Category Archives: Development

Met with MA Secretary of Housing & Economic Development

Jay Ash

Yesterday morning Mike Sullivan, Richard DeSorgher and I met with Jay Ash, the Massachusetts Secretary of Housing and Economic Development to learn what the state can do to assist Medfield with our economic development and housing issues (see photo above).

After that four town meeting (Wrentham, Norfolk, Walpole, and Medfield) at the Wrentham Town Hall, Medfield showed the Secretary the former Medfield State Hospital site (see photo below).

Jay Ash at MSH

My main take aways:

  • the opportunities to get the MSH site listed as ready for development on the MassEcon 100,
  • to have the man who talks to more developers than any one else in the state be able to talk up our site, and
  • to just have the man who administers all state economic development and housing monies know about the MSH site and its expected development so he can help get the word out and be knowledgeable if and when grant applications are made.

Interesting tidbits learned during the discussions:

  • Electric Time reportedly could not complete on price with what The Parc was willing to pay for that site, so an industrial site became a residential site, and
  • Walpole is negotiating with an international company to site a facility that will provide 600 jobs – company is looking for 90% reduction in its taxes.

LCB’s proposed assisted living

Peak House & Clark Tavern

LCB of Norwood is proposing to build a 78 unit assisted living facility on a large tract of land zoned for residential use on Rte. 109 behind the Peak House and the Clark Tavern.  The land is actually U shaped and so large that it fronts on Rte. 109 in two places on both sides of those and the other intervening properties.

As the first step in the required permitting process, LCB has applied to the Conservation Commission for needed permissions to do work near the wetlands.  I asked to have that LCB application put on-line, because I figured there would be lots of interest.  Deb had a hard copy from being on the ConCom, so I was able to review that one.

The on-line version is at the town website under the ConCom section (look under the heading on the right captioned FORMS & PUBLICATIONS, there seem to be three PDF files) –

http://www.town.medfield.net/index.cfm/page/Land-and-Property/pid/21353

When this proposal first surfaced, I reviewed the current zoning bylaw and its recent amendment at the 2012 town meeting, when the town added assisted living facilities as permitted uses, and I concluded that there is a serious legal question as to whether assisted living facilities are in fact a permitted use in residential zones in Medfield.  I assume that issue will get fully vetted and sorted out when the permitting gets before the ZBA.

Assisted living behind Clark Tavern

LCB Senior Living of Norwood, MA purchased land behind the Clark Tavern and  had previously indicated that they wanted to build assisted living there (about 70 units from memory).

This email below this afternoon from Mike Sullivan.  I asked Mike if he could scan the filing and put it online, where it is bound to generate great interest.


The Notice of Intent for the Assisted Living Facility proposed behind the Clark Tavern site was received yesterday. A copy was given to the Selectmen;s Office today and is available for any of you to review. Leslee tells me the Conservation Commission has [sic]

 

Thoughts on MSH as planning begins

Sarah Raposa, our Town Planner, sent out the agenda for the first meeting on Wednesday with the town’s master planning consultant, VHB, for the former Medfield State Hospital site.  As part of her email, Sarah suggested that people jot down thoughts, and below are mine:


Medfield State Hospital Site – Issues to Consider at Outset of the Planning Process

1.    Clean Slate – The past discussions and the visioning session created an interesting list of ideas, but should in no way limit options going forward.

2.    Infrastructure – lots needed, and best if developers instead of town can be made to pay

3.    Natural Resources – exist in abundance, and will continue to exist in abundance even if the town opts for a dense development

4.    Environmental – site has been mainly cleaned of known hazards, except the lead paint and asbestos in the buildings

5.    Transportation – none available – shuttle to downtown and train would be ideal

6.    Historic Resources – buildings are beautiful, but likely too far gone to be preserved

7.    Arts & Culture – it would serve the town well to spend to make such uses happen

8.    Housing – will be the economic engine of any development, and if planned well, even if dense, need not be feared in terms of municipal costs and impacts

9.    Open Space & Recreation – exist in abundance, and will continue to exist in abundance even if the town opts for a dense development

Assisted living facility proposed

LCB Senior Living, LLC of Norwood purchased land behind the Peak House in December and is proposing the construction of a 72 unit assisted living facility on the site.  LCB has reportedly also purchased a home on Main Street to provide access.  Assisted living facilities are a use permitted on the residential zoned land if the ZBA grants a special permit.

Mike Sullivan reports that LCB met with town officials last week about its proposal.  See LCB’s other similar facilities built by LCB at its website, www.lcbseniorliving.com.

