Don’t relocate the MassDOT maintenance facility at the Rt.3/62 interchange

Posted on by

Local issue.  If you’re not a Bedford, MA resident you can stop reading here.

Last updated Monday, 1/26/2015.  Updates provided at the end of this post.

I’ve been delinquent in posting updates the past several weeks.   (The Bedford Citizen is a good source for info.)  Big news tonight:  Success!  Residents and our elected representatives convinced MassDOT not to relocate the salt shed to their proposed location.

MassDOT PR

And points to MassDOT for being responsive to citizens’ concerns.

The backstory:

The Mass. Dept. of Transportation (MassDOT) is proposing to relocate their maintenance facility on the east side of the intersection of Rts. 3 and 62 to the west side of the intersection.   Get the details in The Bedford Citizen here and here.  Long story short, the current facility is in an industrially-zoned area.  The new facility would be built on what is currently a wooded lot sitting atop a big hunk of ledge and would abut a residential area.  Interestingly, DOT plans to sell the land under the current facility as “surplus property.”   (?!?  It ain’t surplus if it’s currently doing the job and you’ll have to buy new to replace it.)

I have not yet been able to determine MassDOT’s rationale for the move.  I’ll let you know when I do.  The arguments against moving the facility are numerous – taken from a petition currently circulating opposing relocation of the facility:

  1. Environment/Public Health: Salt contamination in groundwater, Vine Brook and Shawsheen River
  2. Environment/Public Health: Other (deicer/fuel) contamination of groundwater, Vine Brook and Shawsheen River
  3. Environment: Threat to wildlife, including the endangered Bridle Shiner in Vine Brook
  4. Environment: Tree clearing and ledge blasting Environment: Increased Vine Brook flood risk due to loss of vegetation and soil
  5. Public Health: Air pollution due to idling diesel trucks and heavy equipment
  6. Location: Immediately adjacent to neighborhood in residential zone
  7. Location: Proximity to Wilson Mill Park (National Register of Historic Places)
  8. Noise pollution: Trucks and heavy equipment
  9. Noise pollution: Increased highway noise due to tree and ledge clearing
  10. Light pollution: Operating and security lighting
  11. Traffic: Congestion on Burlington Road, Route 3/62 interchange and Middlesex Turnpike
  12. Traffic: Safety due to trucks entering and exiting facility from Burlington Road
  13. Process: Lack of notice to neighbors and abutters
  14. Process: Lack of alternate site consideration
  15. Process: Lack of precedent for development of highway clover leafs

Again, the existing facility is located across Rt. 3 from the proposed location in an industrial zone.  It’s not bothering anyone there.  (The area in town east of Rt.3 is industrial.  It makes sense for it to be there.)   That noted, if the current facility absolutely, positively must go then an alternative location has been suggested by residents:  the end of Rt. 3 by the interchange with Rt.95/128.   That would seem to be a much less offensive location than what DOT is currently proposing.  It’s in a no-man’s-land and is currently used as a site for MassDOT trucks.

You can get more info by sending an email to MassDOTBedford at gmail dot com and getting on interesting citizens’ listserv.

Upcoming events:

  1. Selectmen’s meeting at Town Hall on 12/22 – video of the meeting here.
  2. Selectmen’s meeting at Town Hall on 1/5 – meeting agenda here.
  3. MassDOT meeting at Town Hall on 1/15

The 1/15 meeting will an informational presentation by MassDOT.   I expect that the selectmen’s letter to DOT discussed on 12/22 will be reviewed and approved at the 1/5 meeting.

Petition to oppose relocation of the maintenance facility to the west side of Rt. 62:  MassDOTPetitionFINAL

=========================================================

UPDATE 12/18/2014:  Statement from Rep. Ken Gordon here.  If MassDOT decides to proceed with their proposed relocation then they will need to obtain approvals from the relevant Bedford town committees.

UPDATE 12/29/2014:  MassDOT’s description of the proposed project:  Bedford project description.  Note that the projected cost of the project, $5.2M, exceeds the sale price of the land by $900,000.  What would it cost to renovate the existing maintenance yard and put up a new salt barn?   Seems like a new salt barn should cost <<$900k. 

UPDATE 12/30/2014:  Read the Bedford Citizen’s summary of the 12/22 Selectmen’s meeting at which the project was discussed here:  Selectmen Hear Salt Shed Concerns. 

UPDATE 1/2/2015:  The master project page at the Mass Highway website is here.  Unless I’m missing something, the page contains only the most rudimentary project information.   It provides no basis of estimate to support the notional project cost, $5.2M.  When I write “basis of estimate” what I have in mind are cost estimates based on prior work or estimates from contractors.   For example, how much did DOT pay for the last two deicer tanks they bought?   How much did it cost to build their most recent salt barn?  Or the most recent metal maintenance building?

$5.2M seems very high to me.  Presuming that there’s no land acquisition cost, per the project description linked to below, that’s $5.2M for a “gambrel style salt storage barn, a  metal maintenance building, two above-ground liquid deicer tanks, an access drive and  plow/spreader staging area, and parking for MassDOT personnel.”   For comparison, $5.2M (give or take) would buy five 3500 sq.ft. new construction homes in town.   Perhaps $5.2M really is a reasonable price tag for a salt barn, maintenance building, two tanks and some site work but we should ask to see the details of how that number was calculated.
Combine the lack of basic information to support the notional project cost with other issues raised and, overall, there’s no indication that the state has done any due diligence for the project.

One more thing:  The lot with the current DOT maintenance yard is being sold to The Davis Companies for office park parking.  (I believe this is The Davis Companies in question.)  The Bedford Planning Board has approved a phased master plan for their office park on Crosby Drive that includes a parking garage in Phase 2. Phase 1 is now under way and includes a modest amount of additional parking. Does the site really need more parking and, if so, is the going rate for parking lots $1M/acre?!   (4.5 acres for $4.3M.)   To conclude, MassDOT sells what seems to be a perfectly serviceable maintenance facility as “surplus” for $4.3M (so that a real estate developer can put in an additional parking lot) and then spends $5.2M to build a new yard across the road in an environmentally sensitive area and in the backyard of a residential neighborhood?  The whole thing just seems really fishy. 

Send an email to MassDOTBedford-at-gmail-dot-com to get on the interested parties listserv. 

UPDATE 1/4/2015:  Video of 12/22 Selectmen’s meeting here.  Discussion of the proposed maintenance facility runs from approximately the 24:00 mark until the 59:30 mark.

UPDATE 1/6/2015:  Via the MassDOTBedford listserv, a strongly-worded letter to Mass DOT from the Selectmen – here.  Note also the list of questions on pg. 2.  Also via the listserv, Boxford’s lawsuit against MassDOT after salt runoff from one of DOT’s shed fouled a bunch of wells – here.  

UPDATE1/13/2015: Story in the Boston Globe, State’s plan for storage shed riles Bedford neighbors.