Developers Reject Most Of The Neighborhood Conditions
Class-A developers are known for their high standards in building and maintaining premium properties. They work closely with communities to ensure their projects align with local needs and values, fostering a collaborative environment throughout the development process. These developers actively engage with residents, local leaders, and stakeholders, holding public meetings and seeking feedback to address concerns and incorporate community input. Beyond just building properties, Class-A developers often contribute to the community by investing in local infrastructure, supporting community programs, and creating public spaces. Their commitment to quality and community partnership not only enhances the neighborhoods they develop but also helps build lasting, positive relationships with the residents they serve.
Unfortunately, our due diligence and experiences in public hearings over the past three years have led us to conclude that the developers of the proposed Chapter 40B Rice Pond Village project, along with other projects, do not meet Class-A standards. Their responses have only reinforced this impression.
On May 29, 2024, our neighborhood and community spokesperson presented our minimum conditions to the Millbury Board of Appeals, the developers, and the assembled townspeople and other attendees. We had hoped for some level of cooperation from the developers, expecting them to engage positively with our neighborhood and act as responsible developers by agreeing to many of our reasonable requests. However, as you will see below, that optimism was not realized.This further solidifies the perception that Steven Venincasa and James Venincasa (herein referred to as the Applicant and Developers) disregard the community's well-being, which we fear will be adversely affected, worsening the previously identified public safety issues. The common consensus is that they only care about themselves and their profit margin, not the neighborhood or community, a reputation they seem to have across the region. This trait is evident in all public hearings and meetings, where they dismiss resident concerns and only respond to decision-makers. Residents seem to be regarded as annoyances or mere nuisances which reinforces our belief that we are not dealing with Class-A developers.
Below are the conditions proposed by our neighborhood through our spokesperson on our collective behalf, along with the responses from Steven Venincasa and James Venincasa, as provided by their project engineer, James Tetreault. These responses were predictable, given that the Board of Selectmen and the Town Manager had previously remarked that the Chapter 40B Local Initiative Program (LIP) negotiations were anything but true negotiations. This is evident from the terms and conditions included in the executed LIP agreement between the town and developers.
Deny the waivers for density and height by reducing the number of apartments from 192 to 96 (a 50% reduction) and uphold our zoning bylaw limit of a maximum 30 feet for building height.
Applicants Response: “At the project's proposed size, its traffic impacts will not diminish the level of service experienced at area intersections. At the project's proposed size there is adequate capacity in the sanitary sewer and water service infrastructure. By the objective measures that can be used to determine if a project is too large, it is not. The Police and Fire Departments have also reviewed the plans and not identified remaining safety issues.”
Deny the waiver request for a reduced parking requirement. Instead, establish a minimum open-air parking ratio of 1.7 full-size (9 x 18 foot) parking spaces per apartment. Any garage spaces will be in addition to this condition of 1.7 open-air parking spaces per apartment.
Applicants Response: “The Applicant's provision of parking to units at a ratio of 1.55:1 exceeds the national standard and that of some other area Towns.”
The LIP Agreement includes requirements for compensating the Town of Millbury for the installation of stop signs and stop lines at four intersections. The Town of Millbury has already installed a new stop sign at the intersection of Rice Road and South Main Street. Therefore, add the condition to install a stop sign and stop line on Aldrich Avenue at the intersection of Thomas Hill Road.
Applicants Response: “We'll adhere to the LIP agreement's proposed installations.”
Furthermore, include a condition for adding a white reflective lane-keeping center line within 100 feet of South Main Street and Providence Street on Rice Road.
Applicant’s Response: “This is not a standard dividing line installation and was not proposed or requested by Town staff.”
Add a condition to add a stop sign and stop line within the Rice Road right-of-way at the exit of the proposed development and document its location in a recorded “as-built” plan recorded at the Worcester Country Registry of Deeds.
Applicant’s Response: “These measures are already proposed on the Site Plans and can be seen on sheets S1 and G1 of the Site Plans.”
Add a condition that the developer and successors maintain a sight line triangular area from the front two corners of the property intersecting with Rice Road to a point that is at least 35 feet back from the right-of-way at the center line of the exit travel way. This area must be kept free and clear of snow piles, winter accumulations, or other obstructions over 30 inches in height.
Applicant’s Response: “The conditions suggested don't make sense. The typical driver's eye is 7 feet back from the front of his or her vehicle. With the front of a car within a foot or two of the gutter line, that position is still within the Rice Road right of way. The sight distance available 35 feet back from the right of way is not relevant.”
