Clarifications and complexities on infrastructure dominated the conversation on Monday night, as the Marion Planning Board continued its review of plans for the 48-unit residential development at 78 Wareham Road.
During the continued public hearing, developer Matt Zuker indicated the plan is to build out infrastructure for the entire area early in the process rather than in smaller sectors based on the phased-in construction schedule for building. While somewhat more expensive for the developer, he said this approach enables more efficient use of town resources in permitting and oversight of utilities, drainage, roadways, etc.
The board supported this approach.
When discussion moved to changes such as curb cuts and other modifications that will be required as a result of the development but are not within the developer’s control or authority, board member Eileen Marum expressed concern about traffic and highway safety in the vicinity that would be exacerbated with the addition of nearly 300 cars between this development and the neighboring Heron Cove Estates project. Anecdotal reports of backups and dangerous merges, particularly near Hill and Oak Streets, were cited.
Marum offered to write a letter to the state Department of Transportation with concerns, including traffic capacity, signage, speeding and related issues.
“Even though that’s a matter we’re not creating, I’m happy to address it,” said Zuker, who believes the safety issues along Route 6 are not related to volume but to speeding. He reminded the board that the highway falls under state jurisdiction, preventing him, for instance, to talking to his engineer about a traffic light at the site.
Select Board member Randy Parker suggested that any communication to MassDOT make it clear that the development is viewed positively by the board and the town. Parker was concerned that the timing of such a letter could be misconstrued as a lack of support for the project. This was affirmed by other board members.
Referencing Zuker’s limitations to directly respond to traffic-safety matters, Planning Board Chairman Andrew Daniel pushed without immediate success to keep the conversation on the matters directly pertaining to the public hearing.
Marum persisted, and board member Jon Henry supported her concerns, suggesting the time is now for the Planning Board to address MassDOT regarding traffic safety along Route 6.
The board eventually determined that Town Planner Doug Guey-Lee will identify the appropriate contact at MassDOT so that a letter can be drafted and reviewed at the board’s September 16 meeting.
Before the public hearing was continued (also to September 16), a resident sought public information on the environmental impact of the 78 Wareham Road project, particularly its effect on box turtles, deer and other animals. Zuker informed the resident that there will be no buildings closer than 200 feet from the shore. The resident was also informed that the town has a peer-review expert (Ken Motta) who reviews Zuker’s plans, and his work is available to the public. Administrative assistant Danyca Filiatreault indicated that she will put them in touch.
Back on the agenda as a discussion item, the revisited MS4 Stormwater Management draft bylaw made no progress. But it was also noted that a Special Town Meeting this fall is unlikely.
Board member Tucker Burr described the draft bylaw authored for the board’s review by a consultant to be “just a rip of what West Bridgewater has.”
“It feels like we’re being handed a pizza and being told to put it in the oven,” said board member Ryan Burke, who believes the board should be judging and authoring its own bylaw. “I think we need to be in compliance, but I don’t think it’s this much.”
Referencing board members’ outright rejection of the town’s initial proposal, Guey-Lee said, “We provided you with people to run this up against, (to) ask the hard questions. I don’t know what more we could do.” Guey-Lee also cautioned the board against authoring its own version of such a bylaw because, without appropriate experience of other towns such as West Bridgewater, it could mean a lot of effort down the drain if and when found by the state to be insufficient.
“I thought the first thing we were going to discuss was, ‘are we going to apply this to the entire town or the portions of town that legally have to have it because they’re considered more urban?’ That’s one big thing we need to decide to move this ahead,” said board member Alanna Nelson.
Daniel reiterated his stance opposing anything requiring more from homeowners in the way of fees. “They’re maxed,” he said.
Both Daniel and Burke considered cutting the fees in half just to be able to move the document off the agenda to next steps. Burke said the consultant’s presentation gave him “the vibe” that full compliance with the state’s regulation is nearly unattainable. Henry agreed it sounds like Marion will never be fully compliant.
At Marum’s motion, the meeting suddenly adjourned.
The next meeting of the Marion Planning Board is scheduled for Monday, August 19, at 7:00 pm at the Police Station on Route 6.
Marion Planning Board
By Mary McCann and Mick Colageo