Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Planning Board Meeting Minutes 03.02.10
PLANNING BOARD J " /, ✓Z.��'1/�_._"- Minutes of the Meeting SIU Tuesday, March 2, 2010 Town Hall, 120 Main Street Top floor conference room 7:00 PM 1 2 3 Members present: John Simons, Chairman 4 Richard Rowen, regular member 5 Timothy Seibert,regular member 6 Michael Walsh,regular member,, 7 Michael Colantoni, alternate member 8 9 Member absent: Courtney LaVolpicelo;regular member 10 11 Staff present: Judy Tymon, Town Planner 12 Mary Ippolito,Recording Secretary 13 14 Chair called the meeting to order at approximately 7 15 pm " 15 16 Chair called for DISCUSSION• 17 607 Turnpike Street—Andover Equity Builders, Inc "property located in CDD1 18 zoning district. Mr. LaRose wishes to renovate the property in order to'transform it from 19 its current residential use to be able to use the first floor as an office as a building 20 contractor business::. 21 >; 22 Judy: Mr. LaRose has,pure ased.a single family home for use as an office and to 23 possibly use the second floor to rent out as an apartment, has no plans to change the 24 footprint of building, Planning Department had a TRC meeting last month. Judy 25 suggested the PB would waive�a Site Plan Revierw SP, triggered by a change of use. 26 Judy: did notify abutters that applicant would be here at tonight's meeting. 27 2s Atty. Cossingharn presented;his client,will convert the property to an office within the 29 CDD 1 zoning district. Structure was built in 1920. Mr. LaRose will have three 3o employees, the clerical help arrives a 9AM. House is located South of Fuddruckers Plaza 31 and house sits close to the road. 32 33 Chair: this is a use completed and encouraged at that end of the block as small lots are 34 close to the street; this is a conversion of an existing structure to a business use. PB 35 wants to make sure it's done well and how the applicant is going to make use of the 36 property. 37 38 MW: we walked that area in November and this is an anticipated use for this district. 39 44 RR: Mr. LaRose's house is the 3`d house form Mr. Hamel's house. 41 Chair: Judy to produce a letter as a summarization of what PB would like to see, 42 and there are still a lot of abutters who live there. 1 1 2 Atty. Cossingham: maximum number of cars expected to be parked in the driveway are 3 3 maybe 4 cars on a typical day. Most of the cars would not be there throughout the day. 4 Mr. Larose determined that there would be sufficient parking for his use. 5 6 Chair: if you have to add to the mix then we should have a conversation about that. Mr, w 7 LaRose wants to create a U shaped driveway for in and out access. Chair: you may have 8 an issue with the State regarding a second curb cut. You don't want to have a situation 9 where the last car in has to back out onto Rte. 114. 10 11 Judy: there is currently only one driveway, create a turnaround area. 12 13 Chair: driveway will be used strictly for trucks and cars. At night, store things in the 14 garage, no other alterative to the property? Mr. LaRose: correct. 15 16 RR: are you going to use a dumpster? Mr LaRose: yes, possibility will put it on a 17 concrete pad along side of a 2 car garage, located it behind an 8foot fence placed on a 18 concrete pad. 29 20 Judy: Health Department reviewed procedures for getting annual permit in order to do the 21 dumpster thing. 22 23 RR: you need to know how to empty the dumpster,if somebody,comes in to empty the 24 dumpster anticipate the,parking arrangement of your vehicles 25 26 Judy: exterior lighting from rear towards garage is required. 27 28 Chair: we need work on the parking plan that makes sense, once the location of 29 dumpsters isActermined take a'plan and mark up the plan. 30 31 Mr. Hamel, abutter; 591 Turnpike.St., what will happen to the other houses there,he may 32 have plans to sell his properly? Chair: ,if you want to go commercial and build a 33 restaurant then you need 4 lots to do that,maybe talk to the applicant about it. Chair: 34 need minimum size footprint to put commercial size building on it, if someone sells their 35 property you run a risk. 36 37 Chair called for DISCUSSION: 38 Zoning information for Annual Town Meeting. 39 4o Judy: has a copy of everything that was voted on last night-passed it out to the PB. 41 BOS agreed to amend the Bylaw regarding language on energy. Amend Bylaw to flood 42 plain district. Amendment to Stevens Estate property at gatehouse. Changes requested 43 by Building Inspector. Judy: procedure,plan for a public hearing. Have a public hearing 44 for zoning at April 2 PB meeting. Judy is leaving on vacation tomorrow morning. 