A majority of the Marion Planning Board indicated during Monday night’s public meeting at the Police Station that it would favor “sunsetting” the Inclusionary Housing Bylaw once the town surpasses the state-required 10% in affordable housing.

            According to the 2020 Census, Marion is at 7.03%.

            While it’s been widely presumed that the town will go well beyond 10% with the building of Heron Cove Estates, a 120-unit, affordable-housing rental development off Route 6 near the Wareham line, builder Ken Steen has yet to pull a building permit for his Local Initiative Program (LIP) project that was negotiated with town leaders and vetted by the state and Marion’s Zoning Board of Appeals.

            Citing these facts, Planning Board member Eileen Marum said, “I’m trying to keep the community in safe harbor, and the only way you can do that (is via the Inclusionary Housing) bylaw.”

            The bylaw requires the builders of residential developments of six or more units to add affordable-housing units or pay the town a fee.

            Developer Matt Zuker, who is planning a 48-unit, townhouse-style, residential complex of market-rate homes for sale, told the Planning Board this year that his compliance with the bylaw will be a payment. “From a business standpoint, it just doesn’t make sense (to build “affordable” units.)… It’s a significant delta … $75,000 per unit, and the sale price is tied to the state,” said Zuker in an earlier presubmission conference.

            The 20-year-old bylaw, opponents are eager to point out, has not resulted in a single “affordable” unit being built.

            Planning Board Chairman Tucker Burr, Vice Chairman Andrew Daniel and members Jon Henry and Dale Jones said Monday night that they would support a sunset provision.

            “The cost of construction to build affordable, there’s no return on investment. Who in their right mind would do that?” asked Daniel.

            With that, Jones motioned to sunset the bylaw. But more discussion ensued, and the matter never reached a vote. A public hearing would be a necessary step prior to a vote that would put the matter before voters at Town Meeting. A town vote would make sunsetting the bylaw subject to attorney-general approval.

            “You cannot make a unilateral decision amongst yourselves, you’re going to have to involve the (Affordable) Housing Trust,” said Select Board member (and former Planning Board Chairman) Norm Hills, who represents the Select Board to the AHT.

            When Hills was still chairman of the Planning Board, he debated in favor of retaining the bylaw. Disputing Henry’s assertion that Little Neck Village costs the town $10,000,000, Hills referenced interaction with Finance Director Judy Mooney and said the number is probably less than $1,000,000.

            Marum and Toby Ast, a member of the town’s Affordable Housing Trust, asserted that the problem in Marion stems from the zoning bylaws’ application to single-family homes.

            While opposed to the Inclusionary Housing Bylaw, Daniel has expressed in past meetings an interest in higher density for single-family homes in Marion.

            Local developer Sherman Briggs, in attendance on Monday for another matter (see below), has made no secret about his longstanding desire to build a townhouse-style residential complex but remains vehemently opposed to Marion’s Inclusionary Housing Bylaw.

            “If you all read it, it leads us right into a 40B project … No matter where we are (in affordable housing), that bylaw gives a developer the right to do a 40B,” Briggs said, calling the bylaw “discrimination to people that don’t qualify for affordable housing. I think it’s totally wrong. I’d like to get … Town Counsel on how he reads that bylaw.”

            On the advice of Town Planner Doug Guey-Lee and Building Commissioner Bob Grillo, the Planning Board voted to require major site-plan review for the construction of the new Marion Department of Public Works operations center at Benson Brook.

            Given the extensive work done by the town-appointed Building Committee over the past year, the board was leaning toward only minor site-plan review until Grillo pointed out that the project exceeds the square-footage threshold necessitating major site-plan review.

            Grillo and Guey-Lee stressed, however, that the board can condition major site-plan review in a manner that negates certain triggers that Burr read from the bylaws.

            The Presubmission Conference featured a summary presentation by Ken Motta of Field Engineering, who was representing the DPW.

            As Motta summarized, the plan for a 14,400 square-foot facilities building on the westerly side of the town’s Wastewater Treatment Plant is the result of an extensive planning effort involving himself, Grillo and the Building Committee team appointed by the town.

            Motta said there has been “little to no clearing” on the contiguous lots where the new DPW will be built, except for the area of the storage facility and a water-quality swale to absorb parking-lot runoff.

