[Music] Heat. [Music] Heat. [Music]
Good afternoon everyone. It's September 18th, 2025 and this is the the ZBA in Chattam the Chattam Zoning Board of Appeals. Pursuant to Governor Healey's March 28th, 2025 signing of the chapter 2 of the act of 2025 extending certain
COVID measures adopted during the state of emergency suspending certain provisions of the open meeting law until June 30, 2027. This meeting of the Cadam Zoning Board of Appeals is being conducted both in person and via remote participation. Every effort will be made
to ensure that the public can adequately access the proceedings as provided for in the order. A reminder, persons that who who would like to listen to this meeting while in progress may do so by calling the telephone number 158-945410,
conference ID 618283 892 pound or join the meeting via the link in the Microsoft Teams um entry on the posted agenda. This is a live broadcasting and simal cast on Cadam TV,
but despite our best efforts, we may not be able to provide real time access. We will post a a record of this meeting on the town's website as soon as possible. These are the procedural steps. Um, in accordance with town pro um policy, the
public can speak to any issue, hearing, or business item on the agenda during the meeting when recognized by the chair. Just want to take this um point in time to say please shut off any gadget that makes any sort of noise whatsoever. And if you have any uh relatively lengthy conversations, please
take them out into the hall. Um we've start our meetings with a roll call vote of all board members, we ask of anyone participating on the phone, make sure that we know who you are with your last four digits and uh give us some identification.
The notice is read by our staff Sarah Clark on my right. You or your representative, in this case it's Penrose, will u provide information about your your application. Um I will read or summarize all letters that we have received. Then we take comments
from the public uh for up to three minutes. Those um anybody in the room um will be recognized and please try to form a line. Next, u the applicant can rebut um any
oral comments or written comments. After that, the board can ask questions and we will vote to continue the application to a date certain. After this hearing, all votes are taken by roll call and at the end of the meeting, we close via verbal
confirmation and we note the time of adjournment. So, we'll start the meeting with um that roll call vote I mentioned. Just acknowledging that you um agree with this form of meeting. Uh David Hitz and uh I approve this form of meeting.
Uh Ed Actton, I agree. David S. Nixon, I agree. Paul C. Simple, I agree. Lee Hubby, I agree. And Steven D. Debor, I agree. Randy Potes, I also agree. We have one member that is absent, but she knows that she will be watching it and signing
um away her life, promising that she did that and that way she stays. Everybody on this board so far is going to be eligible to vote at the end of this uh proceeding. Go ahead, Sarah. Application number 25-034,
Penrose LLC, 15 Milk Street, 16th floor, Boston, Mass 02109. The property is owned by the town of Chadam located at 0 and 1533 Main Street. Also shown on the town of Chadam's assessor's map 9D block 4A lot
1 and map 9D block 4 lot 18. The applicants are requesting the grant of a comprehensive permit under Mass General Law chapter 40B sections 20 through 23 and 760 CMR56 for the construction of 48 dwelling units in nine structures. Also
proposed is the construction of a management building. The applicants are requesting the grant of various waiverss from regulations promulgated by the town of by the Chattam zoning bylaw and other local regulations. The property contains 128,492
square ft 2.95 acres in an R20 zoning district. This was continued from May 8th, June 5th, July 17th, and August 21st, 2025. Welcome Good afternoon. My name is Marian Rose. For the record, I'm an attorney at
Singer and Singer in Dennisport. I'm here in Andrew Singerstead and we both represent Penrose for this project. Very good. Welcome. Thank you all. Thank you. Um my understanding and with me here is Carmen Chung who also represents who's um
representing the applicant. And good afternoon, Madame Chung. I wanted to say a few words. Um, my understanding coming into this late is there have been a number of hearings there. We're on the sixth hearing and
through that process, the plans and proposal has been changed um as a result of conversations between the board and the public. There's a proposal before you now and
