Welcome everybody to today's Town of Chadam Zoning Board of Appeals meeting. The date is May 7th, 2026. Just a little bit of explanation. There's some confusion as to who's
running this meeting and why. Randy was the chair of this board, all of 24 and all of 25. At the end of 25, we had a reorganization meeting. I was elected chairman. Randy was elected vice chair.
But in my role as chair, there's I have a lot of powers that don't need votes by fellow members and whatnot. I said to Randy in December, you did such a great job of running the meetings during the previous 40b.
I would like you very much to continue to run the 40B meetings. And she said, fortunately, yes. her expertise and the amount of time she spent talking to town attorneys, staff members, and just
reading up on her own. She knows more about this than I do and certainly anybody else on this board. So that's why Randy has been running the 40B meetings also because she's vice chair. If I happen to be ill or away, she fills
in. I hope that, you know, eliminates any confusion in the world. So with that in mind, I turn the meeting over to Randy who acts in this capacity as the special chair for the 40B meeting today.
Randy, >> thank you, Mr. Chair. Welcome everybody. This is the May 7th, 2026 meeting of the Cadam Zoning Board of Appeals. This meeting is being recorded and will be available shortly thereafter on for scheduled and on demand viewing on any
smartphone or tablet device. If anyone else is recording the meeting using the AI note takingaking apps, please notify the chair. Are there is there anybody doing that hearing? None. Pursuant to Governor
Healey's March 28th, 2025, signing of the chapter two of the acts of 2025 extending COVID measures adopted during the state of emergency um open meeting law um until June 30, 2027. This meeting of the Chattam Zoning Board of Appeals
is being conducted in person and via remote participation. Every effort will be made to ensure that the public can adequately access the proceedings provided for in the order. A reminder, people who'd like to listen to this meeting while in progress may do so by calling 508-9454410
conference ID 589. Please shut off any gadget that makes any type of noise whatsoever. Um and uh also vibrations because we can feel that too. Um okay, back to this. A reminder persons who'd like to listen. I already I already said
the phone number. The conference ID is 5895680515 pound. I'll say that again. Conference ID 589680515 pound or join the meeting online via the Microsoft Teams link in the posted agenda. This is a live broadcast and
Simocast on Cadam TV. But despite our best efforts, we may not be able to provide realtime access. We will post a recording of this meeting on the town's website as soon as possible. In accordance with town policy, the public can speak to any issue hearing or
business item on the agenda during the meeting when recognized by the chair. We start our meeting with a roll call vote of all board members. We ask that if you are participating um via phone uh just make it known to us um that of your your
identity online. um uh by phone. Hearing notice is read by staff o'clock on my right and the uh in this case Penrose will present their um application. I will read all letters received by the
board um in my discretion. Anyone wishing to comment on the application may speak up to three minutes. Those present in the meeting room will be recognized first followed by anyone online. And there's going to be there's a microphone set up in the middle and
it's preferred by staff on channel 8 that you use that microphone in the middle. Um if you need help with it, we we will help you. Um the applicant can then rebut um any oral uh comments or written
comments. Board members will ask questions. The board will then vote to the continue this application to a date certain which is going to be uh June 4th, 2026. And all votes are taken by roll call. At the end of the meeting, we will close
via verbal confirmation and note the time of adjournment. Um so we're going to start with a roll call vote of all board members starting over there with Mr. Nixon. >> I vote yes. >> No, not vote. No, you do you confirm
this type of meeting? Yeah, sorry. >> Lee Hav, I approve. >> Steven D. Deborne, I approve. >> Virginia Fenwick, I approve. >> Alc Simple, I approve this form. >> Uh, Ed Actton, I approve. >> David HVH, and I approve as well. >> As do I. Randy Podash. All right. So,
Sarah, application number 25-077, Penrose LLC, 15 Milk Street, 16th floor, Boston, Mass 02109. The property is owned by the town of Chadam, located at Zero Meeting House Road. also shown in the town of Chadam's
assessor's map 4E block 11A lot AB. The applicants are requesting the grant of a comprehensive permit under Mass General Law Chapter 4B sections 20 through 23 and 760 CMR 56 for the construction of 42 dwelling units in eight structures. The applicants are requesting the grant
of various waiverss from regulations promulgated by the Chattam zoning bylaw and other local regulations. The property contains 3.57 acres in the R60 zoning district. This was continued from August 14th, September 4th, October
16th, November 13th, December 30th, 2025, and January 15th, February 5th, and March 5th, 2026. Okay, Penrose. >> Good afternoon. >> Good afternoon. Thank you for having us
tonight. Um, is it possible to get the display on the laptop up on the screen, please? >> Perfect. Thank you. Um, for the record, I'm Rio Saketi, uh, developer with
Penrose, the applicant. I'm joined up here, uh, by our attorney, Marian Rose. Also with us tonight, uh, my colleague, Carmen Chung, and our design team members. We have Paul Atman from uh Union Studio, the architect, Joe
Henderson from Horesley Whitten, our civil engineer, and Mark Orul from Crowley Cautrol, uh our landscape architect. Um I just have one brief remark before we get into it. I want to thank the board for your patience the
past several months. Um, we started this development process on this project back in early 2024 prior to submitting for the RFP. We spent a lot of time and resources developing uh those plans all through different um
town department reviews uh through different boards like the select board, the affordable housing trust fund um historic and um it was a lot of time and effort to get the drawings to where we had last left off. And so, um, but we
had heard the concerns from the board and from the community on on that prior plan. And so, we used this hiatus to to respond to those um, productively. And I think um, we've been able to advance the
design significantly in the past 90 days. It's really quite remarkable how much work has been able to get done to to change the uh, development plan. And it's really a testament to the design team we have. Um but um in doing so we
we recognize it did take some time and so we do appreciate all your patience and we are very happy to be here back here today uh today to present um what we've been working on. So uh Marian >> perfect. Yep. Welcome council.
>> Thank you for the record. Marian Rose from Singer and Singer and Dennis Fort. Glad to be with you all again today. Um our goal frankly here is to present in working form the revised plan and we need your feedback and really request it
um to decide on Pinrose's behalf whether to continue with more complete plans for the subsequent meetings. We assure you that what you see today will work on the site and in the main it is a response to the concerns the board and community
members had about density. A 40B developer has limited ways to deal with density if they want a certain number of units on site. This is a rare occasion where this developer has been able to work with a neighbor and come to an agreement, a purchase option
agreement to include additional property as part of this development. I want to make sure that everyone understands I think the board understands that what this is proposing and what it is not. It is not changing the number of
units. the number of units will remain at 42. It's not changing the number of bedrooms. It is changing the site on which this development will be placed. Originally, the property
included in this development is 3.57 acres. The added property is about 0.55 acres. Truth be told, in this 90 days, there hasn't been a survey. That's a significant expense. And so things like that will be buttoned up once we decide
to go forward with this revised plan. But it goes from 3.57 acres to more or less 4.12 acres. How does that change what's proposed on the site? Well, you can look at it in
terms of numbers and as you'll see with the development team, they'll show you what it will look like um with the plans and um eventually perhaps renderings. It's measurable because the number of
units will be reduced from about 11.3 units per acre on site to about 10.3 units on site. It's measurable because the number of parking spaces will be increased from 61 as currently presented
to 67 as proposed. Now, um there's a lot of talk about dumpsters and how many dumpsters needed to be on site. Under this plan, there will be two dumpsters on site rather than one. Also, there was a lot of conversation about
height and the height waiverss. Um, I'm not going to go into a lot of detail on the waivers today. We do have a revised waiver set as part of um, our submission, but I do want to flag that with the height waivers. Originally,
there were five height waivers and the highest was for a waiver of over five feet. Under the current plan, the highest waiver would be about 4 feet 1 in. So, it's significantly reduced. when I don't want to steal the thunder
of the design team, but I do want to flag a couple of things to look at when you're when you're listening to them. When you're looking at how this 4.12 acres will affect and impact the design, you can look at it from meeting house
road and you can look at it and how the the development will operate on site. for meeting house road. When you see the plans, you'll notice the driveway is in a different place. It's more of an angled driveway from the right, and it matches the grade. It meets the grade as
you're going up to the site. Um, you'll also notice that buildings five and six on the prior plan, those have been pulled back. So, from Meeting House Road, there'll no longer be two buildings
right above the ravine. um next to the driveway. Those will be pushed back on site. But when you're in the site, there are meaningful differences for the tenants for the future tenants of the site. You'll see. And the thing that struck me the most is the large green
area um in the the community area in the middle. It was there was one there, but it wasn't what Penrose usually builds. Now, this really resembles the developments that Pinrose normally develops. There's a green and it also
includes um the recreational area for children. The buffers are more substantial and the connection to the bike trail is it fits more easily on the site. The grade is easier to deal with and it's easier to
find on the site. It's not tucked in a corner. Council, are you going to show us all this? >> We'll show you all of that. I'm just flagging it. Those are the main things. >> There's a lot of flags. >> Exactly. Okay. >> So, what you have before you are a narrative, the waiverss, the landscape
plan, the turning template, and the elevations, and the floor plans. Um, we understand that we will be needing to show site control in the future, and we will do that. But what we really want to hear now is how you what your reactions
are to the plan that is presented. >> Just for the public, can you tell us what you mean by site control? >> Sure. Uh we have to show and we have authorization from um the owner of 87 Meeting House Road to be a part of this permit. That's part of site control, but
eventually we'll have to show that we have some ownership interest in zero meeting house. And what by that I mean we we are purchasing zero meeting house from the town simultaneously the purchase the option
purchase agreement will allow us to purchase 87 at the same time >> and that's all at Penrose's expense. >> Correct. >> Okay. Go ahead. >> Thank you. I'll pass it on to the design team. >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Welcome back. Good afternoon. Uh for the
record, my name is Mark Warfl. I'm a landscape architect with Crowley Cultural Landscape Architecture. So before you on the slide here is the previously proposed plan. Um we took all of the comments that we
heard over the past meetings uh and the break that we had to pour ourselves into a new version of this. Um, a lot of hard work went into improving the site plan and being responsive to the comments that we've heard.
This is the new plan. So, it includes the parcel at uh 87 meeting house. Um, as you'll Let me see if there's a pointer here. Um, so the new main driveway moved north up meeting house
and we've essentially eliminated a a driveway by doing this. There was a new driveway proposed for 87 as well as the original entrance into the development here. So we've combined those into one location.
As you enter, it's um more at grade. So, we're not dealing with the larger grade change that we had down um further south on the property. So, it's a much more gradual entry. Uh there's residential
buildings um located around here. The new management office is more centralized with better um sight lines into the property and over the entrance. Um many of these buildings around the perimeter are more or less in the same
location and the same orientation. Um with the the change of building 7. Um if I flip back on the previous plan, we had two buildings that um occupied the
eastern side of the parking. And um not only did that provide a view of sort of the um backsides of these buildings as you're driving into the property, but also from um meeting house, we've opened that up now. So the view is really into
the open space in the middle. Um we've in the the central green area there's a play space place to gather as well as um uh a maintenance building that has um
storage and a shop in it that um Paul will get into a little bit further and um covered bike parking. Uh on the east side there are two dumpster locations as well as a uh trail head landing to uh
the path that connects down to the rail trail. Um, so from a landscape architecture standpoint, really, um, my piece of it, we've been able to, uh, expand the green space for the
members that the residents that'll live here through both the, um, new central green, but also giving a little bit more space between buildings and backyards. Uh there's the central play area that
now has um it's more of a meeting point and and centralized to the whole neighborhood. Um we've also been able to preserve uh some existing trees in that uh central green area.
