Conference 7.286::maynard

124.0. "Tough choice for the School Committee" by VAXRT::RUZICH (How many in your quartet?) Mon Oct 17 1988 17:31

The Maynard School Committee has to make an interesting decision in the near
future.  There are practical questions and matters of principle involved. 

The owner/developer of a proposed subdivision has asked the Maynard School
Committee to grant an easement on school property to drain runoff water from
her subdivision.  The proposed drain would run from 166 Great Road, under Great
Road and then into wetlands owned by the town under the care and protection of
the School Committee.  These wetlands eventually drain into the town well
behind Green Meadow School. 

There are engineering questions as to whether this runoff will have a negative
impact on the wetlands and well.  Also, the path for the drainage was
originally envisioned as the access road to a potential future school. Does
this purpose conflict with the drainage proposal? 

The question of principle is this:  Should the school committee or any town
board, charged with the protection of town land, allow a private developer or
other entity to use town land in *any* way?  This land is owned by the town for
the benefit of the town's residents. 

Is the development a benefit to the town?  The local residents clearly think
not.  We're up in arms about the whole proposal.  How about if the developer
offers cash to the town to buy the easement?  Does that counterbalance the
negative effects of the development?  The School Committee is effectively
put in a position more like that of the Planning Board or Zoning Board
of Appeals, of deciding on the implementation of a proposed housing 
development. This is hardly their usual business.

This is a tough choice for the School Committee. 

The engineering questions about draining water into the wetlands will be
answered in part by an engineering study commissioned by the School Committee
at the expense of the developer. The study is expected to be completed at the
end of November. 

Additional background, plus some more opinion: 

The proposed development is 6 acres on the hill East of Thompson Street, South
of Fairfield, East of Chandler and Louise, and North of Great Road. Currently,
the are is heavily wooded ledge.  Part of the water on this hill drains east
toward Chandler Street, the remainder drains toward Thompson Street. 
Development will alter the runoff characteristics because more of the surface
will be impervious (roof tops, driveways, etc.) and therefore will absorb less
water.  Also, the developer has proposed rerouting the water that drains toward
Chandler Street to run toward Thompson Street. All this water will be piped
into the town wetlands under the developer's proposal. 

The quality of the runoff water will be altered because a development uses
chemicals not found in woods: salt, phosphates, pesticides, fertilizers and
others.  If the drainage proposal is approved, all these chemicals will run
into the wetlands, threatening the ecosystem and eventually will run to the
town wells. 

It is inappropriate for a town board to grant an easement to a private
developer.  If this easement were granted, it would set a precedent for town
boards to allow private entities to use town owned land.  The main reason for
the developer's request to dump water on town owned land is the developer's
financial situation.  It would be extremely expensive for the developer to run
drainage down Great Road; however, the school committee should not be concerned
with the developer's finances.  It is not the town's responsibility to "bail
out" a private developer. 

The Maynard Neighborhood Preservation Association, a group of concerned
residents is circulating a petition to request that the school committee deny
the drainage easement.  If you would like to sign this petition or would like
more information, please contact Cindy Ruzich, 897-6160 or Mary Holtorf,
897-3181.  Petitions are posted in various stores in town and residents are
going door to door for signatures.