Table of Contents
The Planning Board officially closed its public hearing on 10 Converse Place Tuesday night.
“We’re done with that,” member Nicholas Rossettos said, in reference to a proposal to build a new mixed-use commercial/residential building on the site, which has been the subject of a multi-part public hearing April 1 and 15 and May 6, as well as a discussion at a Feb. 24 Select Board meeting.
“I don’t disagree, but we should say that in a public hearing,” Chair Brian Vernaglia responded. “We kept it open in case more discussion was needed, but I don’t believe there’s any reason to keep it open. If no one has anything to say, I’d welcome a motion to close it and reopen it as needed.”
A motion was made and the hearing was closed with no further discussion.
For the time being at least, the move ended official consideration of plans by developer Paul Ognibene to build a six story building with 43-47 units and an undetermined additional height from utility equipment and street or grade level and below-grade parking, as well as commercial space on the ground floor.
Issues that have been raised at various meetings by the Conservation Commission, Design Review Committee and Historical Commission have been about the project’s height, interior design related to the number of units and proximity to wetlands, specifically Mill Pond.
The current proposal may be subject to further review by the state Department of Environmental Protection and requirements under the Wetlands Protection Act and Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 97, which govern open space.
The project has had a tortuous history, dating back to at least 2022 when the Planning Board approved a design submitted by developer Ian Gullespie for a similar building. That project became economically nonviable for Gullespie and he has since gone bankrupt.
On May 6, the Planning Board unanimously voted the changes proposed by Ognibene were significant enough to make it a new project.
Other actions
In other actions, Planning Board members recommended favorable action for later consideration by the Zoning Board of Appeals for a deck or porch extension at 10 Johnson St. by fellow member Jack LeMenager.
“I’ll recuse myself for obvious reasons,” he said, but briefed the board on the plans, which are to extend an already non-conforming deck into an enclosed porch.
LeMenager’s letter to the Planning Board reads, “The footprint of the new structure includes the original footprint plus the additional two-foot, eight-inch extension to the southern end of the deck, facing the wooded hillside. This new space similarly adds to the current impingement on the setback. The new screened porch will be at the back of the house, on the east side, and not visible from the street. Heavy foliage and a tall hedge will make it barely visible to our neighbors on the east, and a nearly a quarter-acre of wooded hillside make it completely out of view of the abutters to the south.”
“This is simple and straightforward,” LeMenager told the board.
“It’s increasing non-conformity, but not increasing any negative impact on the neighborhood,” Vernaglia said.
“I move for favorable action because it doesn’t increase negative impact on the neighborhood,” member John Cortizas agreed before an unanimous 4-0 vote for favorable action.
In other discussion, Town Planner Taylor Herman said the board will be considering the first application for a development at 972 Main St. in the Main Street Mixed-Use District, which is the town’s newest zoning district, having been adopted at Fall Town Meeting in 2024.
“It’s kind of exciting,” Herman said.
“It’s very exciting,” Vernaglia agreed. “I’m looking forward to it.”
Members have not seen the petition, other than knowing the address. More discussion is planned for a June 3 meeting.