Um the gathering area now is adjacent to the the playground. Um, so families that have young children, there's opportunity here to either, you know, host a child's birthday party or just um relax in this
area while um children play in the fenced in play area. Uh we've been able to preserve more trees um so both along the buffers uh because we we've been able to match the grade of
the existing site a little bit better. um preserving more trees in the central area as well as uh along meeting house. So there's a much bigger buffer here um which I have a figure that will show that in a second. Um and uh a real
highlight for the residents I think is a more central and convenient location to get onto the rail trail. So this is a diagram that overlays uh the previous plan in orange um over top the new proposal.
Uh the buildings are outlined in orange here. The dashed outline is the limit of disturbance from the previous plan. And also shown here that um we've talked a lot about uh is this new driveway that was proposed for 87 meeting house. Um so
we're really taking that into consideration when we do our calculations. Uh because there was site disturbance associated with that. Uh and what we're looking at here is that in
total our our site disturbance is around 2.9 acres or or 71%. And that's important because when we look at the new plan, there's areas where we will be we will
have additional clearing, but there's also in the green shown in green here areas where we have uh uh space on site that will be preserved. And um we've been able to uh make the
property feel more generous, open up green space, um better orient things, increase parking, all while keeping our site disturbance the same. So, um we think that's a a really big win. Um
so that's the the new proposed plan. um high level. I'll pass it over to Joe from Horesley Whitten to talk a little bit about the site engineering. >> Good afternoon. Joe Henderson, Horsesley Whitten Group. Uh good to be here. Uh I thought I would go over some of the high
level uh site engineering uh storm water um grading type um aspects of the project. Um, as Mark pointed out, um, we have made, um, some changes to the road entry. Uh, it's been moved, um, further
north along Meeting House Road. Uh, we did review this in relation to the required curb cuts between existing, uh, the curb cut here for 95 Meeting House and the curb cut for the um, the church here. And that does meet the required
curb cut setbacks. Um, all of the roadway widths and parking dimensions throughout the new layout all are the same as what was previously proposed. 24 foot wide roadways, 9 by8 parking spaces uh and the same uh amount
of handicap parking spaces. We've also um provided a plan that shows this layout to the fire department uh and they've reviewed it and has and have not um they have no comments at this time. That's what the report is. They looked at it and no issues with circulation of
the ladder truck throughout the site. Um, we also have bumped up the number of parking spaces to 67. Um, I'll talk about that in in a second here in the next slide. Um, the approach for our storm water management will again remain
the same as the previous design. We're using a bio retention area. Uh there's one outlined here. Uh along with some tree trenches that will be located within the parking lot. Um the grade for the property basically is um coming down
towards meeting house road as Mark has mentioned. So we would capture the water quality volume for storm water in these um um tree trenches and bio retention area and the larger storms would then go as previously um designed into this
large existing depression for infiltration. Uh we are still planning to maintain the uh driveway here that that used to be the access to the abuters. That will be the maintenance access for uh this large uh infiltration area and our bio
retention area that's located here at the bottom of the hill. Um I mentioned the new curb cut. So for 95 Meeting House Road, you can see we're showing a new curb cut and driveway. We have a uh 10- foot wide road with uh a
turnout. It's 18 ft back. So that allows for pulling in and backing out and coming out to the road. Um and as March mentioned, we are um you know, we're we're decreasing the amount of curb cuts for this project. So just to highlight some of the
improvements, um as Marian mentioned, we are increasing the site by 6 acres and we're still maintaining uh the same unit count. So the density does decrease from 117 to 10.3 units per acre. Um we also
feel that this provides more uh better accessibility and uh accessibility through the sidewalks in the site. The entrance has a bus landing or bus stop as previously proposed. But now we have significant buffer between the vehicles
and the sidewalk better situation as far as pedestrian safety. Uh similarly here we have increased safety with the uh path being separated from the parking lot and you probably noticed there was previous design had kind of a deadend uh
portion of the road here that is now eliminated which again provides uh smoother vehicle access throughout the site. Uh we also have two trash enclosures that was mentioned. Um and there's one up for the service the buildings on this
side of the property and then uh a second dumpster on the uh southern portion. Uh so we've eliminated again a conflict with this um there I don't if you recall there was previously in encroachment on
uh this property with the driveway and uh onto the you know the project property that again has been eliminated. Um and then our parking ratio, we one of the peerreview comments from the last design was that our parking ratio didn't
meet what the um it's the IT 85th percentile. That's 1.59 parking um spaces per unit. And um our previous ratio was I believe 1.4 or so. Um and that was with 61 spaces. Now
we've bumped that up to 67 which now meets the that IT recommendation from the peerreview engineer and that's all I have for now. I think Paul was going to continue.
>> Thank you. >> Welcome Paul. >> Hi. Good afternoon everyone. Uh for the record Paul Atman with Union Studio Architecture and Community Design, also known as Union for short. Um, I'll flip
to the architecture and we talked about the improving the building layout as it responded to the new site plan. The one thing that we did were Joe had mentioned was that the management office is more central and visible for the entire
neighborhood and visitors coming arriving at the site. It used to be up here between two buildings. It's still attached to building one, but with the new location, we were able to take the maintenance shop that was attached to the backside of building one and move it
to the center of the site, expand it a little bit to meet Penrose's guidelines for a maintenance shop and a off maintenance office there. And it makes it much easier for operations uh than it uh previously was in this far
corner. that added one more structure to the overall site plan. We're calling it building nine. And we, as people have mentioned, the reduced visual impact of the buildings from Meeting House Road. And as you approach all these buildings
one and eight now have front doors that are really facing toward Meeting House Road, not the back sides of a couple of the larger buildings. And building 7 also has a front porch and front doors facing the its road network. So there's
really no backsides facing Meeting House Road, which we think is a big benefit. And as uh Marian had mentioned about the building waiverss, the uh the the largest waiver we asked for in our previous scheme has been reduced by over
a foot. This chart here is in your packets and I won't belabor that but you can see the comparison from the the waiver request now on every building to what was previously requested. So you can see the
difference from every building numbered the numbers of the buildings stayed the same but as Mark said got relocated throughout the new site plan. And then I these are for everyone to see that the architecture has not changed.
Uh the buildings are the same with the exception of building one that changed a little bit in the floor plan. And this here is the elevation of building one with a management suite here on the south side of the building. Building one
located right here on this corner. And for comparison, we I thought this would be helpful for everyone to see that this is the was original building number one floor plan with a management the maintenance shop on the north side
that got removed here. All the sheds were storage sheds were moved onto that side of the building and then that management suite is now orientated uh out onto the common green and the neighborhood. So, we think it's a much
better plan and the management suite is about the same size. I'll just go through some of the elevations and you can see here on the upper left, this is the key pan key plan of where they're located on the site. And then finally, the new maintenance
building. Here's the elevations and the floor plan. Uh this also gave us an opportunity to provide some covered park uh bike storage uh on this nice porch that's facing the uh the playground.
And I'll turn it over back to I think Marian or Rio for conclusions. Okay. Okay. Um, thanks Paul. This revised plan and I'm I'm not going to just read off
the bullet points. Um, if you have them to see you, but you can see there's a lot of changes. All of these changes are plus positives to the project. Um, this revised plan is not uh an effort from us to restart. Uh, it's it's a
direct response to the concerns that were raised uh at prior hearings and our um goal to provide and develop a a better project. Uh, and so from our perspective, I think
the revised plan does what uh we should all want this process to do. It preserves the core um public um process of creating you know the needed affordable housing which is why we um
responded to the RFP in the beginning. Um, so it it still maintains the goal of creating this affordable housing in this community while we believe it's also being responsive and uh responsive to the board's concerns and and also the
community's raised concerns and we think we've done it in a constructive way. So um we're excited we're have been excited to present this and we're looking forward to receive feedback from the board and from the community. Thank you.
Thank you. All right. So now I will read the correspondences and um first one is from Carol J. Kenner. Dear honorable members of the zoning board and this was received on um let's see May 7th, 2026
at 9:12 a.m. this morning. Um first, thank you for your public service. I write to respectfully request you grant Penrose LLC application for a comprehensive permit. Increasing Chat affordable, attainable, and accessible housing will benefit our entire
community. I fully support the rationale set for set forth by Mike Shell in his recent letter to the ZBA. For our family in particular, affordable housing is vital since the direct care staff who provide services to our adult son with
disabilities struggled to to um find yearround housing on the Cape. Many have already been compelled to leave Cape Cod due to their inability to find affordable places to live. This jeopardizes the availability of care to our son. the Penrose application will
help them as well as simily situated people and families um remain here. Thank you for your consideration and again that's Carol J. Kenner. Next we have a note from Tim Shalo from nine chat Chat Harbor Lane.
I am writing to and this was received May 6, 2026. I'm writing to express continued concern about the Penrol Penrose affordable housing proposal for meeting house road and the process by which this proposal is being advanced since the ZBA meeting in December in
which many serious concerns were raised. Four months have transpired in which Penrose has worked out of the public eye to prepare an alternative proposal that might be acceptable after this long hiatus which may have had effect
dampening the engagement in energy of interest of residents who find the project not to be in the best interests of Chadam. The public has had very limited time now to re-engage and understand the modifications, including
the apparent acquisition of new land and significant changes to the site plan. I hope the overall timeline for the final ZBA decision will not preclude the ZBA for and the public from having sufficient time to fully absorb, consider, and reflect on the new
proposal. This would be deeply unfair and further undermine an already frayed sense of trust between the concerned residents and those who've invested in the success of the proposal. Some specific questions about the proposal.
One is a sidewalk on the west side of Meeting House proposed in this revision. Previously, there were legitimate concerns raised about the pedestrian safety associated with using the driveway to access Meeting House Road and directly then walking along the
narrow roadside, combined with the increase in traffic in and out of the complex and the distraction and disruption that will inevitably impact drivers on Meeting House Road. The safety issue should not be ignored.
Number two of two related to above. The proposal still appears to provide a walkway to the bike trail as the primary pedestrian access into and out of the complex and the linkage to cross to the crosswalk across Meeting House Road.
This seems dangerous and inadvisable both to pedestrians and to bikers. There's a big difference between pedestrian traffic to and from a large residential complex and recreational use of the bike trail. To assume that merger of these two uses would not be
consequential is misguided. I urge the ZBA to fully enable and take seriously the concerns from residents while deliberating and deciding on this important issue for the future of Chattam. We need to recognize that this proposal in totality may be the may be
the wrong fit for Chadam and despite efforts to fit a square peg in a round hole would ultimately pro prove to be net negative for the community. Thank you Tim Childboys. Uh sorry if I pronounced that wrong. All right. Next
we have a note from EJ McKenna and that was received uh May 5th, 2026. Um, so actually this is from Lou Hib of Chadam. By an undemocratic and possibly rigged autocratic process, the Cadam citizens
of South Chattam will suffer egregiously delletterious consequences of this atro atrociously ill-conceived housing project on Meeting House Road. We greatly appreciated the ZBA member who courageously called out the many flaws
in these processes and the board and some of the individuals responsible. There are more than enough problems with this project to fill a book, including overcrowded density, health and public safety, and an aesthetic impact on the
entrance to South Chattam that will permanently negatively transform the character of South Cadam. There are credible reports that Penrose has or is in the process of buying adjacent property. There are concerns that this
could expand further. This multiplies an already sense of many that there have been some kind of maneuvering going on behind the scenes. This harms citizens trust. It's frequently been said that the ZBA's hands are tied. They're not
tied so that you can't vote so that you can't vote no and show support for these fellow citizens. Again, that's from Luhive. Next, we have a letter from David Farrell. May 4th, 2026 is the date we
received it. My December 5th, 2025 memo cited the case of Middlebarro versus Housing Appeals Committee when there is a deception by the Penrose LLC 40B applicant and still unidentified limited
dividend organizations that will be created to own, building, manage the Main Street and Meeting House Road projects. A comprehensive permit is validly denied. On top of the Penrose LLC history outlined by Mr. Mr. Nixon at
his November 13th, 2025 ZBA meeting, the LLC poured is its extensive corporate resources into its many presentations to the ZBA and has bought more land. The LLC has sought the Cadam projects with
all of the corporate might of a 500 pound gorilla, touting its track record and abilities, but the actual work will be turned over to an untested singlepurpose limited dividend organizations. The more appropriate local analogy is a
great white shark has torn through the Cadam but will leave Dogfish in charge. The same deception occurred in East Ham's village by Nars Green by Penrose. Construction defects and needed maintenance have been ignored there.
