[{"_1":2,"_124":-5,"_125":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,100,112],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6488408,"mediaKeyId","5590646-4326fe6a850bfb16a5c1e0bfdea97d78","parentId",5590646,"title","Lakeville planners propose fee, timeline changes in stormwater bylaw rewrite","audioSeconds",1128,"startMs",87000,"endMs",1215000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5590646-4326fe6a850bfb16a5c1e0bfdea97d78&start=87&end=1215","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5590646-4326fe6a850bfb16a5c1e0bfdea97d78/thumbnail_87000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6488408/Massachusetts/Lakeville-planners-propose-fee-timeline-changes-in-stormwater-bylaw-rewrite","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6488408-cab2c247d6240468971b5c6d1e28b922/orig.mp4?Expires=1771170571&Signature=dNcYfUwhwRSNmJWQo8vByFk4YRtG4EwaHB~t8DZNB8OFp1NXId-E0Wc9EjdlSbzGSbEEtFvtQBvJtND7FPzZBLYmTJ~dAHOwUxGDsCxT-mnwpkHFZ6KH8bPTXTJcKSzSY813K7iO1R0trfmkEUX2rD9gFXyCu-yYEknhD8gbw5sLDxpDtkfohk4-8tm-eEIX8SoUMVccfNDfs28m0m0wh5CP6T57hd4kDP82X~HLJlg2oAfUfhOUyhxDPHyIjBPlooVVJbtEY8L~ym0sjCKi8NdaBgrBVDSoYhKoywjxTCsbr~qWaaaKaEwzzTyY2zzZzU95od9VRTHeIlVDZcpTIw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Lakeville","date","2025-08-15T21:05:14Z","article","The Lakeville Planning Board reviewed proposed edits to the town’s stormwater management bylaw on Aug. 14, including who administers the rule, when applicants will pay a stormwater fee and a change to the public‑hearing timeline.

Interim town planner Makayla (listed in the meeting as the interim town planner) told the board she had moved most authority for the bylaw to the planning board, with Conservation Commission review used only when a separate conservation permit — and not planning board review — is required. She also presented two fee options and a proposed timeline change from 21 days to match the site‑plan review calendar.

The proposal would: (1) make the planning board the primary administrative authority for the stormwater bylaw except where only conservation review is needed, (2) let the board decide whether to charge a separate stormwater application fee in addition to other application fees or only when stormwater is the standalone application, and (3) align the stormwater public‑hearing schedule with site‑plan or subdivision timelines rather than require a separate hearing within 21 days of receipt.

Makayla said peer reviewers recommended avoiding duplicate fees for most projects because “most one‑acre projects will require site plan review. They kinda recommended that for right now, we don't charge a separate stormwater fee when the project is already paying for another one.” Board members agreed with that approach, citing both cost‑recovery concerns and legal limits on charging more than an agency’s reasonable cost for review. The board then discussed numeric fee suggestions that staff had gathered from comparable communities and settled on two practical guidelines: use the separate fee only for standalone stormwater reviews, and keep residential/subdivision fee tiers that include a $100 per‑lot unit with a $500 cap for residential subdivision calculations (the board agreed verbally to a $100 per lot up to a $500 maximum for residential subdivisions). Members also signaled support for a $100 per‑acre structure with a modest minimum for standalone commercial/industrial stormwater permits, while noting the exact dollar figures could be adjusted in the bylaw language before final adoption.

On process, members asked staff to change the 21‑day requirement to 30 days so the stormwater hearing schedule would track the site‑plan/subdivision calendar and avoid separate, overlapping public‑notice cycles. Board members also instructed staff to include a required stormwater checklist in the site‑plan application so applicants file stormwater material with their site‑plan packet when both reviews apply. The board asked the planner to send a revised clean draft to town counsel that calls out the 30‑day timeline and to return with a recommended enforcement path (town planner vs. DPW/building commissioner) after counsel’s review.

