LONGMEADOW – Following two presentations regarding the potential harmful effects of allowing a gas metering station to come to town, residents of Longmeadow resoundingly voted in favor of a zoning bylaw amendment that looks to prevent the construction and operation of these types of facilities in residential zones.

Article One

Article one was presented to the town by a citizen’s petition. The proposed amendment explained the following, “Any public utility building or installation, not to include the garaging of trucks and the outside storage of materials and supplies and the installation and use of meter stations, take stations, city gates and connected facilities; or any building for the exclusive use of the United States Government or any agency thereof.”

At Longmeadow’s Special Town Meeting on Aug. 20, residents heard from Longmeadow Pipeline Awareness Chair Michelle Marantz as well as viewed a presentation by Curt Freedman. Freedman is a forensic engineer for CMF Engineering, Inc.

Marantz started her presentation to Longmeadow residents by providing “background information.” She explained that the construction of a gas facility in Longmeadow was “part of an area-wide effort that began 18 months ago when Columbia Gas issued their five-year reliability plan and targeted seven communities.” These communities, Marantz shared, included not only Longmeadow, but Springfield, West Springfield, Agawam, Holyoke, Northampton, and Easthampton. She then explained that Northampton’s City Council and Holyoke Mayor Alex Morse rejected expanding pipelines in their communities.

Marantz covered many gas-related issues including fatalities due to outside air pollution, climate change concerns and “starving polar bears,” and extreme weather events.

“Just look at the intensity of yesterday’s storm that hit Longmeadow without warning – a storm like this is becoming the new normal as extreme weather events become increasingly common,” Marantz said.

In Freedman’s powerpoint presentation, he provided his opinion based on his “personal ethics.” He continued to explain that the Wolf Swamp Road neighborhood is a “high consequence” area. Freedman showed a map of where the proposed location is, along with a yellow circle indicating the radius of what buildings within that area would be affected if there was an explosion.

“The yellow circles show where in the event of a pipe rupture and fire that any building located within that radius would immediately ignite. Where Wolf Swamp School is, should there be an incident there, everyone in that building would likely perish,” Freedman stated.

He continued, “Should there be an incident, the fire department could not do anything to put this fire out. When these incidents happen they simply burn themselves out, there’s no way to put these fires out with any type of fire engine or water. No one could get near this, if you walked within the yellow circle your skin would peel off almost instantaneously.”

Bruce Colton of the Longmeadow Planning Board provided the board’s recommendation, stating that unanimously they recommended the town adopt the article.

“It is the strong belief of the Planning Board that these facilities have no business being located in or adjacent to residential neighborhoods, close to schools, or playgrounds,” Colton stated. “In addition to unintended gas leaks, metering stations such as the ones proposed for Longmeadow relieve gas pressure by regularly blowing off gas into the air we breathe.”

Colton continued to explain that children and the elderly are particularly vulnerable to these “regularly released contaminants.” Children, he shared, could be at risk for increasing allergies and respiratory issues, asthma, infections and learning disabilities. The elderly, according to Colton, could be at risk of exacerbation of COPD, congestive heart disease, myocardial infarction and diabetes.

When the floor was open for discussion by residents, they remained seated and moved to vote on the article. Nearly unanimous, most voters raised their green cards in favor of the article, and the motion carried by a ? majority declaration affirmative vote.

Article Two

Article two was host to much discussion by residents, as the article involved the “softening” of the incline of the raised crosswalk located at the corner of Grassy Gutter and Williams Street. The sum of money to re-grade the incline was to the tune of $40,000.

The article explanation read, “There have been many proponents and opponents of the current construction of the raised crosswalk at the corner of Grassy Gutter and Williams Street.” The explanation continues to explain that the article would give residents a chance to debate the current construction, and if they choose, to appropriate funds to lessen the incline of the crosswalk.”

Finance committee member Maury Garrett Jr. shared with residents why the committee voted against this article not once, not twice, but three times. He explained that the first time the finance committee considered this article was in May when the dollar amount to re-grade was $19,000 based on the engineers best estimate. Based on “numerous unanswered questions,” the committee voted against it. The second time the article came before them, the dollar amount was raised to $28,000 for the same speed table based on an exact quote. At that time, Garrett said, the committee voted to reject it “based on the fact that it was functioning as intended, it was slowing traffic.” Finally, in June, a new reserve fund request was made asking the finance committee to reconsider due to a new contract with the quote higher, coming in at $38,000.

“Given the escalating cost to remove and replace it, also given the fatal accident that occurred at the location, $40,000 could be better spent on other valuable projects in this town of higher priority,” Garrett told those in attendance at Town Meeting.

When the time came for residents to speak, one resident questioned why they could not simply paint the speed bump “really bright.”

Freedman returned to the mic to discuss this article, stating that he has watched cars go over the speed bump and most slow down, though he has witnessed one car speed over the bump, relating it to a “scene from the Dukes of Hazard.”

Resident Larry Star asked for the Police Chief and Fire Chief’s opinion, though only Chief John Stankiewicz spoke, stating, “In the interest of public safety we’ve had no motor vehicle accidents nor pedestrian collisions or injuries. In my opinion, it’s functioning as it was intended.”

Select Board member Mark Gold came before the town and stated that people seemed to be commenting that “it works,” but “the one at the Community House works but it’s not damaging vehicles.” He then shared a situation where the town’s ambulance suffered over $10,000 in damages after they were attempting to answer a call and were not aware of the bump’s severity.

Director of Public Works Mario Mazza shared with the town that the DPW Town Engineer had designed the speed bump to MassDOT standards.

When it came time to vote, the article failed by a majority affirmative vote. Therefore, the speed bump will remain as-is.