There in six months since I first showed the ZBA in November 2025 photo and he he has actually attached a photo that you could see online. Um attached this May 2nd, 2026 photo.
The Chattam ZBA must not allow a repeat here and should deny the comprehensive permit. And again, that's from David J. Farrell Jr. And if you look online, you will see a picture um that he um took of East Ham's Village at Nars Green.
According to this letter, next we have a note from Elaine Gibbs received May 6, 2026 at 2:00 um in the afternoon. Sir, Attorney Singer should have been required to send the financing details in advance so members of the public
could read it in order to prepare questions and comments. It's a huge unknown. He has clearly known about this potential property purchase since March 5th when he was asked by a ZBA member what changes were being made and he responded he was quote not at liberty at
liberty to discuss it unquote. The new design requires that extra piece of land. It's not listed on zero Zillow as pending a pending sale and there's no deed transfer on 87 meeting house road since 2013.
This is an extremely significant development with a total redesign effectively taking this process back to square one. He was able to send the numerous waiverss required only excluding the financials. I ask you
share this email with the ZBA members and add it to the correspondence packet. Um, see next we have a letter from Mike Shell that is nine pages long and he asked specifically that we just
acknowledge receipt and he asked the ZBA to read it and I don't know if we have a point of order that's in our Go ahead. What >> you have repeatedly said that correspondence to go on their record needs to be one page. >> Turn on the microphone.
>> One page correspondence you repeatedly insisted on. My letter was one page. Most of what you >> I am not going to read this. So if you could just hold on a second, you'll see what I'm going to do with the nine-page letter. I think you might be jumping the gun. >> I might be. >> Okay. If you could hold on a second and
let me finish my sentence. >> Mr. Michelle asked that we just note the letter and not read it. >> So now I'm going to move to the next letter. >> No point of order. It should not be part of the record. You've you've said one-page letter.
>> It's not a matter sir. Sir, it's not a matter of what I say. It's a matter of what the rules are. If you could have a seat, that would be great. >> You said >> if you could have a seat, >> it should be madam chair. >> If you could have a seat, that would be wonderful. >> There's collusion you and Mr. show.
>> Next, we're going to read the letter from Let's see. >> That's it. >> That would conclude the letters. Now, members of the public, you have three minutes. Who would like to go first? If you could enter the middle aisle and
Yes, ma'am. Just state your name and we'll start the clock. Welcome. >> Good afternoon. Uh members of the board, I'm attorney JP Burke from uh Cadam. I'm representing uh Gloria Hicks, 95 Meeting
House Road, which is the home immediately adjacent to this property through which she has a right of way. I want to comment. There's a major legal defect in applicants documents that needs to be addressed and that major issue is sight. >> Could you speak a little bit louder? I'm sorry, maybe it's me. Just a little bit
louder. And Mike, >> the major issue is sight control. It's important to understand the site controls a major threshold that must be met first for eligibility determination by the subsidizing agency and by the local board for a 40B permit. It's not a
mere technicality and it's fundamental mandatory prerequisite. It doesn't come later for both processes. The applicant has not achieved site control documentation in either the eligibility process nor before this board. First, state regulations for eligibility of three minimum requirements. one,
applicant's qualification. Two, fundability, and three, site control. If you don't have all three, you're not eligible. These three requirements are minimum mandatory requirements for the project. Site control is a prerequisite for 40B here as well, pursuant to your
own regulations and the CMRs. They require the documentation be sub submitted uh to show sufficient control of the property in order to build the proposed development. That's not happened as the original application, nor this revised one. The applicant has failed to demonstrate control by means
of an agreement with Gloria Hicks to extinguish the right away which they need to develop that runs through the middle of this property. To further compound the issue, the applicant has now submitted a revise showing additional property to be included in the development without showing that it has control over that property as well.
Documentation is required as a prerequisite. Doesn't come later on. Finally, the state regulations require that if an applicant requires to change aspects of his proposal after determination of eligibility, it shall notify the subsidizing agency in writing
of such a change. The subsidizing agency shall make a determination within 15 days regarding continued eligibility. This process does not appear to have been followed and should be without the without sight control. This uh site will not be eligible. The board needs to be
as thorough with the revised proposal as it was with the original proposal. A revised application checklist should be submitted to be sure the new portion of the property meets the requirements in the same fashion and detail as the original application such as impacts and mitigation to abuing properties,
traffic, environmental. These defects will invite costly and lengthy litigation by appeal of the permit >> you 30 minute 30 second notice >> and the court petition to quiet title. My my client will file a court petition to acquire title to stop this project. Continuing the hearing process without
diligent attention to these requirements is a waste of municipal and civic energy, not to mention the taxpayers's dollars. A minimum this at a minimum this matter should be continued if not procedurally dismissed for failure to file a completed application. >> And in conclusion, >> thank you. >> Yes. Thank you. And I'll just
incidentally let you know and let the public know that we do have town council online and he will be um responding to legal uh questions and topics that are raised. Um okay, who'd like to go next? Somebody. Yes. Oh, wait. Um I
acknowledge that person right there, but you can go after her. Welcome, ma'am. >> Thank you. Uh Katie Sherer, 14 Janette Drive. Um I wanted to say I'm here to support the proposal. Penrose has indicated they're looking for an indication of whether it's worth it for
them to move forward. I say resoundingly yes. We need this housing in town. We need more kids in our schools. We need the ZBA to work with Penrose to develop a design that is acceptable to Penrose
and to the town. I think you did it effectively with Main Street. I look forward to you doing it effectively again with this proposal. Thank you. >> Thank you, ma'am. If you'd like to go next, Miss >> Carol Gordon, South Cadam. I'm here today as an individual not representing
South Chattam Village Association and I'm saying how do we how did we get here? Most importantly, why did we get here? We all recognize the need for affordable housing. But what many of us wonder is why the town after hearing from its citizens chose to work for with
a for-profit developer. Town's people's vision should prevail, not the demands of Penrose. We got to this ill-fitted plan because town officials um have been afraid to stand up to Penrose and the state in the pursuit of what is best for Chadam. Afraid to specify in the RFP how
many units are appropriate. Afraid a developer might not take the job because it's unprofitable. What we wanted for Main Street, the Buckley property, was for it to be a development that considers Chadam's environment and special character. But when Penrose delivered its ultimatum to appeal to the
state if the ZBA did not approve its plans, the ZBA backed down. Member it of its members were approaching a no vote but changed their minds at the last minute and voted yes to the project except for Mr. Nixon who has stayed true to his convictions from the start. Where
is our leadership? Leaders who are strong, willing to stand up for what's right for Chadam. We can only hope the Main Street Buckley properly is not the disaster it appears to be. We know meeting house road project before you today has changed, but we're looking at a plan when they don't even have the
land. And I'm tired I'm frankly I'm tired of people hiding behind 40B and telling us their hands are tied. Does 40B prohibit sidewalks, designs that fit into the neighborhood and crosswalks, plans that provide handicap accessibility and safety for our children? Of course
not. We've been told it's too late. The select board gave its approval and contracts have been signed. The purchase of the additional land was not in the original contract, so we could start over. I'm asking you to at least consider that and reverse the project and do what's best for Chadam. Thank you.
>> Thank you, ma'am. >> Yes, sir. >> Did I do it right? >> Uh David Oenheim, Absigami Ron. I was a former member of the affordable housing trust. Um I think this thing should be approved. I think uh compliment should
go to Penrose in the way they've reacted to the comments made by this board as far as density and things like that. They've taken a very unique approach instead of taking perhaps what would be the easy way which would be go to housing court which might well have uh overturned if if this board turned it down it might have overturned it and
then they would have had exactly the way it was when they first presented it. In fact, they've gone out of their way to make I I think it's roughly 20% more land. I maybe have the calculation wrong. It's much more creative with only one curb cut. Uh it meets the setback things and I think they should uh much
like they did with uh the Buckley property. I think they've gone out of their way even beyond what's normally done in affordable housing to accommodate the concerns of this board and the uh neighbors and I think it's a really well well thoughtout project. Thank you.
>> Thank you, sir. Yes, ma'am. >> Good afternoon. I'm Judy Patterson. I live in West Chadam. Um, I don't approve of this project at all. There's no opportunity for any home ownership here, which is what Chattam needs. We should have gone with Habitat for Humanity.
Instead, we have these monstrosities in West and South Chattam. And it's really unfortunate that the prior select board went ahead and voted for this because the majority of the residents in this town do not support this. Thank you. >> Thank you, Miss. Who would like to go?
Yes. Yes, ma'am. Linda Mroy, 86 Tanglewood Drive, South Chattam. Uh, there's no question that we need affordable housing. That is not the question here, but there's a lot of concerns over this property. First off, the proposed buildings are totally out
of character with the neighborhood and they're going to be an eyesore that will continue with us. the proposed density is not appropriate even with the increased property that they've been talking about. We should be looking for housing units that are available for
purchase rather than apartments. There's some other concerns, but what I'd like to focus on first is a safety concern. Penrose has not been willing to include sidewalks in the design of this meeting house property road uh
development from their development down to Route 28. And this prop poses a huge safety risk. Meeting House Road is extremely busy. And during this past winter, we all know that there was significant snowfall. There were
continual snow banks on the side of the road with no plowed shoulder for about six weeks. This would have required residents, including children, to walk in the roadway to get from the proposed
Penrose development down to Route 28 where there's public bus transportation. In the winter, it is dark in the late afternoon and pedestrian traffic would be expected during those hours. Penrose has stated that a sidewalk is not needed
because of the bike path, but this route was impassible for at least six weeks. The bike path was not plowed and there was no way to access it. If Penrose receives permission to proceed with this project, there should be a requirement
to install and maintain a sidewalk from their development to Route 28 for safety of the residents, especially the safety of our children. Without a safe and maintained sidewalk, it is only a matter of time before there
will be serious injuries and perhaps even death. Walking along Meeting House Road is dangerous. We all know that. We have lived through this winter and it won't be the last winter we see. Thank you very much.
>> Thank you, ma'am. >> Yes, sir. >> Hi, Frank Msina. Took my hat off. Uh Frank Msina, South Chadam. Um, I I think there's no question the community wants to do something that we need affordable housing. We need
something to solve the problem of people un en unable to unable to live in Chattam and work. >> You can shut that phone off whoever's that noise. I'm sorry. >> It's a serious >> Oh, I'm sorry. Never mind. >> That's all right. >> I I didn't realize what it was. >> So, I think the question of the need is, you know, it's kind of beyond us. We
know, we know, we know that and the affordable housing trusts and the previous select boards, you know, made some decisions and unfortunately or fortunately, you guys get it. You know, they dumped it on you, so to speak, 40B.
