The focus of the Rochester Planning Board meeting on April 23 was the public hearing for the Annual Town Meeting article to adopt a Smart Growth Overlay District Bylaw to allow for a 40R residential development.

            Developer Ken Steen and Attorney Paul Haverty gave an overview of what adoption of the article would allow – 208 luxury apartments that will provide the town with 52 additional affordable housing units, bringing the town above the state mandated 10-percent minimum while essentially circumventing any future 40B developments.

            Planning Board Chairman Arnie Johnson wanted to make the differences between a 40R and a 40B clear, explaining briefly that a 40R development like the one Steen proposes would allow input from the Planning Board under a Site Plan Review, and the state would reimburse the town financially, both via one-time payments and on-going payments to offset the impact on education resulting from an influx of children.

            The 40R will bring, right off the bat, roughly $1 million in incentives to Rochester, but Steen estimates Rochester will get $350,000 as a zoning incentive, $624,000 in density bonus payments, and $130,000 in permitting fees. As for the “40S” educational payments, Town Counsel Blair Bailey said the 40R in Lakeville is bringing an additional $8,000 annually for education costs.

            With a 40B, Johnson said, “The Planning Board has no say. We don’t really get to work with the developer and there’s no incentive money for education or for the willingness to work with the [developer].” There would be no financial incentives, either.

            And should another project seek to enter Rochester as a 40B after Steen’s 40R, “The town would have the ability to decline that and … the state would uphold that,” said Johnson. 

            Town Meeting voters would only be approving the “Cranberry Highway Smart Growth Overlay District” zoning bylaw amendment, not any specific project proposal, Johnson emphasized.

            “We’re very confident that if we are fortunate to get approval through Town Meeting … that the regulations would be approved by the DHCD (Department of Housing and Community Development) … which would be the next step in the process,” said Steen. The next step would require Planning Board approval.

            According to Steen’s plan, the land located off Routes 28 and 58 would be divided into a zone for multi-family residential and one for commercial development. Within the four four-story buildings would be a mix of one-, two-, and three-bedroom apartments. Rochester residents would be given priority during the first lottery to rent 75 percent of the units.

            Abutter to the proposal, Eloise Hebert, pointed to Steen’s comment that there would be no traffic impact on the neighborhood, to which she said, “Really? Two hundred and something houses? There’s a lot of traffic out there.”

            “It’s a relative term,” said Steen.

            “Either way, I’m impacted – major,” Hebert said. “Wanna buy a house?” she said to Steen, which elicited a slight chuckle from him.

            Bailey reminded Hebert that the land is currently zoned commercial, so any “big box” superstore could simply move in there if the 40R does not.

            “So, at least, it’s the lesser of two evils,” Hebert concluded.

            “Unfortunately, that tends to be the common refrain,” said Bailey.

            Dolores Freitas asked about the price of the affordable units, which Steen said would be based on the 80 percent of the median income. A ballpark figure, he said, would be $1,100 for a one-bedroom, $1,350 for a two-bedroom, and maybe $1,550 for a three-bedroom.

            Before adjourning, Johnson reminded everyone, “At Town Meeting, we’re not voting on the project, we’re voting on an overlay district.” He also reminded residents that Steen could easily have gone with a 40B development at that site instead of the 40R he is asking the town to allow through the overlay district.

            “It’s important that when we go to Town Meeting that we’re not talking this specific project, because there will be plenty of hearings on the particular project,” said Johnson.

            The Planning Board is unanimously recommending adoption of this bylaw to Town Meeting.

            An educational overlay district bylaw public forum is scheduled for May 8, and will feature the results of the financial impact study, which Johnson said would help voters make an informed decision at Town Meeting on May 20. The May 8 forum will be at 7:00 pm in the Fellowship Hall of the First Congregational Church of Rochester. Johnson urged all residents still seeking further information ahead of Town Meeting to attend the forum.

            In other business, Brian Wallace from JC Engineering gave the board an update on REpurpose Properties, LLC’s plan for a 22-duplex age-restricted residential subdivision, saying the project will be ready for a formal submission within a week.

            It has been about a year since the project was shelved in order to focus on drainage issues from abutting Plumb Corner on Rounseville Road, and the process now is roughly 95 percent complete.

            The layout of the plan has not changed much, Wallace reported, but a few significant changes include the relocation of the main entrance away from Plumb Corner to the opposite side.

            “I like that new entrance,” said Planning Board Chairman Arnie Johnson.

            The layout and style of the actual units has changed, also, including relocating the driveways more to the side of the units.

            “We plan on submitting a full plan set … and supporting documents later this week to sort of get that started again,” stated Wallace.

            The board did advise Wallace that he should reconsider allowing for a 16-foot travel lane as opposed to a 14-footer as marked on the plan, given the preference of the fire chief.

            The public hearing was continued until May 14.

            The public hearing for Sofia Darras, care of Patricia McArdle, 565 and 0 Rounseville Road, for drainage and stormwater management upgrades was continued until May 14 at the request of the applicant.

            The next meeting of the Rochester Planning Board is scheduled for May 14 at 7:00 pm at the Rochester Senior Center.

