The Public Safety Building Committee is inviting the public to an info session. The meeting, scheduled for Thusday of next week, is to update the public on their plans.
The committee is giving abutters and other concerned residents a chance to weigh in before it takes plans to “regulatory boards” (e.g., Planning Board and Conservation Commission).
With ambitions to break ground this coming spring, it’s just one of the steps the committee is taking to try to make the process smooth. Chair Jason Malinowski recently spoke to the Planning Board. He asked members to advise him on issues they will want to see addressed in the traffic study they will be bringing the board.*
Recently, the committee issued the following notice to abutters and asked me to share it with readers:
PUBLIC INFORMATION SESSION
The Public Safety Building Committee will host an information session at the beginning of a public meeting on Thursday November 2nd at 6 PM at the Southborough Town
House, 17 Common Street, 2nd Floor Hearing Room. The purpose of this session will be to present the most recent plans for the Public Safety Building, solicit any feedback,
and also answer any questions from abutters and any other member of the Southborough community.
This project will be heading to the town’s regulatory boards for review starting in November with a goal of shovels in the ground late-Spring 2018.
All are welcome to attend. Look forward to seeing you.
*Worth noting – following the Planning Board’s conversation with Malinowski, members informed the public of some conflict of interest issues. When the project comes up before Planning, two of the members sitting in on part of the decision will be neighbors.
That’s because, of the five member board, two members are abutters and one, who lives nearby, is considered non-abutting.
The board will have two decisions to make. The Site Plan Review will only require three acting members. For that, members Jesse Stein and Andrew Mills who both reside on MacNeil Drive will recuse themselves.
For the Special Permit for Low Impact Development, four members are required to act. For that decision, Stein will act as the furthest abutter (by two houses). It is a plan that was advised by State Ethics as conforming to the “Rule of Necessity“.
Phil Jenks disclosed the public that he lives nearby, on Latisquama Road. But he said the property is non-abutting. He also pointed out that the home is about halfway between the existing safety stations and the future project. Believing that he can be neutral about the project, he was advised by State Ethics to simply file a disclosure form. He will sit in on both decisions.
Since he hadn’t filed his forms yet, Jenks chose not to participate in the discussion on the traffic safety issues last week. Mills also abstained from the discussion.