45 2 i Chair: Mary remind Chair to get legal notices scheduled in first week in April 6u, 2 meeting. Grab a copy of final thing submitted. Notice in newspaper by mid March. 3 4 5 Chair: CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: 6 Robert Ercolini, 195 Bridle Path, requests a Watershed Special Permit to add a one floor 7 addition 24'x6"x25' of living area and a full basement to the rear of the existing dwelling 8 and patio/deck within R-1 zoning district. 9 CHAIR: WILL NOT VOTE ON THIS PETITION: 10 Edits for the draft decision: 11 Judy: changed to 4 inches of compacted stone. Applicants roof area will be tied into 12 infiltrated to two new roof drain cisterns, also,put on plan erosion control, siltation 13 fencing and hay-bailing. Over 55 feet from wetland to fire-place area. Lot slopes toward 14 the road, most of natural drainage comes toward Bridle Path 15 16 Steve Stapinski, Engineer,presented: Judy summarized the plan and proposal. At the last 17 meeting the PB reviewed the plan; discussion regarding methodolog}%for calculations for 18 expansion, Mr. Ercolini will add a sanitary sewer service from addition into Bridle Path. 19 Paver detail w/crushed stone, revised that per Con/Comagent, voted to close public 20 hearing and issue an Order of Conditions. 21 22 MW: square footage was squared away. 23 24 Edits for the draft decision:.chair: Mr. Ercolini will provide restrictions regarding not 25 using chemicals or deicers Brick walk ways will be removed when they build the 26 addition. Chair: include that information in Findings of Fact. See above title block for 27 that info. Judy: put deed restriction for non use'of chemicals. 28 29 Motion to close public hearmg by RR;`2" �by,MW >vote was unanimous. 30 31 Edited-draft decision,page 4 Special Conditions number 3...add reduction in impervious 32 area- add it to Findings of Fact. 33 34 RR: under IBI add comment the post changed impervious area is less than the current. 35 36 MW: page 3 definition 1B,Mr. Ercolini's first name Robert! 37 38 Motion by MW to grant a Watershed Special Permit to Robert Ercolini, 195 Bridle Path 39 as amended this evening, 2"d by RR: vote 4 to 0, John Simons abstained. 40 41 Chair called f©r CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: 42 Elm Development Services, 1275 Turnpike Street, Site Plan Special Permit and 43 Continuing Care Retirement Center Special permit to construct a 125-unit apartment 44 CCRC within the V-R zoning district. 45 3 1 Paul Marchionda presented: the primary development that's taken place within the past 2 month is that a wetland delineation needed to be re-done, that did take a little bit of time 3 w/Com/Com. 4 5 Judy: received reports from VHB for civil and traffic reviews and from Lisa Eggleston 6 who is a storm water management consultant. Judy: hasn't had a chance to go into 7 details regarding traffic reports,hasn't had a chance to review them. Lisa Eggleston liked 8 the storm water design better; concerned about amount of infiltration and likes design as 9 it stands right now her questions have been answered. Judy: received a landscape plan 10 today. Doesn't have a list of questions or any kind of a summary for the PB right now. 11 12 Mr. Marchionda: he's planning on taking water from the hill for drainage. Changed 13 design - got big concrete containers, so recharge satisfies requirements by Lisa Eggleston. 14 15 Judy: more infiltration would have caused more of an issue Runoff will be the same not 16 faster. 17 18 Mr. Marchionda: not enough storage to mitigate..runoff, now that is corrected,big 19 opening thru chambers in the parking lot to take care of runoff. 20 21 Judy: Storm water prevention plan required by EPA, make this a condition of the SP. 22 23, Mr. Marchionda is satisfied with VHB generalengineering review, and Mr. Kelly's 24 traffic review. if you want,rnore traffic information get it from Mr. Kelly tonight. 25 26 Judy: Read VHS comments:wants certain analysis to be done differently, more of 27 a matter of completeness. Example: i.e.; trip generation rate for CCRC as opposed 28 to Congregate-Care Community;would not make a difference to the end result. 29 30 Dermott Kelly, Traffic Engincer: the last commercial office he reviewed was done by 31 VHB:in 2007. Mr. Kelly slid it the same way in his response to VHB it was about 1%. 