The Board of Health at its Feb. 12 meeting again took up the Ch. 40B application for Pine Hill Village, now under discussion by the Zoning Board of Appeals. Proposed for Stow Road between Finn Road and Hillcrest Drive, the 50-bedroom, multi-building development of Carter Scott, principal of Transformations, Inc., has been problematic to the health board.
The most recent attempt to develop the property calls for each of several lots to have a mix of single- and multi-family dwellings, each lot sharing one well. A narrow, shared roadway connects the individual driveways shared by three houses, a questionable configuration from a legal standpoint, the board believes.
This plan caused the board to send a letter dated Jan. 29 to environmental engineer Robert Kimball of the Department of Environmental Protection asking its formal review of Pine Hill Village. In the letter, Chairman Tom Philippou describes the plan to subdivide one lot into five or six lots with separate condominiums, each with a private water supply. He lists two concerns: “the commonality of the access and driveways which are split [shared] by two or more separate condominiums and a completely separate lot just for drainage.”
Philippou told the DEP that no condo documents have thus far been submitted for review, but raised the ownership question and relation to public water supply. The letter also states, “the overall project would also exceed 2,000 gallons per day of sewage flow and be subject to additional sections of Title 5 for the larger flow.”
The letter concludes with a request for a determination of “ownership and control and how it relates to well and septic issues.”
The ZBA has asked the health board to review proposed 40Bs early in the application process to achieve a more thorough and balanced decision-making process. While Ch. 40B allows developers to bypass many local regulations in exchange for providing 25 percent affordable housing, it does not allow them to sidestep the health and safety regulations of local town boards.
The Pine Hill property has been the subject of previous unsuccessful efforts to develop it. The topographic nature of the 15-acre property presents hurdles to septic system installation—wetland, tough soil, a seasonal stream, and high ground water, plus a steep area with ledge. Westgate had been unable to build two single-family properties there. Scott purchased the property in 2002, and when he proposed a six-lot subdivision there in 2003, was told by the board that he would have to apply for public water supply status if more than 25 people are to reside there. The latest application introduces the “condominiumizing” of the property and shared wells.
In January Nashoba Associated Boards of Health sanitarian Ira Grossman told the board that the ZBA—the permitting authority for 40Bs—did not approve a Littleton Road 40B application because of its similar trench-between-trench septic design.
