A continued hearing on the proposed Central Gas Site Plan at 77 Central Street dominated much of the discussion at the Planning Board’s last May meeting. Peter Madsen, Project Engineer of Keech-Nordstrum Associates, was there to speak on behalf of the property owner.
“We are here to seeking conditional approval as we believe we have gone above and beyond to address comments from the previous meeting in February,” said Madsen.
Some of these issues included a noise study, which the applicant had done by Boston company Acentech.
“They went out to the site, they installed a sound meter where all of the action is going to be in between the convenience store and the pumps, and they monitored sound levels over seven days,” he explained, going on to say the company compared this ambient noise to the average noise of similar facilities using speakers to simulate the sounds of an active gas station and convenience store. “They found that even with all these sources on, the max sound level to nearest abutter is only going to be 46 decibels.”
At the Central Street site, zoning regulations allow up to 50 decibels. Updates to the site plan also addressed the issue of underground storage tanks, pictures of similar gas stations, and the methodology of the traffic study, which he assured the Board had been peer-reviewed.
Member, James Crowley, expressed concern over guards or trenches to keep stormwater runoff free of underground storage tanks, after failing to find such drainage in the revised site plan. State law and the site permit would require ways to keep runoff from the tanks. He also wondered why the new plan had an elevated grade when the original visuals at the first meeting indicated it would be on flat land.
“I just hate to approve a plan that I know shouldn’t be approved,” he said.
Madsen promised that the gas station would comply with all state and local regulations, saying more drainage would be added if needed.
“We’ve really tried to put our best foot forward here,” said Madsen. “I just want to reiterate that gas stations are allowed, they are an allowed use.”
Despite the reassurances, the site plan still faced questions from the Board, including the possibility of placing the entrance on Melendy Road instead of Central Street to relieve traffic, although it was unclear if the site had room for such an addition.
Crowley emphasized the need for another engineering study to look at the driveway, noting “a tremendous amount” of public input at the February meeting.
“I don’t think an exit at Melendy Road will work,” said member, Ed Van der Veen, after looking at the site map.
The Planning Board voted down requiring another engineering study and a second motion to further restrict construction hours. Several other proposals to add new requirements or stipulations to the site plan were proposed and voted down throughout the night, leading to some frustration.
“I feel like we continue to put forth requests over and over, and I’m not sure I 100% understand why we don’t support one another as a Planning Board, and why we continue to support applicant, and not the residents who are asking us and providing us all this input to do something,” said Board member, Victor Oates.
This was matched by frustration from the applicant’s side.
“These plans have been submitted by professional engineers,” said Project Attorney, Andrew Perlman, following a question over whether the gas station would have room to accommodate fuel trucks. “We’re not designing a site that’s going to fail, it doesn’t make sense.”
Despite a one-hour extension, the meeting ran out of time at 11 p.m. without a final vote on the site plan application. Two waiver requests, one regarding a 100-foot buffer between residential and commercial uses and one to allow more than one driveway onto the proposed site, were approved in a five-to-two vote.