32 VHB still wants Mr. Kelly'to use No:now. This won't change the site distance. Site 33 distance is the issue...see his'report he submitted to PB tonight. Put on the plan where 34 he isn't putting any vegetation. 35 36 Chair: referring to the.entrance from Johnson St. talked about having a light there; do you 37 see the State is any more willing to go for that at this location? 38 39 Mr. Kelly: hasn't heard one way or the other, is Johnson Street more important than 40 Sharpner's Pond Road? In terms of which one is more important to have a traffic light is 41 Sharpner's Pond Road more important than Johnson Street? 42 43 RR: change intersection at Johnson Street to make it more perpendicular to Turnpike 44 Street? 45 46 Mr. Kelly: should have a corrugated circular concrete painted island in the middle? 4 1 2 MW: what is trip report for adding to the warrant for the State to put a signal in there and 3 help impact traffic volume in the area of Brook Street (closed in April or May of last 4 year)? Mr. Kelly: he didn't ever count Brook Street in any previous study. 5 6 MW: concerned because school busses are picking up there, Johnson Street is becoming 7 more/greater volume. Mr. Kelly: one would only have to meet A or B of the warrant. 8 Brooks Street wouldn't be adding 50 cars per hour. 9 10 RR: what have we experienced over 10 years? Mr. Kelly: used I% for projects -not 11 know in today's economy, historically, he did traffic count>for this project in 2001 12 average daily 2280, December 2008 at 246 it went down by IK cars per day. 13 14 Chair: any civil engineering issues? Judy: not that she can see from VHB report. 15 Parking waiver requirement-will have to do.ANR plan because the lots need to be put 16 back together again. 17 18 Chair: review the landscaping plan- due to visual impact...next time we meet 19 should be the last one and even.vote that night. 20 21 Mr. Marchionda: loading area pointed out on plan, designed for SUV feels it's adequate. 22 Setback line from building shows 100 foot setback will be drawn on the plan. 23 24 Architectural Plans.show actual elevation of proposed building. Wooden type guard rail 2_5 is proposed, crash pirotectiori guard rail is over kiltears are,only going a few miles per 26 hour. Could be about 10feet high wall. Mr.'Marchionda would prefer to leave it the way 27 he has it. 28 29 Chair: next time w.e:can do landscaping, architecture, or other open issues. 30 31 RR is..-land dedicated to open space? Mr. Marchionda: yes, 25+ acres of open space was 32 pointed out,on the plan. 33 34 Chair: did State.make their decision? Judy: Curt Bellavance hadn't resolved this 35 issue yet. MW he'll check it out. Judy: will send PDF of landscape to PB. 36 37 Mr. Marchionda: willsubmit plans electronically to PB. Chair: we'll need a set of 38 the final plan for the record. Mr. Marchionda: he'll e-mail the plan to Judy. 39 40 Henry Fink, abutter, Turnpike Street: Water runoff on Thursday evening was 41 tremendous, started on front right corner of property across the street, entered highway, 42 and broke shoulder of road down, at approximately 2AM in the morning. At midnight 43 Police blocked off Johnson Street, later on it broke into highway. Highway people put a 44 load of big rocks to stabilize Rte. 114. 45 5 I Mr. Marchionda: recognize there is a big watershed and the road can't take the water,but 2 he'll make it somewhat better by capturing the water in detention basin and let it out at a 3 slow rate. 4 5 Mr. Fink: traffic is an issue, Johnson Street abuts Salem Street, at a right angle it's much 6 better for the line of site, if same tactic employed where Johnson Street enters Rte. 114 7 create a right angle and it would be better and you wouldn't need a traffic light. 8 9 Steve Tryder, 386 Chestnut Street: how far away is this facility{proposed CCRC) from 10 Boston Hill tower? Mr. Marchionda: about 1110 feet or approximately 900 feet. Mr. 11 Tryder: between tower and nearest property line how much;distance? Mr. Marchionda: 12 doesn't know. Mr. Tryder: is it more than 600 feet from boundary line? Chair: tower is 13 already there. 14 15 Mr. Tryder: can you put a residence closer than.600 feet to a tower,.? 16 17 PB will continue this until the next mecting 18 19 Chair called for PUBLIC HEARING: 20 T-Mobile Northeast, LLC (formerly Omnipoint Communications, LLC) 15 Commerce 21 Way,North Andover, MA is requesting renewal of the following Special Permits. 22 23 Renewal of Special Permit for First Calvary Baptist Church, 586 Mass. Avenue, wireless 24 facility in steeple. 