it's been it's been a work in progress to meet the goals of providing a development that is functional, operational, and is also enjoyable. A place for pe where people would want to
live. And balancing that with the need and really requirement that it be economically feasible. I want to go through what we've done um since the last meeting. The intent today is to provide you with
a limited number of updates and responses um with the hope that you may be ready to close the public comment period at the end of this meeting. The updated material include and you
have a copy of this um you've been sent this by email but you also have a copy of that this before you. It's a supplemental memorandum, a revised waiver list, revised landscape plans and civil plans. There's a civil engineering
peerreview response letter, a traffic engineer peerreview response letter. There are three photographs showing the screening from the viewpoint of Jesse's Landing behind the project. There's also a model Pinrose lease and
an updated stormwater report in the interim from September 10th to now. I think there's also been a tie-in bond response a peer response letter to um the civil plans and so we'll be responsive to that as well in this
hearing. What I'd like to do is flag the high points of Andrew's memo and members of the team will be getting into more detail as I pass the
process off. So from the memo of September 10th, want to reconfirm that the building coverage is 22%. Mark Waffle will go into details about the sign. We've provided more sign
details. Joe Henderson will speak to the updated civil set. There's a question that was raised at the last hearing about the potential to switch buildings four and seven. Those
building locations, as you all know, were different as originally proposed and they actually have been revised to locate the smallest and the shortest buildings adjacent to the Levit property and that was a response to a butter
concerns. Um, we also shifted the parking area and the dumpster area location further away from the property line. And we really believe that at this point in the sixth hearing and because of the constraints
of the property, further switching of the buildings is not feasible. We're providing an updated landscape plan and Mark will speak to that. But I do want to highlight that um and
actually Carmen will speak to meetings with um the abutters that have happened since the last meeting. But the revised plans do reflect additional landscaping. will show you that uh the rear buildings have been moved away providing more of a buffer
and a benefit of that is that it's more likely that existing trees and that expanded rear buffer will be able to be preserved. Part of the updated letters since the last hearing was a letter from one of your board members who's not here today.
um she noted and appreciated that this this property won't be clear-cut. We're trying and really trying to keep majority of the trees and that's a really big impact in the center of the property. That'll be impactful for both
people going by the property but also for the residents. Um there was a specific request for cedar sighting. Um Jenny also spoke to this. Um it's
if the applicant was able and it had no economic constraints, was able to do everything, this would be a great thing to do. However, there are financial maintenance and operational including fire safety and insurance concerns. We don't believe that this was is
economically feasible. Speak to the traffic peerreview responses and we've also provided a model lease and as a lawyer I just want to flag that this is not the lease that will necessarily be used for this but it is a lease that has been used by Penrose
and so it gives a representative flavor for what's required. I do want to before I pass the baton in terms of
in terms of designing a project that meets those requirements, making it something that's operational, functionable, functional, enjoyable to the residents who will be living there and also meeting the economic requirements.
There's a letter from the community housing partnership that I know that you will read into the record. When I read it, I literally highlighted so many parts of it because it's incredibly important and sometimes it's helpful to hear this from someone
other than the applicant. The housing partnership unil sorry unanimously um recommended that the ZBA consider the needs and quality of life of future residents of the main street property.
