Planning Board gnashes latest Smith proposal

Topsfield developer Christopher Nash and representatives from Ducharme and Dillis appeared before the Planning Board and a room full of concerned residents on Wednesday night to present a conceptual plan to commercially redevelopment the Smith property on Main Street. It was the second time this year that a developer has appeared before the Planning Board for such a purpose.

Facing the prospect of having to ask for a zoning change at the Annual Town Meeting in May (from residential to business or to limited-business) in order to move the project forward, the developer was looking for indications of support from the Planning Board. He did not get it.

Topsfield Associates' conceptual proposal for the redevelopment of the Smith property. Click to enlarge.

The drawings presented two buildings (a single-floor structure of 13,000 sq. ft. with a drive-through bay, and a two-floor structure of 20,000 square feet), plus 135 parking spaces. The developed area would be confined to about half the lot. Water, septic, and runoff would all be handled on-site. The proponents made it clear that the one-floor, 13,000 square feet building was intended for an anchor tenant, an unnamed chain pharmacy, presumably CVS or equivalent. The other building would house retail shops on the first floor and offices on the second floor. The project hinges on the pharmacy tenant.

The proposal included two entrances from Main Street, one directly across from Wattaquadoc that would require the removal of the existing historic house.  The developer acknowledged the need for a traffic study and indicated a desire “to work with the state” in exploring options that would include signalizing the intersection as well as widening Main Street in order to introduce a westbound left-turn lane onto Wattaquadock. Plans seemed to suggest that the use of off-road state highway easements would be required to accommodate the third lane. This would likely encroach upon sidewalks and front yards near the intersection.

There was no mention of a residential impact study.

The developer offered a willingness to negotiate conservation restrictions and trail easements on the rear of the lot in order to control access to backlot properties.

The developer argued that this proposal represented the smallest scale of commercial development that was economically viable for the property given the challenges associated with the parcel—challenges that include a zoning change requirement for business use, costs of contamination cleanup, proximity to wetlands, the existence of a perennial stream (Great Brook) that crosses the property, and the need for traffic congestion mitigation.

Many in the audience and on the Board questioned the scale and architectural style of the proposed buildings as well as the overall impact of the project on the historic town center. When questioned about a new pharmacy on Route 20 in Wayland, Nash admitted that that store “would never have been approved if it was located within the [Wayland Center] historic district”— a district, he added, that is similar to Bolton’s in age and style of architecture. Nash is a former member of the Wayland Historical Commission.

Nash closed his comments by saying that “the bottom line is this tenant [the chain pharmacy] is interested in the town. If the town does not wish the tenant to be in this location, then they’ll go down the street…. The whole idea here is to have an economically viable project to redevelop this critical commercial property in the center of town, which is zoned residential. We’re here informally and if people don’t want to do it then we’ll leave, but the tenant’s not leaving. They will go to another location… And this site will stay vacant and it will not contribute economically and it will continue to be an environmental threat for years to come, in my opinion. That’s not a threat, just a comment.”

After 90 minutes of presentation and discussion, each member of the Planning Board was asked by the Chair to summarize their reactions in an informal poll. “Not appropriate for this site,” said the first Board member. “I’m opposed,” said another, “scale is too large…it is a residential neighborhood…” In the end, none of the six members of the Planning Board voiced support for the proposal. And from the tone of the comments and questions, it was evident that those in the audience were of the same mind as the Planning Board.

It was unclear whether the developer would go forward as planned with a meeting seeking the support of the Board of Selectmen, tentatively scheduled for December 16.

The meeting was broadcast and taped by BatCo (Comcast Ch. 10). Click the triangle below to listen to the full audio of the discussion.


This entry was posted in General, Planning Board, Smith property and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Planning Board gnashes latest Smith proposal

  1. chuck says:

    Citizens of Bolton, Stand up now and nip this new proposal for the Smith Properety in the bud ! Do not let it get any momentem what so ever ! Let this developer know we will not allow this to happen in our town center and he will never get a zoning change from us. I am very happy to have read the Planning Board is against this.

  2. Joe Myerson says:

    Your summary of the meeting was right-on. The only thing I would add was the comment–I think by Chairman Doug Storey–that a big chain pharmacy just “wasn’t right for the center of town.” That seemed to be the sentiment of the assembled residents, as well as the board members.
    Thanks to this website, residents are able to hear about these meetings and attend them. And it’s gratifying to see that the town’s Planning Board is on the same page as most of the residents.
    Let’s all remain vigilant, and also be prepared to accept some changes to Main Street.

  3. Barbara Bing says:

    If the proposed development anchored by a 13,000 sq. ft. chain drugstore is truly the only sort of commercial development that is “economically viable” for the Smith property, then surely Bolton citizens can come up with a more appropriate use for this land in the heart of the town. Let’s put our heads together — be creative — and develop a plan that will enhance the Town Center and become an attractive addition to town life.

  4. David Drugge says:

    Lets see…. development of a small village 4-6 buildings built in a scale that blends in with our rural character or two massive structures tucked behind main street.
    Which design best fits Bolton Center… is there an in-between?
    “No” will not work forever, we will have only one shot at working with someone who will develop this property.
    Who thought the Regency would look like it does now? To me me its just a small step up from the camp ground it used to be. Great development but just a bit dense if you ask me.
    I believe something can be developed at this property we could all be proud of… or it could be something we will all have to live with.

  5. Faith says:

    Why in the world would we want a chain pharmacy in the center of town when there are three chain pharmacies in Clinton, several in Hudson, and probably one in Stow as well? Let’s bring in something that would not only get business from folks in town but also bring in folks from surrounding towns that aren’t already glutted with that type of store…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s