The Southborough Zoning Board of Appeals on Jan. 26 continued the public hearing on a M.G.L. c.40B comprehensive-permit application for 250 Turnpike Road after discussions about traffic safety, emergency access, septic setbacks and vernal-pool habitat left outstanding items for further review. The board scheduled the next hearing for March 19 at 7:45 p.m.

The applicant, FD 250 Turnpike, LLC, represented by George Bonon, assistant general counsel for Ferris Development Group, and civil engineer James Tatrol, presented a recent revision to the site plan that consolidates several building blocks, pulls units farther from abutters and adds a stone-lined drainage swale to direct runoff to an on‑site wetland. "We took 2 different blocks of units here and push them together...and that allowed us to pull units a little further away from Abutters to the east," Tatrol said, and described the stone-lined swale behind units 3–11 to carry runoff to the wetland.

Why it matters: The changes respond to abutter concerns and to peer-review comments but do not yet resolve questions about emergency-vehicle access from Route 9, compliance with Massachusetts Title 5 septic setbacks, or potential impacts to vernal-pool species in adjacent wetlands — issues the board and peer reviewers said must be resolved before the hearing can close.

Traffic and emergency access

Jeffrey Dirk, managing partner at Vanessa and Associates and the town's traffic peer reviewer, said the applicant's traffic analysis shows a net reduction in traffic compared with the site's prior office use and that crash history at the nearby intersections does not indicate a disproportionate safety problem. "We agree that this project will not be any more impactful than the prior use of the site," Dirk said. He added, however, that several site‑plan issues remain material and should be addressed before the hearing is closed.

Dirk's outstanding site-plan items included fire-truck circulation in the cul‑de‑sac (including swept-path aerial clearances over trees and light poles), driveway lengths and emergency access. He recommended minimum driveway lengths of 21 feet where a sidewalk is present (23 feet where there is no sidewalk) and asked the applicant to verify specific unit driveways that did not meet those dimensions. "So the driveways should be 21 feet long measured from either the garage door or the face of the building, and the far edge of a sidewalk," Dirk said.

Dirk and the board emphasized the lack of a full second means of access into the deep site from Route 9; a secondary connection to Parkerville Road was suggested as one way to limit response-time impacts but the applicant and abutters noted practical and title constraints. Dirk said a secondary access need not be paved if it meets the fire chief's requirements for load-bearing surface and plowing, and he urged the applicant to explore options. Board members also noted the fire chief's suggestion that sprinklers and other measures could mitigate the lack of a second access.

Public commenters urged caution on safety at nearby intersections. Abutter John Palmer of 131 Parkerville Road said he has observed repeated crashes at the Route 9/Parkerville intersection: "I've been there for 10, 12 years now. There's been at least a half a dozen accidents at that intersection," Palmer said. Dirk responded that crash rate and severity metrics used in the review show the location is below the state averages for a high-crash location, but he said the project should not make existing conditions worse.

Wetlands, vernal pools and habitat

Joseph Orzel, a professional wetland scientist with Lucas Environmental and the town's wetlands peer reviewer, said the applicant has responded to many review comments but several substantive items remain. Orzel asked for more documentation showing how the project will avoid altering hydrology that feeds the wetlands and requested a retaining-wall detail to show excavations will not expand buffer impacts.

Orzel also reiterated that a vernal pool within Wetland A remains a concern: prior Conservation Commission approvals allowed limited maintenance but prohibited stump and root removal and restricted work between March 1 and July 1 to protect vernal-pool species. He asked the applicant to provide a vernal-pool migration study plan immediately so field work can begin in the spring migration season. "We're requesting that the applicant submit a migration study plan to the board as soon as possible," Orzel said.

Ryan Rosini, a wildlife biologist with Goddard Consulting, said his team will submit a draft migration-study plan to Lucas Environmental and the board by the end of the week or early the following week and that he is aware of the time-sensitive spring window.

Septic setbacks and Title 5

The wetlands reviewer flagged a potential Title 5 issue: because the site wetlands are classified as tributary to a Class A public water supply and outstanding resource water, Title 5 minimum setback distances to soil-absorption systems (100 feet in some circumstances) may apply. The applicant said it is working with its civil engineer to confirm whether the proposed leaching-field locations meet Title 5 setbacks; the issue was raised previously by civil peer review and remains under review.

Other technical items and applicant response

Applicant counsel and consultants said the January 31 revised plans were distributed to board peer reviewers and abutters and that the plan changes were made in response to board and abutter comments. Tatrol said the road length from Route 9 to the end of the cul-de-sac is just under 1,000 feet (about 980 feet), a regulatory threshold the team sought to stay under when reshaping the roadway. The applicant also confirmed that several parking and access interactions with adjacent contractor yard parcels and the existing self-storage access will be coordinated through easements.

Board action and next steps

After discussion, a board member moved and a second was recorded to continue the public hearing to March 19 at 7:45 p.m.; the motion passed by recorded voice vote: Jamie — aye; Doug — aye; Morris — aye; Mike — aye; Williams — aye. The board directed the applicant to provide additional responses to peer-review comments, submit the vernal-pool migration study plan promptly, provide clarifying Title 5 documentation or peer-review responses, and work with the fire chief on circulation, sprinkling and any secondary-access options. The hearing remains open.

The meeting also included a brief discussion of subdivision/easement plan revisions for a separate agenda item (120 Terminal) and scheduling matters; those items were left for future meetings.