Dr. Ed Hoffer’s circumstantial need to depart early from the March 24 meeting of the Marion Zoning Board of Appeals set off a substantial discussion in part because it foreshadowed his potential permanent departure.
Hoffer’s bid for a seat on the Select Board would truncate his availability to follow through as a voting member on the Heron Cove case that is expected to see several more continuances of the public hearing he partially sat through on March 24.
The longstanding proposal of a “friendly 40B” residential development along Route 6 near the Wareham town line is a LIP application and, at the municipal level, is only subject to the vetting of the ZBA. Otherwise, developer Ken Steen only answers to the State of Massachusetts.
ZBA member Margie Baldwin was altogether absent from the March 24 public hearing so Town Counsel Jon Witten jumped in when discussion continued several minutes in Hoffer’s absence to ensure the ZBA was cognizant of the ramifications of seeing through that night’s public hearing.
Witten explained that the ZBA can only use the Mullin Rule for one member for one meeting, presumably Baldwin, since there is no apparent threat that she would miss future meetings. The ZBA, he said, is a five-member board with a three-member quorum. Three is the voting requirement for the comprehensive permit sought by Steen.
Along with Chairperson Cynthia Callow and members Dana Nilson and Will Tifft, two alternate members, Tucker Burr and Danielle Engwert, were also in attendance. Both would be eligible to fill in and vote, but because so many future dates are anticipated to continue the public hearing to pour over many aspects of the 120-unit residential project, Witten wanted to be sure Callow and the board had the opportunity to consider its option to stop the public hearing and continue.
Mark Bobrowski, Steen’s attorney, told the board that the meeting had not proceeded further enough for him to object to the application of the Mullin Rule to cover future involvement for Baldwin while, at the same time, recognizing the freshly departed Hoffer as present and qualified for future participation involvement.
Nilson moved that the board discontinue discussion to protect its membership under the precarious conditions of two absent members.
After it was learned that neither Witten nor peer-review consultant Peter Palmieri are available on April 14, the Heron Cove public hearing was continued to Thursday, April 28, at 6:30 pm. That meeting will take place at least partially in person at the Police station while also being accessible via Zoom.
As the public hearing was opened, Callow reminded the board that Steen’s project is a “friendly 40B” that has been “very highly” endorsed by the Select Board.
Bobrowski said peer-review discussion should go before the board’s review of Steen’s waiver requests because the requests will evolve as the project is reshaped according to peer-review requests and further dialogue.
In introducing Phil Cordeiro of Allen & Major, Steen’s engineering consultant, for a basic presentation of the current state of the proposed project, Callow asked him to address erosion control and subsurface recharge system.
Palmieri of the Merrill firm provided his peer review to Cordeiro. “We have had a chance to digest it, but we have not had a chance to provide written responses. We will do so,” said Cordeiro. “We believe that everything Peter has laid out in the Merrill report is addressable by us, it requires some additional clarification, some additional plan revision. Nothing that will change the design intent.”
Cordeiro said nothing in the Merrill peer-review report will change the number of units on the site or its general layout. “We are really dealing with a lot of technical matters on the engineering side.”
In his opening remarks, Cordeiro acknowledged Palmieri’s issues regarding erosion control and subsurface drainage, along with specifics such as available parking space and earthwork quantities and sought roadway profiles and site lines.
Steen is proposing stormwater basins on the southwestern sideline of the property, and Palmieri asked for Cordeiro to consider bordering to the outside of the project with additional vegetation. Cordeiro said the initial premise on why that vegetation is not in the plan as presented is because of the substantial buffer provided by natural forest. Nonetheless, he said the applicant would look into the request.
Strategies Cordeiro presented to the ZBA included erosion-control devices such as a stabilized construction entrance to avoid construction vehicles tracking erosion onto Route 6 — any tracking, Cordeiro said, would be swept up in coordination with the state Department of Transportation. He also said erosion “fiber rolls” would be used on the property’s perimeter. The mulch that Cordeiro said would be used in areas raised above their original height is biodegradable.
Soil-testing information is being gathered now that weather is allowing the digging of test pits. “Doing it in the springtime will also give us very clear indicators of groundwater situations,” said Cordeiro, all part of the revised package that will be resubmitted to the ZBA.
One question in Palmieri’s report that Cordeiro said was unresolved is what is planned for roof drainage, limited at the March 24 presentation to roof gutters and downspouts.
Callow’s question on erosion control focused on who is in charge of it during engineering, construction and post-construction phases.
“We don’t have a hard answer to that question. I’ll work on the exact (arrangement.)” said Cordeiro. “Typical operations, I could be the person charged with monitoring the installation of erosion control and continued monitoring during the construction process. … Because we are disturbing greater than an acre of land, this project will be required to file a … stormwater-pollution prevention permit.”
Cordeiro said the responsibility could fall on Allen and Major, Steen or the construction team.
Callow asked about onsite maintenance of infrastructural. Cordeiro said that attention is required until all paving is completed, grass is growing in and there is at least 70 percent of coverage of any planned vegetation.
Cordeiro explained that under the LIP program, there are erosion controls around the base of any stockpiles of materials and sometimes cover.
Asked to address the subsurface recharge system, Cordeiro explained that the construction is mandated by standards to mimic preconstruction standards, meaning they cannot release more water than is being released to the construction. Two types of systems proposed: open-air basins (bathtub) for slow release to targeted areas. Also, recharge chambers will be installed near the multiuse racket-sport courts where the stormwater will recharge.
Burr asked for a summary of the topography. Cordeiro explained that the water will drain in opposite directions from a central high point on the property, but both sources will wind up in the Weweantic River, one moving more directly than the other.
The next meeting of the Marion ZBA is scheduled for Thursday, April 11, at 6:30 pm via Zoom.
Marion Zoning Board of Appeals
By Mick Colageo