They also noted that Chattam has not increased subsidized housing inventory in the past and it's actually gone down. It was at 5% and it's now at 4.8%. So, there is a real need and an immediate need for this
project. Thank you. I was going to pinch hint for Rio for a little bit, but since he's here, uh, he can give the remarks that he originally planned to share. He had he's the one that had the meetings with the neighbors. So,
thanks, Carmen. Okay. Thanks, everyone. Sorry, I was running late. I got stuck in traffic at the bridge, which I wasn't expecting to happen in September. So, I'll be very brief and then I'll
hand it over to what probably everybody wants to see is updated plans. Um since our last hearing um I and and Mark Warful from Crowley Cautrol had met with um several of the neighbors from Jesse's
Landing as well as Rick and Ella Levit when we walked the property. Um and as a result of that meeting um what we've put into the plans is um additional areas of trying to save existing vegetation. uh
and that particularly in between our prop the the property and Jesse's Landing and then adding um a thick row of Evergreens and that would be along um
the property border with Jesse's Landing as well as along the um border of uh the property and Rick and Ella Levit's property. Um so we think these changes are going to strengthen um the existing
natural screening. It's going to add an additional layer of yearround full-time screening with the evergreens. And we think it's going to be um an improvement from the neighbors perspective. We also think it's it's a good improvement for the overall design of the project as
well. So I'd like to bring Mark up now to walk through the the uh new drawings. Good afternoon. Uh my name is Mark Warfl with Crowley Cultural Landscape Architecture. Uh I'm just going to briefly walk through some of these
changes. This is the site plan um that was submitted in the supplemental update. Uh it's very similar to the one we showed last time. uh but we fully coordinated it with the civil engineering now that all the engineering
has been done um with a few uh adjustments for utility conflicts uh and the additional screening that Rio just mentioned. Um last time we had some comments about wanting to know what the street facing
uh landscaping was going to look like uh a little bit more. So, we've put together just a few slides to talk about that. Um, I've zoomed in here. Uh, Main Street is towards the top of the slide. Um, first is the signage. So, there are
two sign locations. These, um, are on either side of the entry drive. They have, um, small up lights that just light the face of the sign. and they are uh one-sided. So only the side facing
the street will have um the sign graphic on it. Um this is the detail from the uh from the submission set uh that shows the construction of this sign. Um so it's
got a masonry base uh and then on top of it is the actual sign face. Um, here's a picture of one at a recently completed project. So, it'll be very similar to this. Obviously, the name, uh, address and phone number will be different, but it's in this style. And so, there'd be
one of these, um, flanking each entrance drive. Going back to the plan, uh, let's talk a little bit about the planting. So, highlighted here are the street tree locations. Um and then uh along the bottom are
example imagery of the the species that we're thinking of for this. Um so there they're a mix of uh maples, oaks, and hackberries. Uh there's also a robust layer of uh
planting both adjacent to the buildings but also around the signage. Uh and these pictures show um what what that what we're thinking about for that. Um we will determine the final kind of
counts and mixes uh based on what's available during construction. But uh this I think gives a a representation of the level of planting. So this is what we you can expect.
Um, going back to the site plan, we'll zoom into the kind of back half of the property. So, towards the bottom of the screen is Jesse's Landing and to the left um is the Levit property.
So highlighted now in red is the existing buffer planting that we've um discussed previously, but we reaffirmed what is there on our site visit um a few weeks ago where we walked with the abutters. Um so along the uh southern
border, there's this zone that we've been able to preserve that has a number of existing trees. Uh and we identified um you know probably more than a dozen trees that will remain
um that are on the property line or just inside the property. Uh these are a mix of evergreen and deciduous trees and some of them are very mature so it'll be great to to save those. There's also um
the screening that exists already on Jesse's Landing. So across all three properties, uh there's an evergreen hedge. Um so these views are taken from the street. Um and I believe they were also
submitted with the uh memo on the west side of the property. There's an existing private hedge that uh you can see in the left image uh creates a fairly robust screen uh but
it's most effective during the summer months. In the winter months when the leaves fall off it becomes uh a little bit more um you can see a little bit more through it. There's also two large existing
evergreen trees that we will be saving which are shown in in both images but maybe show up a little bit better in the wrench. So now I just want to talk about what we're doing to augment those existing uh
screen plantings. Um, one of the major changes, and I don't have a laser pointer, so I'll try with the mouse here, uh, that we did was we took this, um, retaining wall here that's about 2 and 1/2 ft tall and extended it further
south. And what what this is going to do, uh, is allow us to plant those new evergreen trees just that much higher. Thank you. Um, so right right in this area. So we'll be able to plant these that much higher and then as we move
further south our the the project grade in in this area starts to become closer to existing. So uh around building three we're actually three or four feet below um the Abutters property and then as we
move further south they they kind of meet. Um so by extending this wall we lift this screening up which just makes it that much taller and that much more effective. uh looking at so the what's highlighted in red is the
revised buffer planting and what we've done um the the ones that have sort of the jaggedy edge are representing evergreens. Uh and the ones with the the three pluses represent a flowering tree.
