March 3, 2021 ~ Planning Board Meeting

2021-03-03 · Planning Board · 30:10 · watch on YouTube →

A partial recording of the Planning Board's public hearing on a conditional use application to run a wedding and event venue at a house on Maplewood Lane and the adjoining field. The recording picks up in the middle of board questioning, covers the applicants' answers on noise, alcohol, insurance, traffic and how many events they expect, then two neighbours speaking in support during public comment. The chair then shared a draft decision form and the board began working through the approval criteria. The recording ends part-way through that review, when a notice appeared that the town's free Zoom account would expire in ten minutes and the meeting moved to a new link. The town's written minutes record that the board granted conditional use approval twice that night and adjourned at 9:41 p.m., but none of those votes are on this recording.

What was discussed

1. 0:03
   Buffering at the house site as against the field

   Anne Torregrossa pressed the applicants on what protects neighbours at the house itself, since the wedding party would start and possibly stay there before moving to the field. The applicants said the field is roughly 50 feet from the front door, that oaks ring the field on all sides, and that the direction sound would carry is more than a quarter of a mile of dense woods.

2. 0:03
   Whether abutters and neighbours were contacted

   Juliet Caplinger asked whether the applicants had reached everyone along Stackpole Road between their property and Cloutier Road. An applicant said she had personally spoken to the households on her side of the road and named them, and Juliet Caplinger told her the board would commend the effort.

3. 5:15
   Alcohol service and event insurance

   The applicants said they would not serve alcohol themselves; a party wanting a bar would have to supply the alcohol and hold event insurance. The applicants said they will carry event insurance on the house and on the field, and the contracting party must carry its own as well.

4. 5:15
   Traffic and late-night driving

   A board member said traffic was the number one concern already raised by several members, and that adding alcohol brought late-night driving with it.

5. 5:15
   Whether to require a noise assessment

   Juliet Caplinger raised a noise assessment as something the board could consider, saying a neighbour would probably want one. The applicants replied that after a family wedding held on the site that summer the only household that heard anything was one across the field and over the hill, and offered to control the direction the speakers are aimed.

6. 5:15
   Scale of events, parking and animals

   The applicants said other uses such as craft fairs, birthday parties and retirement parties would run to about 50 people, and that they were planning on around 50 cars with a ceiling of 175 guests. All parking would be off the road in the field, and animals would not be allowed loose, though a couple's own pet could attend if someone was made responsible for containing it.

7. 10:23
   One event per weekend, not consecutive weddings

   Asked whether there could be a wedding Friday, Saturday and Sunday, the applicants said that was not their business plan. What they intend to sell is one rental of the house and the field for a weekend, with the ceremony and reception on a single day.

8. 10:23
   PA system and the customer contract

   The applicants said they do not intend to supply a PA system; a DJ would bring one. Asked whether the contract with customers covering liability insurance and similar terms had been drafted, they said they have a model but no drafted document yet.

9. 10:23
   How many events a year

   A board member asked whether the limit described in the abutter letter, around six weddings and perhaps ten events, was the ongoing plan or only the first season. The applicants said they are starting late this year and would be pleased to get six, but that it could grow to one event most weekends and they do not know.

10. 15:34
    Public comment in support

    Jenny Woods of 118 Stackpole Road (?) said she has never heard anything from the site and supports bringing small businesses into town. Jill and Pierre Gastonay (?) of 110 Stackpole Road, direct abutters whose back deck faces the property, said their only complaint is that they wish the music were louder, and that traffic for a couple of hours a day is nothing next to the detours when Route 136 floods.

11. 20:42
    Chair reads through the draft decision form

    The chair shared a draft description on screen: a wedding and event venue at 58 Maplewood Lane, owned by Ms Fischer (?), and the adjacent field owned by Ms Bolier (?), who has given permission for its use. The draft allows one prime event with smaller events the evening before, up to 10 guests staying overnight before and after, events in May through October only, a maximum of 175 guests, hours of 9 a.m. to 10 p.m. on the designated weekend day and everything ending by 9:30 p.m.

12. 20:42
    Setup, vendors and site improvements in the findings

    The draft records that setup, breakdown and maintenance happen on other days of the week, that all events are staffed by the applicants or their representatives, that a 60 by 100 foot tent will be erected and portable toilets provided, and that no changes will be made to the site other than running electrical service closer to the tent and possibly improving the parking area. Interested neighbours who supply an email address will be told of events in advance.

13. 25:49
    Public health impact criterion

    The board turned to whether the use would create unsanitary or unhealthful conditions through sewage disposal or emissions. Members said they had no concerns, and one member asked whether life safety inside the house was a related question.

14. 25:49
    Free Zoom account expires and the meeting moves

    The chair announced a notice that the free account would end in ten minutes and asked everyone to move to a new link posted in the chat and on the town website. The recording ends here, before the board finished its deliberations.

What was decided

• 20:42
  Board and applicants agreed the draft decision form's description of the proposal was accurate, and agreed to amend it to say the smaller events are associated with the main event rather than unrelated bookings.passed
• 20:42
  The chair asked to put a time limit on setup, breakdown and vendor traffic, such as daylight hours. The discussion moved to business hours for vendors and ended without the recording making clear what wording, if any, was settled on.outcome unclear
• 25:49
  On the public health impact criterion, members said they had no concerns and one said she would make a motion on it. The recording cuts away before any motion is made or voted.outcome unclear

An outcome reads "unclear" where the recording does not state it plainly. The recogniser drops short words, and "the motion does not carry" is one missing word from its opposite.

Motions the minutes record

The town's own written account of what was decided, taken from pb_minutes_3-3-21_final.txt. It owes nothing to the recording or to a model: the clerk typed it, with the vote. Where the summary above claims a decision this list does not carry, the summary is the part to doubt.

• grant Conditional Use Approval, with the conditions listed on the Final Findingscarried 5-0

  Moved by Anne Torregrossa, seconded by Allan Purinton

• grant Conditional Use Approvalcarried 5-0

  Moved by Anne Torregrossa, seconded by Wesley Grover

• Adjourn at 9:41 p.mcarried 5-0

  Moved by Juliet Caplinger, seconded by Wesley Grover

Worth knowing

• 20:42
  The chair warned the applicants that the conditions written into the decision form are binding: she had put 175 guests in the draft, and an event of 500 would not fall under the approval.
• 15:34
  Both members of the public who spoke supported the application, including the direct abutters at 110 Stackpole Road, who said their only complaint was that they cannot hear the music well enough.
• 10:23
  The applicants expect about six weddings in their first season but told the board that the venue could grow to an event most weekends; they said they do not know what the demand will be.
• 25:49
  The hearing was interrupted mid-deliberation because the free Zoom account it was running on was about to expire, and had to be reconvened on a second link.

Elsewhere

← 2021-02-03 Planning Board2021-05-19 Planning Board →All meetings