The board did not vote to adopt the bylaw at the meeting; members asked staff to prepare a revised draft with the indicated fee approach, the 30‑day hearing language, and an updated application checklist for the next meeting and for a town council / town counsel review before a public hearing on the bylaw.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Lakeville Planning Board, 8-14-25","oneSentenceSummary","The Lakeville Planning Board reviewed proposed edits to the town’s stormwater management bylaw on Aug. 14, including who administers the rule, when applicants will pay a stormwater fee and a change to the public‑hearing timeline.","taxTitle","Town of Lakeville, Plymouth County, Massachusetts","taxId",58187,"location","Massachusetts","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6488402,"Lakeville planning board reviews ZBA petitions, votes to send no comment",914,6833000,7747000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5590646-4326fe6a850bfb16a5c1e0bfdea97d78&start=6833&end=7747","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5590646-4326fe6a850bfb16a5c1e0bfdea97d78/thumbnail_6833000.jpg","/articles/6488402/Massachusetts/Lakeville-planning-board-reviews-ZBA-petitions-votes-to-send-no-comment","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6488402-9f197f44926f79859b1108f0ccd816f1/orig.mp4?Expires=1771170571&Signature=B~RYCgX-tmwDxpf7cEcMfrhWEmXJApS6tM3r1ksp-u~fUDbMx69DQXFLcgOmKDDPcg9nCvyvakZ2iLSfoCSYNw3dDqhGijQqGraD2lUnwFVud~2oBuDrPPh4cPXXYq3ANrlmG7t9TCa9E0fqu7rCW4rZ4w7RonFn4nKioaR4GtBSdbUEAwguVjg0OKbVJb0IjxWmkBctd8MtRfJ22561F3aX7rQUcAEYQRAuwf0mj0aKlODkX~~z2kb3U~foPnc5sYRM0gnjzTokRVBLHFMexuIQ-sKsQXq1iD3PJvQy4HYlxDWIaC44Y4jIKtZ8z-lOYMcWTsnOMgYNE~oLvy9PxQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Planning Board reviewed a batch of zoning board of appeals petitions on Aug. 14, including multiple residential “raise and replace” projects on lakeshore streets and several accessory‑structure special‑permit requests.

Most petitions were residential in nature — replacements or enlargements of single‑family homes, raised foundations or sunroom reconstructions near the shoreline — and the planning board did not identify issues requiring formal comment to the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA). One petition on Justine’s Way proposed a 2,400‑square‑foot accessory barn; board members noted the neighborhood has existing drainage concerns and suggested neighbors would have the opportunity to comment directly at the ZBA hearing.

Following review the planning board voted to send no formal comments to the ZBA on the petitions in the packet. The board also encouraged abutters with concerns to appear at the ZBA hearing where those issues will be considered by the zoning board.","At its Aug. 14 meeting the planning board reviewed a series of zoning board of appeals petitions (primarily residential raise‑and‑replace and accessory structure requests) and voted to send no board comments back to the ZBA on the set of petitions reviewed.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6488405,"Board continues review of 19 Main Street mixed‑use proposal; applicant to submit building elevations and lighting",1753,4927000,6680000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5590646-4326fe6a850bfb16a5c1e0bfdea97d78&start=4927&end=6680","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5590646-4326fe6a850bfb16a5c1e0bfdea97d78/thumbnail_4927000.jpg","/articles/6488405/Massachusetts/Board-continues-review-of-19-Main-Street-mixeduse-proposal-applicant-to-submit-building-elevations-and-lighting","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6488405-5ed37d2088f743f88b5ce640f62c7ee3/orig.mp4?Expires=1771170571&Signature=RvLfOtpCUNSTsZ8aXZSND7jIzRsj9U0ngB5Mis7UCx-zUFYfZ8qKGqJkkFtUZ01Mw8PvoV7FmtYYlxO86B8CSc0wKLS2kjziM5naFbi6uEUJTewcHQjba3Gg90jtcYGL3OSWTd1~Qtlyk3R1tLMetVgtczEgROWW2-wSKmEj4LJnuOmSeZAuPP9iUDA9HQ5rz8IkQr1G6rpi5wq-RfKF7lIhCj9w2dw03uJVUwXMHGVhs7QgDic1cDNzxVim2wKUgTRLlrkmxV7hc4wsJSyR7g5XoG75KFXSSevEOyl6X3embVAMA8QYN8-4MvJ1xxQTEXhuKFkMGnZra4R39veYtQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Planning Board continued the site‑plan review for 19 Main Street on Aug. 14 after outstanding engineering and architectural items remained under review.

