Above: Ferris Development’s will be at the ZBA this month on issues related to 120 & 250 Turnpike Road. (images of renderings from proposals for 40Bs at the site)
Updated (12/8/23 11:26 am): I was informed by the Building Dept that I jumped to the wrong conclusion on the hearing for 250 Turnpike Road. That hearing isn’t the start of a 40B hearing. It is for a Special Permit at the site. The permit is for an unrelated commercial use on the other section of the property. Scroll down or click here for more on that.
The Zoning Board of Appeals will have to juggle 40B housing development applications this winter. In addition to the Park Central hearings already in process, the board is opening hearings on the proposals for 120 Turnpike Road and 250 Turnpike Road this month. (As noted in my update above, the 250 Turnpike Rd hearing isn’t on a 40B at this stage).
120 Turnpike Road
At the tail end of my update on Park Central yesterday, I noted that on December 13th, the ZBA will hold the first hearing for 120 Turnpike Road. (You can find related materials here.)
I also mentioned that last night the Select Board would be addressing the Planning Board’s request for Special Counsel on related issues. In their December 5th meeting, Chair Andrew Dennington said the request would be considered at their meeting on December 19th.
The ZBA hearing on the 13th will be combined with a hearing on a related request by the developer — to revise the special permit for the 118-120 Turnpike Road site. The application is to address the use of the driveway for both the existing commercial properties and the proposed apartment building.
On November 27th, Planning Board members discussed the application, their ongoing confusion about legal issues with the application and the roles of the ZBA and Planning Board.
Chair Meme Luttrell said it appeared the special permit request was meant to address Town Counsel’s comments by creating a separate lot for the section of the parcel to be used for the 40B. But she said that a special permit can’t create a lot. That needs to be done through an ANR or subdivision, both of which require road frontage that the parcel lacks.
Resident Paul Carter told the board that the current application as should be halted. He argued that legally, the lot needed to first be subdivided and a new application submitted before the ZBA could consider a 40B.
Member Debbie DeMuria thought people’s belief that you could put the cart before the horse was creating a lot of problems for the board and public.
Member Jesse Stein suggested asking for Special Counsel to advise them. Though he was skeptical it would be approved, they would at least be on the record. Others agreed.
Carter argued that the Select Board doesn’t have justification for denying special counsel after the results from the Park Central decision.* He also referred to the Select Board’s letter supporting the project “premature”. He made clear that he was upset about the impact he perceived it would have on the abutting Breakneck Hill Conservation Land, where the project is being shoehorned in.
Luttrell said that Town Counsel previously made clear that his legal opinions are in support of positions held by the Select Board. Given the Select Board’s support for the project, she believed that creates a conflict of interest with their concern.
Their newest member, former Select Board Member Lisa Braccio, noted that they had been going over many of the same questions since August and the process wasn’t working. She followed, “If we can’t get answers to the questions we need as elected officials to do the job that we have to do, that’s a bigger problem.” She said she would defer to the rest of the board who has dealt with issues longer.
The board voted unanimously to make the request, specifying that they need advice related to the subdivision issues. The decision was part of their discussion on what to include in their comment letter to the ZBA on the project. Their letter was posted here today.
Luttrell believed the letter should also point out that the the owner had agreed to donate to the Town land now being proposed for the 40B. It was a condition under the Planning Board Site Plan Review a prior Special Permit was conditioned on. She said the developer didn’t follow through on the majority of the work allowed under the permit to build a Parking Garage. But they did do some minimal work under it, creating a patio that crosses between the two commercial buildings.
250 Turnpike Road
This morning, the Town issued a News Flash alerting that a Special Permit hearing for 250 Turnpike Road will open on December 20th at 7:00 pm.
Initially, I referred to this as a hearing on the 40B. As I stated in my Update at the top of the post, I learned I was incorrect. The hearing is for a Special Permit to allow two buildings and two uses on one lot. The proposal is for a Contractor Yard Building in the commercial section of the site — “lot A”.
Ferris Development has received approval from MassHousing that the site is eligible for pursuit of a 40B project on the area behind the storage facility — “lot B”. According to the Building Department, the owner has yet to file an application for that with the ZBA.
That project is bound to create more controversy if they do pursue it. During the eligibility phase, abutters on the streets across from and behind the parcel made clear they opposed the project. Arguments covered concerns about drainage issues related to the site and impacts to neighbors, the height of a tall housing complex right behind a single family neighborhood, potential additional traffic on Parkerville Road, and claims of legally binding promises made to neighbors by prior owners that the site would never be developed.
The developer responded to the public input by making some adjustments to their plans. (I’m doubtful it satisfied all of the abutters concerns. But we’ll find out through the upcoming hearing.)
You can see the revised application materials submitted to MassHousing here.
The full materials for the hearing, including the letters to MassHousing and the ZBA from boards and the public, aren’t yet publicly posted. If a hearing does get scheduled, you can expect that information and materials to be added to the ZBA’s section of the Town website here.
*In 2016, the Planning Board asked for Special Counsel to fight a decision that the ZBA made on Park Central that they said usurped their authority. It was denied by the Select Board. Last year, in a ruling on an appeal by abutters making similar arguments, the court ruled that the Planning Board was right. It’s worth noting that Braccio voted in the minority to allow Planning to hire Special Counsel.
Updated (12/6/23 2:38 pm): I had written the Planning Board was going to wait for legal advice before submitting their letter on 120 Turnpike Road. I was wrong. Their letter to the ZBA was issued on 12/4/23 and posted earlier today.
