Dusty Lane Residents Oppose Increased Industrial Uses

By Andrew Gorosko

Some residents living on a side street in Botsford, where a firm proposes the construction of two new industrial buildings, have urged the Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) to reject the construction application.

The Peter A. Spath Trust is seeking P&Z approval to construct two industrial buildings that would enclose a total of approximately 9,000 square feet of space at 5, 9, and 17 Dusty Lane. The two new buildings would be constructed near two existing industrial buildings.

Dusty Lane is a dead-end street that extends northward from Botsford Hill Road.

The section of Dusty Lane where the proposed structures would be built has industrial zoning. The section of Dusty Lane nearer to Botsford Hill Road has residential zoning.

At a recent P&Z session, P&Z members learned that the applicant has received an aquifer protection endorsement from the Conservation Commission. The site lies in the town’s environmentally sensitive Aquifer Protection District (APD).

Traffic engineer Fred Greenberg, representing the applicant, said that a traffic study of Dusty Lane indicates there are about 350 vehicle trips daily on the dead-end street. The proposed new construction would generate approximately 100 additional vehicle trips daily there, he said.

P&Z Chairman William O’Neil asked how the proposed two buildings would be used, learning that the applicant would lease out the use of the two structures for industrial purposes.

Resident Kathryn Metzker of 4 Dusty Lane urged the P&Z to reject the construction application. Ms Metzker said she seeks to protect her property and her neighborhood by opposing Spath’s development proposal.

Spath’s proposal does not comply with applicable regulations concerning the issuance of special permits, she said. Spath is seeking to modify its existing special permit, which applies to the two existing industrial buildings.

The proposed construction would not be in harmony with the residential uses of the area, Ms Metzker said.

Dusty Lane caries heavy traffic stemming from the two existing industrial buildings, she said. Users of those buildings include Spath Construction Company, Inc.

The houses located on the street do not generate much traffic flow, Ms Metzker said. The street has about ten small houses.

Adding a third and a fourth industrial building to the neighborhood would make for a “horrendous” situation, she told P&Z members. “It’s a residential area,” she said. Home values would drop significantly if more industrial buildings are constructed there, she said.

Ms Metzker questioned the specifics of the applicant’s traffic study for the project.

“I’m in dismay,” she said. It would be a public disservice to allow more industrial growth in the neighborhood, she said.

Resident James Bahan of 10 Dusty Lane said that his home has decreased in value due to the initial 1991 special permit that allowed Spath to build an industrial structure on Dusty Lane.

The commercial vehicles that use Dusty Lane to reach the existing industrial buildings pose speeding problems, he told P&Z members. Many delivery trucks use the road and many other trucks are parked in the area, he added.

Mr Bahan stressed his opposition to the Spath proposal. “Give us a break,” he said.

Resident Steven Metzker of 4 Dusty Lane asked what types of businesses would locate in the proposed spaced that would be leased out by Spath. The type of development now proposed is “inappropriate” growth for a residential neighborhood, he said.

The neighborhood suffers due to its proximity to the two existing industrial structures, he said. Speeding is a problem, he added. He urged that the P&Z reject the Spath proposal.

Mr O’Neil said, “We will mull over all this information.” P&Z action on the Spath application is expected an upcoming session.