Applicant representatives submitted multiple plan sets and responses to peer review, and the board’s consultant identified two substantial remaining items during the second peer review: groundwater separation / groundwater mounding calculations for the proposed subsurface infiltration system and documentation of stormwater pollution prevention controls that must be finalized prior to construction. The peer reviewer requested site‑specific soil log data and an initial saturated thickness (ESHGW) be used in the groundwater calculations; the applicant reported the team revised the calculations using an 11.5‑foot initial saturated thickness and adjusted pipe routing to reduce mounding in the critical area.

Board members and the planning consultant also asked the applicant to provide architectural building elevations, a photometric (lighting) plan showing any potential light trespass onto adjacent properties, and a detailed planting/landscape list (peer reviewer recommended native species). The applicant said mass DOT permitting remains pending and that the site will require a final SWIP and illicit discharge plan to be submitted as a condition prior to construction.

Because several items remained for peer review and the consultant had not been contracted to review the applicant’s third set of revisions, the board continued the public hearing to Sept. 11 and requested the outstanding material — building elevations, the photometric plan, a planting schedule and any mass DOT coordination materials — be submitted in advance so staff and peer reviewers can prepare conditions of approval.","The Planning Board continued the site‑plan review for a proposed two‑building mixed‑use development at 19 Main Street. Peer reviewer requested revised groundwater/septic and stormwater information, building elevations, a photometric plan and a landscaping/specimen list; the board continued the matter to Sept. 11.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6488406,"Planning board approves minor modification to Golfers Way subdivision with waiver condition",2214,2761000,4975000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5590646-4326fe6a850bfb16a5c1e0bfdea97d78&start=2761&end=4975","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5590646-4326fe6a850bfb16a5c1e0bfdea97d78/thumbnail_2761000.jpg","/articles/6488406/Massachusetts/Planning-board-approves-minor-modification-to-Golfers-Way-subdivision-with-waiver-condition","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6488406-1c566d90f7d708bee4316678d1eee371/orig.mp4?Expires=1771170571&Signature=FSk6gk47NOWk59WSiAxXvQir5HXyQzLrZC0Qqu7NRdjsschSmyu1sDPmlAtUnZNdJB5gfXiUwz7VBRCZuc2VIt67tB83DLcgFW~GMkFZJobsjywQgtfTh8slEfPFk~IFmPPrQxERLUze~pZCKXuqi8TfNPKRVTLPDKvMw84duIO~MvP4YO3eFKCo4tipLvkB5UmCulIePwy4rX-uH72OeFjoRkW95m2NsdaogzYFDryoJy-kgResa~O~344-YtQk2U2QYECdM7qu0OM2~DwB-2Snnf~UzGRbMUSqHPBKVpKdrdl0BsNU0v-n4FAn5e3SER7MZWgZuj-4d1lHCqwveg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Planning Board voted Aug. 14 to approve a requested modification to the previously approved Golfers Way definitive subdivision (44 Clear Pond Road) subject to a condition that the applicant provide an updated cover sheet listing the waiver request.

Applicant representatives presented revised sheets showing the relocated roadway and a reduced cul‑de‑sac radius. Peer review determined the proposed change to the cul‑de‑sac width was acceptable for fire apparatus provided the waiver is documented on the plan cover. The board and peer reviewer confirmed the revised inside radius and a 20‑foot roadway width on the submitted sheets matched the intended change; town counsel asked for an explicitly updated cover/title sheet listing the waiver to ensure public record clarity.

A resident who received abutter notice attended and asked clarifying questions about access, existing speed bumps on Golfers Way and whether the road would remain private or be built to town standards. Board members confirmed the plan will be built to town roadway standards, the existing speed bumps will be removed and that there is no new takings of private property associated with the modification.

