Above: The ZBA appears to hope its conditions in a comprehensive permit for a new 40B project will sufficiently reduce impacts to opposing abutters on Parkerville Rd, Sarsen Stone Way, and Skylar Drive. (image edited from site plan and GIS Map)
The Zoning Board of Appeals issued its written decision approving the permit for a 40B housing development southwest of the corner of Route 9 and Parkerville Road.
The project proposes 32 new townhouses behind the Beehive building and contractor’s yard. The ZBA’s decision included several conditions to mitigate impacts on the Town and abutters.
The project is one of the 40Bs proposed by Southborough-based Ferris Development. The company will need to keep working with Town officials to ensure they comply with the ZBA’s decision and to address concerns raised by the public and other boards.
To move forward with the residential development project, Ferris will need to go through another hearing process with the Planning Board based on changes to the commercial sections of the property.
The 40B project consists of 28 2-bedroom units and 4 3-bedrooms. Eight of the units will be restricted as affordable housing.
The development’s only access will be a driveway through a commercial lot to Route 9. (See the most recently posted site plan right.)
The project could help the Town enter a “safe harbor” status to protect it from future unwanted 40B projects. But for some project abutters, this may be the 40B that is unwanted.
That may depend on whether or not they believe the conditions imposed in the ZBA’s decision go far enough in addressing concerns they have raised during the hearings over the past few years. Those include concerns about stormwater drainage impacts on the area given how “wet” the property is and visual screening for abutters.
The ZBA’s decision states:
The Board finds that the Project will have an adverse impact on local services and infrastructure. However, such impacts will be mitigated through appropriate conditions. . .
when built in accordance with the Plans and the conditions imposed herein, the Project will be “consistent with local needs”. . .
any unmitigated impacts posed by the Project will not outweigh the benefits provided by the Project’s affordable units.
The Board also finds that the Applicant has worked in good faith to mitigate adverse impacts to the best of its ability.
Any opponents of the project have until June 10th to file a timely appeal.
The decision calls for the developer to make its “best efforts” to secure a building permit within a year. But the permit won’t expire unless construction doesn’t begin within three years. (Under state law, the developer can also request and receive extensions “for good cause” prior to that deadline.)
This spring, as the ZBA came close to making a decision the Planning Board and Conservation Commission provided updated comments on the project. Planning’s letter included highlighting that the project reimagines plot lines for the property that were previously approved by the Planning Board. According to the letter:
Changes to the lot line will render the approved site plan for the storage facility and proposed contractor’s yard building out of compliance and will require a site plan modification.
In an April ZBA meeting, the developer’s attorney assured the ZBA that the developer would apply to the Planning Board for the revised approval. In their decision, voted on at their May 6th meeting, the ZBA added that as a permit condition.
In its decision, the ZBA also sought to address issues raised by the Conservation Commission’s letter. Some of the requirements include working with the Conservation Agent.
To read the full decision, click here. To view the project documents and communications, click here. And to read the most recent documents that were included in the ZBA’s packet for the May 6th meeting in which they voted, click here.
Project Background
The project initially proposed by Ferris Development in 2023 sought to build a 4 story, 56 unit condo building. That drew fierce public opposition from abutters and the neighborhoods of Sarsen Stone Way and Skylar Drive.
Some neighbors claimed that the new property owner was violating an agreement made by prior owners and the Town in order to gain the neighbors’ support for permitting the commercial section of the property directly abutting Route 9.
Residents objected to the building height and proximity to their yards, the potential for increased traffic on Parkerville Road, and worsening water issues on the property.
In June 2024, after working with some of the neighbors, Ferris proposed an alternative scenario with 28 townhouses. The next month, that number grew to 32. While some neighbors still continued to raise some concerns about the project, the overall opposition appeared less intense.
However, at the final night of ZBA hearings on the permit, residents were still voicing worries. John St. Andre of Sklyar Drive told the board that he continued to speak on behalf of most abutters from the neighborhood. He highlighted concerns of engineers and the Conservation Commission that weren’t yet resolved.
John Palmer, did not believe that Town officials had correctly or sufficiently addressed the stormwater and septic issues the project poses given wetlands and a tributary to the reservoir.
St. Andre suggested the plan could be more viable if reduced to 28 units. ZBA minutes recap ZBA member Doris Cahill’s response:
her experience is that if they press the developer too much, they don’t have to build the project at all, so she is going to take the applicant at their word that it is not economically feasible to reduce units. She stated it is more financial burden on all involved to disprove the point.
Under state law, when the Town doesn’t qualify for “safe harbor” from 40B projects, it is limited in how restrictive conditions can be. A developer has the right to appeal imposed conditions if they can make a case that it destroys the economic viability of a project.
The ZBA closed its hearing for the project on April 15th. The board deliberated on May 6th to draft and vote on the decision. The Chair, David Williams, was authorized to write up and issue the final version. It was submitted to the Town Clerk’s office on May 20th and posted today.