The LIP Agreement includes requirements for a sidewalk on the north side of Rice Road, extending from the existing South Main Street sidewalk to the entrance of the proposed development. This condition should be expanded as follows: the sidewalk shall be extended to a point perpendicular to the east side of Aldrich Avenue, with ADA-compliant ramps on both sides of the intersections with Aldrich Avenue and Thomas Hill Road, and Cape Cod berms along the entire length of the sidewalk. Additionally, the driveways for 5 Rice Road and 7 Rice Road must remain usable without increased steepness or creating any drainage or access issues. Existing stone walls are to be reconstructed outside of the limits of the Rice Road right-of-way.
Applicant’s Response: “We were specifically asked by the Tree Warden to eliminate even the sidewalk on the east side of the entrance pavement rounding. We will not add the additional sidewalk suggested. Conditions suggested for the new sidewalk west of the entrance in front of #'s 5 and 7 were already contemplated.”
Add a condition that the developer shall construct a school bus shelter for grade school students on the north side of Rice Road at the intersection of Rice Road and Thomas Hill Road, positioned east of the proposed project entrance. This school bus shelter shall mirror the design elements of the proposed buildings in the development and be akin in nature and design to the one at Stratford Village.
Applicant’s Response: “Again, this would fly directly in the face of the Tree Warden's pleas to avoid any damage of the extraordinary trees present east of the site's entrance.”
Add a condition that requires the developer to install and maintain in good condition a 6-foot vinyl-coated chain link fence with privacy slats, along with densely planted mature arborvitae, along the entire western boundary of 19 Rice Road, except within 10-feet of the right-of-way of Rice Road. The arborvitaes shall be maintained in good health in perpetuity.
Applicant’s Response: “The Plans propose a 6 foot opaque privacy fence along this boundary and plantings to shield the project and abutter from each other.”
Add a condition that requires the developer to install and maintain in good condition a 6-foot vinyl-coated chain link fence with privacy slats and densely planted mature arborvitae along the eastern side of the proposed retaining wall, extending the entire length of the eastern boundary of 11 Rice Road, except within 10-feet of the right-of-way of Rice Road. The arborvitaes shall be maintained in good health in perpetuity.
Applicant’s Response: “As at #19, the Plans propose a 6 foot opaque privacy fence and plantings at the wall near this boundary to shield the project and abutter from each other.”
Add a condition that the developer shall install densely planted mature arborvitae along the northern side of the proposed 300-foot retaining wall depicted on the plans north of Rice Pond to visually buffer the rear of the single-family homes along the north side of Rice Road and shield them from the parking lot and parking lot illumination maintained in good health in perpetuity.
Applicant’s Response: “Plantings are proposed but it should be noted that the nearest parking spaces beyond that wall are 280 feet or more from the homes of these abutters.”
Add a condition that the developer shall install and maintain in a 6-foot vinyl-coated chain link fence with privacy slats along the length of the Providence & Worcester Railroad property boundary, except within the width of the New England Power Company easement, in compliance with any easement requirements or restrictions prior to the issuance of the first occupancy permit. This fence shall be maintained in good condition in perpetuity.
Applicant’s Response: “This condition was already suggested by the Town Planner in his draft conditions of 28 May 2024.”
Add a condition that before the issuance of the first occupancy permit, the developer must establish and record a clearly defined metes and bounds conservation easement at the Worcester County Registry of Deeds, excluding out parcels. This easement shall include the area around Rice Pond and extend from the eastern side of the New England Power Company easement to the western property boundaries retained by the developer. The conservation easement will prohibit any development or construction of manmade structures, except for the proposed dog park as specified in the final approved site plans.
Applicant’s Response: “Much of the remaining land is already encumbered by the presence of wetlands and the power line easement. The applicant does not intend to create additional restrictions to the creation or revision of amenities should lessee interests change in the future.”
Add a condition that the developer shall incorporate the aforementioned restrictions into their rules and provide notices to tenants accordingly.
Applicant’s Response: “As noted above, the Applicant does not intend to create such restrictions.”
Add a condition that the developer shall before beginning any site construction to convey the parcels of land previously offered to the adjacent property owners on the north side of Rice Road and along the cul-de-sac of Jackie Drive. These conveyances must be recorded deeds and plans by the developer in the Worcester County Registry of Deeds for those homeowners who choose to accept the offer and be staked in the field according to town requirements.
Applicant’s Response: “We will abide by the Board's decision on the timing of the transfer of these parcels.”