25 26 Renewal of Special Permit for 723 Osgood Street, Stevens Estate, antennas concealed in 27 existing monopole. 28 29 Renewal of Johnson.Street panel antennas on existing guyed-tower. 30 31 Judy::,'this is for renewal of SP's for,all 3 above properties. These facilities currently 32 exist, reviewed by Mark Hutchings, RF engineer. Lease agreements for each locations, 33 provided existing conditions; engineering inspection affidavit, complete RFR report from 34 Dr. Haes, complete noise report, affidavit of RF engineer,provided coverage map 35 showing coverage without these facilities, all complete site plans were provided. 36 37 Judy: Dr. Haes report demonstrated all 3 installations that RF exposure is below MPE 38 .388% is the highest level: Applicant asking for considerable waivers because facilities 39 exist. At Steven's Estate some damage at ground equipment, some increase in noise 40 levels, for safety purposes it should be repaired. 41 42 Gin Vilante, agent for T. Mobile, handed out coverage map tonight Section 8.9.12 T. 43 Mobile is seeking SP's. 44 45 Chair: it would be helpful to put it on easel and show where all 3 are and how you 46 calculated it. 6 1 2 Ms Vilante: 658 is Stevens Estate...see 2A that is Baptist Church.....bottom at 345 is 3 Johnson Street tower. Elm Street V0023A it's not included as turned off on this map. 4 Installed 3 antennas and one cabinet at Johnson St. site. Structural's were done by the 5 Building Inspector and completed for all these sites, no modifications or changes in them. 6 7 Chair: how do you check the towers to make sure they aren't going to topple over? 8 9 Ms Vilante: recent modification at Stevens Estate, if co-location at same property they 10 usually do a structural analysis. Technicians do site visit once a month to see if there 11 maybe an issue. 12 13 Judy: wireless facilities are owned by other companies, Stevens Estate one is owned by 14 Talico. They are responsible for maintenance and structural integrity for that tower, 15 16 Judy: affidavit is supplied w/all applications; there was inspection by,professional 17 engineer regarding complete design. 18 19 RR: on initial application do structural analysis of int 'for support Judy' is no 20 language in Bylaw that establishes threshold for renewal." 21 22 RR: if treated as a new application i frepoA from 3 years ago were re-submitted would it 23 satisfy requirement of today for application in lieu.of a waiver?,Judy: would assume that 24 Town could accept that. T.udy: you don't,have a structural engineer saying he's reviewed 25 old structure. Report in his opinion.—RR: he's saying the design study was the design 26 study if antenna on.structure is still adequate. 27 28 Chair: reviewed coverage map which is.:consistent in application? Judy: Mark Hutchings, 29 Engineer, reviewed,the RF emissions not the coverage maps. Ms Vilante: without these 3 30 facilities there would be a significant gap in coverage. 31 32 Chair: talk about how you:do the study? 33 34 Ricardo Sousa;Attorney, for T-Mobile presented: if you're asking about EMA study 35 done by Dr. Haes,who isn't here tonight. His report was submitted to Mark Hutchings. 36 Judy: see his report,prov ded''a map where he took measurement from, shows attributable 37 to their equipment. 38 39 MC: time of day and power they are generating at can give results, is this consistent or a 40 peek valley? 41 42 Atty. Sousa: see specific monitoring that Dr. Haes did at different locations and take 43 readings which are well below half of 1% of maximum permissible energy. 44 45 RR: how frequently are measurements done? Judy: report is to be submitted within 90 46 days, yearly update from issuance of SP. 7 1 2 RR: is data the same? Judy: doesn't have original reports she'll check it. 3 4 MW: will landlord have responsibility to comply with noise level at Stevens Estate? 5 Atty. Sousa: if this would be a condition of this decision it would be appropriate. 6 7 Karen Laurel, abutter at 590 Mass Ave, (Engineer): reviewed measurements from years s ago, they are minimalist,parking lot could have 0 and her house could have significantly 9 more because you don't want to eradiate this area you point outward you don't point 10 down. Did they do recent measurements? Concerned 3 years ago study done by a T. 11 Mobile individual, self-certified themselves which is not allowed? Concerned about 12 safety. 13 14 RR: we have measurements available and will make them available to the public. 