LCB reported that none of the units will be affordable, as the economics of including affordable units would require the facility to be many times larger.  That means the proposed facility would add 72 units to our housing stock, as each bed counts as a separate unit, and to reach our 10% affordable housing threshold we would need another 8 affordable units.  Per a presentation to selectmen Tuesday evening, we currently need another 136 affordable units to reach our 10% threshold if one includes the 92 units at The Parc that is now in construction.  Those 72 units LCB proposes would require another 8 to make us need 144 more to get to 10%.

Below are the Medfield zoning bylaws involved, and that list the findings the ZBA must make for it to grant a special permit.  The ZBA clearly has lots of discretion on this issue, neither to allow or deny any application, so the evidence presented at the hearings will probably be the determinative factor.

This is another example of how our town’s zoning decisions, as reflected in the bylaws we adopt at town meeting, allow different, non-residential uses to be sited next to homes in residential areas.


USES:

5.4.4.10            Hospice or nursing homes, convalescent and assisted living facilities and medical and dental offices   –  SP


SPECIAL PERMITS:
14.10.5 After the public hearing required by Section 14.10.3 has been concluded, the Board of Appeals may grant a special permit if it concludes that a special permit is warranted by the application and the evidence produced at the public hearing and if it makes the following specific findings of fact:

a) The proposed use will not result in a public hazard due to substantially increased vehicular traffic or parking in the neighborhood. In deciding this, the Board shall find affirmatively that
the road’s structure, surroundings and configuration are such as will support the added traffic safely.

b) The proposed use will not have any adverse effect upon property values in the neighborhood.

c) The proposed use is architecturally and aesthetically consistent with the other structures in the neighborhood.

d) The proposed use will not create any hazard to public safety or health in the neighborhood.

e) The proposed use will not create any danger of pollution to public or
private water facilities.

f) The methods of drainage at the proposed site are adequate.

g) If public sewerage is not provided, plans for on-site sewage disposal systems are adequate and have been approved by the Board of Health.

h) That no excessive noise, light or odor shall be emitted.

i) That no nuisance shall be created.

j) There is an adequate supply of potable water approved by the Board of Health or the Water and Sewer Board.

 

EDC opts for sports facility over Sr. housing

Economic Development Committee
TOWN HOUSE, 459 MAIN STREET MEDFIELD, MASSACHUSETTS 02052-2009
RE: Lot 3 Ice House Road
Dear Selectmen,

At a duly posted meeting of the Economic Development Committee
At their duly posted meeting on November 21, 2014, the present members of the Medfield Economic
Development Committee voted unanimously to recommend that the Town issue a Request for Proposals
(RFP) for the development of an indoor sports facility on Lot 3, Ice House Road. This decision was
based on the review of the two Expressions of lnterests reviewed by the Town on November  14, 2014.
One of the proposals was for the sports facility while the other presented a concept for
age-restricted senior housing.

The Committee reached its decision by assessing the proposal against the following selection
criteria: potential tax revenue, possible lease terms, services, connections to existing uses, job
creation; as well as with the overarching mission of the Economic Development Committee.

The vote was based on the following benefits (in no particular order of priority):
•  No zoning change required, proposed use is allowable under zoning
•  The use complements the existing recreational use of the Kingsbury Club
•  The risk of development is privatized; the Town does not incur the capital expense or management
of such a facility
•  Similar tax revenues

Notwithstanding the above, the Committee does see the value in senior housing and asserts that the
Hinkley property is better suited for housing due to its zoning and proximity to The CENTER.

The Committee also discussed the connection to the Medfield State Hospital property and ongoing
planning efforts. The Committee feels that to delay development of Lot 3 will go against the wishes
of the 2014 Annual Town Meeting vote that authorized the Selectmen to enter a lease agreement for
development of Lot 3. Further, tax revenue could be realized sooner than the eventual development
of Hospital Hill. The citizens of Medfield have demonstrated support for this type of project that
would not be suitable for overall aesthetic of Hospital Hill.

Issuing an RFP and following proper procurement may also offer the opportunity to capture more
developers with a specialty in indoor sports facilities and will level the playing field comparing
like projects. It will also offer the Town the ability to review the sublease option of the
Kingsbury Club.

The Economic Development Committee believes that the reviews performed by the various land use
committees (Planning Board, Zoning Board of Appeals, Board of Health, and Conservation Commission)
will mitigate potential negative impacts to the surrounding neighborhoods and The CENTER.

