Discussion of MUD Development Begins

The Dunstable Board of Selectmen and members of the MUD Proposal Review Committee met with representatives of Harvest Fields, LLC last Wednesday (Jul 12) to discuss plans for the development that is being planned for the Mixed Use District (MUD) behind the post office. Skip Ciccarelli and Mark Cunningham of Cunningham Contracting, and Dick Doherty of Hancock Associates civil engineering firm were there to represent the newly-formed Harvest Fields partnership. The purpose of the meeting was to open discussion on a number of areas they each hope to agree on before proceeding with any detailed plans. The MUD development is a critical component of Dunstable's affordable housing production strategy.

Last month, the Selectmen chose Harvest Fields as the design concept and development team that best meets the requirements of the Request for Proposals issued last January. Over the course of several meetings, the Selectmen and MUD Proposal Review Committee identified a number of key areas they wanted to discuss.

In discussing land use and conceptual layout, the town asked to have conceptual plans show the location of:

• A common area with access to the proposed conservation land and parking for non-residents. They clarified that the town would not expect the developer to create trails through the conservation land.
• A bus stop
• Fire hydrants and a plan for adequate fire protection. In the discussion of this point, they touched on the idea of having a cistern, or a dry hydrant supplied by Salmon Brook, or having a "wet" water detention area that would supply water for fighting fires.
• Adequate drainage systems and plans for surface water control, as well as a designated area for snow plows to push the snow.

They want to have the design of the sewage and waste water treatment system to be presented and approved relatively early in the process. The town would like to have a third party review the design of the sewage treatment system.

The town expressed a strong interest in seeing the buildings laid out in a more circular grouping around a "common." In response to this request, the developers asked if they could be permitted to cross the line that Dunstable's Conservation Commission had drawn across the plan as the boundary limit for building structures for the purposes of the RFP. Harvest Fields indicated that the circular design would be more feasible if they could cross the line, but stay outside the boundaries of the 100 year flood plain and the 50 foot wetlands buffer. Harvest Fields is planning to survey the property in order to get a more detailed topographic layout of the site, as well as a more precise definition of wetlands boundaries.

In the discussion of architectural concerns, they covered the need to stay within the town's height limitations for fire safety. The town would also prefer to see attached garages, In response to the concern that garage doors on the front of condos is less desirable, the town suggested that they could try a design with a perimeter road that would provide access to garages from the back of the condos and leave front doors open to the common area.

Harvest Fields: Proposed development concept, likely to change based on discussion.

The Harvest Fields developers came to the meeting with a revised conceptual layout that addressed some of the issues, but still failed to show a more circular layout and attached garages. However, they were quick to clarify that they expect the discussions will result in further refinement of the concept.

Selectman Gaudette clarified that the town's expectation concerning the footprint of any commercial development in place of the green house out on Pleasant Street is that the footprint would not exceed the footprint of the house and the garage combined with the land between the house and the garage. Harvest Fields had proposed 3500 sq ft. of commercial space, when 5000 would be within the scope of the town's RFP.

The discussion of the project's timing relative to the town's affordable housing production plan touched on its relationship to the already approved Salmon Brook Commons 40B project. The state only requires Dunstable to approve 7-8 affordable housing units per year. Thirty units were certified based on approval of Salmon Brook Commons, which gave Dunstable a 2 year deferment on 40B appeals. Gorman Management is expected to get a building permit for Salmon Brook Commons by the end of September. If that doesn't happen, then the town would want to get the MUD units certified sooner than what was originally planned.

Another concern is the 12 inch water main that Gorman Management has agreed to run along Pleasant Street, replacing the 4 inch pipe that currently serves customers between Pond Street and the Post Office. The water main improvement is required to support the Salmon Brook Commons development. The MUD project also depends on that water line being installed. "We're prepared to run that line if we have to," said Mr. Ciccarelli. They would expect to have part of their costs defrayed by any new customers that would tap into the water line.

The Selectmen also asked whether a higher percentage of the units could be planned as 1 bedroom units. The town wants to limit the number of bedrooms in order to minimize the impact of the development on the town's infrastructure, particularly the schools. Mr. Doherty explained that the state regulations already limit the number of bedrooms to 90 for the type of sewage treatment system they would install. In a 50 unit development, 10 units would have to be 1 bedroom units. The developers were reticent to increase that number because they questioned the marketability of 1 bedroom units. The group also discussed ideas for providing storage without creating space that could be converted into additional bedrooms.

High on the developers' list of concerns was the expense of meeting the town's sewage treatment requirements. Mr. Doherty estimated that it would cost approximately $350,000 to meet the state requirements. "This isn't even a Cadillac of a system you're asking for. It's a Rolls Royce," said Mr. Doherty. He estimated that meeting Dunstable's requirements could cost as much as $500,000-$750,000 and questioned whether it was really necessary to add that expense to the project, given that it would ultimately impact the cost of the units. Selectman Gaudette explained that the town's septic requirements are designed to preserve the town's water quality and that the Board of Health is particularly concerned about the proximity of this development to Salmon Brook, which is the town's drinking water supply. However, the question was quickly deferred to the Board of Health, since it would be better to have engineers talk to engineers in order to resolve the issue.

The meeting ended with the expectation that Harvest Fields would do a survey of the property to accurately define the contour lines and location of the wetlands and then present some alternative ideas for the layout of the project to address some of the concerns raised in this discussion. They will also talk to the Conservation Commission to see if they would allow some structures to cross the line they drew, and they will talk to the Board of Health about the requirements for the sewage treatment system. The next meeting with the Selectmen and MUD committee is expected to be in late August.