Rochester Planning Board

By Jean Perry

            The Marion Board of Selectmen know that its article to spend $350,000 on a comprehensive wastewater management plan will likely be a hard sell to Town Meeting voters on May 13, but Selectman John Waterman is fighting hard to get residents to understand why this plan is critical and he urged voters to consider Article 10 during a pre-town-meeting forum on April 18.

            Marion’s wastewater woe peaked back in February when the board learned its primary engineering firm, CDM Smith, utterly underestimated the cost to line wastewater lagoon 1 and make associated upgrades to the plant.

            Town Meeting appropriated $2.5 million last year, and this year is being asked to appropriate an additional $3 million to perform the government-mandated work, which voters will see in Article 8 on the warrant. Furthermore, Article 9 asks to appropriate another $1.7 million for the needed upgrades to the plant’s ultraviolet disinfection equipment, for a wastewater grand total of exactly $4,752,294, a brunt the 1,700 sewer ratepayers will be forced to bear.

            For Waterman, before the Town can even move forward in its exploration of a feasible and affordable wastewater future for Marion, the Town simply must have a plan. And the wastewater management plan it does have is 20 years old, completed two decades before today’s more stringent environmental requirements and, apparently, not helping Marion with its capacity to cope with the burden.

            Moving forward in any new wastewater direction without a plan, says Waterman, would be futile.

            “It’s like building a foundation for a building that we don’t know what it is going to look like over time,” Waterman said using his preferred analogy.

            “As everyone knows, we’re focusing on infrastructure here. It’s not pretty, but some day it’ll pay dividend, we’re hoping,” said Selectman Randy Parker who, along with Waterman, sought to place the article on the warrant. Selectmen Chairman Norm Hills was not in support of asking for an additional $350,000 at this time, but on April 18 he acknowledged that the Town’s current wastewater plan has reached “the end of life.”

            But one resident wasn’t happy that all taxpayers would be footing the bill for an updated plan. Why should taxpayers with septic systems pay for part of this plan instead of just the sewer ratepayers?

            “This is a community-wide look at our wastewater infrastructure,” Waterman explained. The Board of Selectmen, the Department of Public Works, and the Board of Health would all be working together to assess infiltration and inflow of stormwater, and failed septic systems of non-sewer residences. “And failed septic systems is one of the biggest sources of nitrogen in Buzzards Bay, so we’re looking at, community-wide, coming up with a long-term plan for our wastewater infrastructure. It’s not just the sewer enterprise [residences].”

            But what about Tabor Academy, one resident asked. “We’re talking about Tabor Academy who is our biggest water and sewer user in town and they’re not going to pay a dime; they’re tax exempt.”

            Waterman pointed to Aucoot Cove residences on septic, saying there have been issues with failed septic systems there for years. But, without a new plan, the Town cannot address the best options for Aucoot Cove and other areas of town relative to feasible sewer tie-ins, either to Marion’s plant, Mattapoisett’s (Fairhaven’s), or even a “mini wastewater treatment plant” for more secluded areas of town, as Waterman suggested.

            “Multiple questions like that,” Waterman said, “many that involve million-dollar decisions that will affect the whole community, not just someone on the sewer system today, and for that we need a road map.

            “It affects everyone,” Waterman stated. “Not just those on the sewer enterprise fund.”

            Hills referred to newer, modern septic system technology that reduces nitrogen emission into the ocean and groundwater, which he says would be in the Town’s best interest to explore, with, perhaps, possible betterments to help septic upgrades become more affordable for residents. All aspects Waterman said would be addressed in a new plan.

            “But these are things that we have to deal with as a town,” said Waterman. “We can either start to deal with it ourselves and have a plan, or, like everything else, the regulators are gonna come along and make us, so we’re trying to be proactive here … and put in a long-term plan. It’s not going to happen overnight.

            “We need expert help to help us work though these different options,” continued Waterman, “deciding what the best and most cost-effective approach is going forward, and we obviously don’t know that.”

            There are some questions that remain unanswerable, Waterman acknowledged that night, “And that’s why we need a plan.”

            Using a plan to explore the Town’s options is the only way to identify ways to increase sewer tie-ins and possibly reduce sewer rates.

            “We have hundreds of questions like this and a lot of decisions about millions of dollars,” said Waterman.

            Finance Committee member Alan Minard pointed out that the mechanism that would be utilized to fund the comprehensive wastewater infrastructure plan would be a one-year, “one-time hit” for taxpayers known as a capital outlay override. In other words, instead of an override or a debt exclusion, the wastewater plan would be paid for in one year using a one-time tax increase.

            For the average $600,000 home in Marion, that means a one-time, one-year tax increase of roughly $121, according to Finance Director Judy Mooney.

            “The millions we have at stake moving forward … are huge,” Waterman stated, “and we don’t want to be playing defense. We’ve been playing defense from now, waiting for the regulators to come along and make us do stuff … and we want to finally participate and be ahead of this.”

            Waterman said one of the biggest mistakes in Marion for years has been to say ‘no’ to new sewer hookups, “And I think, for environmental reasons, sewer hookups make sense, and we’re suffering now from the fact that this town has had no new growth – and that affects our taxes. We’re totally dependent on our [residential] tax base … because we don’t have any growth because we can use sewer hookups as a way to say no to them and we need to change that.”

            The next regular meeting of the Marion Board of Selectmen is scheduled for May 9 at 7:00 pm at the Marion Town House.

Marion Board of Selectmen

By Jean Perry