have open wall space around the entrance? If you do then you should put up a larger size sign about respecting the neighborhood that will allow the message to sink in. That way it is the last thing the attendees see before going out of the building. Finally, the lighting outside of the building? There is a bright light on the telephone pole to show the entrance. Can this be shut off after hours? The applicant noted that they have placed signs outside saying "Please don't smoke and respect the neighbors". Taylor: have you met with the neighbors? Murphy: not yet -they just received the approval from the trustees to hold the meeting. Taylor: opened to the floor to the public. Howes (1444 Main Street) - sent a letter that was read in at the last meeting: His major issue was a safety concern -and the trustees are not policing. He has seen 3 significant Planning Board Meeting Page 4 of 14 06-09-10 accidents at this location. This is a gift shop - it was not designed as a function hall. If he called the police for every issue then the police would have to hire another person. Trash is all over the place. Leven: She wants to make sure that everyone understands that the Board is not here to address the use - it is a permitted use. Howes: understands the use is permitted but the concern is the safety. Amy Maloney: Wanted to address the no smoking issue. There are ash trays outside. The yellow light out front is on 24 hours a day and it lights up her house. The noise is a concern -people congregate outside before and after the meetings. Too many people use the facility especially in a residential zone. Matkrick: 1425 Main Street -agreed with the other abutters. The no-smoking signs are above the ash trays. Too many people for the location. Dugan, a neighbor: This is a residential area and this has become a burden. The site is only so big and 2 sides have wetlands. The parking lot is full and how would an emergency vehicle address an emergency. The building and the parking can only accommodate so many people. It is dangerous and is only so big. Howes: what is the total occupancy for a building with concrete on either side of the entrance? Staley: The concrete is a building code issue -and this is an egress and ingress issue. The building department would make sure that it conforms for the use when/after the Board approves the permit. Taylor: would like to continue after Dry Dock meets with the neighbors and after the Board has had a chance for a group site visit. Any further comments? McMullen: has a lot of problems -you have to address the residential area....a former museum that was a good fit. This use causes a lot more traffic and it appears there is a safety issue. Dry Dock is a good thing but is wondering if that is the right location for the area? Evans: when Dry Dock left Swamp Road they looked at many different places. They felt this met the needs of the club. A lot of 6A is residential and there are many businesses along the way. The noon and the 5pm meeting times are the highest traffic -they are willing to work on it. They have and will continue to address the needs of the town. Staley: Club Dry Dock is a non profit entity which only gives limited authority for the Board. Murphy: they would like to be out in the woods if anyone had any other solutions they would be willing to review. Planning Board Meeting Page 5 of 14 06-09-10 Taylor: would like to encourage a meeting prior to the 13tH Henry Shepherd, Trustee of Dry Dock: They would be willing to hold an emergency meeting prior to the 13 Barbara Tamasse, Trustee of Dry Dock: She goes everyday and announces the concerns. They could have one of their attendees out in the parking lot "policing" the lot. Collum: The light -does it need to be on all the time or can it be shut off after hours? Murphy: Would address the light issue with NStar and see what could be done. Kuzman: 2 conditions that he thought of: posting a large sign with in the building stating rules for attendance and; someone out in the parking lot "policing". Leaning: Having someone policing the smoking is going to be tough. The signs would be helpful but limited. Traffic detail may be more appropriate but he understands there is a cost associated. Murphy: had not received any police notifications and was unaware of any police issues. The alarm is the fire museum's and not the gift shop. Leaning gave Mr. Murphy a copy of the police reports an abutter had submitted. Barnard: What is happening with the parking on the berm in the front? Murphy stated that No Parking signs are clearly posted. Barnard would encourage the Board to go on a site visit. Kara Duff, a citizen: suggested that attendees car pool. Dugan: Hoped that the Board members would get together and go on a site visit. Murphy: the meetings are at: 7 am, noon, 5pm and 6 or 7:30 pm Barnard: the busiest meeting is? Noon and 5pm Taylor: Suggested that members go out individually, and that Dry Dock schedule a neighborhood meeting asap. Leven: Reinforced Victor's point: on the Educational, non-profit status of the applicant. The Board can establish reasonable site plan requests but it is limited in conditions. Next trustees meeting is June 15tH at the 6:30. Evans. Asked when he needed revised information in for the