And then we have the round with a one plus is is a proposed deciduous tree. And so we've looked at this in a way to try to uh have the most effective screening without it being a green wall. So we
have a a staggered row of evergreens up along the west side that is only broken by flowering trees where there is robust planting on the other side. um or in in this case there's a uh an existing shed
in this area. Um we've taken the same approach along the south side. So, we've added more evergreens and where uh we've determined um we can we've introduced just a few deciduous trees that uh will help to
break up that line and um also knit into the preserve trees that are in this uh buffer zone. Um so, that is the update to the site plan. Um, I'm gonna turn it over to Joe
Henderson with Horsesley Whitten. Hi, good afternoon. Joe Henderson, Horsesley Whitten. Um, I just wanted to give a brief update on our site plans. Um, what you see here before you is the the turning radius plan. I think this there was some discussion about um, how
the the new layout would work with the the fire department's ladder truck. Um we did communicate with them, send them the plan and heard from the chief that uh he had no issues with this revised plan. Um in general we've updated the
site grading and utility drawings. Um we sent those to Tyen Bond along with the updated storm water calculations and along with the um our peerreview response memo and you I think you have a copy of Tyen Bond's um response back to
us. There were three items on there that they left and they noted as to be I think conditioned and they were all related to the landscape drawing. Um the first one was the FA uh there's a a plan is getting a stamp as you can see
get this to work right there. So we added a stamp to all the drawings so the board can endorse the plans. Um that was the first. The second was um there were some conflicts identified between some of our storm water infrastructure and
trees or shrubs um and that's they wanted to check that. And then lastly were the greenscape calculations and um unfortunately I did not send those drawings to them in time so it didn't get into their letter but um we're
definitely confident that we can address all these comments. we're fine with their response that they would recommend um you know conditioning that we get those to them and we expect we'll coordinate that with them you know as soon as possible to make sure all that
gets um verified with them. Um so yeah that's that's what I have to report from the civil side. The storm water site no additional comments all were closed. Um so those again those three items are remaining. So with that I'm going to
turn it back to Rio. Okay. Um that pretty much wraps up our presentation and I think before we move on to um the public comments and the board comments um I just wanted to uh summarize everything we've done to
date because as we've moved through this process um from the beginning we've reduced heights of a majority of the buildings uh we've reduced the size of the management building
um we've improved moved the setbacks um at for all buildings um abuing residential single family neighbors. Uh we saved a significant amount uh of mature trees and existing vegetation
from where we were originally. Um we've added substantial landscape buffering and screening. Uh we've incorporated additional architectural details both to the management building and the residential buildings. Um all of these
changes we've made today we think have made the project better overall. Um but when we evaluate these changes and we evaluate feedback from the board and from members of the public and the neighbors, we always look at potential
changes. We consider three factors. I think we've said this earlier in another hearing, but I'll I'll mention it again. We when we look at these changes, we consider whether, you know, does this change improve the quality of life for the residents who are going to live here? Um will this will these changes um
affect our ability to provide high quality class A professional property management? And um also uh will these changes affect the project's ability to remain competitive in seeking really the
necessary state and federal resources needed to fund this type of affordable and obtainable housing. Um and so I guess I'll do my Andrew Singer impression and say since he's not here and say there's always tradeoffs. Um, so
those are the trade-offs that we look at and we think where we're at now sort of strikes the right balance in those trade-offs. So with that, um, I'll our our presentation is over and I'll, um, hand it to you, chair.