This is so-called friendly 40b, but it's still a 40B. So, your decision- making and what you can or cannot do is limited. Uh, and nobody wants to end up in court. We had an attorney, I think, speak here about all a lot of legal stuff and I'm sure you guys will take
care of that and you've heard some comments about sidewalks, but I I just, you know, it's going to be difficult. But I think at this particular point, I was not in for this originally when it first came out, the first the square and the squareness of it. And I I you know I
think I congratulate uh the folks at Pembrose for thinking a little bit outside the box and and and obviously they had to put a a driveway in for that resident and now they they've incorporated and then obviously a little bit of more cost to them. But I think it's a good design. It it's no longer
square. It's it's it's it's it uh moves out to the side. The fact that the entrance uh the driveway is up further up the road away from the intersection is great. It ain't perfect, but I think you've got a lot to work with here. And again, I'd like to thank
Payne and Rose for for trying to do something more and listening to the community. And a lot of people in South Chadam are upset about it. But, you know, we've got to do it. It's just necessary. It's not perfect, but I think it's going to go a long way to help solve the problem in Chadam and uh
support your efforts. Good luck. >> Thank you, sir. Yes, ma'am. Meredith Fry, North Cadam. I truly hope the board uh supports this project. It's much needed. The town needs it. Um we
are down for at the elementary school with students. I think this project I think Penrose did a great job um with the bike path. Kids can bike right to Volunteer Park. Maybe a sidewalk could be included in the plan, but also um
this Chattam needs this. We need this and the children need it and young families needs this project. Um so I do hope you support it and it would be an historic step forward with affordable housing for Chadam.
>> Thank you. Yes, sir. Um, thanks very much, Mike Shell, Chadam. Um, we've been at this a long time. Uh, by the way, I'm I apologize for burdening you with a nine-page letter. Um, I wanted you to see what has been going on
here in Chadam, uh, over a very long period of time, uh, at least since 2003. Um, but I I for for today, what I want to say is this. We started a a party. Think of it as a party. And we worked on an invitation
starting in 200 um basically I guess it was 20 uh 23. Well really 2021. Every official body in Chadam including town meeting has been involved in one way or another. Not with this particular
project but trying to bring affordable housing to fruition here in Chadam. We put out an invitation. In the first instance, we went out and we said, "We need information." We did a so-called RFI, a request for information
in 2023. Penrose was one of, I think, five or six people who came back and told us a lot of stuff that we didn't know. And that helped shape, as did the others, our request for information. Okay. We put out requests for proposals.
I would like to remind everybody there was no proposal for affordable h for for ownership housing on meeting house road. Nobody. We we invited it if people wanted to submit it. They didn't. Okay. You have a partner here who has
demonstrated their willingness to work with the town to work with you. They have accommodated. They have changed. they have tried to accommodate the the the the the community and now they've come forward with a new plan which implies that they're willing to spend
what must be a significant amount of money in order to accommodate your concerns. And so and it's going to be hard to adjust all of the things that people are asking for here, all of the objections to get this project to a finish where we get some housing as
opposed to just shutting it down. So I I would just say keep in mind you have a good partner here. These guys know what they're doing. They're good at it. They are capable of being flexible. They've demonstrated. I am confident they will be flexible and work with you going
forward. Thank you. >> Thank you, sir. Who's next? Yes, sir. Hi, Ron Bergstrom, Queen Enro Chadam. Um, personally I I I wouldn't mind if we never cut down another tree in Chadam, but I'm going to speak in support of
this project because for one thing, the conditions under which we acquired the property mandate that we build housing. So, housing is going to be built on this property. Now, some people would object to that and try to, you know, lower the density and stuff like that, but it
doesn't matter. Housing is going to be built on this property. Given that, shouldn't we maximize the opportunities we have here to provide housing for people who right now don't have a roof over their head? And you know, the Cape Cod Commission and other organizations that have looked extensively into the
housing needs of the Cape have said that the most immediate need is rental housing. There a lot of people who are commute from long distances. They're couch surfing. They're living with relatives. They need a roof over their head. I know we as a community may say, "Well, we like home ownership, but
that's what we like. What do we need? We need rental housing." And, you know, to to limit it to, as some suggest, to home ownership is inherently discriminatory. You're cutting off a lot of people who need housing and would not be able to
buy a house. Okay, that's one thing. Another thing I have to say is that I've been to attended a lot of meetings like this and you always get a couple of things. One is it's an inside baseball. Somebody's, you know, somebody's colluding. Somebody's working behind the
scenes. You know, they're pushing they're pushing this on an unsuspecting public. I think you can dismiss that right away. I mean, you guys have seen this in its many iterations. There it is. This is what is being proposed. Okay. And and the other thing is I mean
it's a 40B but I'm not a fan of 40Bs either but we have to deal with the realities we deal with. So I mean I think that this has covered enough of the bases and they've been responsive enough to the community that we're going to build something there. It's going to
be housing. We've done the homework. We know we need it. And I think that the and this board and I don't know all of you, but I'm sure you're honest public servants and you're going to make a decision based on your own judgment. I think you should support this. And one
other thing is who controls the property down the road is really beyond I think the the authority of this board to determine. I mean you're you're a land use agency. You're going to decide on the property itself. So anyway, that's a few comments. So thank you.
>> Thank you sir. Yes sir. Please approach. My name is Richie Hall. I've been a Cadam resident now for some 38 years and a voter for almost as long a time as that. I've heard a lot about the lack of
home ownership possibilities and criticism of this project. and I hear that everybody's for affordable housing. Those are not particularly courageous stands to take. Of course, home ownership o
opportunities are important. They're the foundation of every town, but we also have an obligation to people who can't afford and never will be able to afford a down payment, especially in a town like this.
This project offers opportunities for young families who don't have $100,000 to buy a house to put as a down payment to live in Chattam, raise their families,
and continue to be in a town that they grew up in and love in love. So, I don't want to make a long speech here. I think it's important. This is an important project. I commend the developers and I commend the town for
the work they've done and I hope it gets your approval. Thank you. >> And thank you. Yes, sir. >> Right. Um, this is a home ownership project. >> If you could just state your name for the record. >> For the record, Brian Phillips, 374 Orleans Road. So, I'd like to clear up
some information over there. Um, if this was a home ownership project, I'd be totally in favor of this. It is the biggest concern of people my age. I'm 39 years old. Um, and if we did uh >> if we did the project uh like hack, the home ownership uh you know affordable
home ownership projects, you only need 3% down, but you only really need 1.5% down because there's grants and stuff for that. So those projects do allow people to afford homes. Um the first meeting we had I questioned if anyone had done a water study with all the you
know massive amounts of affordable housing going up. Um someone did in Barnstable and presented it in front of a meeting just like this and they said we don't have enough water. So I think it'd be totally negligent uh to not look into that further. Um the 4dB AML for
4DB AMI affordable housing is a sickness and a virus creates helplessness and discon hopelessness and discontent in its inhabitants and it creates class separation and I I won't uh say too much more but it's my generation that's going to have
to pay for the consequences of this project and the generation before me. Thanks >> and thank you. Yes, ma'am. Oh, well, you already spoke, so we're going to let everybody that if you could please have a seat, we're going to let everybody have one chance and then I will let you speak again. Yes, sir.
>> Sean Hobec, East Chadam. I'd just like to say that I am opposed to this and I hope you guys uh deny the comprehensive permit. Um, I guess there's agreement that everybody we need affordable housing here.
However, this is not the right fit for Chadam. If it was, they wouldn't need so many waiverss to the regulations and variances here. Um, the variance the the waiver for the setback, we all have to
abide by it. They're woefully inadequate with the parking. They're talking about 90 residents with 67 spots. It's got to be more than that. Everybody knows that. It's just not the right fit for Chadam.
One of the glaring variances that stands out to me is the waiver for the impact review. As Brian just mentioned about with the water, we've been underwater conservation for a long time. Throwing
another 42 units in here is not going to help. How is there not going to be a review on this? At a minimum, it needs this needs to be stalled and somebody needs to look at this further. I understand they've made changes
and they've done their best, but make no mistake that they're not doing this out of the kindness of the hearts and trying to help Chad. And this is a money grab. They're doing this and there's going to be a profit to be made at our expense. Once it's done, we're not going to be
able to backtrack from it. Thank you. >> And thank you. Who's next? Just anybody that hasn't spoken yet. Yes, ma'am. Thank you. Good afternoon. I'm Lori McCann. I've been a resident of Chadam since 1964.
And I have a question for Penrose. And I'll turn around. >> No, we that is not how this works. Ma'am, I'm I'm sorry. If I could if I could finish my sentence. You are allowed to make your comments and I and we're going to stop the clock. I'll let you start again. However, it's not a back and forth question. They are taking
notes there and they will respond um to questions that they think are appropriate to respond to. But you go ahead and ask your question and I'll let you start over. Go ahead. >> Thank you, Randy. I'm concerned that the purchase of the Abutter, where is Penrose getting that funding from? By my
estimation, that parcel is valued at approximately $800,000. Penrose is already seeking funding from an a v, you know, a variety of organizations and the number for the funding is unclear. So, are they going
to add $800,000 to the funding bucket and expect the town's people to pay for their profit organization? I think it's um deceitful. I also am so concerned about these looming
buildings, the traffic safety, the noise pollution, light pollution, and this is no longer affordable housing. The word Smith is now attainable housing. And that is not affordable housing. So, I
challenge the board to relook at this. And if you'd like my services to help develop 8 to 12 freestanding houses for home ownership, I'm here to help you do that. Thank you. >> Thank you. Anybody that has not spoken
that would like to speak. We also have to go to the online and I'm going to allow the person in the audience to speak for another minute. One minute. But it's not a back and forth and it's not a rebuttal time. If you have something that you forgot to say before,
please approach and say it. >> Yes. Thank you. I I would just like to uh if you could remind us at some point what the rents will be for this for these units in the development, I'd appreciate that and I think the the community would too. >> Absolutely. Okay. Anybody else in the
audience? It's going once and going twice and then we're going to go to online. Um no. Okay. So online, who is first? >> Ela Gibbs. >> Elaine Gibbs. >> Welcome. >> Thank you. I almost missed it. >> No, no, no, you didn't.
>> Yeah. Uh, this is a totally new design, literally bringing us back to square one, regardless of what the gentleman said during the presentation. And I believe Charlie Adams and Attorney Singer should have been here. Um,
Singer knew two months ago that they were going to add uh 87 meeting house, take down a family home, and make the project area larger. And he didn't tell us then. This is exactly why no one who's paying attention trusts Penrose. This isn't a game. This is our home and
our families. Decisions made will impact Chadam's infrastructure, water, traffic, quality of life, and the safety of our children, not theirs. And it's forever. as a forprofit. We've uh we've just uh I'm sorry, we're just another money
maker for them and their bottom line. You saw photos of the structural deterioration of the 5-year-old NSET green buildings in Orleans used by Penrose as their model project for design, construction, and landscaping. Uh poor quality materials were used and
Penrose still, after being told about it uh months ago, still hasn't made the repairs. That's exactly what we can expect from Penrose in perpetuity, no less. Uh I can't believe uh the no no site control has been done, no uh
surveys been done and apparently no impact review. Um, no financials were included, so we could read them in advance. And that would include the agreement that has been struck with 87
Meeting House Road and the price and how Penrose is going to be able to afford that um those costs. Is it going to be uh using cheaper materials? Uh the added green space that they pointed out for
recreation is minimal. Uh and dangerous culverts and ravines still surround the area. Where are the sidewalks for pedestrian safety connecting the new entrance to Route 28? We shouldn't have to pay for it. How do you justify little children now having to walk even
further? Some children crossing that parking lot three times to get to their bus stop and having to walk 500 ft. There is no sight view uh for many of the units uh in the rear to watch their
children get to the bus. Uh >> excuse me, just so you know. >> Where's the assigned parking and guest parking? >> There's 30 seconds left. Just just so you know. >> Children and families are an afterthought when their safety should be the priority. Nothing about this design is familyfriendly. If Chadam approves
this, knowing the inherent dangers, Penrose in the town can be held liable. The legal basis is when any reasonable person should have known the dangers was advised of them and ignored them. They can be sued. The fact is not one person who supports this project would want their children or grandchildren living
here. That's the test. Anything less, >> in conclusion, in conclusion, Elaine, please. conclusion. Anything less is hypocritical when you won't be personally impacted just so you can check off a box for state funding. >> Thank you very much. Okay, who's next online?
