MBTA Criticized for Past Missteps

            Coming before the Rochester Conservation Commission on July 6 was Tess Paganelli of the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority with a Request for Determination of Applicability for the installation of two tracks with bumping posts located in the back of an existing building to the edge of a fenced area located at 45 Kings Highway.

            Paganelli said that an earlier plan vetted in July 2019 had allowed for the expansion of the tract in question, but that now the two tracks in the plan need additional lengths of appropriately 100 feet. She explained that there would not be any additional pavement and that 2019 wetlands flagging was sufficient for this filing.

            Commissioner Daniel Gagne took exception to the request, saying that the pitch of a graded area needs new stormwater calculations to ensure no increase in runoff to the wetlands or abutting properties.

            Paganelli seemed a bit surprised but said that she could, if necessary, produce such a report. But Gagne wasn’t done. He asked about the type of hydraulic fluids being used in the railroad cars. Paganelli responded that all oils, including those used in maintenance equipment, were vegetable-based oils. Gagne said, “I don’t trust the MBTA!” He said that in the past the agency had cleared vast areas beyond what had been permitted. He then questioned if the filing should be an RDA or a Notice of Intent.

            When the dust cleared, the commission gave a positive determination of applicability with the condition that an NOI be filed for the work requested.

            Later in the proceedings, another filing found an abutter questioning the accuracy of deeds associated with 22 High Street. Represented by Bob Forbes of Zenith Consulting Engineers, the filing sought an order of conditions for an NOI. After making his presentation that detailed wetland boundaries, lot lines, and other significant data, the public was invited to ask questions.

            Coming forward was abutter Kimberly Ashley, owner of Old Tuck Cranberry Corporation. Ashley questioned the accuracy of the deeds being used by DBT Investments, LLC, saying that the page and book numbers being referenced from the Registry of Deeds did not exist. “My deeds go back to 1884 and 1902,” Ashley asserted. She said she knows a great deal about land court because of a 17-year case she had been involved in. Of the new dwelling being proposed, she said she has concerns over a construction-related dewatering basin and the location of the septic system. She also questioned wetland boundaries.

            Land surveyor David Maddigan countered Ashley’s claim that the page and book numbers are wrong, saying that more recent deeds are normally used and that their research had gone as far back as the 1960. Ashley said, “I know how to research a deed.”

            The commission believed that the applicant had provided all the documents and details necessary for their decision making and that deed matters are beyond its scope. The filing received an order of conditions.

            Long Built Homes and Evan Watson of W Engineering presented two applications on this night, an RDA for property located at 0 Walnut Plain Road, and an NOI for 223 Burgess Avenue. After presentations of both, the commission was satisfied that all wetland-related issues had been thoroughly addressed. A negative determination of applicability was rendered for 0 Walnut Plain Road, and an order of conditions issued for 223 Burgess Avenue.

            Continued until July 20 was an NOI filed by Bendrix Bailey for property located at 0 Gerrish Road, as well as an NOI filed by Snipatuit Road Solar, LLC.

            Sent back to the drawing board for more details was Spencer Lynd of Prime Engineering for a ground-mounted solar array planned for 268 Mattapoisett Road. The commission was not satisfied with the lack of wetland boundary details, lack of panel locations, especially footings, or the absence of tree clearing notations for the Certificate of Compliance being requested. The public hearing was continued until July 20.

            The next meeting of the Rochester Conservation Commission is scheduled for Tuesday, July 20, at 7:00 pm.

Rochester Conservation Commission

By Marilou Newell

Leave A Comment...

*