Thank you so much. Um, so what I'm going to do next is read the correspondences and, um, Mr. Nixon is going to read one of them last, unless you want to go first. Um, and then we're going to take comments from the audience. And then after that, uh, we're going to give
Penrose another chance to, um, speak. Then we'll take comments from the board and we'll see where we're at. All right. So, we have letters from the following people. M. Lewis Hicks, Leslie Sheenberger,
C. Fucci, Ty Bond, um, CCHP, Virginia Fenwick, and T. Eldridge. We are not going to read uh because we've been permitted not to Leslie Sheenberger and Tyian Bond, but we are going to read
the rest. Okay. So, letter from Thad Eldridge. Uh he apologizes uh for the delay in his comments. He was hoping that his meager concern would have been addressed by others. As one who frequently drives along the section of Route 28, I find the lack of turnouts
for bus stops to be frustrating. I would hope that a consideration for a means to get the buses out of the travel lanes during the stops could be accommodated within the design and that was uh given to us um yesterday and he's at 1038 Main
Street in Chattam. Martha Lewis Hicks writes on August 20, 20, 2025 that um she's writing to express her support for the affordable attainable housing project uh proposed by Penrose which could contribute 48 rental units
to the housing inventory in Chadam. As a person whose family connection in Chattam goes back to the mid1 1960s when my parents built a home on Dune Drive, I have seen Chadam change and grow in many ways over the past nearly 60 years. In my 20s, I remember noticing my friends who grew up in Chattam, whose families
had been part of the fabric of town for generations, could no longer afford to live here. I've seen many humble homes that once housed members of this community get leveled and replaced by Gagua homes that are only occupied by a
single family and for a single season each year. I've seen how small business owners, teachers, cops, medical and restaurant workers can no longer afford to live here. I've seen how local businesses struggle to maintain a workforce of people within our communities. In order to remain a
thriving community, we need to address the inaccessibility of affordable housing for young families and whose uh for who fortify our workplace. If indeed we mean to do more than fret and um pre
pverate, we must do something meaningful at once. We must seize upon the opportunities that lay right here at our fingertips to make this happen. Responding affirmatively to the housing development proposed by Penrose will allow for meaningful progress towards the housing goals unanimously adopted
over two decades ago by the town's comprehensive plan. It's time to recognize that the time for action has arrived and we must have the courage to embrace positive change. Next letter is from Cynthia Fucci of 20
Jesse's Landing received um on August 25, 2025. I am writing as a concerned resident regarding the 40B application for 1533 Maine. I want to begin by stating clearly I'm not opposed to affordable housing. I recognize the need for our community. However, the proposed
development at this particular site raises serious concerns about safety, density, and long-term impact on the town, safety concerns, crosswalk, and pedest pedestrian access. At the last meeting, I raised the issues of pedestrian safety and the absence of a
crosswalk near the proposed site. This location is not within walking distance to schools, shops, or services, and there is no safe infrastructure for pedestrians. I fear it's only a matter of time before a child or another pedestrian loses their life if proper crosswalks and traffic controls are not
in place. The board must give weight to the peerreview traffic studies and ensure that pedestrian safety is addressed before any approvals are granted. Excessive density and scale. The proposed calls The proposal calls for 48 apartments and only a three acre
parcel of land. That equates to roughly 16 units per acre. This level of density is completely out of scale with the surrounding neighborhood and far exceeds what Chadam zoning would normally allow. Such density along a busy state highway does not reflect responsible planning
for a small town like Chadam. To allow it would set a dangerous precedent for future progress and give projects and give the impression that maximizing developer profit takes priority over community character and safety.