>> Steven Buckley. >> Steven Buckley, please go ahead. >> Okay. Um, before the clock starts, uh, >> no, there's no before. Yep. Excuse me. There is no be such thing as before the clock starts. The clock starts when your
mouth starts moving, sir. So clarification of the procedure of this meeting as uh Mr. Frell had requested before. Um I don't think that should start a clock for my comments on the project. >> No, the clock has already started just
to just uh so you know. >> Okay, let's say this. Here we go. Um then I will say to you I have just read the regulations for the procedures of this meeting this hearing and according to the regulations says five minutes and
according to the regulations it doesn't it says uh written comments shall be one or two pages I forget exactly what it is which would indicate that there's no exceptions it nine pages should have been rejected now I don't agree with
those regulations In fact, I would encourage >> Mr. Buckley, would you like to talk about the project because that's what these comments are for. I'm going to respond to the topic um that was raised before when when I find it a good time to do that. But if you'd like to respond
about this project and your feelings about it, please do that. And I would even start the clock for two minutes for you to do that. But we're not going to talk about what our regulations are right now. We're going to talk about your feelings on the project.
My feelings on the project are that it is being designed in a and developed in a poor way. So that's the connection to the project and the development of the project is that it does not allow it is
not following the the formal procedures that are required for us to conduct this meeting. And if it's if the meeting's not being conducted according to regulations, then it compromises all the all the input and feedback that's that are being
done. So that's how it's connected. And uh the other part is I will say that uh uh looking at the clock, yeah, you don't have to remind me when we hit 30 seconds. Um I see a clock here. Uh, I would say that uh
I would suggest that the um that the chair explain whether or not the procedure that was approved at the beginning of the meeting overrides the adopted regulations, which would be highly improper. that that that an
on-site vote would overrule stand standing regulations that were adopted in 2023 on how to run these meetings. You can't say that you run a transparent organization if it's not clear to the people who are supposed to be engaged in
you want to engage the public. It has to be clear to them what the rules are on how to participate. If it's ad hoc then that's not transparency. It's not clarity and they can't be they can't participate in the procedures in a proper
>> Okay, you have 10 more seconds left. If you please wrap it up, sir. In conclusion, >> 15 according to this. In conclusion, I would like to have more time to talk about the substance of it of this project. Um, but I spent all my time
explaining how it's being compromised by lack of procedure. Thank you. Thank you very much. Who's next online? >> No one. I'm going to go back to the to the uh audience. Does anybody have anything to say that they wish they had
already said um that has to do with the project, but you know, you didn't raise your hand before. I'm happy to let you do that. This is not the last time you're going to get to talk about the project. This is the first time. And um there'll be other meetings. So I don't
see anybody that else that wants to talk. Um we're going to next what we're going to do is do comment. No, actually we're going to do rebuttal from Penrose. And after we do that, we're going to take a break. >> Could we take the break first so we can have a moment to
>> Absolutely. Thank you. Yes. Yes, you can. I am the chair and I have said yes, they can. 841 841 We we are back. So if everybody could have a seat and keep your conversation
uh till after the meeting that would be great. We are back. Okay, >> Penrose, respond to the comments that you heard if you if you would. >> Certainly, I'll take three. Um, the first one is we don't believe there is
such a thing as an environmental impact study, there isn't. We haven't asked for a waiver from one. To the extent that those kind of impacts are considered here, the Cape Cod Commission's letter to the board has addressed those. They address regional concerns. Um, in terms of waiverss and variances, it's
sometimes confusing looking at 40B versus a regular um, I'll say like a project to um, to permit a house. Um, we're talking about waiverss here. It's particular term of art for 40Bs. There's a presumption um, that the interest in
providing affordable housing is um, a powerful need here and that's what the 40B has created. And so um that is we're asking for waiverss from from you all not variances. And in terms of
site control um we will have to show and we have we I'll clarify we have site control over the additional parcel. We have site control because we have an option purchase agreement with the owner of that property. And so we will need to
at some time during this um review we'll need to show that to the state or show that to state and also show it to you make sure that you believe that's substantial enough but we have that control. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. Rio, did you have anything?
>> I did. I did. Thank you, chair. Um just just a couple items. Uh I think this came up once or twice. Um some folks uh had concerns about the single-purpose entity that would be created to um to own and develop the project and the fact
that it would be a li limited dividend entity. Um this is standard for for all 40b at least with the limited dividend. Uh it's actually a requirement and the singlepurpose entity is actually a fairly common business practice for any
real estate development. Um, and that's because lenders don't want to lend to entities that own multiple other properties because they're at risk of co-mingling and crosscolateralization. Um, but this singlepurpose entity is going to be owned by Penrose. Penrose
would be a managing member, general partner. It would just be a new entity created to comply with 40B and then to also be able to be financable. But it and it's it's an affiliate of Penrose. basically Penrose a Penrose single purpose entity. Um,
and then I think somebody had some questions too about uh the rents and I don't have the exact rent grid uh in front of me unfortunately but I did have some numbers um that I can share and I always add um kind of an asterct to this
because they're moving targets. um these rants that we need to comply with as part of the you know the affordability program you have to restrict rents at certain levels and it's based on rents and incomes that are published by HUD
annually uh and I believe HUD just recently published new rents for this year and it's based on each metropolitan area or county so uh it would be based on the rents that HUD published as of uh most recently for the one bedrooms, they
would be starting at 1,300. The two bedrooms starting at 1,550, 1,550 and the three bedrooms starting at 1,770 and those were would be for the lower
income ones and then it would get a little higher for the higher AMI. And um but those those are the starting rents. >> And could you just tell us what is the lowest AMI that you'd be referring to? uh 30% AMI. >> Okay. Go. Okay.
>> Okay. And uh Joe Henderson will help address some of the concerns about the sidewalk. >> Sure. Um can we call the presentation back up? Just wanted to get to a plan. I don't know if we can see it here, but um but yeah, there was a question about a
sidewalk running to uh 28 and we did look at that. We looked at um along the frontage of the property. Uh if you've been out there, there's a significant slope that comes off the meeting house road down into the property where that's
why we decided to not do the sidewalk there. It's really not a feasible construction effort. We are proposing as shown in the plan to access uh the bike path through the current uh this proposed walkway. There's a
crosswalk um here at the bike path and then Penrose as part of the development agreement will be installing a sidewalk from the east side I guess of that crosswalk down to 28. >> Okay.
Anything else in terms of rebuttal? No. >> No. >> Okay. Okay. Very good. For now, we're going to do questions from the board. Who wants Who wants to go first? >> I'm going to give you an opportunity and then I'm going to have to pick on someone.
>> Paul, you're up. >> I'm up. No problem. Um, you've asked uh you've actually answered uh one question that I had and that was concerning the sidewalk arrangement. Um the bike path
does get snow coverage. What do you plan to do in terms of access? Uh are you going to plow that or maintain that in such a way that it's passable in the wintertime? >> The bike path off property. >> Yes. I, as I understand it, you're going
to connect your your pedestrian walkway on the property to the bike path and the bike path is then going to go down to uh Meeting House Road, but that's snow covered if there's a storm. So, uh, and
it it isn't maintained on a regular basis. Who would be maintaining that uh uh so that people can pass there? Uh we have not committed to maintaining that town way. Uh we would certainly be
plowing the path on our on our property. >> So how how do you see that as a solution for pedestrians? Um if you're in the wintertime and it's got a foot of snow on it. >> So the town does not plow that.
>> Correct. We're going to only have one person when they're acknowledged talking at a time. Right now, Rio is acknowledged. >> Well, if that was the case, I think um there would I mean, we could have we
potentially would be able to plow for our residents to get there to the um 28 connection, which we're helping build for the town through our development agreement to come up there. Um, I mean, we wouldn't commit to plowing the entire bike path, but a way for our residents
to get to 28, which was the intent. Um, >> I guess what I'm asking you to do then is to give some consideration to how you want to handle that problem and come back to us with a solution. >> Sure. >> Okay. Um, and then secondly, I take it there
is no uh sidewalk that's going to go down the east side of Meeting House Road other than after the crosswalk point at the southern end of Meeting House Road. In other words, there's no cross there's
no sidewalk on the church side. >> No, we would not do that. We would prefer not to have multiple crosswalks. So that would mean you'd have to have a crosswalk at the entrance to the property crossing the road. So we would just propose the one spot to cross
meeting house road at the existing crosswalk if that makes sense. >> Okay. Um the uh questions, you had some questions concerning uh water and uh is there any
input from the town in terms of the impact of this development on our existing aquifer or uh plans with respect to wells. So we've we've reviewed these plans with the DT DPW. We've reviewed them with the sewer
department and that no one's expressed any concerns with the the water demand. >> So your understanding is that there is no concern then from any of the town committees or or uh town departments? >> No one has expressed that in our discussions of the project.
>> Okay. Um there's been some question about financing and um I know that you've had a number of proposals pending before uh community uh preservation fund uh groups
in various towns. Uh is your proposal contingent on approval of uh community preservation funds coming from uh Haritch, Orleans, Cadam or elsewhere?
It's not contingent upon it. Um those I mean we we will be seeking we're in the process of seeking those funds to improve the project and make it better. Um but not well not only to improve the project the quality of the materials we
can use in landscaping but also um to make the project more competitive for the state and federal resources. Um the state wants to see um local contributions uh to projects before they come in and
and when they come in, they're coming in with the majority of the subsidy that's needed to build these 70 to 80% of the subsidy would come from them. But they like to see um projects with that that do have some community resources and
being more competitive means ability to get um the necessary subsidy on uh quicker with less applications. Uh so there's there's that added benefit um which to applying for CPC funds. So, uh,
for instance, I I know from reading the, uh, the chronicle that, uh, um, there may be a recommendation of, uh, community preservation funds from, uh, the folks that authorized that even at a lower funding rate than you requested,
but that that was opposed by a majority of the selectmen. Mhm. >> From your viewpoint, it's not necessary from a financial viewpoint, but it's more necessary from the viewpoint of showing community support. >> Well, I would say it's both. I mean, it
it wouldn't kill the project not to have it, but it would we would have to make up for costs other ways, which would may include asking for additional subsidy from the state, making our project a little less competitive
or um having to uh not be able to add certain improvements and amenities that we like to add to the projects like uh the like site furniture and stuff like that after it's built. Um, so it it wouldn't the project would
go forward without any CPC contributions, but it would be very beneficial to to have them for those two reasons because it's use it can be used to beautify the project even more and also it can be used to make us more competitive with the state so it gets
funded quicker. So the project would be described to us for our approval on the basis of uh being doable even without the additional funds. >> Uh and then the additional funds would
be add-ons to what's being described to us. >> Correct. >> Okay. Um >> it it would not be used to fund the purchase of the neighbor site. Well, I'm not concerned about that so much as I I understand that. But aside
from that, you have amenities that are on the property themselves that are being described to us, the children's uh playgrounds, things and such. Uh that uh as I understand it, >> that's not contingent. >> It's not contingent. Okay. I would say >> um you're
>> but that would be example of you know we could get a much higher quality and a nicer playground maybe expand the footprint of the playground stuff. >> Okay. >> As just a a you know as a hypothetical.
>> All right. Um on your memo concerning revised waiverss from local requirements and regulations. Um in number four you say a waiver of uh parking requirements, six required spaces, two parking spaces per residential unit are required where
67 spaces per unit are proposed. Those aren't at 67 per unit, are they? You're talking about 67 unit 67 places for the entire operation. >> Yeah, correct. That's right. >> So that's that's that's a mistake in the in the memo.
