Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Environmental Review topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Abutters urge more review of Rugged Trails subdivision at 228 Ruggles Street; Planning Board continues the application
Summary
Neighbors raised stormwater and drinking-water protection concerns tied to Zone A and MassDEP standards at the 228 Ruggles Street (Rugged Trails) subdivision hearing; the Planning Board continued the application to July 7 pending Conservation Commission review, peer review, and additional technical testing.
Developer Barry Adelson of WDA Design Group presented a revised definitive plan for a three-unit subdivision at 228 Ruggles Street (branded 'Rugged Trails'), describing reductions to the right-of-way and pavement widths, removal of sidewalks, use of grass swales and detention basins, and a private-road TY turnaround and mailbox cluster. Adelson said soil-infiltration testing remains to be completed and peer review comments are outstanding; Conservation Commission review was scheduled for mid-July.
Multiple abutters urged the board not to approve the plan before technical issues are resolved. Anton Abaya (3 Long Drive), an abutter, told the board the property drains toward a protected public water-supply area and pressed the board for clear documentation on Zone A compliance and peer-review closure before any approval. Abaya said, “Mass DEP stormwater standards state that stormwater discharges to zone A are prohibited unless essential to the operation of a public water supply.” He asked the board to require final location soil testing, groundwater mounding analysis, and explicit mapping of Zone A prior to any decision.
Another abutter, Matthew Gounis (230 Ruggles Street), said he had retained independent counsel and echoed concerns that construction and grading will impact Zone A and visibility on Ruggles Street; he also urged the board to require release of lots only upon completion of the road to avoid partially completed infrastructure. Gopi Sadagopan and Romana Qureshi raised similar concerns about omitted written responses to previous questions, stormwater impacts, visibility/sight-distance, and tree removal that could affect noise and privacy for neighbors.
Chair Hazel Nurse and staff (Kristen Belanger) acknowledged the technical complexity, noted that the plan revisions had been redistributed to departments for re-review, and said CEI (peer reviewer) had indicated it would complete remaining review under existing escrow. Given unresolved peer-review and Conservation Commission items, the board continued the application to its July 7 meeting to allow the applicant and departments to return with additional information.
The board did not take a vote on substantive approvals and told the public the continuance was intended to preserve the town's review process and allow technical questions to be resolved in writing and at Conservation.
