The Acton Planning Board convened on Wednesday evening, Dec 20, for a “continuation” hearing for a Planned Conservation Residential Community (PCRC) application for 123 Quarry Road. According to Acton’s Zoning Bylaw section 9, PCRC’s are communities with housing clustered in one section, leaving at least 60% of the property as preserved open space. Sometimes property owners deed some of the open space to the Town. The 123 Quarry Road property has two dwellings on it at present, and the development would add four more. After discussion, the Board continued the hearing to a future meeting, with no decision.
The Quarry Road project requires the granting of a special permit under the PCRC provisions of the Town zoning code. The property is in close proximity to NARA Park and involves potential deeding of a portion of the land to the Town for future open space use.
The discussion focused on the Conservation Commission review, location of the septic field, and an easement to provide public access to the potentially deeded conservation land.
The Acton Planning Director Kristen Guichard and a representative of the applicant’s engineering consultant, Stamski and McNary, reported on the Conservation Commission’s review of the application. A small fraction of the proposed project is within the 100-foot buffer zone of an isolated wetland. Both the Acton Planning Director and the engineering consultant described the project as having minimal impact on that wetland. Both individuals reported that the review of the two departments had indicated the need for an easement to provide access to the proposed conservation-restricted acreage. Stamski and McNary had now added a public easement along the property line.
Conservation Officer Mike Gendron entered the meeting to provide a summary of the Conservation Commission’s deliberations. He conveyed enthusiasm over the potential addition of the new open space and the possibility of connecting other open space parcels and NARA Park with this parcel through a trail that might be enabled by easement.
One Board member asked for some clarification of why the septic field would be located so far from the residences. The Stamski and McNary consulting engineer stated that the septic field is well located because it is at a low point of the property.
Because the portion of the land proposed to be deeded to the town included the septic field, there was discussion of whether the Town would be responsible for the septic field. The engineer stated that no maintenance would be required other than occasional field mowing. The Conservation Officer stated that it would be unusual for the Town to take ownership and responsibility for a septic field serving a private party. The Planning Director concurred.
The property owner, Bettina Norton, expressed her dissatisfaction with the pace of the hearing and review. She asked, “Has anyone here seen the property we are talking about? It has been extremely well cared for over the years, and is highly suitable for conservation.” The Planning Board members indicated that none of them had viewed or walked the property they were discussing. Norton invited them for a property tour.
The Board decided to continue the hearing to await the engineering consultant’s wildlife inventory, and to meanwhile direct the Planning Director to prepare a draft opinion of approval. Norton said she was dissatisfied that the Board would not be making a decision and that she would “not be able to sleep at night” until this was finished.
Norton has owned the property since the late 1940s, and made clear that it is her interest that the conservation portion of the property be maintained for the good of the town.