>> Yeah. >> And then I was confused by number five as well which talks about a waiver of front side and rear setbacks of 40 25 and 25 respectively required where 37 20
and 17 respectively are proposed. So you don't need a waiver if you're proposing setbacks that are less than are required. Do you? >> Correct. There's a setback of 40 where we're proposing 37. So, we need a waiver for
that. There's a setback of 25 where we're proposing 20. There's a setback of 25 where we're proposing 17. So, we need waiverss for all of those. >> Okay. Well, that's not the way it reads. As I read it, we are saying uh that it
requires 40 25 and 25 and you're providing 37 20 and 17 respectively are proposed. Are you not saying that that your setback is going to be 37 where 40 is required?
>> 40 is required and we're we're proposing 37. So we would need a waiver for that. >> Oh, I see. I'm sorry. >> Yeah, I'm I'm sorry. Sorry, I got that screwed up. That's my problem. >> Um, >> just to clarify, there is a um a right
of way that I don't if you recall that came into the site for the entrance. So, we do have a a front setback waiver from that. And the side setbacks are 25 ft along these property lines here. There's no waiver along this property line. It's
just this property line and then around the backside where the waiverss are proposed. >> Okay. Well, when we engineer more detailed plans, they'll be clearly shown. >> All right. Uh and my last question would be right now is is uh the dumpster locations you're looking at are uh at
the bottom on the far uh eastern side of the of the property of the developed property. Um did you look at putting one of of those dumpsters uh up at the other end of the property? It seems as if you end up with a situation where you've got some people
who are in the far uh western uh buildings which are uh well I have to look and see here numbers three and four have to go the entire length of the property. Did you
look at the idea of putting a dumpster at that end? So, we put the dumpsters where we thought would be best accessible by the trucks that that need to get in there. So, that that's one of the main drivers as to where they're located now. So, the trucks can get in and out uh cleanly
from the those locations. >> Well, so so your tenant your tenant in building four is going to carry the garbage the length of the parking lot down to the dumpsters at the other end. >> Correct. Correct. We we also have full-time maintenance who's and um part
of their role is assisting with that if there's residents that aren't able to for whatever reason because physical issues or weather related u the maintenance man >> okay >> will be able to help with that. Uh my my last question I guess right now would be
um we've seen photographs of uh some uh maintenance issues with respect to the NSET green uh property um which you developed uh which show seems to show um some woodwork and paint issues that had
been existing for quite some period of time without any kind of uh correction to that problem. Is that something you're aware of or can comment on? >> Sure, I can comment on that. That that's a large project and what was it 18
buildings? And so there's a couple instances where I think there's some damage to some shingles that hasn't been replaced yet. Um, but those buildings are in excellent condition. I believe most of the board has been to the property. Uh, the town administrator for
EAMS speaks very highly of the project. She just recently gave us a recommendation uh to another town that um we had applied for on the RFP. Uh I I think is it in 100% pristine condition?
No. But it's pretty close and it's you know if you're trying really hard to find something person will find it. And uh but overall that is a very well-maintained property. we actually use it to show other people um the
quality of our management and um so I I just I think that is some images might be un taken you know made to make a unfair assumption over the entire property
uh and um and it's not just village in NASA green I folks are more than welcome to go see our fair project in Orleans which is very close by and um our little our swift's landing project which is a
two projects of senior housing project and town home project in um Wearham which isn't that far away either. Both of those properties also in excellent condition and and that also gets overseen by the funding agencies and mass housing in the state. They come and
they do the inspections. We always score extremely high on the maintenance and upkeep of the projects. >> Okay. Thank you. >> So, Mr. Nixon, you are next. >> Thank you. Uh, as you recall, um, there
were a number of issues that I was very concerned about and you've successfully ignored them all and that's okay. You don't there's no rule that says you have to respond to me. For instance, uh I thought that
a auxiliary parking lot for 30 cars or any number like that was necessary in this scenario. Didn't hear a word about that. Uh I talked about the density being too much, but that's similar to the other one that
you folks had. Uh I can't see more than 24 units, but uh you're sticking with the 42. And unfortunately, instead of eight buildings, now there's nine buildings. You didn't make that better. You made it worse.
I talked about at length studio apartments. Your plans don't include anything for young folks who are starting out, the 21s, the 30 year olds. They just get their first job, maybe at CBI, something
like that, where a studio is perfect for two people. I know because I think I mentioned I actually lived in one at one time and you I think have excused that because there's no money in it for you. Meaning
the Commonwealth isn't going to support you having a studio. Is that correct? Did I misunderstand that? I >> I think you're unfairly characterizing when you said there's no money in it for you. It's that that project a project you're describing will likely not be
built because the these type of affordable housing pro uh developments rely on the HLC funding >> and studios are not >> and HLC thinks and right or wrong they think the studios is substandard which
is why they're pushing for more one two bedrooms especially the two bedrooms and three bedrooms. Mhm. >> And the unit mix we've done is specifically tailored to meet exactly what HLC considers the perfect type of mix for this type of housing even though
there's such a need at that level. Okay. Um you talked about you didn't feel it was economically feasible to put a sidewalk along the Penrose side. Correct. So it's it's
a money situation. It's not that. >> Well, it's it's both be and Joe can help me here. It's physically extremely difficult, which is why it makes it >> well spending money, >> right? >> Yes. >> Yeah. Okay. Because I got to tell you,
they uh bicycles and pedestrians, particularly children, don't mix on bike paths. Uh, I've got several personal examples I could give you, but when you
have four or five kids or even three that followed your path, get on the bike path and are heading down to a bus stop or whatever it might be, and folks are riding their bike at um 32, 35 miles per hour, whatever it might be. I'd have to
ask Eddie Act on how fast he can get his bike up to, but they don't mix. It's a bad idea to put pedestrians onto a bike path. Bad. And finally,
elevators. I know you don't have to put elevators in any of these buildings. You don't have to provide access for disabled people for the second story, but um on Wednesdays um
I help out with the wheels on meals and deliver meals to people. And there's a couple of buildings here in town that are for seniors. And if the elevators weren't in those buildings,
those folks could not ever live in those buildings nor get services such as a meals on wheels. So, generally speaking, I'm very disappointed that you haven't
addressed really any of these issues. Thank you, Madam Chair. >> Thank you, Mr. Nixon. David Vch, you're up on the other side of the room. Uh well, I guess in terms of questions
um um this might be um and and again with it paying attention to the new um um connection connector to the bike path um that same question that Paul asked was raised in my mind. Uh and then uh I
would say you know I'm now going to say I'm thinking that you'll be providing uh lighting etc along that along that path as well right for safety etc. >> Yes we'll be providing lighting.
>> Okay. Um yeah and I yeah I don't think in terms of questions I don't think I really have any more >> Mr. Beach it's also comments you know so that you can an idea of what your thoughts are. >> Oh okay I thought we were going to do a question and then we would do comments. >> No and I'm going to go back to Paul if
he has any actual comments as well. So, all right. So, in terms of comments, well, what I would say is that the last time we were here, um, and, um, and this was more after the meeting, um, I was
not happy with some of, uh, the response that some board members gave. And um what I'd like to say is I am really impressed
with what you've done and what you've come back with and for um and also impressed with my fellow board members for pushing you uh in this direction and and just seeing that and and and it's been commented on earlier, but I think
that you're showing you're really showing a desire to make this a better project and work with us to make it a better project. I can see that by looking at it and it and it helps by having some of the explanations been given. But I took one look at this and I
and I could just quickly see how much improved this was over the the former proposal, which I would have supported as it was, but I really I really am thankful that we're here because of all that and and it's that much better.
Thanks. >> Thank you. And Paul, did you want to comment like your overall feelings? >> Yes. My overall feeling is that this is an improvement over what was previously proposed. Uh the access to Meeting House Road and the approach to the buildings
is much better than it was before. Uh we've eliminated some of that drop off issues into the ravine uh towards Meeting House Road. Um, we're increasing the playground area. Um, I agree with
previous comments that we've had that the twine field is nice. It's a conservation area, but um, it's loaded with ticks and it's not really what I would consider to be a great child's play area. Um, so I think overall this
is a better uh approach than what we saw before and that's in part because they've taken up the ability to purchase uh 87 uh meeting house road. They've got that option available to them. So I think in that sense it's a good improvement.
>> Yeah. Yeah. Thank you so much, Paul. So um Lee, your thoughts? >> Okay. Well, I'm going to start with a couple of questions. Um, a lot of mine have been asked already, but I wanted to ask about, especially after this winter,
um, the snow removal storage areas. I don't know, I don't really see any place where you can dump a pile of snow um, without taking up parking spaces, which we know are um, important. So, that's one of my
questions. So, Carmen Chung from Penrose for the record since I haven't spoken yet. Um, so I think as we said earlier, this is kind of our first uh feedback from you all. Snow storage is definitely something that we look at uh and we
would be coming back to the next meeting with more engineered plans that show all the snow storage area. But we manage properties similar to this uh out even out in Lennox in the Brookers and the mountains and we have a lot of famili
familiarity with managing snow on properties like this and in instances where there isn't enough space on site for snow. Uh we'll even have the um snow plower take snow offsite and we would pay for that.
>> Okay. Well, I look forward to hearing um a little bit more of those plans. Um there's also a path here um to the right of it's faint on that but on my um paper it's a a brown looks like walking path
to the property is is that what I'm looking at >> this >> yeah I guess yeah it's hard to see on Oh yeah okay >> yes that's um a contemplated path for the neighbor to be able to access the
bike path if she so chooses to um to come here and then link up to our uh sidewalk system to come down around to the bike path because uh down here is very difficult
because of the you know the steep grade change. >> Okay. Um >> so like there's a there'll be a big depression between this driveway and this driveway which are much higher up. So, this is a way to get to even grade to safely get over to the bike path.
>> Okay. Um and I'm assuming that that path will be maintained as well and snow removal and >> uh well uh we have not gone into the details that with that with the neighbor but yeah the idea would there would be
some shared maintenance if we keep it uh cleared on our side and then uh if she so chooses to want it and use it um be able to clear her side. >> Okay. Um,
has there been any thoughts? Um, I mean, the the access to the bike path, the path down, it's it's it's a good it's good in theory. I I appreciate that. Um, I still think it's going to be tricky.
Um but in the months that we don't have snow and hopefully we don't get as much snow as we did this year. Um but and maybe another access point um on the further side. Where are we? That would be the southern side of the
property. I don't know. Just an idea. Um and could you also tell me what the unit mix is? just I mean I guess I'm asking because I
would like to see fewer units. Um, I know you have 42, but if there's any way we could have fewer units, I don't I know that you have set it up so that it's ideal,
but if there's a way to decrease the units, that would be ideal for me and for I think a lot of people. Um, so overall
I am pleased with the progress. I am pleased with the new location of the driveway. Um, I like the new green space. I like the fact that we don't have those buildings overhanging. Those were really
tough. Um, I appreciate all of the work you've done and um, the option that you have to buy 87 um, I think is a good option.
Um, I still think there's a little bit more work to be done, but all in all, I think it's a step in the right direction. >> And, um, I'm going to go to Ed and then to Jenny.
Um, I guess my first question is regarding the entrance. Um, the original design had the entrance lined up with the the property across the street and, uh, your traffic studies, you know, at that point said that was, you know, a
very, uh, good location. Having it directly across from the entrance across the street made sense. And I guess my question is, have you done a traffic study uh regarding the new location of the
entrance? I I did hear that the sight lines were okay, but um I guess at some point I'd like to hear more about the new entrance and and how that is going to work. >> Sure. So, as far as the traffic volumes, the there's the same number of units. Um
but we did so when we before we moved the entrance we did consult with the traffic consultant Vaness and um we were advised that you need to maintain a minimum of 75 ft from the corner of our entrance drive to the nearest driveway.
