Planning board challenges Station Lane developer on tree clearing, groundwater and connectivity

Jamie Easton of EP Land Services presented Station Lane, a large mixed‑use project adjacent to Entrada with two multifamily buildings that would contain roughly 344 units, 46 rowhouses and a 110‑room hotel.

Easton told the board that both stormwater and sewer constraints are driving much of the site's grading and tree disturbance. "Stormwater drives the design and the height of the road because we can't violate that requirement," he said, and he noted DOH requires 4 feet of cover on sewer pipes so sewer invert locations force roadway elevation increases. Easton estimated roadway grades rise "about 5 feet to 6 feet above existing grade" in places to achieve the required covers and infiltration separation; he added some parts of the site have seasonal high groundwater within 15 inches and other areas over 40 inches, which constrains infiltration basin placement.

Board members pressed the applicant on alternatives. One member asked whether a pump station would be feasible instead of relying on gravity sewer; another urged rethinking building massing and parking to reduce clearing. The applicant said a gravity sewer is the first choice but that a city‑owned pump station would be feasible and that smaller low‑pressure systems were not practical for the scale of development. "If you can, you want to use gravity sewer. First choice is gravity, always. But a project of this scale... a pump station would be feasible and economically viable," said one board member during the exchange.

The board treated stormwater, groundwater, and habitat (notably potential bat habitat) as SECRA/SEQR items requiring careful Part 2 analysis. Members marked several items as moderate‑to‑large pending further detail: impacts on land from fill and grading; impacts to habitat; and safe pedestrian connectivity (the board flagged how the SUP request for no on‑site commercial uses could force residents to cross major roads to reach services). The board asked the applicant to provide revised Part 2 material and offered a workshop for a deeper, focused SECRA review.

The board also requested more work on non‑vehicular connectivity (crosswalks, CDTA flex stops) and asked the applicant to engage DOT/CDTA on mid‑block crossings or flex transit stops; traffic consultant Alanna Moran recommended outreach to CDTA for flex points at the driveways. The board did not make a final SECRA determination at this meeting and set follow‑up steps including additional applicant submissions and possible workshop sessions.