Use this search box to find articles that have run in our newspapers over the last several years.
Date: 9/29/2021
HAMPDEN – After three hours reviewing the legal requirements and technical plans, and fielding questions from the public, the Hampden Planning Board is still far from a decision on a controversial self-storage facility at 2 Somers Rd.
Roughly 70 residents came to the Sept. 28 meeting in person and another 25 attended via Zoom. The meeting began with the two newest Planning Board members, Heather Beattie and Christina Brodeur, certifying that they had reviewed the documents and video of the previous meeting on the issue.
Interim Chair John Matthews read a letter from the Board of Selectmen detailing the dissolution of the property’s “owner of record,” Hampden Farms, as a company in 2013. Despite filing the back years’ paperwork, the letter said that the application to the Planning Board was defective because it wasn’t a legitimate company at the time of the special permit application.
Petitioner Daniel Garvey of Hampden Self-Storage responded to the letter by stating that Hampden Farms was the owner, but not the petitioner and therefore the legal status of Hampden Farms was not an issue that would void the application. Steven Riley, the attorney for Hampden Farms, confirmed that his client was “winding down” and liquidating its assets and was not a party to the special permit application. Matthews said that he had brought the legality of the application to Town Counsel Rose Crowley, who said denial of the application on those grounds would not stand up in court.
Considering the issues that arose around the two different legal entities, Matthews asked Garvey if he wanted to withdraw his application without prejudice, but Garvey declined, saying that he believed he was “on solid ground,” legally.
Matthews asked his colleagues if they wished to continue with the special permit application and he received verbal confirmation. Attorney Seth Wilson of Wilson Legal Group, who represents “Save Hampden,” a citizens’ group opposing the project, asked for an official vote on whether to continue the process. When Matthews said a vote wasn’t needed, Wilson told him that he was documenting his refusal to be used in an appeal.
Garvey and Joseph Peznola, of the engineering firm Sherman & Frydryk, presented plans for the self-storage project. Since the last meeting with the board, Garvey had updated that plans to reflect a peer review done by the town’s engineering firm, Tighe & Bond. In the interest of transparency, Matthews announced that board member Madison Pixley worked for Tighe & Bond, albeit in a separate division from the services Hampden employs.
The board systematically went through the requirements under state laws and Hampden bylaws, with Matthews reading from the statutes on aspects such as surrounding structures, parking and catch basins.
A member of the crowd interrupted the proceedings by yelling, “No one wants it so why are we going through it?” Matthews informed the resident that he would be removed if he continued. Wilson calmed the crowd, saying it was “part of the process.”
Water
Matthews called the initial drainage report from Sherman & Frydryk, “rather extensive.” Peznola explained that a state-certified soil evaluator dug “test pits” to determine the absorption capability of the land. He said signs of water were found 77 inches below the surface, which should support the amount of water that will run off the impervious paved areas.
Planning Board member Jason Barroso explained that Tighe & Bond held the project “to a higher standard than what the field evidence showed,” and the calculations still supported the ability to handle water runoff. “Nothing leaves the site,” Peznola said.
Matthews quoted Tighe & Bond’s report. “The well-drained nature of the sand is a blessing to both projects,” the consultant said of two separate proposed self-storage facilities at 2 Somers Rd. and the adjacent property at 16 Somers Rd.
The water that runs off the pavement will be collected in catch basins and directed into an infiltration system where it will be treated and enter the groundwater. Peznola explained that there were several stages of filtration, from hooded intakes that catch oils on top of the water to a “washing machine” style system that spins the rainwater water, separating debris and sediment from the water. The final stage is the soil and sand in the ground, which will provide a final filter.
One resident of Meadowbrook Drive, which abuts the property, asked if the system will filter out chemicals. Peznola explained that the system is designed to the state’s Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP) standard of removing 80 percent of “total suspended solids.” It will not filter out other substances, such as phosphorous. Matthews noted that the stormwater that runs off the roads isn’t filtered for chemicals, either.
Another resident said that the paint on the storage units will deteriorate and chemicals from the paint will contaminate the groundwater. Barroso, who has professional experience in evaluating the hazards of building materials, pushed back on this comment. He said that the paint contaminants from the self-storage units are “no different than putting up a house” and that anything built in that location will have paint that deteriorates over time.
Someone else wondered about contaminants from hazardous materials that might be stored in the units. This prompted a question from resident Barbara Rose, who asked how the company knows what materials are stored in the units. Garvey explained that there are contracts that users must sign and the facility’s video monitoring system helps monitor users.
Wells And Set-Backs
A back and forth between the board, Peznola and a townsperson began when discussing the setbacks from surrounding properties. MassDEP recommends a setback of 100 feet between infiltration systems and neighboring wells.
The resident said that if the infiltration system has to be 100 feet from a well, it means residents can’t dig another well closer to the rear edge of their property. Matthews explained, and Peznola confirmed that this was merely a recommendation and that residents would not be held to the same 100-foot distance if digging on their own property.
The person pushed back on Peznola’s answer and said the town’s zoning bylaws require 100 feet between wells and septic systems. Matthews told him he was conflating septic and infiltration systems.