            The building, which is being designed by Will Saltonstall, is proposed per the Building Committee as a wood-truss design with metal skin on the outside, according to Randy Parker, the Select Board’s representative to the committee.

            It will be centrally located on one lot but spreading to the other two, and the footprint is entirely in the “lay-down” area adjacent to the water tower.

            Motta called it a “sustainable design” per zoning bylaws and the needs of the DPW. It will be connected to town sewer, have water service and a fire-service tap so the building “will be sprinklered,” he said.

            Touching on stormwater management, Motta said half the site will drain toward a single catch basin on the southerly side of the parking field and to a double catch basin on the north side. An existing stormwater detention basin, he said, has been in place for years and has never shown evidence of water, so Motta does not expect additional flows to cause capacity problems.

            Marum asked about potential grant funding for construction or state assistance, citing the support that Representative Bill Straus gave the town during its cleanup of the WTTP lagoon.

            Parker said grant funding has not been explored and noted that the town secured approval from voters at Town Meeting. “But we will take any grant money that comes in,” he said, suggesting funding for solar panels atop what has been described as a “solar-ready” roof.

            Jones, also on the committee, clarified that the structure has been designed to accept solar panels.

            “It’s on the radar screen … we’re still wrestling with budget numbers on this project,” said Motta.

            After several residents in attendance continued a discussion of their growing concern of short-term leases in residential neighborhoods, the board voted to make it a goal to write a bylaw for short-term rentals by 2024 Town Meeting.

            While Burr and Daniel initially expressed hesitancy to write a bylaw addressing the matter, Marum, Ryan Burke and Jon Henry thought it important to find a way to address the emerging concern.

            Marum brought research to the table, having reviewed existing bylaws in Barnstable and the sparsely populated town of Alford in the northwest corner of the state.

            “If things come to our level, there’s a problem. It’s going to have to be dealt with sooner or later,” said Henry.

            Burke suggested that if someone purchases a property without intention to live there, they are not living up to the zoning bylaw.

            Resident Charlie Cosman, who lives on Planting Island said, “now’s the time to get ahead of it.” He suggested that an inn openly operating as a commercial enterprise is keeping to all kinds of codes and rules, whereas investors buying residential properties can skirt those requirements.

            “The bylaw will not only protect the public but the owner,” said Cosman. “(Bed-and-breakfasts) in town are dictated very carefully what they have to do; the Airbnb’s should at least have that.”

            A lengthy discussion with land developer Sherman Briggs resulted in the board’s decision to lift a stop-work Enforcement Order pending a successful application on Briggs’ part for a Special Permit to complete the leveling off of his property off Spring Street (Map 24, Lot 36A, 37, 37A and 38) under Section 230-8.11 (A.)

            Given the floor, Briggs disputed that erosion control is an issue, noting that the lots lie below the grade of surrounding properties, including the bike path by 2.5 feet and Sippican Health Care Center by 2 feet.

            Marum asserted that the 3.5-acre site shows evidence of the removal of more than 1 acre of vegetation, a trigger point for remediation, but the board decided it was impossible to disprove Briggs’ statement that 85% of the vegetation removed occurred as far back as a dozen years ago as preparation for (failed) sale of the property to Baldwin Brothers.

            “It does require a special permit,” stated Grillo, citing that certain triggers have been met under the erosion-control section of the bylaws. “I’ve received a litany of calls from some abutters, and I felt that the issue needs to be addressed.”

            Briggs insisted to the board that there are no plans to raise the height of the property beyond its current grade and that he has no problem applying for a special permit.

            “All I want to do is go in there and clean up the existing piles,” he said, noting that he plans to work weekends in order to get the job done. “The fill that came in and went out came in when the Baldwin site was done. … We crushed all the material and took it off site. The bottom line is I’ve been an inconvenience to Baldwin Brothers and they’re complaining. I’ve probably got one weekend of work to get the majority (of the remaining work finished.) … I may be filing for the building permit, we’re getting that close.”

            The board quickly approved an Approval Not Required (ANR) application submitted by Alexander Biner for what representing engineer Brian Grady of G.A.F. Engineering called a minor land swap at 546 and 548 Point Road. There are no new lots as a result of the action.