So that was the um parameters we went by and to make sure that this worked with the other surrounding driveways. Okay. Um I guess my second question is the community funds um that you're seeking
from Chadam and other towns have when you get community funds do towns um restrict the use or designate it what it can be used for almost like a charity
giving giving. Can you have you ever seen it where it's been designated for a certain use on on a project? >> And I elaborate it. Um, usually >> we've sort of identified what it will be
used on um in most most instances as long as it's on um hard costs which include landscaping as opposed to consultants or architects or stuff like that. If it's in the bricks and mortars, uh, which is what we've always used it
for, um, then that's typically been acceptable and sufficient for CPCs >> cuz, um, I know, uh, you know, the the sidewalk along the western boundary, um, I understand there's a steep grade
there. I know, you know, it could be it's expensive to put in a sidewalk or it could be more expensive than a nice flat site. Um in um Harage right now they're they're building a sidewalk on Route 28 and you
can see where they have a grade issue. they also have some conservation issues and it's a sort of a difficult situation but it can be done and I I was wondering you know or perhaps hoping perhaps Chadam's uh uh funds to this project
could be maybe someone could designate those to go to a project like having the sidewalk on on this side of the street because some you know comments have come up that, you know, lighting for the bike path,
plowing the bike path, um, bicycles and kids on the bike path. I I really do think a sidewalk is a is a pretty good idea on that that side of the street. And I would go as far as um, wanting to
see if if if towns are going to designate funds that maybe they could designate it for a project like that. Um I assume uh at some point we'll be getting information regarding building
materials and uh uh of that nature. And I I had a question. What's what's your oldest project on the Cape? >> Village in Green. >> And how old is that? >> Seven years old. And do you have any
projects of similar style and building materials in New England that's say 20 years old or 30 year old? So we could per perhaps see, you know, how these projects I mean building materials have
changed since 20 years ago. you're going to be using, I assume, ASAC and and building materials that that hold up much better. But it would be nice to see sort of an older project and and the level or condition it's in. If uh if
you can think of one that >> we don't have anything older in Massachusetts, we recently 10 years ago started developing in Massachusetts. um in New York, Philadelphia possibly.
Every project's different, every site's unique. Climate is different in different areas. >> We're really proud of the qualities that we use. We did we don't propose vinyl, siding, or anything like that. >> And that's not even something we propose and people push back on. We we don't we
don't do that to begin with. Um, but we can try to find some similar town home style projects with cementitious uh siding in in New York and Pennsylvania, which is sort of good
proximity, same similar type climate. >> Okay. >> And similar type building products. Would have to get get back and >> and do some re research to see where we could find you. >> Okay. Uh and and overall I mean um
I was a proponent or you know was in favor of the old project. I feel we we we need this housing and I'm also aware of you know this is a a friendly 40B that was supported by this town. I
don't know, and maybe it's a question for the attorney, but I don't know of a friendly 40B that's ever been denied by a ZBA or one that has uh been uh overturned,
you know. Um, so I my concern from the beginning was losing our input when Penrose if we denied it and Penrose just went to the housing authority. Um,
to the board's credit, to the residents of South Chadam, um, to you, you've made this a better project. So, um, I would be in I'm still in support of
this project. We need this type of housing. Um, so that's my overall comment >> and thank you, Ed. Yeah, thank you so much, Jenny. I promised that you'd be next. >> Yeah, I have a couple questions left. Uh, and then I'll sprinkle in comments.
Um, so my first question, um, how close, I guess this would be for you, Rio. Do you know how close was Mr. Baker's home from the property line of Penrose to what Mrs. Hicks home is now
to the project? >> We have a approximate length. We have not surveyed it. We've surveyed the town site. Uh we will be surveying uh 87 meeting house. It hasn't happened yet. It will be happening in the future.
>> Um our goal uh has always been, you know, there's nothing getting any closer to the ab butter than what's already there. And most likely it's even back further than Corey's existing house. But we don't know the exact dimensions yet
without the survey information. But our whole intent is behind it and and at no point is it any closer than what is existing there. Um I will also point out that um that building is also
set down on a lower elevation too. That's our smallest building. This is a twotory. It's set down on a lower elevation. Um I I think Cory's homes of one story, but even though this is two, I I think it's it's without the survey
information, it's we don't have exact numbers, but it's not not even that much higher. Um and we also are looking at keeping a lot of all the existing vegetation and then adding some substantial vegetation where uh Corey's
house currently sits. And also the orientation of building 8 is less. there's less frontage of the building facing that because it's angled sort of a way whereas existing single family home is you see the whole side of the building. This is you know you're
catching that angle. >> So uh the the home there in white I'm I'm looking at kind of the um the other image that's showing the the home there. Okay. Right there where the c What is that? >> That's uh I believe that's Mrs. Hicks
home. And what's the area below in the white? Is that just the driveway? >> That's the new driveway. We proposed the building. >> Oh, okay. Okay. Um, okay. So, you I mean, you didn't really answer the
question specifically because I don't think you have the answer, but her her property my concern is that her property is about the same distance from what Mr. Mr. Baker's property was from the original proposal. So, is it I just And also, you know, the attorney for Mrs.
Hicks spoke earlier. I didn't know if you had additional comments to add to that, but I I'm concerned about that aspect of the project. Okay. No, another question I had was um >> uh I didn't mention this before, but no
setback waiver here. We're we're way past the setbacks. >> So, I'm going to let >> And no height waiver. I'm gonna I'm gonna allow um David V. >> Jenny, I just want to say that, you know, we got we got two plans. One's more of a sight type plan. The other is
the landscape plan. If you look on that site plan, >> Yeah. >> I believe it shows the um outline of the of of Mr. Baker's house and it's not colored in and it's pretty much overlaid by the first building here. Oh, >> building number one. And you can look,
you could see that relationship on this plan. >> Thank you. >> You're welcome. >> Thank you, David. Yeah. Yep. Thank you, Dave. Um, >> could you >> Oh, sorry.
Could you address um I I didn't hear a response to the water study that Mr. Phillips asked about during questions. Is was there intent to do a water study? there's concern there's been concern raised about
>> so typically that's addressed with the letter from concom when the 40b gets filed it goes to concom to address those issues um we can go back and revisit that we're not current >> talking about drinking water drinking water and I think you might have made
note that you had some information from about that maybe it needs to be repeated we're not talking about um >> I think you're talking about water supply right So we are proposing to connect to the municipal water supply. We've talked about this with the public
works department. There's been no concerns >> uh adi given to us regarding our water demand. Uh the same water demand on this pro, you know, this proposal as the previous one. Same number of units, same bedrooms, same flow. And before the
project, you know, once we get into more detailed design, we'll actually do uh flow tests on the hydrants to determine the flow and pressure and just make sure that we have adequate pressure throughout the site for, you know, whatever domestic and fire protection.
>> Okay. Um also the um I I also Rio want to go back to the comment about the NASA green. I I know that you mentioned that, you know, you don't want to be nitpicky here, but that was something that was brought up
six months ago at one of our hearings, and I I was disappointed to read the letter that said that that particular side of the house was still not addressed. So that is, can you just elaborate a little bit more about that? You you answered it, but you answered it
more generally. Do do you not agree that it's really unacceptable to have had something called out like that and then not address it? >> Sure. Sure. It should have been addressed a lot sooner.
>> Okay. Um All right. I wanted to just also ask you about the parking. So I do I do and I'm I'll start talking about comments. Um, I think that the the overall
redesign is very creative. I think the changes were were needed. I think that you've demonstrated that. The last hearing we had on this project there there was really significant negative feedback and you you have been responsive to that, but it it was almost
I think Mr. V may have been the only one that liked the project. So, it it really is uh it is an improvement, but it's an improvement that really had had to be made. And I I think that um
I I like let's look at the parking for example. Parking was improved, but parking was 142 and it's now 156. Parking on Main Street is one was 150 was in the like 1.5 and Main Street
has much more accessibility to downtown. The folks that are in this location are much more remote and isolated. So to to have the parking be the same as what Main Street is, I I don't think that the parking is sufficient in the proposal.
Um, so even though you have improved the density, I think that you needed to to get what is proposed here is is much better, but I think what would be really even even better would be to have 30 um to go to 36 units, not to 42
because I would argue that the first proposal at 42 that you previously showed us was really a non-starter and and this is this is much better, but at 42, I think That's sort of where we were. I I think
it needs to go to 36. So, I think those are all my questions have been answered um by the previous folks. The financials you answered that the town would not be paying for the purchase of the You answered that.
Oh, I do have a question for Mark. Mark, sorry. Um could you at the beginning of your update you said that the entrance way is more at grade that's how exactly how you said it is it at grade I mean will you need any kind
of bridge or any uh or is it what did you mean by more at grade than what was there before because what was there before needed a bridge >> so it's it's more of a level access so as you come off the grade from meeting
house here. It's a much gradual slope up into the development. >> Mhm. >> Where this point on meeting house is much lower, but the development was more or less the same elevation. We have tweaked it a little bit to um
>> so no bridging is needed here for that. No, I mean this side of it there's a a sloped embankment that's just needed to get back down to the existing. >> Does it require fencing in your view? You're not proposing that.
>> There's a guard rail on the south side, but it's not against where any pedestrians are going to be. And and we've provided a much bigger buffer between the curb and the guardrail. So, it's an abundance of caution. >> Okay. And then Mark in the center the
center green that you call it. Um I see the playground and I see the maintenance building. What and and you mentioned that area that's it is like a tree canopy. Is that all like uh clear, you know, grass underneath where it's it's shaded but grassy open space?
>> Yeah. Yeah. We would um we would clean up the existing forest to make it a place that could be um occupied, >> but the goal would be in that area to save as many trees as we can because we're >> the the design of the central green and
of the grading allows us to preserve that ground as it exists. So >> improved but um but keeping existing trees there. >> No, I I really do like that feature. Um, it was just hard to tell and I didn't see the detail on it whether it's 12
smaller trees or one or two larger trees. But the idea is that it would be usable space underneath a shaded canopy of trees. Yeah. Is that >> And the short answer is we don't know yet. We'll when we go to do the survey. >> That's your vision. Okay.
>> Okay. Um All right. Thank you. That's that's all I have. >> And Steve, >> I thank you uh for coming. Um I think I have a few safety related questions. I think uh they would be categorized. But
the first question I have is if you have the same number of units at 42, why is there another building? What changed that now requires another building from what you had originally?