While the wells for nearly all properties were marked on the plans, resident Dawn Gurski told them that her well was not marked. After reviewing the plans, Peznola said that they would research her property with the town and locate her well to make sure it was far enough from the infiltration system.
Matthews tried to move on but people began shouting out questions. “I’m going to move on. If you don’t like it, too bad,” he told the crowd. Someone responded, “We’re taxpayers. Show some respect.”
Accountability
One resident asked who is responsible for taking care of the property. Barroso told them that the company would be required to submit an operation and maintenance plan that included landscaping and stormwater system maintenance schedules.
Aesthetics
Garvey made several adjustments to the plans based on community and Planning Board input. Most of these changes were made to adjust the aesthetics of the facility. The original barbed-wire fence was changed to a chain-link fence, which the company would weave screening material through. Barroso said that residents would prefer something that fits the style of the residential neighborhood surrounding the property on two sides. He suggested a white vinyl fence, and Garvey agreed.
The office building, which is the only structure visible from the street was changed from a metal building to a more residential-looking design, similar to that of the abutting Polish National Credit Union. The building would be 275 feet from the road to limit its obtrusiveness.
The storage and parking area has been eliminated from the plans. Only four parking spaces at the office building remain - two handicap spots and two standard spaces.
While the storage buildings had originally featured peaked roofs, the style was changed to a lean-to to keep the height of the buildings at 13 feet. The storage buildings would be 60 feet from the property line and blocked from view with the fence and a “vegetative buffer” of arborvitaes.
The bushes, which will be 6 feet tall at the time of planting and grow to 12 to 16 feet, were originally spaced at 8-foot intervals, but Garvey said they have changed them to 4 feet apart after community feedback. The arborvitaes will be installed in the first phase of construction and Garvey said they will be “at least 10 feet tall” when the storage buildings are constructed.
Lighting
Resident Jim DiAgostino asked how people will see in their storage units at night if they are not electrified. Garvey told him that there are lights planned for the property that will illuminate the aisles between storage buildings and the front of the units.
Peznola explained that the lighting would have a shield that limits light “spilling” onto other properties. The lights will also be “dark sky” compliant, eliminating light directed up, which contributes to light pollution. The final aspect of the lighting, which he said is most difficult to mitigate, is their visibility from the surrounding area.
Security
Garvey said that the lights would turn off at 10 p.m. when the facility closes. A Meadowbrook Lane resident was concerned that a dark facility would “invite crime.” Brodeur confirmed with Garvey that the video monitoring system can be viewed remotely, so even though there would be no staff present after 5 p.m., the company can keep an eye on the property. The cameras would be pointed at the units and away from the neighbors.
In addition to the video monitoring system, the security at the facility would include a locked gate that can be opened with a valid four-digit code. Cameras photograph each vehicle that comes and goes and the time is marked.
Matthews noted that the Hampden Police Department reported almost no crime in the area.
Traffic
A traffic study has not been performed for the site and the Planning Board has not yet asked for one. The facility’s proximity to the notorious intersection of Somers, East Longmeadow and Wilbraham Roads and Allen Street has some people concerned with traffic safety.
Using estimates of a storage facility in Springfield that is owned by the company, Peznola estimated that one vehicle will go through the gate every eight minutes during the peak morning hours and once every four minutes during the peak afternoon hours. Matthews questioned the reliability of the data, but Garvey told him it was a high estimate, as the number of trips through the gate did not exclude staff entering and exiting. Garvey said the rate of vehicles coming and going will be “significantly less” than the bank next door, while Peznola estimated the effect on the intersection would be negligible.
Matthews told Garvey that sidewalks will be required along the front of the property.
Next Steps
Garvey and Peznola left the meeting with a laundry list of further changes to make and plans to submit, including a formal lighting plan, an operation and management plan, models of the neighbors’ lines of site, landscaping and snow and ice removal plans. The petitioner was also instructed to review the well on Gurski’s property.
Matthews gave the attorneys the choice of two dates to continue the hearing. He attempted to set the meeting for Oct. 13, despite Wilson being unavailable on the date. Wilson objected, but Matthews said he wasn’t going to plan meetings outside of the Planning Board’s regular bi-weekly schedule.
Resident Mary Grassetti stood up and demanded the residents opposed to the project have representation. Matthews told her that people can represent themselves and had done so by speaking at the meeting. Wilson insisted that the more than 500 people who had signed the Save Hampden petition have a right to legal representation. Wilson said that the board had shown “a very measured bias” toward the petitioner and had treated him “adversely.” Wilson said he wished to be reasonable and “get back on cooperative footing.”
After several minutes of confusion and people talking over one another, the meeting was set for Oct. 14, as the date worked for both sides and the board. At that meeting, Wilson will present his clients’ side of the issue.
Editor’s Note: For coverage of the hearing on the 16 Somers Rd. self-storage proposal, visit https://archives.thereminder.com/localnews/wilbrahamhampden/legal-questions-complicate-hampden-self-storage-pr/.