            Member Dale Jones’ efforts to get the board to order business cards was voted down. Marion staff including Grillo, Guey-Lee and Planning Board administrator Terri Santos have cards.

            The next meeting of the Marion Planning Board is scheduled for Monday, August 21, at 7:00 pm at the Police Station.

Marion Planning Board

By Mick Colageo

            The award letter has gone out to the winning bidder for the clear-and-grub contract for the Point Road Bike Path, but interested parties had not been notified as of the July 27 special public meeting of the Marion Open Space Acquisition Commission because the commission had yet to receive a signed contract.

            Meantime, MOSAC Chairman John Rockwell was voted approval to sign on behalf of the commission. He explained during the Zoom meeting that if for any reason, the contract is not signed, MOSAC would go to the next highest bidder on the list.

            MOSAC member Deb Ewing noted that the town drafted the contract and said she is in favor of Rockwell signing on behalf of the commissioners.

            Rockwell was also voted by MOSAC members to act as project manager for the clear-and-grub contract work.

            As an example of the project manager’s role, Rockwell posed a scenario of large rocks and ledge as not being covered by the contract and the potential need to instruct the contractor on a course of action should those elements be encountered.

            MOSAC member Marc Sylvia asked if there is a threshold amount of money that should trigger greater involvement of the commission beyond what the project manager should decide.

            “We specifically said in the RFR that you don’t have to move ledge because it costs a lot of money, but if they hit ledge …” said Rockwell, noting that ledge is not subject to frost heaves. “If you want to put a dollar limit on that motion, that would be fine.”

            Visiting the site, Rockwell and Ewing borrowed some surveying equipment, and Rockwell said the measurements of the planned retaining wall met his estimations plus or minus a foot.

            In order, the clearing out of the bike path needs to be done first, according to Rockwell. “Otherwise, they would have an unfair advantage in bidding this out. You can’t do the retaining wall project until the other portion of the project in that area is complete,” he said.

            MOSAC would like to pay a per-yard price for fill to complete the 2,700-long trench to be topped with gravel.

            Ewing asked about the possibility of a visit from the Marion Department of Public Works to a MOSAC meeting. Rockwell said he has met with the DPW twice about the project.

            “If we run out of money at the end … a couple years from now and there’s some spots that are holding water because the road is not crowned sufficiently, you’ll get a puddle and that puddle will get bigger. It will require the addition of some stone dust. And somebody’s going to have to cut the grass,” he said.

            Ewing said that is why MOSAC has discussed having someone to oversee the entire project. “Is that, again, is that a reason we would try to get this with one contractor?” she asked. Rockwell said MOSAC does not have the funding for that option, but he doesn’t think the project is as complex as road construction because it’s gravel, not asphalt.

            Rockwell read resident Carol Molander’s submitted question into the record: “What will happen when a tree falls on the path? This is town property, the town should maintain it, the town approved the path.” He agreed with Molander’s contention and noted that MOSAC does not have the capacity to remove trees should one fall onto the path.

            Noting the town will eventually have a bike path measuring 3.5 miles long, Rockwell added that MOSAC does not have the capacity to mow the grass bordering the path.

            “We’re not a Parks Department,” he said. “I think directions have to come from Town Hall about maintenance of our open-space amenities.”

            While it’s not pragmatic for MOSAC to have maintenance staff because, unlike the Recreation Department, open space does not require regularly scheduled grooming. He said the matter remains under the Select Board’s purview.

            Resident Shaun Walsh, via the chat function in the Zoom meeting, noted that the DPW mows along the Creek Road multi-use path and suggested that should apply to the Point Road Bike Path. Rockwell agreed but said he cannot speak for the DPW.

            “Maybe we can have a Bike Path Friends group, but who knows? But I think it’s the town’s responsibility to take care – people want to walk and we’re giving them a place to walk,” said Rockwell. “It’s the town’s responsibility to take care of it. The maintenance is somebody has to run up and down the shoulders with a mower.”

            Ewing suggested Town Administrator Geoff Gorman needs to play a role in making sure the DPW understands its role where it concerns the Point Road Bike Path. Rockwell said he would be meeting with Gorman and would address the matter.

            MOSAC will meet again via Zoom on Thursday, August 3, at 7:00 pm.

Marion Open Space Acquisition Commission

By Mick Colageo