===PAGE 1=== TOWN OF L UNENBURG Office of the Planning Board Tanner Cole, Chair Tel: (978) 582 -4147, ext 5 Matthew Allison, Vice Chair Fax: (978) 582 -4353 Paula Bertram, Clerk 960 Massachusetts Avenue Matthew Brenner, M ember Lunenburg, MA 01462 Erik Torgers en, Member Adam R. Burney Land Use Director Marjorie J. Boggio Administrative Assistant Minutes Public Hearing 225 & 259 Leominster Shirley Road March 14, 2022 Meeting Posted: Yes Place: Town Hall, 17 Main Street, Lunenburg, MA Time: 6:12 p.m. Present: Tanner Cole, Matthew Allison, Adam Burney Paula Bertram and Erik Torgersen participated remotely under the Act relative to extending certain COVID -19 measures adopted during the state of emergency. Absent: Matthew Brenner The Hearing was to hear and review applications for a stormwater management permit and site plan approval under Chapter 204 and Chapter 250, Section 8.4. of the Code of the Town of Lunenburg 225 & 259 Leominster Shirley Road. (Map 146, Parcels 15 and 14 respectively), owner/applicant PSG Realty 225-259 LLC, 133 Leominster Shirley Road, Lunenburg, MA. Representing the owner/applicant PSG Realty ( Steven Powell ) was Brian Marchetti, McCarty Engineering, Inc. PSG Realty received a special permit for dimensional variation from the Zoning Board of Appeals as the building did not conform to setback requirements, due to the parcel’s unusual shape. PSG Realty planned to construct a 12,300 sf 7 bay garage and reshape the parking areas to provide for better trucking service, maneuverability, and enhanced stormwater management and landscaping. A septic system was located on the property and the building was served by a public well. There was no stormwater infrastructure and all runoff was flowing onto Leominster Shirley Road to existing infrastructure in the vicinity of Route 70. The site consisted of approximately 2.36 acres with almost 85% of the site impervious. The existing garage will remain operational until the new building is buil t. Parking spaces would be located on the right side of the property for employees and visitors. The main body of the building would be the garage, with the office located on the left hand side. PSG Realty would maintain the setbacks approved by the Zon ing Board of Appeals. There was approximately 84,000 sf of impervious area; this would be reduced by approximately 4,000 sf. The existing septic system would stay in operation during construction, but the existing well would be decommissioned. PSG Realty would be proposing, to the Water District, an extension of the water main from Keating on Reservoir Road all the way to Route 70. PSG Realty was aware that the building could not receive an occupancy permit unti l the water main was extended. The proposed site would be graded for a stormwater collection system. Catch basins would be located next to the office and on the eastern portion of the site. The infiltration basin was proposed to be located where the current septic system is locate d. Due to th is, PSG Realty asked for the stormwater soil testing to take place during construction. Catch basins are located along Leominster Shirley Road and there is a pipe network for stormwater infrastructure along Leominster Shirley Road. Once the ne w DPW Director is on board, PSG Realty will work with that individual to locate that infrastructure for tie -in. The septic system would be reconstructed. ===PAGE 2=== Minutes, 225 & 259 Leominster Shirley Road Pg 2, March 14, 2022 Due to cancellation of the February 28 th Board meeting, PSG Realty had the opportunity to revise and resubmit plans based on review from Graves Engineering, Inc. (GEI). Based on GEI review, remaining outstanding items were:  Non-compliance of the pavement setbacks; however, the proposed improvements better organized the sit e, curb cuts, and improved landscaping along Leominster Shirley Road.  Soil testing had not been performed; however, B. Marchetti responded that was due to the current septic system being located under a paved area within the footpr int of the proposed infiltration system. With Board approval, soil testing would be conducted once the replacement septic system was constructed. M. Allison had concerns with the recharge being proposed over the existing septic. Given the footprint of the existing building and location of new building, little room was left for naturally existing soils. B. Marchetti noted t he footprint of the septic system would be over -excavated and removed. The soil was very sandy and depth to bedrock was not a conce rn; t here would be significant depth of natural soil. In viewing Board of Health plans, the existing system was very shallow. The existing system was located on the right side of the parcel; the proposed system would be located on the left side of the si te. P. Bertram inquired if soil testing had been done at the proposed location of the septic system. It was done a while ago by PSG Realty and based on the soils excavated at adjacent properties, the sand was deep. The system would be sized per vehicl e bay and office. In reviewing department comments, per the Board of Health Agent, P. Bertram requested the Board’s Conditions specify dust mitigation. Per Stormwater Permit Standard Conditions, the stormwater infrastructure needed to be installed, and functional, at the beginning of site work . As PSG Realty would be placing the drainage system where the septic system was located, A. Burney made the Board aware that this would be an alteration to the Standard Conditions. Some Board members voiced co ncerns not knowing whether there would be a well or public water, the timeline on the Water District’s approval as to the extension of the line, soil testing not being performed in the location of the proposed septic system, and what would happen to the st ormwater during construction as the stormwater system would not go in until after construction. B. Marchetti responded that the building could be installed first as that would go where there is currently pavement. He str essed that a SWPPP (Stormwater Pol lution Prevention Plan) would be submitted and sediment and stormwater would ha ve to be controlled during construction. The application for extension of the water main was filed with the Water District in summer 2021 and was currently under review. B. Ma rchetti stressed that some of these issues were building permit issues and a building permit would not be issued until these items were finalized. T. Cole suggested that the hearing be continued until PSG Realty had a decision from the Water District. B. Marchetti strongly felt that the Water District would agree to extension of the main. A. Burney recommended the hearing be continued to allow time for resolution of some of the outstanding issues. M. Allison made Motion to continue the hearing to Marc h 28, 6:05 p.m., P. Bertram Seconded, Roll Call Vote- P. Bertram, aye; E. Torgersen, aye; M. Allison, aye; T. Cole, aye. Passed unanimously. Hearing recessed 7:02 p.m. Documents used at meeting: Applications for Site Plan Approval and Stormwater Permit dtd January 27, 2022 Graves Engineering, Inc. Review Letter dtd March 4, 2022