>> Sure. We weren't really considering it another building. It's not another building of units. It's a It's a maintenance shed. So, there's a shed uh to store stuff like the snowblower and bags of salt and um landscaping
supplies. It's It's um Where's the >> Oh, yeah. Here we go. >> Okay. So, the number of resident buildings is the same. >> Yeah, exactly the same. >> Okay. um in those resident buildings, do you
know from past experience how many people drive? Let's say there's let's say there's a hundred occupants. Do you know what the percentage of how many people have their own cars and drive to work and have their own
transportation? You know, we have a list of the number of cars on our other properties and and I can get a list of the number of residents. We I can get you that info. Um, a lot of it's a lot of the residents um have uh
are multigenerational like like a mother with two kids and so one car. Um, then there'll be some units with maybe a couple with two cars, but >> it's usually more we're building a lot of family units, so we get a lot more of
the units with, you know, young parents or single mother with kids and and usually it's one car >> because what Well, I guess what I'm thinking of is if there's a hundred residents and 50% have their own cars or drive to work,
that means 50% have to walk or find some other transportation. Do you have any thoughts of incorporating some kind of a bike or excuse me, a bus route that stops at or
near the entrance to your property for? >> We would love that to coordinate. We try to do that at all our properties. We built a bus stop at Eastam um because it's a great amenity for the people who live here. Uh just going back to the 50% don't drive. A lot of those are like
kids that I mean they're not gonna be driving anyways or they're driving with their parents. >> I understand >> walking somewhere. >> But there's a certain percentage that every day they have no choice but to walk out to Route 28 or walk to the end
of your driveway to find some other sort of transportation. Yeah, we'll go back and I I'll get the figures. I I am guessing that it is very rare that there will be any occupants any units occupied by folks that do not
have a car. And I will note um what we've increased the parking to was what your consultant asked to thinking that that was adequate number based on this type of property in this location. We were a little lower. I I thought the lower number was better and I I I think
personally we overbuild parking but we we moved it up and this meets what uh the town hired for the traffic consultant and it meets his figures. >> Okay. >> That he deemed appropriate. >> Okay. So, sort of in that same vein, um,
is there any talk with the school district to have school buses go up through there? Because if you're a kid that's in building number five, which is in the very back corner using my rudimentary measuring device, my
paperclip, it's approximately 500 ft to the entrance to your driveway. >> Mhm. Um there's no school bus stop there apparently. So these kids are going to be walking all the way to that back corner in, you
know, conceivably >> Yeah. >> Uh bad weather in the dark. Um have you spoken with the school district about maybe having some buses run up through there? >> We haven't yet. We do. We typically do this very premature when we usually do
that. Um it wouldn't be in the dark. This is going to be well lit walkways. Um, and the, you know, the goal would be to have a pickup here. Some of the properties we get the school buses to come in next to the management building, which is great, too, because then then
they can kind of hang out in the lobby in bad weather. But, um, this uh I I feel this is very well designed for children to be able to access. I have I have five kids myself going to four
different schools. All of which is a much more difficult path than any of the folks living here would have. Uh it's completely enclosed. You have a property manager here extremely well lit. So the kids are always being watched. Um
they'll be um I forget if the enclosure we had down here we had a covered enclosure. Um, that's something we could look at at Village of Dasa Green, the the bus stop and we had a covered one to help with the weather also well lit. I also think with like an alarm button system too as well.
>> Um, >> if I could just add um we also per permitting a project in Horitch and this question came up recently. >> Um, I'll second what Rio said. It was premature. We reached out to the school district um and they will want to
designate the site for the pickup when the building's built and tenants are there. But what we did ahead of time is to look to obvious places where the um the bus stop could be on site. Mhm. >> Okay,
>> Steve, if I might interject, u uh they're not going to pick you up. And we've had that problem on Stage Island. Family of four children. Uh-uh. Take them down and we'll pick them up in front of the Coast Guard
station from my house to the Coast Guard station. Too bad. >> Okay. >> It's just not in the dollars and cents. Okay. >> All right. Um Uh the pedestrian path I assume is going
to be lit down to the bike path and the bike path as well out to Route 137. >> Yes. >> Well, we don't have control over the bike path. So, >> well, you're sort of incorporating it into your infrastructure. So, I would
think that if you're going to maintain it and plow snow, you're also going to have to provide some sort of safety measures also. >> We can have that discussion with the town, but um I can't guarantee that we can do that. >> Okay. Um and the sidewalk along meeting house
row, which I think everybody here has mentioned, and uh you know, you said it was, you know, a steep grade there and and difficult to build. also utilities. There's storm storm water sewer stubs that all in here that would all have to be relocated. There's also well
>> many uh poles as well. >> Well, poles, >> you know, they build uh boardwalks >> along the seashore that are elevated that have to do deal with all sorts of contours and obstacles. So, I don't
think it's impossible or cost ineffective to have some sort of a reasonable sidewalk along Meeting House Road because, you know, getting back to my original question about how many people are going to be walking and riding. I I I think you you have to you have to provide something other than the
bike path for people to get out to a maiden thoroughfare. Um because there is going to be bicycles there and the bike path is for bikes. So I I I think you you need to to provide some other sort of mechanism for people
to get out to a major intersection. >> The the bike path here is only for people on bicycles. >> No, but you know there's a when you mix bicycles and little kids and people who aren't paying attention. Um I think it's
just waiting for an accident to happen. >> But kids are currently allowed on the bike path. >> Not as many. They limit the amount of kids that can use the bike path. >> I'm I'm sure there's not that many people walking in that area now as there would be if this project is done.
>> I I'm I'm getting the sense that people just don't want our residents to be using this bike path. >> I don't think that's it. I think that needs to be done in a safe manner and I think you need to provide as much safety as you possibly can on that portion.
It's 150 feet long. So, um, you know, okay, it's just not crossing the street there. >> Um, other than that, you know, I like this design better than the first one. I think it it lends itself to the property a little bit better. You know, it is,
you know, first first, uh, crack at at a redesign, and I think there's some good things here, but, I think it needs some refinement. So, um, look forward to seeing what you have to present in the future. Thank you. Okay. So, it's my turn. I'm not going to
uh talk like I did last time. I want it to be positive and um and and I'll start with a positive note. Um let's see what's positive. Um the it's positive is that there's more
room. Um, and I don't think it's necessarily such a plus that you haven't asked for more units because as we've gone back and forth about and um, it's been true that your LDA limits you to 42
units and in order to have asked for more units, you would have had to go back to the drawing board, do a whole new um, LDA and started the project really from scratch. You don't deny that, correct?
>> Do you? I mean, do you agree with that? >> Somebody I neither agree nor disagree. I We would have to ask our attorney. But feel free to continue with >> No, I I will continue, but I might have, you know, this is questions and comments. So, if I have a question, it would probably be in your best interest
to try to answer it. So, you agree that the LDA limits you to 42, right? >> Yes. >> Okay. on the site with LDA >> government. Yes. So, you couldn't have actually come back and said, "Wow, look at all this extra space. We're going to
try to put more units." That would not have been possible with this application. That's all I'm pointing out for the public's uh knowledge that you couldn't have done that today. You would have had to fill out a new application. Um, but I'll leave it at that. I I I
believe that's true. Um, and unless somebody knows for a fact it's not true, I'm going to just leave it. I guess I would say that wasn't part of our decision- making. We know that there was concerns about the amount of units and we made the choice, you know, let's keep it the same.
>> Yeah. But we didn't try to take advantage. So, it wasn't like we we only stayed at 42 because we had to. I think we didn't necessarily have to, but but we wanted to. >> Okay. Well, you had to for this application, and I'm just going to leave
that alone. Okay. So next, um, we just learned about this when it was dropped in, you know, the office and we all saw it. Um, nobody knew anything. There was some rumors and innuendos and this and that, but what about Miss
Hicks? Um, did she know about it before it was dropped into the public? >> No, we were, as we were negotiating, we were under confidentiality obligations. >> Okay. And >> Yep. So, you haven't had a sit down with
her whether or not she's comfortable with this and you did hear from her attorney today. What are you going to do about that >> if you know? >> Well, when we submitted the plans to you, we submitted them simultaneously to Gloria so she could see them and come
back and give feedback. >> Yeah. And the feedback is so there's a lot of things that you know her her feedback is one of the outstanding issues. So, is the finalization with Corey Baker's purchase? There's a lot
of, you know, ifs here. And, you know, I'm not saying that they're not all likely. Do I think I'm a I'm an optimist. I think you'll work something out with Miss Hicks because I know you've worked with her in the past. Um, I do, but I don't know that for a fact.
I think that you will probably acquire Corey's property. I do. Um, and I also think um that what stands out to me I think the most, and this is troubling, that you're really relying on the bike
path as a way to get in and out of this property um by foot. And I I'm troubled by the fact that you didn't know that the town doesn't routinely plow the bike path. So, I'm I'm asking you to get a little bit more acquainted with how this
town works. Like I know I caught you off guard when I told you that there was a sign on the entrance to the twine field that said this is a this is a tick habitat. Not just like there's ticks here, watch out, but like there's no universe where somebody would see that
sign and feel comfortable putting a you know a blanket down having a picnic with kids. You just wouldn't do that with a tick habitat because that's like where they multiply and divide. Um, so this is similarly situated to me that you really
aren't well acquainted with what happens with that bike path during the winter. And I'm not picking on you. I'm just asking you to get more acquainted with the town that you want to you want to be in. You know, this area is very different from Main Street. That was a flat piece of property and it really
didn't make all that much difference in my mind whether you had 10 buildings or nine buildings. It was always going to be too much to many of us. But we had to make a decision. But this is a little this is a different kind of property. And um I just would like you to get more acquainted with how this town works.
Okay. Yeah. Uh yes, I understand what you're saying, Randy. We designed this. It wasn't access in and off the property. It was access to an amenity that's available for everybody else in the town. >> No. >> And we wanted our residents to be able to access that same amenity. This wasn't
designed as some emergency access for for our residents. So if it was, yeah, we would have investigated that further. We would have talked with the fire department, but this was always anticipated as, hey, this is such a great amenity. Families with kids would love this amenity.
>> You mean the bike, right? The bike. >> How are people going to get off of this property and walk off if they don't go through the bike path across the street, you know, with the um the crosswalk, right? I don't understand how else
they're going to get off the property. So, help me with that. Maybe I'm missing something. I'm not perfect. How else are they going to walk off? >> I guess the only other way would be
to use this. >> That is that is that right? Yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. So, do you do you understand what I'm saying? that that's how you walk off and I'm just asking you to get acquainted with how the town works with
that place to walk off. And to me, if I were voting on this, one thing I would have to know, and it would have to be clear as day in that, you know, contract that you will have somebody there 24/7 that can clear the snow off of that so
people can get to school, people can get to work. Um, people can go running, people can go walking, whatever they want to do. They can't be trapped like a rat in there. They can't be. So, that to me is really, really important. Um, so I've I've said it and I I know you've
heard me and I'm I feel heard by and large looking at this plan compared to the last one. I feel heard which is great. I should have started with that. I said I wanted to start with some positive but that to me is glaring very concerning another and also the the this
the situation with Gloria Hicks is concerning because how we treat our citizens is the most important thing. You know that's a number one. and you know she lives there. That's her house. That's she's a member of our of our um
community and we don't want you to just come in there and you know put something public at the same time we're all hearing about it and think that she's just going to merily go along with having 42 units right next to her. So I I want you to pay close attention to
that. I'd be asking you to pay very close attention to that. Um and let's see what else I have. Um, just give me one second. Okay. Um, I I I totally agree with all the other comments that that our
colleagues had. Um, and I, you know, I I'm not going to repeat any of them, but I think everybody has done an amazing job here, and I I want to just commend this board for their typical and usual, perfect, you know, responses. So, um I
guess what would you like to do now? >> Continue the >> I think that we're ready to continue. We don't have any more comments. >> No. Right. You want to continue it? Would you like to continue it? Okay. Okay. Very good. Um I think we picked a date of June >> 4th.
>> Correct. June 4th. >> I'll move to continue the hearing to June 4, 2026. >> Dave Dave each seconds and votes yes. >> All votes yes. Ed votes yes. Ed, >> you don't get to vote, I don't think. Sorry, Dave V.
>> I I I voted yes. I vote yes for >> Mr. Nixon. >> Yes. >> And Jenny? >> Yes. >> And I vote yes. Thank you very much. And thank you all for coming. >> Yes. >> Motion to adjurnn.
>> I think the people motion to adjurnn. >> Uh Dave V seconds and votes yes. >> Everybody >> Paul votes yes. >> Jenny votes yes. I mean, >> Ed votes yes. >> Yep. >> Jenny votes yes. >> Steve votes yes. >> Lee votes yes. >> Yes. >> As do I. And what time is it?
>> 4:40 p.m. >> 4:40 p.m. Good evening, Chadam.