Board. Leven felt that June 30t" was a good date that would allow her enough time to review prior to sending the information to the Board. Planning Board Meeting Page 6 of 14 06-09-10 Barnard: Felt we should make the Police Chief aware of the additional parking. Barnard: Motion to continue to until July 14. Kuzman Seconded. Vote: 4-0-2 (Abstained: Leaning, Collum). CONTINUED LEGAL HEARING -Corridor Overlay Protection District - COPD #2010- 12 Applicant: Bayside Seafood and Market, LLC; Owner: Cathy & Todd Hoyt -Property is 2740 Main Street and shown on Assessors' Map 14; Parcel 61-1. The applicant proposes to modify special permit #2005-07 to allow applicant to apply for a package store license. -REVIEW DRAFT DECISION Present: Cathy Hoyt Taylor: Asked the Board if they had any comments/changes regarding the draft decision or the application. A few minor modifications were noted for the decision. Leaning: Motioned to approve the application and the decision with the modifications noted. Seconded by Barnard: Vote: All aye (6-0-0). LEGAL HEARING -Definitive Subdivision #2010-13 Applicant: Peter Copelas - Property is located on vacant wooded land south of Freeman's way, east of William Maker Way, west of Cove Road and shown on Assessors' Map 42; Parcels 66 & 67 and on Map 47; Parcel 37. The purpose of this application is to subdivide the current 3 lots into 9 lots. Present: Dan Ojala, Jon Idman, Attorney from Singer & Singer Ojala: A preliminary plan was submitted to the Planning Board several months ago and now they have moved on to the definitive process. He provided an overview of the definitive plan; He showed 2 plans; cluster and the grid subdivision. The plan the applicant would like the Board to focus on is the cluster plan. It utilizes smart planning and preserves the land in the rear. In addition, the applicant provided the topo plan showing the portion of land that would be developed. A bio retention area is provided. They have tried to go through the regulations and show everything that is required. Mr. Ojala pointed out that the Board is allowed to waive some regulations. The applicant would like to request a "green" island in the cul-de-sac, as opposed to paving the entire area in order to make it more appealing. The preliminary plan was stamped in on 10/16/09 and the definitive was submitted within 7 months. There are no sight distance issues, not a lot of cut and fill, they are protecting a lot of land and think it is a good thing for the town. Taylor: did you consider a centralized wastewater system for the 9 lots. Ojala: the lots are only for 3 bedrooms and they didn't think it would be practical for only 9 lots. There is light density overall for 26 + acres and trust Title 5. Planning Board Meeting Page 7 of 14 06-09-10 Taylor: why is there a band of open space around each lot? Ojala: Felt it was better as a buffer for the neighbors. The lots don't really need to be bigger. A homeowners association would be established for the open space. Idman: Section 35 B.9 addresses the open space -would like to understand how the Board felt. Taylor: Without some protection a neighborhood association doesn't work out well. The "open" space is supposed to function as wildlife habitat - it doesn't work that well without a conservation restriction. Opened to the Board for comment Leaning: Concerned about Title 5 -and the comment that they thought it would take care of the issue. This subdivision is in the Town's DCPC and we need to protect our water. He urged the applicant to spend a little time to see what is possible. Ojala: Could look into these solutions -conventional system has been used in lower density. What would be required for the open space? Idman: If it were conveyed to the Town then would you still need the CR? Leven: If the Town takes the land then a CR is not necessary. Taylor: Or we could have someone else hold the CR (Conservation Restriction) Leven: This is not a conversation we need to have today. Barnard: Same subject of the open space -and it works out pretty well. Just need to have the space conveyed as soon possible. Would like to entertain the idea of a narrower road. The volume of traffic for only 9 lots does not necessitate a 40 foot road. Idman: If they seek waivers from the Town then they loose the ability to have the Town plow the roads. Kuzman: Asked the applicant to verify the location because the old assessors map shows Cove Road going through the lot but this plan shows it actually further down Freeman's way. Also, regarding Lot 9 -what is the distance from Freemans? Ojala: The distance for lot 9 looks like 60 feet - 80 feet down by William Maker. They feel there is a nice buffer and they would like to have the development upfront because the road cost is about $200+ per foot. Collum: thinks it looks good, open space in the back is good, and in the town's best interest. McMullen: would like the applicant to address the cul-de-sac with the fire department Planning Board Meeting Page 8 of 14 06-09-10 Barnard: Discussion regarding drainage. Ojala -clarified how they plan to address the drainage as a natural feature for the site. Taylor: Read in the Department Reviews. Barnard: 18 foot wide road would be his suggestion. Idman: if the Board would allow the