The board approved the modification with the condition that the applicant resubmit the cover sheet showing the waiver language before the board signs and stamps the final plans. The motion passed unanimously.","The board conditionally approved a modification to move the roadway in the Golfers Way subdivision (44 Clear Pond Road), requiring the applicant to resubmit a cover sheet listing the requested waiver before the board will sign final plans.",{"_33":113,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":114,"_41":115,"_43":116,"_45":117,"_47":118,"_49":119,"_51":120,"_53":121,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":122,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":123,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6488407,"Planning board continues review of proposed 6‑bay fire station at 28 Precinct Street",2410,1713000,4123000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5590646-4326fe6a850bfb16a5c1e0bfdea97d78&start=1713&end=4123","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5590646-4326fe6a850bfb16a5c1e0bfdea97d78/thumbnail_1713000.jpg","/articles/6488407/Massachusetts/Planning-board-continues-review-of-proposed-6bay-fire-station-at-28-Precinct-Street","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6488407-f71b898f908b3157a19bef3771df389e/orig.mp4?Expires=1771170571&Signature=SA3CDxL1f1VZzcsGTwpHrc2Xk4ZnGb-GLaRzOi8a4bceKRUGrEeI2sSZYAEeY9RugzLOAmXOTh6pNC4KWAoDiHgsMW-9S2uK41Tog6gG5j7Of92HS5v7VAu2fNcoY0wizgmobf3fVr5Su-ZVfs5GNUHPvwq0pkE~pboRUt93g5NO01qToui-tLF0JrckKlq~qjv7Bhz5WRTu4OUQhoMghl7Is-ILOh0ZvkRBg1xrhNfNFQKEKsr81evNDa4TYw~LHw~--LHLE9ApeTit4Kq3YsgVkvFcKRXQ7peZCyHHaOz1DFesihn9Rg6fijNsv7JbqAdefuRZtG3VbySutIJHJg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Lakeville Planning Board continued the public hearing on the town’s proposed new fire station at 28 Precinct Street on Aug. 14 after technical and peer‑review issues remained open.

Spencer Lin of Park Corporation and Fire Chief Steve O'Brien presented revisions to the site plan for a 17,040‑square‑foot, six‑bay station, focusing on turning movements, grading and stormwater. Lin said the team modeled turning movements using a vehicle larger than the town’s current largest truck to create a conservative design and to prove access under a range of conditions. Chief O'Brien told the board the modeling exceeded the dimensions of Lakeville’s ladder truck and provided “a factor of safety” for future equipment needs.

Lin described the grading strategy in detail: Bedford Street sits at about elevation 87 and the station floor at roughly 90.5, a rise of about 3.5 feet over roughly 100 feet. The apron is graded at roughly 2 percent for a flat entry into the bays; the approach pitch up from the road is about 5 percent (the same slope commonly used for ADA ramps), which helps balance truck clearance and reduce the risk of “bottoming out.” Lin said the team confirmed the vehicle clearance and engineered the station ramp, apron and bay elevations so the rear of a long ladder truck will not “kick out” when backing in during cold or slippery conditions.

The applicant also reported a recent traffic and sight‑distance study done to respond to MassDOT comments; the consultant said observed conditions exceed AASHTO minimum sight‑distance recommendations. The firm measured sight distances of more than 800 feet in both directions, noting AASHTO minimums of roughly 425 feet. MassDOT’s comments to date focus on signage and trimming roadside vegetation to preserve sight lines; the applicant said it will propose AASHTO‑compliant warning signs and coordinate locations with MassDOT.

Public comment included residents who expressed concern about truck size and safety at other station locations; one resident said, “the fire truck was too big for the firehouse” during earlier local work. The chief and Park Corporation representatives said the design team and the fire chief are satisfied with the current engineering work but welcomed MassDOT’s input on signage and roadside pruning.

After the presentation and public comment, the planning board voted to continue the hearing to Sept. 4 to allow the applicant to respond to outstanding MassDOT and peer‑review comments and to provide draft conditions and any additional materials the board requests. The motion to continue passed unanimously.","Park Corporation and Fire Chief Steve O'Brien presented updated turning movement, grading and stormwater work for a proposed 17,040 sq. ft., six‑bay fire station. Engineers say they modeled larger apparatus than Lakeville operates; MassDOT and peer review comments are pending. The board continued the site‑plan hearing to Sept. 4.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Lakeville planners propose fee, timeline changes in stormwater bylaw rewrite

Lakeville planning board reviews ZBA petitions, votes to send no comment

Board continues review of 19 Main Street mixed‑use proposal; applicant to submit building elevations and lighting

Planning board approves minor modification to Golfers Way subdivision with waiver condition

Planning board continues review of proposed 6‑bay fire station at 28 Precinct Street