We look forward to meeting with you at your meeting on December 2, 2014.
Sincerely,

Patrick Casey, Chairman
Economic Development Committee

MSH-PC notes from last night

The Medfield State Hospital Planning Committee heard from Beth Murphy of MassDevelopment about her “carrier” redeveloping the Northampton State Hospital.  Fascinating insights from someone who has recently already done what we are about to undertake.


TOWN OF MEDFIELD

       Medfield State Hospital

Planning Committee

 

MEETING OF:

September 9, 2014

MINUTES

Committee Members:

Stephen J. Browne

Patrick Casey

Ralph Costello

Theresa James

Randal Karg – absent

Stephen M. Nolan

David Perini – absent

Kenneth J. Richard

Gil Rodgers


 7:00 pm: Beth Murphy, VP Real Estate, MassDevelopment, Springfield Office

Beth described MassDevelopment’s role in the redevelopment of Northampton State Hospital. She toured MSH prior to the meeting with Gil Rodgers. Her main points of advice are:

  1. A thoughtful master plan is essential; allows the Town to be clear about what it wants from developers
  2. Develop as a whole to get full value out of the site. The Town may decide to sell to one developer or multiple developers for different uses. Consider strategy as one developer might be able to underwrite the high cost of demolition and infrastructure prior to development.
  3. Take the time to do a comprehensive job; five years is realistic
  4. Don’t skimp on maintenance, security, and demolition; do demolition up front
    • Discussion on Mass Historical Commission’s position on demolition and the integrity to the historic designation versus use of state and federal tax credits for commercial redevelopment
    • Historic Preservation consultant as part of the planning process to identify the best development plan in concert with development plan
  5. Manage community expectations; Citizen Advisory Committee held regular public participation meetings
  6. Northampton was zoned using a “Planned Village Overlay District” special permit and each lot is subject to Site Plan Review by the Planning Board. The overlay removes dimensional requirements and allows flexibility in design to achieve the overarching goal of a walkable, dense community. Discussion of Northampton demographics and target market.
  7. Despite the immense costs associated with redevelopment Village Hill is successful for the following reasons:
    • Increased tax revenue
    • Green building
    • Fits within the overall community
    • Elimination of blight

 

Gil’s extensive notes on Village Hill can be viewed here:

http://mshvision.net/downloads/notes-on-nsh-010914.pdf

 

Village Hill Northampton website: http://www.villagehillnorthampton.com/

 

Upcoming Events and Updates:

  • Saturday, September 20, 2014 9:00 to 3:00 pm – Medfield Day
  • Tuesday, September 23, 2014 at 7:00 pm – Lessons from Foxborough State Hospital
  • Sunday, September 28, 2014 at 2:00 pm – Site tour of Foxborough State Hospital

Gil’s Foxborough notes can be viewed here:

http://mshvision.net/downloads/foxborough-comparison.pdf

  • Saturday, September 20, 2014 9:00 to 3:00 pm
  • Change regular meeting to first and third Wednesdays starting in October due to member conflict
  • Alec Stevens will remain the facilitator of MSHVISION.NET but all info should be pre-written before given to him
  • The History of Medfield State Hospital prepared by Richard DeSorgher and John Thompson was distributed to committee members
  • Steve Nolan to schedule MSH building tour (tentatively for Friday, October 3, 2014 at 3:00 pm)
  • Thursday, September 18, 2014 at 7:00 pm – RFP Subcommittee meeting (planning office)

 

Committee Organization

  • Ken Richard nominated Steve Nolan as Chairman; Seconded by Steve Browne; The Vote: 6-0 (Nolan abstained)
  • Notes will be prepared by committee members on a rolling basis

8:45 pm: Adjournment

 

Respectfully submitted,

Sarah Raposa, Town Planner
 

On being a selectman

Board of Selectmen Meeting

When the selectmen meeting ended at 9PM on Tuesday evening, I walked over to the Bros. Marketplace, and despite learning that they had just closed (they were all cleaning up), they still let me buy a loaf of bread to make a meal out of.  The friendliness of that gesture, along with the tasty bread, won me over to being a customer.  Just as I find in my law practice, it is all about the customer service.

Medfield State Hospital

Meeting last night of the Negotiating Committee with DCAMM.  Again dinner after 9PM.

Arts Center

Jean Mineo came to my office hours in Straw Hat Park this morning, and laid out her plans to seek some sort of community arts center as part of the Medfield State Hospital site redevelopment.  She noted that the arts center in Maynard is cited by residents in that town as the thing in town of which they are most proud, and that the DeCordova in Lincoln in a signature feature of that town.  This concept got me really excited for the possibilities.