15 Ms Laurel: special waiver for 300' setback instead of 600', EMF has been recognized as 16 contributing to issues, overall background EMP from everything,power lines, 17 transformers, it isn't the only source. 18 19 RR: measurements are 6 feet above grade, if you.measure 20 feet above grade from 20 source of radiation it's a more thorough study, it is.Wt an unreasonable request. 21 RR: do checks for elevations above 6 feet above grade if houses are within a certain 22 distance. MW: feels this isn't an unreasonable request. 23. 24 Atty. Sousa: read Dr. Haes report 15 feet above each antenna for compliance. Dr. Haes 25 and Mark Hutchins would easily and quickly give you the answer. 26 27 Thea Fournier, Main Street, is this considered a renewal application or is it considered a 28 new SPS Chair: they applied for renewal applications. 29 30 Ms Fournier: if SP is expired we're looking ata new ball game, legally,because if 31 expired they are essentially dead. Town can charge $300 per day for any expired 32 permits. These carriers need to apply.for a new SP and be fined $300 per day; Building 33 Inspector should shut that operation down until they go thru new permitting process. 34 35 Atty. Sousa: nature of these applications is unique of these types of Special Permits 36 because they are requred.to b..e renewed every 3 years. Most times these SP continue on 37 without renewal requirements. No fines have been issued to other carriers that have not 38 been renewed on time. It`would be discrimination to fine T. Mobile and not fine other 39 carriers as well. 40 41 MW: do you have evidence of discrimination? Atty. Sousa: other carriers have not been 42 fined,why should T. Mobile be fined? 43 44 Ms Fournier: it's in our Bylaw and in other town's bylaw, legally; when permits are 45 expired they are dead. This is our Town Board's mistake if they aren't enforcing this. 46 Money could be coming into Town. 8 1 2 Chair: is there anything in the application that they provide tonight that if it were a new 3 application all the material they provided is the same material they would have provided 4 in a new application. Is it a procedural issue or a substance issue? 5 6 Ms Fournier: doesn't have application in front of her. Said certified notices were not sent 7 out. Atty. Urbelis: said certified notices were sent out. 8 9 Chair: Out of PB scope to fine people, that's Zoning Enforcements Officers job, if this 14 were a new application, what are you interested in looking at that PB is not looking at 11 now? 12 13 Ms Fournier: is talking procedural not substance. ,Call in the.Building Inspector in a 14 separate meeting. 15 16 Atty. Urbelis: case filed by Ms Fournier and challenged by erecting a monopole 17 on Elm Street challenge is 600 foot setback requirement of Bylaw. Mass Superior Court 18 said TelCom Act of 1996 trumped that 600 foot :setback requirement because 19 requirements of TelCom Act were met. PB was'compelled'`to grant that SPi Comparing 20 600 foot setback to whether this renewal was filed before or after of the expiration of 21 that SP, the Court would compare the 600 foot requirement in Bylaw to a procedural 22 requirement of filing SP in context of TelCom Act of.1996, especially where all the 23 necessary filings have been submitted by applicants including current noise reports and 24 RF study. Everything has been filed fora new application. Nothing in Bylaw that ties 25 any alleged fines to a denial of a renewal of a SP or a new application_ 26 27 RR: certain provision 1n.our Bylaw,are unenforceable etc. We issue SP valid for 3 years 28 if it lapses and you reapply.within 3 year period then it's a renewal application. If 3 years 29 is lapsed then it should be application fora new.SP not a renewal. Are requirements 30 for renewal identical to;new application? In his opinion it should be a new application. 31 32 MW: agree at minimum with what RR has to say, however, substantial gap in coverage is 33 sorriethmg TCA requires of us. With renewal there has been some charts but not at the 34 same level whe.n.wc entertain a SP application. Technology changes, as RR said, if 35 you're inside 3 year.-nermit period it applies, now you're outside of that. 36 37 Ms Fournier: brought up:touchy subject of 600 foot setback. Superior Court law cases 38 she's involved in now - most decisions of this nature don't hold a lot of credence to 39 Superior Court decisions as they usually go to a higher court, we're in appeal process 40 with a higher court, to keep reiterating how we can't uphold our Bylaw isn't true. 41 42 MW: doesn't agree. Right now that's the law. Until you have appellate decision in your 43 hand that's the law. Ms Fournier: we have the right to oppose. 