um Penrose development model and ROI concerns. By Penrose own admission, they typically build larger projects close to 68 units to achieve their return on investment. This is in this case the select board approved a structure that
allowed Penrose to split their desired units total along two sites, Meeting House Road and um Main Street. This decision raises serious concerns about transparency and fairness. Each 40B project should stand on its own merit of
location, density, and safety. Instead, residents are left with two projects shoehorned into unsuitable sites in order to meet developer ROI targets. This is not how responsible planning should be done, and it sets a troubling
precedent for Cadam's future development, site location, and accessibility. Affordable housing should be built in places where residents can thrive. 1533 Main Street is not near essential services, grocery stores, or employment
centers that residents can easily walk to. Sitting affordability affordable housing in a location without walkable access undermines the very purpose of creating opportunities for families and individuals to live securely and independently. Parking and traffic
impacts. The proposed parking is insufficient for the number of units and will likely lead to overflow onto nearby streets. This is a narrow section of Main Street already challenged by traffic in congestion. The addition of high density housing without
adequate parking and traffic solutions creates risk for both residents and the surrounding neighborhood. In conclusion, I urge the I urge the board to take these issues seriously. The question is not whether Cadam should build affordable housing. It should. The
question is whether this particular project at this particular site in this form best serves the needs of our community. It is in its current design. It does not. Thank you for your attention and ensuring that decisions made by the ZBA prioritize both safety
of the residents and the integrity of our community planning. And this is Cynthia El Fucci at 20 Jesse's Landing received on 829 2025. See who's next is
Carolyn Mlen and she writes on uh received September 16, 2025. At our meeting uh September 4th, the commuting ho the community housing partnership with five members present voted unanimously to make the following
comments and recommendations to the ZBA concerning the main street development 40B application. The housing partnership would recommend and ask the ZBA to consider the needs and quality of life of future residents of the main street property, our future neighbors, friends,
employees, volunteers, and parents of children in the Chattam schools to be just as important as to all the abutters. We are concerned that the neverending stream of concessions being requested is beyond what is reasonable,
including enlarging the buffer zones to a depth that is beyond what the zoning code requires in other developments, constricting the residents use of property, reducing the size of their own only flex space within the community building, eliminating the small exercise
room within the community building, reducing the interior ceiling height of the units to save a couple of feet of exterior height that will be unnoticeable and of no consequence visually within the context of the entire landscape and development,
especially where there are taller buildings all over Chattam, including within the immediate vicinity of West Chattam. The square footage of the main street property should not be considered an asset of the Abutters in order to compensate for the choice that was made
by them to clearcut their own lots. so that they could maximize the use of their properties. The town has spent years working on acquiring the entirety of this possible further development of housing with supermajority support in
town meeting. The members of the housing partnership would like to remind you that you that you that neighboring towns have recently added housing lotteryies where more than four to five four to 600 people applied for housing. The need is
very real. And while our neighbors have built significant projects over the past several years, Chattam has not increased its subsidized housing inventory at all. In fact, because the SHI is a percentage
of affordable units to year round units within the town, as market rate development continues unabated, the percentage of affordable units has actually dropped to 4.8%. 8% half of what the state mandates through 40B when
a few years ago it was over five. Please do not forget what the task is here for the town to build quality housing to address the dire need of our yearround residents and workforce. And please remember that this development will be
home to 48 yearround households at both affordable and attainable income levels. Every accommodation you make for the abuters comes at the expense of these residents who will be your friends and neighbors who will be just as dedicated to Chattam as you are. Please consider
the equity in your decisions. The housing partnership would advise it would be advantageous to look at this not as a burden but as an opportunity for Chadam to express its exceptionalism to develop the best most attractive
subsidized year-round attainable and affordable housing on the Cape. It certainly is a beautiful design with classic buildings surrounding a traditional New England green with robust native planting to augment the significant trees that are being saved
and incorporated into the site design. Thank you for your time to read this letter and consider our comments and recommendations. Carolyn Mlen. Lastly, we have a note from our board member Virginia Fenuk. She is a a full member of the zoning board of appeals
and she uh unfortunately couldn't be here tonight, but she wanted um her her thoughts to be read and Mr. Nixon is going to do that. Thank you, Madam Chair. Ms. Fenwick
works for a national firm and uh as we speak she's in Washington DC and the fact that our president is in England shouldn't be any connection I don't think I hope not uh these are her
comments and she asked me to read them with this thought in mind I'll be speaking But you should think that she's the one that is speaking. Now, that's not so easy,
and I understand that, but that's what it is. So, she writes, and she addresses everybody here, I'm unable to join the meeting on September 18th, and as required, we'll
watch the full hearing before our next meeting. We are required if we miss one to watch it in full and have Sarah has a nice paper where we sign that we did it and so forth. Uh failure to do that would mean you could not vote when the
time comes. For the purpose of progressing the dialogue, I provided what I hope is a helpful summary of comments, questions, and concerns. She told me that as we've gone along, it's been a number of months now, some certain things get lost, they
get forgotten or whatnot. And it's her attempt to uh set her mind at ease that what have we heard and what do we haven't and also for the rest of us to consider. She starts with height. Height was a
concern when the original proposal included each multifamily building to exceed the 30foot chatter maximum. Penrose promptly revised the waiver request to just six of the C buildings
exceeding the 30foot. To put this into perspective, Penrose confirmed the sea buildings were designed to have a partial third floor and conforming changes to this building design would
significantly impact their proposal. I see that point and would like to also make it clear that the waiver represents nearly 60% of the proposed buildings. These six buildings collectively
represent an ask of 17 feet 33 in with the largest request being 3t 11 in and the smallest 2'8 in over the 30t height limit. Building coverage
R20 zoning requires 10% max building coverage. The waiver requests 22%. Like the height, I'm agreeable to this, but note it res represents a significant ask of 120%.
