Lakeville open space committee reviews Namaskett Landing plans, urges attention to river and wetlands

The Town of Lakeville Open Space Committee on Feb. 7 reviewed comments the group filed on the Namaskett Landing conceptual plan, a residential subdivision proposal near the town’s train station, and agreed to prepare a draft letter urging the planning board and conservation commission to prioritize river protection and wetland compliance.

Committee chair Patrick Marshall and members said most committee comments tracked a detailed letter prepared by Mike Schroeder; Linda Grubb summarized that the group’s submission emphasized river protection because the proposal is among the largest developments on the Lakeville side of the Nasketucket River. "Most of the comments went along with what Mike had in your letter," Grubb said, and the committee submitted a brief combined email to the planning board through Tracy and Lorraine, who were collecting comments.

The committee noted the conceptual plan shows a stream and a 100-foot floodplain near several new lots. Members discussed the conservation commission hearing scheduled for the following Tuesday, where the proposal will appear. The committee also reported a potential preexisting wetland violation on the site where material had been filled; members said that issue may need to be corrected at the conservation commission hearing.

Committee members discussed open-space subdivision approaches as an alternative to conventional subdivision layout. Member Joan Wharton described open-space subdivision principles — identifying valuable features, configuring the allowable number of lots to preserve a large portion of the site and reduce road and infrastructure footprints — and suggested the committee include a general caution to the planning board about rapid development and the absence of strong open-space provisions in current zoning.

No formal committee vote to send a final letter was recorded at the meeting; members agreed to circulate a draft letter for review and to decide at the next meeting whether to submit it. Several members said they would alert the group if they hear a response from the planning board or the state when state documents are published, which sometimes include public comments and responses.

Votes at a glance - Motion to approve the Jan. 3 minutes: approved (mover/second not specified). - Motion to adjourn: approved (mover and second not specified).