deviation then they would have to speak with DPW and the client. The Town definition of street would be jeopardized and they would need to review before they proceeded with this modification. Leven: This is similar to the issues regarding parking. If the Board wants a lesser road then they will have to rewrite the regulations. DPW would have to ok a narrower road in order to plow. Taylor: any further comments from the Board - No. Opened to the Public Kara Duff: The entrance looks like it is directly across the street from her home. Is there a way that the entrance could be moved or a buffer to block the headlights from shining directly into her home? Also, she expressed concern about the drainage -will the water go across the street? Ojala: the headlights are going to sweep -people taking a left it is going to shine Leven: Could Mr. Ojala put a stake in the center of the road to show where it is proposed? Ojala: He would be happy to put a stake in and see the impact. You could buy blinds; you would be surprised that there would be limited traffic. Idman: The rules/regulations require a street light at the intersection -how does the Board feel about this? Tom Walker, William Maker Way: It was his understanding that when this land was surveyed there were some discrepancies. Would this plan stand if the back lot line changed and would this be a viable development? Or if the Board approves then what happens if later on a discrepancy is found? Right now the plan crosses over 3 lots. Ojala: The assessors maps have been known to be inaccurate and the assessors map are not always surveyed. We could throw out hypothetical questions all day but that is not why we are here. He stands here and in his professional opinion the information is accurate and it is backed by his license. Leven: If someone is going to be buying the property then a question of the title would be cleared up. The Board is not ruling on the title. They have to base their approval on what is before them. If someone puts in a claim later then it would probably be a civil matter. Planning Board Meeting Page 9 of 14 06-09-10 Barbara Marsha, William Maker Way: a plan submitted in October, 2009 -how was that plan submitted without any markers or a survey? Ojala: He had been out there and based the preliminary plan on GPS and did make some markings. The preliminary plan is rough and has been refined now with the definitive plan. Marsha: has the owner, Murray, been notified and don't they own some of the land in the back? Ojala: there is some discrepancy with the assessors map and Mr. Copelas does feel that he owns the land. Marsha: She submitted a letter from Mr. Richard Davenport, an abutter. She is 100% opposed to the plan and wants to make sure that people know the impact on the groundwater with approving a development on top of one of the Towns wells. Ojala: showed a map that showed the proposed development was roughly 1,500 feet to the nearest well. Idman: Informed the audience that the Town requires a developer to prepare a traditional grid subdivision and a cluster subdivision. The Planning Board and the Board of Health review the plans in relationship to the by-laws and the regulations. If the plan meets these guidelines then the plan should be approved. The applicant is requesting a cluster subdivision which they feel is better than a grid because it is offers consolidated development and open space. There is a lot of space here - we have over 26 acres of land and only are proposing 9 lots with 3 bedrooms per lot. Ojala: what we are talking about is approximately 1 bedroom per acre. Richard Barber, William Maker Way: Opposed to the plan. How many acres are the 9 houses actually sitting on? Why consolidate the development -you aren't looking at the whole property. Ojala: the grid subdivision doesn't work as well Patricia Whelan and her husband: they are opposed to the plan. Joan Corcoran: opposed Josh from William Maker Way: opposed - Mr. Copelas is only interested in making money. Taylor: a property owner is allowed to develop based on what is permissible by law. All we/the Planning Board can do is deal with what is before us tonight. If it meets our requirements then we make our decision. Planning Board Meeting Page 10 of 14 06-09-10 Leaning: Mr. Barber -according to his math -the 9 lots will sit on about 7.5 acres. That doesn't translate to 1 bedroom per acre. Not a fan of development but it is allowed. Bill Marshall: who can use the open space and what can be done with the open space? Taylor: that would be determined in the conservation restriction - or if it is put under the custody of the town then there would be ample space to access. Ojala: there is open space and would accessible. Marshall: how will the water pressure be affected? Ojala: a full connection would be established and the pressure typically would improve. Taylor: The new water quality performance standards need to be addressed -particularly the 5ppp. Susan Barber: 2 questions: 1. the water runs off to an open area -will it be standing for a period of time? Ojala: In his professional opinion it will not be a problem. If it became one then the homeowners would be responsible. 