40,000 Square Foot Eversource Gas Facility Gains Approval for Commerce Way Site
Key Points
- Zoning Board approves 40,000-square-foot Eversource gas division facility on Commerce Way
- Friends of Marshfield Dog Park granted waiver to install permanent shade structures
- Board debates "de minimis" zoning relief to stop "punishing" homeowners for minor setback issues
- Members express concern over Stormwater Bylaw "teeth" and impact on uphill property owners
- Proposed ADUs in commercial zones met with skepticism from Town Counsel via text update
The Marshfield Zoning Board of Appeals cleared the way for a major industrial expansion on Tuesday night, green-lighting a new operations hub for Eversource’s gas division. The 40,000-square-foot facility at Zero Commerce Way is slated to become a central service point for the utility, featuring 5,000 square feet of office space and significant on-site storage for piping and equipment. Paul Seabberg of Grady Consulting informed the board that the project had undergone rigorous peer review, noting, All comments have been addressed. It conforms to all zoning requirements.
The project, presented on behalf of Marcus Partners, will see the utility relocate from its current local footprint to the larger, consolidated site. Josh Burman of Marcus Partners explained the facility’s utility, stating, They will relocate from that location to here. This will be the gas division... they'll be storing pipe on site. It's for service.
Peer review engineer Pat Brennan raised concerns regarding environmental safety, suggesting a prohibition on outside storage of hazardous materials to prevent leaks into the local ecosystem. Building Commissioner Andrew Seeger noted that traffic mitigation payments would be handled during the building permit phase. Motion Made by B. Murphy to grant site plan approval with conditions including no outdoor hazardous material storage. Motion Passed 5-0 (L. Keane, S. Lynch, G. Hensley Jr., B. Murphy, E. Murphy).
Community recreation also saw a win as the board approved a site plan waiver for the Friends of Marshfield Dog Park. The group sought permission to install two 16x12 shade structures and ADA-compliant walkways at the Paprius Drive facility. An unidentified representative for the Friends explained that the move follows two years of operational challenges after a planned solar canopy project fell through. We've been having to rent tents for $5,000 each summer,
the applicant said, adding that a local benefactor has offered to build permanent structures for the shade. Member Larry Keane clarified the design, asking, So, it's basically just going to be like a gazebo set up, just a canopy? Full post and a roof over it? Perfect.
Motion Made by B. Murphy to allow a waiver of site plan approval for the shade structures and walkways. Motion Passed 5-0 (L. Keane, B. Murphy, M. Brothers, J. Lee, E. Murphy).
The board also tackled the ongoing challenge of raise and rebuild projects in the town’s non-conforming coastal and residential districts. At 154 Standard Street, Rick Savant of Stenbeck and Taylor presented plans to replace an existing home with a 48x22 dwelling, slightly improving the left-side setback from 9.1 feet to 10 feet. Motion Made by B. Murphy to grant a special permit for 154 Standard Street. Motion Passed 5-0 (L. Keane, S. Lynch, G. Hensley Jr., B. Murphy, E. Murphy). Similarly, at 39th Road, Gregory Morse of Morse Engineering secured approval to replace a non-FEMA compliant home with an elevated structure. The proposal is to take it down and construct a new home elevated in full FEMA compliance,
Morse said, noting the project had unanimous support from neighbors. Motion Made by B. Murphy to grant a special permit for 39th Road. Motion Passed 5-0 (L. Keane, S. Lynch, B. Murphy, J. Lee, E. Murphy).
The 39th Road application sparked a broader debate about the unintended consequences
of current zoning bylaws, particularly regarding deck heights for elevated homes. Commissioner Seeger noted that under current rules, homeowners must often drop their decks to less than four feet off the ground to meet setback requirements, even when the house itself is elevated much higher for flood safety. There's been no consideration for when you elevate a house to protect people's rights to have a deck,
Seeger said. Member Stephen Lynch suggested the existing rules were rooted in privacy, noting, It was put in place to protect people from being seen in other people's yards.
This led into a lengthy workshop session where the board debated potential amendments to the town’s zoning bylaws. A central point of contention was the idea of de minimis variances—allowing small deviations from setbacks without a full hearing. Lynch argued for a 10% threshold to reduce the burden on residents, stating, It's not fair to be denying people permits for eight inches. We just put hurdles in front of them for no reason.
Chairperson Brian Murphy disagreed with a rigid percentage, arguing that specificity in zoning often leads to more problems. When you create specificity in zoning law, you get unintended consequences that bind us, like these elevated decks,
B. Murphy said. He advocated instead for a special permit process that lists acceptable circumstances for relief.
The board also explored the possibility of allowing Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) in commercial buildings. Associate Member Jean Lee provided live updates from Town Counsel Robert Galvin, who messaged her during the meeting to caution the board. Lee shared Galvin’s perspective, asking, Do we want people living over a cannabis business or a liquor store?
Associate Member Mack Brothers added his support for reforms that would move simple, non-detrimental
special permits to administrative approval to streamline the process for homeowners. Member Grover Hensley Jr. echoed the need for efficiency, previously noting that frequent continuances can discourage public participation.
Finally, the board expressed skepticism regarding Article 33, the town’s Stormwater Bylaw. Lynch criticized the law’s potential for neighbor disputes, saying, If you live at the top of a hill and someone at the bottom blames you for water that has run downhill for 50 years, that's not fair.
B. Murphy agreed, calling the current language too vague
and arguing that while new construction should be regulated, the law should not punish
owners of existing homes. The board also acted to prevent a constructive approval for 745 Webster Street due to an absent applicant. Motion Made by B. Murphy to deny the application for 745 Webster Street without prejudice. Motion Passed 5-0 (L. Keane, B. Murphy, M. Brothers, J. Lee, E. Murphy).