Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Riverfront topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Commission continues 87 Moore Road garage hearing after debate over three layout options and tree removal

Sudbury Conservation Commission · October 21, 2024
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Engineers presented three garage layout options affecting the 200-foot Riverfront Area; Commissioners split on feasibility and mitigation, requested additional feasibility details for option #2 and continued the hearing to Nov. 18, 2024.

Sudbury Conservation Commission members on Oct. 21 continued the Notice of Intent for 87 Moore Road after extended discussion about three proposed garage layouts and their effects on the 200-foot Riverfront Area.

Engineer Stephen Poole outlined three options. Option 1 would allow a garage partly in the Riverfront Area with 384 square feet of disturbance (182 square feet permanent and 202 square feet temporary) and removal of an 18-inch maple; Option 2 would move the garage entirely out of the Riverfront Area but still require removal of the maple and about 176 square feet of temporary disturbance; Option 3 would rotate the building parallel to the riverfront and fall outside jurisdiction but increase impervious surface and be less desirable environmentally. Poole said the applicant preferred Option 1 for access and usability.

Coordinator Lori Capone told the Commission she saw similar net impacts for options 1 and 2 but raised concerns about long‑term effects from increased impervious surface in Option 3. Commissioners pressed for turning‑radius details and feasibility information for Option 2. Commissioner Ken Holtz and Chair Henkels favored Option 2 if it proved feasible; others noted that Option 1 could be tolerated with stronger mitigation measures. Commissioners and staff also discussed tree health and the proximity of a healthy 36‑inch pine that the applicant sought to protect.

Given the unresolved vehicle‑maneuvering and mitigation questions, Chair Henkels said the applicant should return with additional feasibility drawings and mitigation proposals. The Commission continued the hearing to Nov. 18, 2024 by unanimous roll‑call vote.

Next steps requested by the Commission include feasibility drawings showing turning radii for Options 2 and 3, a mitigation plan addressing tree removal and Riverfront restoration, and follow‑up coordination with Conservation staff.