Add a condition that the developer must install a catch basin at the intersection of Rice Road and Thomas Hill Road in front of 1 Thomas Hill Road to resolve the water/ice pooling at the curb line.
Applicant’s Response: “There's no existing drain line to which such catch basin would discharge until 4 Thomas Hill Road. The Applicant already negotiated the extent of offsite work with the Board of Selectmen.”
Add a condition that the developer must commit in good faith to provide funding for any railroad design and safety expert selected by the Town of Millbury, deemed necessary to design, oversee, and execute all recommended upgrades at the Providence & Worcester Railroad crossing on Rice Road. This includes upgrades to the pavement within 150 feet of the Providence & Worcester Railroad property, as determined by MassDOT, Town of Millbury, and/or the Providence & Worcester Railroad. These upgrades must meet or exceed all Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) standards and shall be designed to surpass the traffic volumes outlined in the developer’s Traffic Impact Study and the FRA’s Annual Average Daily Traffic Data.
Applicant’s Response: “This was not part of the LIP agreement negotiated with the Town. Furthermore, railroad safety expert, James Sottile, who spoke to the Board, stated that the safety of the railroad crossing is the responsibility of the railroad and not the Applicant.”
The board should stipulate that before any board decision, the developer is obligated to furnish all required documentation for a Comprehensive Permit, encompassing, though not limited to, the final quarter-inch scale architectural floor plans and elevations for each apartment building and the clubhouse, isometric drawings of the site, and any other outstanding deliverables. Any extension of public hearings to do so must be mutually agreed upon by the developer to guarantee the fulfillment of these requirements without conditional approvals, allowing ample time for thorough board and peer reviews.
Applicant’s Response: “Final architectural plans will be prepared and submitted to the Building Department, as required, after a final action has been taken by the Board.”
Add a condition that the during site work and construction, all vehicles related to or associated with the project must be parked or standing solely on the five parcels of the project site. No temporary parking or standing shall be permitted on Rice Road, Thomas Hill Road, Aldrich Avenue, or Captain Peter Simpson Road under any circumstances. Enforceable temporary no parking signs shall be installed on the aforementioned roads during construction.
Applicant’s Response: “The Applicant has no objection to a condition that construction vehicles shall not park on surrounding Town roads. There is ample room to park construction vehicles on site even abiding by the Tree Warden's request that the front yard of the existing home not be used as an equipment staging area.”
Add a condition that the board agrees that Town Counsel shall review and update these minimum outlined conditions to ensure they are air-tight, with no loopholes, and include significant and enforceable penalties for non-compliance.
Applicant’s Response: “We presume that Town Counsel will review the Board's decision.”
Our neighborhood had anticipated that many of these straightforward conditions would be easily agreed upon. However, considering their well-known reputations, past and current behaviors, and the responses received, we are not surprised. Therefore, we will request that the Millbury Board of Appeals consider our neighborhood's perspective and incorporate all 20 of our minimum conditions in any decision they make regarding the proposed Chapter 40B Rice Pond Village project.
If Steven Venincasa and James Venincasa decide to appeal the Millbury Board of Appeals' decision that includes these conditions, they should anticipate at least a 3-4 year delay in receiving a decision from the Housing Appeals Committee (HAC) and/or Superior Court. This delay would be further compounded if the neighbors also appeal, creating two fronts for the developers to contend with, along with potential additional appeals. Additionally, the developers should consider the financial implications of such a decision and the current market conditions, as national indicators show a decline in financing for large multifamily developments in our region. Time is money, and delays can turn opportunities into missed chances.
As Town Counsel explained to the Millbury Board of Appeals, if the project is denied, the developer could revert to the original plans, which are favored by the developers for being the least expensive to construct. However, these plans are less attractive and have a greater impact on abutters due to their close proximity to homes. Conversely, if the project is approved with conditions, the plans under appeal would be the latest ones submitted, which the Millbury Board of Appeals approved with conditions and which the developers indicated are more expensive to construct. Although Steven Venincasa expressed a preference to avoid going before the Housing Appeals Committee, the developers' failure to collaborate with the board and the neighborhood could potentially lead to such an outcome, or even to involvement with the Superior Court, or both. Opting not to cooperate and collaborate does not seem to be the most prudent business decision.
The next public hearing on the proposed Chapter 40B Rice Pond Village project will be held on Wednesday, June 12, 2024, at 7:00 PM at the Millbury Senior Center, located at 1 River Street in Millbury, Massachusetts. Everyone is encouraged to attend in person.