Parking traffic. I accept the professionals determination included in the revised parking proposal of a ratio of 1.52 and not the required two spaces that we have here in Chadam. Crosswalk. The ZVA
board has stressed the importance of resident and child safety and has requested a crosswalk across Route 28 in direct proximity to zero and 1533 Maine. The board more than appreciates Penrose's agreement to
incorporate this. We expect it. We understand it requires an application submission to the Mass DOT for the curb cut permit and crosswalk after the comprehensive permit has been issued. I acknowledge the extensive and
professional civil engineering work performed by Joe Henderson. You heard from Joe a little earlier and have nothing to add to it. Landscape plans. I wish to say I appreciate the submission submission of the updated landscape plan
as Mark presented to us with the expressed commitment to not clearcut all existing vegetation and I observed the revised landscape proposal outlines a re repeated commitment to preserve mature and perimeter trees
color scheme and cedar siding early Greek revival gable front balloon frame name homes were white. As design aesthetics changed at architecture, color was introduced. However, with the
town's incorporation in 1712, combined with the project locus being within the Chadams historic business district and it's approximately to downtown. The building color proposed in Union Studios
original design is in my opinion better fitting to remain white. Additionally, I thank Penrose for examining the request to consider Cedar Shake sighting as it is distinctly Cape Cod aesthetic. And while I like the board's suggestion, I
understand the Penrose's conclusion that Cedar shingles present financial and operational considerations not reasonably congruent with an affordable housing development entrance signage.
Regarding signage on Maine, I'm not in favor of two sides flanking the affordable housing development entrance. According to landscape detail L400 401, the proposed signs are each 5t tall, 7 feet long. So she has two questions
about that. 5 by7 equals 35 square ft. And Penrose's narrative says not exceeding 18 square feet per sign. So she says, is the 18 square feet representing only the face of the sign or the overall size of the sign? Her
second question, are the two signs being proposed, each double-sided signage setbacks? There have been significant discussion of a butter setbacks. This is important because understanding of butter's impacts, concerns, and
questions are and will be for all future proposed projects a priority for our town and its residents. I mentioned in one of our earlier hearings that getting this project right for our butters specifically and Chattam residents
broadly will help answer future concerns and hopefully quill objections. Therefore, I appreciate the abutters and town citizens for sharing their feedback and I acknowledge Penrose multiple efforts to edit the setbacks within their development regarding buildings
four and seven and the potential switch. I agree with Penrose's notation number four, page one of the September 10th supplemental memorandum regarding Western, Southern, and Eastern of Butters, noting their previous site revisions made to improve setbacks,
building heights, and additional buffer screenings to address concerns. But how much is a reasonable number? And I want to get to the fourth setback. That's the street street skate on Main Street a mile from
downtown Chattam is very important and the visual impact of this project will have reverberating impacts to future housing proposals in Chattam for consideration. I'd like to propose the following. Number one, management
office. The impact of Main Streetscape of skinny roadside setbacks could be improved if the approximate 29 square foot 2900 square foot management building was one removed or two relocated to the
meeting house project or three moved to the back of the main street project as either the current proposed building or redesigned office space within existing buildings along the southerntherly end of the property. This would remove the
waiver request from main street setbacks and improve neighborhood visual character through addition of more open space and reduction of scale and mass lighting. Again, we're still talking about streetscape
in lie of the clean looking but contemporary black ballarded and post lighting proposed. Would Penrose instead consider the distinctively charming copper lighting fixtures? And this I think she's talking about along Main Street that you see. This
