The City of Norton Planning Commission reviewed a preliminary site plan (SPR 15 2025) from Ganley Ford for a new service garage at 28 Barber Road and said it is receptive to dividing the project into two phases — construction of the building first and wetland/site work later — while engineering and wetland approvals proceed.

At the meeting, city staff summarized the application and cautioned that wetlands and mapped floodplain issues are the project’s primary hurdles. As city staff noted, the packet contains an engineering report with a number of requirements the applicant must satisfy before a final site plan can be approved. "Probably the biggest hurdle ... is the wetland and maybe floodplain issues that the property puts forth," a staff summary said.

Paul Serco, the applicant’s representative, told the commission that the project will be built over a floodplain but that the design team plans to raise the site and that approvals are already in progress. "We are planning to raise the entire site out of the flood plain," Serco said, and he proposed splitting the work so the building could be constructed while wetland approvals conclude.

Commissioners and the applicant discussed options including purchasing wetland mitigation credits and either consolidating parcels or providing easements between parcels to permit phased construction. Commissioners emphasized that any phase allowed to start must be accompanied by a finished site plan signed off by the engineer that clearly delineates what is included in phase one. A representative of the engineering firm GPD also said engineer input will be required to avoid starting a phase with unresolved items.

The chair asked staff to draft a resolution capturing the commission’s comments: that the commission is receptive to a two‑phase plan (building and wetlands), that the applicant should address the engineering comments (engineering report dated Dec. 9), and that parcel consolidation or appropriate easements should be clarified. Because this was a preliminary site plan review, the commission did not take a formal action to approve the plan; instead staff will provide formal written comments to the applicant and circulate the resolution.

The discussion also included practical site questions: Serco said the project will require bringing fill ("about a couple feet on the average" on the south side) and that the team will verify setbacks and whether a perimeter fence is needed. Public comment at the meeting noted local flood history and on‑site pumping systems; one business representative said the Ganley Ford site had not historically experienced standing water despite its mapped floodplain.

Next steps: staff will send the engineering comments and the drafted resolution to the applicant; the commission indicated it would expect a finalized, engineer‑signed phasing plan before allowing construction to proceed under a phased approach.