44 45 RR: Bylaw has contradictory language you read that at 600 feet and the Bylaw states if 46 you put it on existing structure that underling zoning setback prevails. 9 I 2 Ms Fournier: it's a preexisting structure, 3 4 MW: not saying it has to be completely brand new,he wants to see that there is 5 substantial gap in coverage at least use the same standards of review. 6 7 Atty. Sousa: this applicant has gone above and beyond providing new noise reports, it 8 tabes into consideration all 3 SP at the same time...if you want us to provide individual 9 plots we'll do that. Atty. Sousa: if we were coming in new we would show what it was to before and what it looks like after. Encourage us to utilize the church; application is the 11 same whether it's a renewal or new application. 12 13 Judy: with a new application they provide before and after,maps,how they drew the 14 map, ask for raw data to duplicate map as applicant showed it; so in that case they have f5 provided information, we have it reviewed by Mark Hutchings,butprovided one map. 16 17 Atty. Sousa: every new site provides more seamless coverage, it's an incremental 18 process. He'll provide new maps showing more gaps m coverage for the next 19 meeting. Each site could be reviewed by a Structural Engineer, 20 21 TS: this speaks to your property but doesn't speak to the integrity of the monopole. PB 22 wants something from the Tower owners on this and to provide it for next meeting. 23 24 Steve Tryder: what is Mass.General Law,for SP? What is length for term by Mass 25 General Law. It's 2 years? 26 27 Atty. Urbelis: it doesn't have to be. 28 29 Mr. Tryder is there Mass General Law that require SP be renewed? 30 31 Mr. Tryder; Judy when was SP for Johnson Street renewed? 32 33 Judy: doesn't have that information with her, 34 35 TS: in PB discussion it is clear. 36 37 Mr. Tryder: regarding the church, do you have a list of abutter's notified? Michael Dyer 38 is listed as 61 Cambridge Street, Lawrence, MA. and do you have a list of abutter's for 39 the schools? 40 41 Mr. Tryder: stated that legal notices were not sent to two schools located near 586 Mass 42 Avenue, First Calvary Baptist Church,because he asked people at the schools if they 43 received legal notices. Please note for the record that Recording Secretary advised 44 Mr. Tryder that she had sent legal notices to both schools as well as a copy of the 45 legal notice to the Superintendant of schools and had copies of certified receipts at 46 the office. 10 1 2 Mr. Tryder: do you have abutters list for Johnson Street? Looking in the file can't find 3 anything for 10 years? 4 5 Mr. Tryder: any annual reports in the file for this? 6 7 Chair: no, they provided current reports and that's what is in front of us today. 8 9 Mr. Tryder: who's in charge of enforcing what it says they are supposed to do in the SP? 10 11 Mr. Tryder: has a letter from Curt over 2 years ago asking thein to renew/comply. 12 13 Mr. Tryder: who informs the Building Inspector that there. are fines due? 14 15 Chair: Building Inspector knows of the situation. 16 17 Loretta Wentworth, Pleasant St.; there's a disconnect between PB and Town, it needs to 18 be tightened up, wireless companies are told what they have to do and what requirements 19 should be and then it's ignored, who's watching the store? fines are not being enforced, 20 this isn't discrimination. Demonstrate in writing that structure is sound on a regular 21 basis. 22 23 Atty. Sousa: Referred to Mark Hutchings comments in his review on page 3 "1 filed 24 comments in this proceeding and have closely followed the issue of compliance proof. It 25 is my expert opinion that measurements are not needed to demonstrate compliance at any 26 of the three facilities::since calculated exposure is so low." Atty. Sousa: measurements 27 are not needed to demonstrate compliance since calculated measurements are so low, 28 once you;calculate and m' ' nitor.the site it complies. 29 30 Chair: Judy collect the information from Dr Haes and the applicant and we'll be 31 back in,two weeks. 32 33 Motion bMW to approve February 1�6 2010 Minutes, 2"a y' by RR, vote was unanimous. 34 35 Motion by MW to-adjourn, 21 :by TS,meeting adjourned at approximately 10PM. 36 37 38 By order of the Planning Board 39 40 41 Approved 42 43 44 Please note: The Planning Board reserves the right to take items out of order and to 45 discuss/or vote on items that are not listed on the agenda_ 46 11