Jean said that she is also looking to identify all artists in town, so that they can start to communicate with one another, and perhaps collaborate in mutually beneficial ways.  If you are a Medfield artist, you should get in touch with Jean.

 

Housing for those Age 55+

Roberta Lynch, Director of the Council on Aging, came to my office hours at The Center to discuss her desire to build reasonably priced small single floor housing for those age 55 and over, near The Center on Ice House Road’s lot 3 and the Hinkley field land, to take advantage of the synergies that would be available from adjoining The Center.  We also discussed how housing for that age group has been talked about for the Medfield State Hospital site redevelopment, and that the Medfield State Hospital Master Planning Committee member (and housing developer), Ralph Costello, described at our Tuesday selectmen meeting when discussing that sort of housing that one gets to different price points by adjusting the density.  This concept also got me really excited for the possibilities.

MSH purchase bill & MPC status

Bill Massaro provided to me a link to a clearer version of the legislation that authorizes the town to buy the former MSH site.  The link is above the actual legislation is below.

The MSH Master Planning Committee has had one meeting so far in what is to be its 10 month task to get the town to a planned redevelopment of the site.  Their first task is to put out an RFP for the consultant who will do the heavy lifting and work to get all the planning done on that accelerated basis.

The MSH MPC will meet the second that fourth Tuesdays of the month, starting 9/9/2014, when they will hear from Beth Murphy from Mass Development about how Northampton State Hospital was redeveloped.  At their 9/23 meeting they will hear from Foxboro planners about the Foxboro State Hospital project.


Chapter 211 AN ACT AUTHORIZING THE COMMISSIONER OF CAPITAL ASSET MANAGEMENT AND MAINTENANCE TO CONVEY CERTAIN PARCELS OF LAND IN THE TOWN OF MEDFIELD

     Whereas, The deferred operation of this act would tend to defeat its purpose, which is to provide forthwith for the conveyance of land in the town of Medfield, therefore it is hereby declared to be an emergency law, necessary for the immediate preservation of the public convenience.

     Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court assembled, and by the authority of the same as follows:
     SECTION 1.  Notwithstanding sections 32 to 37, inclusive, of chapter 7C of the General Laws, chapter 269 of the acts of 2008 or any other general or special law to the contrary, the commissioner of capital asset management and maintenance may convey certain parcels of land located at the former Medfield State Hospital to the town of Medfield.  The parcels are shown as parcel A and parcel B on a plan entitled “Compiled Plan of Land, Medfield State Hospital, Medfield, Massachusetts, prepared for Division of Capital Asset Management”, dated June 14, 2005, prepared by Judith Nitsch Engineering, Inc., on file with the division of capital asset management and maintenance. The exact location and boundaries of the parcels to be conveyed shall be determined by the commissioner, in consultation with the town of Medfield.  The use of the parcels to be conveyed to the town shall not be restricted to use for municipal or other specific purposes; provided, however, that the town may so restrict the parcels at a later date, in accordance with any applicable general and special laws.  The parcels shall be conveyed by deed without warranties or representations by the commonwealth.
SECTION 2.  As consideration for the conveyance of the parcels described in section 1, the town of Medfield shall pay the commonwealth an amount equal to certain costs related to the closure of the former state hospital in Medfield including, but not limited to, the costs of removing combustible materials, disconnecting certain utilities and otherwise closing those buildings located on the parcels conveyed, routine security and other capital expenditures and operating expenses incurred by the commonwealth in preparation for or following the closure of the former state hospital, as determined by the commissioner and agreed to by the town.  The town of Medfield may pay the amount so determined by the commissioner and agreed to by the town upon its purchase of the parcels described in section 1 or the town may pay the amount so determined in 10 annual payments pursuant to section 20A of chapter 58 of the General Laws. If the town’s payment of consideration pursuant to this section so requires, the town may seek voter approval pursuant to subsection (k) of section 21C of chapter 59 of the General Laws.
SECTION 3.  In the event that the town of Medfield sells or leases any portion of the parcels described in section 1, the net proceeds from such sale or lease as determined by the town and agreed to by the commissioner, shall be allocated between the town of Medfield and the commonwealth in equal shares; provided, however, that the commissioner may agree to reduce the share of the commonwealth’s proceeds to not less than 30 per cent of net proceeds in order to provide certain incentives to the town of Medfield to sell or lease any of the parcels described in section 1 expeditiously or to facilitate the development of some or all of the parcels in accordance with smart growth principles promulgated from time to time by the governor and the secretary of energy and environmental affairs.  In the event that the net proceeds, as so determined, is a negative amount, the commonwealth shall not be required to make any payments to the town of Medfield.
SECTION 4.  Notwithstanding any general or special law to the contrary, the town of Medfield shall pay for all costs and expenses of the transactions authorized in this act as determined by the commissioner including, but not limited to, the costs of any recording fees and deed preparation related to the conveyances and for all costs, liabilities and expenses of any nature and kind related to the town’s ownership of the parcels; provided, however, that such costs shall be included for the purposes of determining the net proceeds of the town’s sale or lease of any portion of the parcels described in section 1.  Amounts paid by the town of Medfield pursuant to section 2 shall not be included for the purposes of determining the net proceeds from a sale or lease.
SECTION 5.  Notwithstanding chapter 269 of the acts of 2008 or any other general or special law to the contrary, parcels A-1 and A-2, as shown on the plan referenced in section 1 shall be maintained as open space or used for agricultural and passive recreation purposes, subject to those subsurface utility easements on parcel A-1 serving the town’s water system.  Notwithstanding the foregoing, but subject to such subsurface utility easements, the commissioner of capital asset management and maintenance may transfer the care and custody of parcels A-1, A-2 and C, or portions thereof, to the department of conservation and recreation for open space and passive recreation purposes.  Such transfer shall be without consideration and shall not be subject to chapter 7C of the General Laws.
SECTION 6.  (a) In the event that the town of Medfield does not complete its purchase of the property described in section 1 on or before December 31, 2015, then notwithstanding sections 33 to 38, inclusive, of chapter 7C of the General Laws or any other general or special law to the contrary, the commissioner may sell, lease for terms of up to 99 years, including all renewals and extensions, or otherwise grant, convey or transfer to purchasers or lessees an interest in the property described in section 1 or portions thereof, subject to this section and on such terms and conditions that the commissioner considers appropriate; provided, however, that the purchase by the town of Medfield shall be considered complete upon the transfer of title to the parcels described in section 1 to the town. The commissioner shall dispose of the property, or portion thereof, using appropriate competitive bidding processes and procedures. At least 30 days before the date on which bids, proposals or other offers to purchase or lease a property, or any portion thereof, are due, the commissioner shall place a notice in the central register published by the state secretary pursuant to section 20A of chapter 9 of the General Laws stating the availability of the property, the nature of the competitive bidding process and other information that the commissioner considers relevant, including the time, place and manner for the submission of bids and proposals and the opening of the bids or proposals.
(b)  Notwithstanding any general or special law to the contrary, the grantee or lessee of all or any portion of the property described in section 1 and subject to this section shall be responsible for costs and expenses including, but not limited to, costs associated with deed preparation and recording fees related to the conveyances and transfers authorized in this section as such costs may be determined by the commissioner.
(c)  No agreement for the sale, lease, transfer or other disposition of the property described in section 1 and subject to this section, or any portion thereof, and no deed executed by or on behalf of the commonwealth, shall be valid unless the agreement or deed contains the following certification, signed by the commissioner:
“I, the undersigned commissioner of capital asset management and maintenance, hereby certify under penalties of perjury that I have fully complied with the relevant provisions of general and special laws in connection with the property described in this document.”
SECTION 7.  In any disposition pursuant to section 1 or section 6, the commissioner may retain, accept or acquire by purchase, transfer, lease, eminent domain pursuant to chapter 79 of the General Laws or otherwise and may grant by deed, transfer, lease or otherwise any rights-of-way or easements in, over or beneath any parcel or any portion thereof or any other portions of the former Medfield State Hospital, as the commissioner deems necessary and appropriate for the continued access to, egress from and use of portions of the former Medfield State Hospital including, without limitation, parcels A-1 and A-2, by the general public or other state agencies or to carry out this act; provided however that in any disposition pursuant to section 1, such retention, acceptance, acquisition, or grant of any rights-of-way or easements in, over or beneath parcels A or B shall be subject to the approval of the town of Medfield.
SECTION 8.  Sections 1 to 4, inclusive, shall take effect in the town of Medfield upon their acceptance by a majority vote of the board of selectmen of the town of Medfield but not otherwise.

Approved, August 1, 2014.

Mural on side of Brothers Marketplace

This is what the mural on the side of the Brothers Marketplace is going to look like, per the plans submitted to the town, that are displayed on an easel just inside the front door of the Town House.  The photo and the intelligence to take the photo are both courtesy of much missed former Medfield Patch editor, par extraordinaire, Theresa Knapp.

photo of mural