Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Wetlands Application topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission continues hearing on 331 Hudson Road after questions on dry well, downspout decommissioning
Summary
The Sudbury Conservation Commission continued the hearing on 331 Hudson Road to Feb. 10 after staff asked for a Phase One–only plan, groundwater confirmation for a dry well sized to a 10‑year storm, clearer mitigation tables, and a change from filling to capping existing downspout outfalls.
Chair David Henkels presided as Montgomery Nsamba of Stamski and McNary presented Phase One of a phased renovation at 331 Hudson Road, which would repair storm-damaged roofing, add a second floor and new bedroom, and replace an existing porch and brick walkway with a deck approximately 32.8 feet from the river. Nsamba said the project’s roof runoff now drains to a nearby brook and that the proposed dry well was sized for a 10‑year storm and designed to accommodate potential Phase Two connections.
Conservation Coordinator Lori Capone told the commission the project scope has changed since its prior review and asked the applicant to submit a revised plan showing only Phase One so the commission could issue an Order of Conditions limited to that scope. Capone also asked for a confirmatory test pit to verify the estimated seasonal high groundwater used to size the dry well and recommended an overflow or other assurance to address potential overflow concerns.
The handling of existing downspout outfalls drew particular scrutiny. Coordinator Capone asked whether the outfalls would be removed, cut off, or otherwise decommissioned; contractor Frederick Hanna said the pipes would be dug out about 5–6 feet from the house and that the remaining pipe sections would be left inert. In Mr. Hanna’s words, the outfalls “would be disconnected and filled with concrete put left in place.” Capone suggested capping the pipes instead to avoid future discharge pathways; Mr. Hanna agreed to revise the approach to capping rather than leaving filled sections in place.
Commissioners and staff also asked for clarity on mitigation tied to a proposed Phase Two garage: the mitigation planting area at the rear of the property would only be needed if Phase Two proceeds, and Mr. Hanna confirmed that the mitigation would be implemented only if the garage is approved. Chair Henkels and Coordinator Capone emphasized separating approvals for the two phases and directed the applicant to submit a Phase One–only Notice of Intent and updated plans.
On a motion by Commissioner Mark Sevier, seconded by Commissioner Jeremy Cook, the commission unanimously continued the hearing to Feb. 10, 2025 to allow the applicant to supply the requested revisions and test-pit information. The applicant indicated plans to return on the Feb. 10 agenda.
