Plans to install geothermal wells as part of the Pollard Middle School project have run into land conservation concerns, leading town officials to seek additional local approvals ahead of next week’s key meeting with the Massachusetts School Building Authority’s Facility Assessment Subcommittee.
Pollard plans call for 120 to 125 wells to be drilled under Warner Field, a baseball field that is part of DeFazio Park. The wells are essential for a ground-source heat pump system to heat and cool the new building with minimal operating costs and greenhouse gas impact. Ground-source heat pumps use the earth as a heat sink when aboveground temperatures are warmer and as a heat source when temperatures are cooler. The system was chosen for its efficiency and long-term cost benefits.
In addition to housing the geothermal wells, Warner Field would be used as a staging site during construction — taking the field offline for several seasons before the project is completed and the field can be restored.
During a joint School Committee-Select Board meeting, town manager Katie King said the state Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs has indicated the wells could trigger Article 97 of Massachusetts Law, despite being beneath the surface of the field.
“At our next meeting on July 29th, the MSBA will ask us to reaffirm our chosen mechanical system, the geothermal wells — and I think inquire about the status of local approvals under Article 97,” said King.
Article 97, which protects public open space, conservation and recreation land, enforces a “no net loss” policy requiring that public land taken for a project be replaced with physical acreage or its monetary equivalent.
“Conversations this week with EEA [have] revealed to us that they do view subsurface use as a loss that needs to get legislative approval,” King said. “One point of ongoing exploration and conversation with the state that we are undertaking is what guidance will they give us on how to value that loss.”
Once triggered, a series of local and state approvals must be given before action can be taken.
The town seems to be trying to signal to the MSBA that local approvals will be likely, by asking for a vote from the Conservation Commission and Park and Recreation Commission before the July 29 meeting. If the two boards give their approval, King said Needham would “move forward with confidence” and stand by the project’s submitted schematic design. The Select Board would then be positioned to vote on placing a debt exclusion override referendum question on the November ballot, as planned.
“Since there’s no change in acreage for the placement of the geothermal wells — and the use would always remain … as its current use — we did not believe that Article 97 would be triggered,” King noted. Whether or not it will is a legal matter, yet to be decided.
If the town stood by original geothermal plans and triggered Article 97, next steps would involve a two-thirds vote of approval from Town Meeting for a Home Rule petition, a two-thirds vote of approval from the House and Senate, and the approval of the governor before the EEA could green-light the project.
“It’s quite a complicated process,” said Conservation Commission chair Dave Herer. “I guess they made it like that to not make it easy for land that was dedicated to recreation or to conservation to have its use changed.” Herer added that Article 97 also provided Park and Rec its authority last fall to assert jurisdiction over DeFazio Park, preventing it from being considered as the site for a new Pollard building.
“More to come,” said King in response to concerns around potential project delays. She added that the level of review required and length of time needed for those reviews has not yet been clarified by the state.
“These are not things that we need to resolve and include before August or before [the MSBA] would advance us from schematic to detailed design,” she said — later adding, “Understanding that we’re still trying to figure out what exactly is triggered at this time, I’m not anticipating that completion of Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act or Article 97 requirements would impact [the] construction start date.”
Needham Public Schools’ superintendent Dan Gutekanst added that other projects in the commonwealth undergoing similar reviews have been approved by the MSBA, and remained on-track with original schedules.
Because a potential vote under Article 97 is required to be unanimous, if any individual on either the Conservation Commission or Park and Rec were to object this week, the Pollard project would almost certainly need to be paused while new options are considered.
That would likely defer MSBA approval, King said, and delay the town vote on an override by at least five months.
Although King noted both boards should be given “time to digest” before voting, the MSBA meeting on July 29 is pushing the process forward. A Conservation Commission vote is scheduled for Thursday, July 23 and a Park and Rec vote is set for Friday, July 24.
Herer said the Conservation Commission will likely vote in favor of the current Pollard plans. “I can’t speak for the Conservation Commission’s individual members, but I think that most of them understand the Pollard project and have supported it in the past,” he said.
Based on the outcome of the commissions’ votes, the Select Board will need to schedule a special meeting prior to Aug. 5 to vote on an override referendum question for November’s ballot.
The MSBA board of directors is expected to vote on approval of the project’s scope and budget at its Aug. 26 meeting.
Save as PDF