ORANGE — A representative from the civil and environmental engineering firm that monitored cleanup at the site of the former cereal factory that burned down in 2022 recently provided the Selectboard with an update on potential future uses for the land.
Tim Clinton, a senior project manager with Fuss & O’Neill, said at last week’s Selectboard meeting that any remaining environmental cleanup at 16-36 West River St. would depend on whether the site becomes a parking lot, a public park or a hybrid of the two.
“We’ve been working on the environmental reports. We’ve completed the survey. A subcontractor of ours prepared that survey and we also did a wetland delineation to inform … a notice of intent, or wetland permitting steps, all with the goal of building a parking lot there,” Clinton said. “I heard from [Town Manager Matt Fortier] that there was some rethinking of the ultimate use objectives for that property, and so we prepared a … scope reallocation, if you will, to move away from the parking concept to more of a public park, municipal use concept.”
In March 2022, the town was forced to close part of West River Street from South Main to Pleasant streets, as the former factory building was reportedly in imminent danger of structural failure. Orange was pursuing an emergency court order to tear down the building and had accepted a bid from Bourgeois Wrecking & Excavation of Westminster when the structure was reduced to piles of asbestos and brick in June 2022 in an arson case.
The blaze sent embers into the air, with some landing on the vacant former blacksmith shop near 24 East River St. and causing such severe damage that it had to be demolished. The vacant buildings at 50-58 South Main St. also sustained damage.
A Massachusetts Land Court decision transferred the 1.06-acre lot’s ownership from KARMACAN LLC to Orange two years ago. The town received $3.4 million in earmarked money from the state for cleanup costs and the town had already used $392,589 in American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds before receiving that money. Fortier said at last week’s meeting that the earmark has a remaining balance of roughly $200,000, which he said is not nearly enough to adjust the elevation of the land to the roadway or to see any of the proposed uses to completion.
“It’s unlikely that we have enough money to fully do any of these design concepts as is,” he said.
Fortier explained that the proposed parking lot with a splash pad is a $1 million to $2 million project, whereas the proposed walking trail would cost $600,000 to $800,000.
“I don’t think it’s going to happen, unfortunately,” he said. “Sorry.”
Liza Melo, broker-owner with Four Columns Realty, spoke at the meeting to represent the owner of 50-58 South Main St., whom she declined to name. She said the owner is in the process of getting a permit for requested brick repair, though Fortier said no application had been received.
“The next step is they’re going to be doing the roof,” Melo said. “They are working with an engineer to develop 40 to 25 units for residential living inside those buildings. They would like to have a portion of the former factory site to use as a parking lot for future tenants.
“They would take on the responsibility of the paving, anything that is needed to go with those buildings,” Melo said. “But they do need that in order for it to be completed.”
Jason Granai, the town’s building commissioner, said his department is requiring “a large amount of engineering” because of the building’s condition.
“We want to see it … made safe and then we can continue to move forward,” he said.
Selectboard member Kelli Gervais read aloud a letter Melo sent to the board earlier this month. The letter states the owner acquired both properties in July 2025 with the intention of developing workforce housing in downtown Orange. The Selectboard eventually provided the owner with a letter expressing the town’s willingness to explore the feasibility of reserving up to 48 parking spaces for the exclusive use of residents of the proposed 50-58 South Main St. redevelopment project.
The parcel could potentially accommodate 156 parking spaces — 44 in Row A, 38 in Rows B and C, and 36 in Row D.
The owner requests the town consider dividing the parcel in two. The proposed division line would be located about 141 feet from the right-side property line, subject to a final survey, engineering review, permitting and all required governmental approvals. The owner would construct roughly 48 parking spaces. The letter suggests Orange could develop the remaining portion of the property, with approximately 108 public parking spots.
“If the town ultimately intends to develop … a 156-space public parking facility, this arrangement could reduce the town’s construction responsibility and related expenses,” the letter states.
When it came time for public comment, resident Ann Reed said she favors allowing for the development of single-level parking. She said she does not believe a public leisure space would prove to be worthwhile.
Denise Andrews, a former state representative, said she wants money upfront and a long-term lease agreement for the potential 48 spaces. Green space can serve as economic development, she said, because people would see that Orange cares about its appearance, and potentially move their families and businesses to town. She thinks it is “totally not appropriate” to put 156 spaces “on prime riverfront property.”
Resident Polly Bixby also said she wants some type of commitment from the owner, while Mary Wolfe commented that having a full parking lot could enable carnivals, farmers markets and other community events.
“This is an important piece of town,” she said.
Clinton mentioned the asbestos at the site was removed about two years ago.
“Part of what we’ve done since then is a more in-depth environmental investigation that went into the ground, below where the building slab was,” he said.
The biggest risk the company found is arsenic. Clinton said the presence of arsenic is very common in urban fill, which is soil mixed with man-made materials — such as brick, concrete, glass, asphalt and ash — used to raise or level land for property development.
According to Clinton, any pollution is 10 to 15 feet below the final grade.
“The likelihood of people contacting that pollution is extremely small at that point,” he said. “But that doesn’t necessarily mean that you could leave it all there under a park scenario, just because you’re attracting children, and that has a higher standard of cleanup.
“It’s likely that at the park portion — wherever that falls, and whatever the extent of it is — that there will probably be some targeted cleanup that would be needed to kind of bring down the overall … risk,” he continued.
A parking lot, Clinton explained, would likely require less soil removal because it would not be a recreational area.
“I do want to say we haven’t gone through the whole risk-assessment process yet,” he said. “So we would have to look at that. To kind of sum it up: more parking lot — likely less cleanup; more park — more cleanup would probably be likely.”
He also said he questions whether Orange has the demand for a two-level parking structure. He said the return on investment would give him pause.