2"d question: Don't understand the lot size for a Cluster subdivision? Ojala: The minimum is 5,000 SF they are proposing 30,000 + SF Ojala: When a cluster subdivision is approved it restricts further development on the open space and the developer would not be allowed to ever subdivide the back lot. Marsha: Would the Board take a field trip? And look at the beauty? McMullen: Mr. Copelas owns the property and he can do what he wants. Taylor: do think we need to continue so that they can address 179.35. (the Question regarding the requirement for the landscape architect) and the requirement of 5ppm nitrogen. Leven: this is a plot plan for a residential plan and a Landscape Architect's stamp probably isn't necessary. Ojala: a quick memo can be addressed -will provide in a written memo for the Board. Leaning: Is it within our purview -can we ask them to look into a centralized system? Taylor: we can ask but it is not a requirement. Ojala: street light? What is the Board's feeling? Taylor: that is something we should discuss with the Police Department? Planning Board Meeting Page 11 of 14 06-09-10 Ojala: possibly a rock with some light shining on it? Michael Lach, Governor Bradford Road: clearly there are some disgruntled people here. But the property owner needs to do what they want; would they consider an aggregate septic system; the plan was filed prior to the new zoning by-law -would the applicant consider the reduced number of lots. Just a thought? Ojala: Does the Board have a direction on the cul-de-sac? Meet with the Fire Department. Collum: they do have a thing called a "green" driveway -that might be nice to way to address the cul-de-sac. Ojala: would see where they get with the Fire Department. Taylor: would like to see an association that encourages reduced lawn sizes; restrict fertilizer especially given that the land is in the DCPC. Barnard: Road width: 22 foot road width and berms? Why can't we reduce? 18 inch berms proposed - we could do 12 inch that should be fine Taylor: They may jeopardize the plowing. McMullen: the by-law should be changed McMullen: Motioned to continue to July 14 to allow the applicant to provide additional information. Seconded by Kuzman: Vote: All Aye. CONTINUED Application for Endorsement of Plan Believed not to Require Approval - ANR#2010-07 Applicant: Dennis W. & Elaine F. Dugan -Property is located off of Great Fields Road and shown on Assessors' Map 35; Parcel 7-2. The purpose of this plan is to create a 40,650 +/- square foot lot from the existing 13 +/- acre property owned by the Dugans for conveyance purposes only. 6/4 APPLICANT REQUESTED A CONTINUANCE Taylor: Read the request for the continuance McMullen: Motioned to approve continuance to the next Meeting on 06-23-10. Seconded by Barnard. All Aye Other Business: 1. Letter from Victor regarding Allard. McMullen: suggested we wait until we hearfrom Victor 2. A brief discussion regarding the Letter from Sharon Ledder re: the Garden Center on 6A. Ms. Leven had not heard whether Ms. Ledder had an answer yet. Planning Board Meeting Page 12 of 14 06-09-10 3. Planning Goals: discuss Zoning issues; do we want to set up a separate meeting? Leven: any suggestions on zoning please send to Sue. ET: mixed use on Underpass Road -would like to address; there are illegal business out there and we need to address 4. Leven: Do not ever say "we would probably approve something" regarding something the Board has not seen, and read decisions before the meeting. Also, a roll call vote is not necessary unless it is an executive session. Action Items Case #/Reference Action Who Due Date Revise Sign Review existing Sign bylaw Board and Target Fall Town B law Planner Meetin COPD#2010-09: 1. Meet with neighbors Applicant 1. Revised plan due Club Dry Dock 2. Post larger signs regarding on June 30, 2010 policies 2. Hearing 3. Light on Pole Continued to July 14, 4. Submit revised site plan with 2010 the re uested chan es COPD#2010-09: 1. Site Visit (meeting times Board 1. Board is invited - Club Dry Dock lam, noon, 5pm, 6 or 7:30 pm) not a requirement 2. Planner to attend Trustee 2. Revised plan due meeting on June 30, 2010 3. Submit revised parking plan to Police/Fire Def. Sub.#2010- 1. Determine Street Light req. Applicant 1. Information due 13 2. Documents require by July 7, 2010 Copelas (off Registered Landscape Architect 2. Hearing Freemans Way) stamp Continued to July 14, 3. Address items in Article XI; 2010 Section 56-B-11 and 57-A (Water Quality) 4. Address Cul-de-sac concern with FD 5. Contact NHESP COPD #2010-12 Decision to be signed and filed Elizabeth/ By June 16, 2010 Ba side Seafood with the Town Clerk Ja anne Proposed Zoning Any Suggestions Board By June 17 in order Changes to be discussed at the next PB meetin . Upcoming Meetings -Invitations were extended to the Board. These meetings are not required Date Time Meetin Pur ose June 15 6:30 pm Club Dry Dock Location: 1439 Main Street Trustees Meeting June 24 7:30am -gam Chamber of Commerce Si ns: Desi n, Streetsca es Planning Board Meeting Page 13 of 14 06-09-10 Location: Town Hall nd B laws July 13 6:30 pm Club Dry Dock Trustees Meeting Location: 1439 Main Street McMullen: Motioned to adjourn. Seconded by Barnard. All Aye. Respectfully submitted, John Leaning/Clerk nior Department Assistant Planning Board Meeting Page 14 of 14 06-09-10