edit would reflect Chadam's nautical history, provide significant impact, charm, and character. Admittedly, more costly than the composite or plastic. But unlike the costly cedar shingle response, these quality lanterns,
spotlights, and building lights provide longevity. And the cost delta is measurably more manageable given the quantity of lighting versus building siding and the quality of copper versus
composite. I urge you to evaluate density. In addition to setbacks, density has also been one of the most frequently mentioned and frankly most important topics by Chattam citizens and the ZBA board. Density correlates to traffic and
parking and it also connects to financial considerations. One, the economic viability of the project for Penrose as the impact to its proformer. to the impact to important infrastructure of Chattam such as our
schools, fishing industry, firefighters, police, nurses, restaurants, and retail. In one of our earlier meetings, I raised the question and the idea of removing one building C along the southernly property as a way to help reduce setback
pressure on the western, southern, and eastern Butters. Removal of one building C of six units would take the total proposed units from 48 down to 42. That wasn't addressed in subsequent revisions, and I remain curious what
that would do to the economics of the Penrose proposal. If bedrooms are an additional proxy for density, the bedroom breakdown is as follows. Onebedroom units there are 16 that would
be 33% of the project. Two-bedroom units there are 26 that's 54% and threebedroom units there are six which is 12%. That gives you the total of 86 bedrooms within the 48 units.
I mentioned at a prior hearing, what's clear is that at Chattam's all town meeting June 12, 2021, article 18, Chattam citizens voted unanimously for the appropriation of money to acquire to quote acquire two parcels on Maine for
affordable and attainable housing. As we know, the RFP and proposal before us now wasn't part of that vote. And therefore in these final weeks, further clarification of definitions, distinctions, requirements, and related restrictions within this proposal to
affordable, attainable, and workforce housing would be helpful. For example, questions could include, we've talked about local preference, and this proposal is for 70% local preference at the time of initial lease, and after the unit's first lease, it can
be leased to non Chattam residents. Is that correct? She asks, "What happens if we're unsuccessful in getting the approval for local preference?" Please explain the following. A subsidy, a grant, a tax credit. Are
these local, state, or federal? And here I presume this is a question to Penrolls about their submission. In closing today, I don't know how I will vote when we meet in October, but I do know I have concerns about the
project and the needle needs to move before I cast my vote. All right. So with that we are going to now go to the audience that is here and then we will go to any questions for
people online who would like to speak that. Yes sir. And as usual um please line up if you want to speak. Oh you can't leave. Welcome. Thank you. Uh Henry Marcelli, 32 Jesse's
Landing. Um I'd like to take this opportunity to thank Rio and Mark for meeting with us, listening to our concerns, walking the property, and coming up with a proposal that really shows that uh you listened and are trying to accommodate the
abutters in the Jesse's Landing area and the Levit will speak for themselves. But I we do appreciate that. I also appreciate the fact that the board has encouraged the developer to sit down and talk with the neighbors um because we talk about the balance that the attorney
spoke of earlier, but the abutters do have rights also and I appreciate the fact that you recognize that and uh gave us an opportunity to do it. I think the new uh proposal provides a dense vegetative buffer that enhances the
project and will provide uh a much better screening for the residents on Jesse's Landing. And for clarification, we keep hear I keep hearing this I keep hearing I should speak as an individual about these uh summer residents kind of things where people say uh you know
we're not year-round residents. Just for clarification, there are nine homes in Jesse's Landing. Two of the homes are occupied year round. The other six homes are owned by Massachusetts residents who come down
here weekends, Thanksgiving, Christmas, and use their properties year round. I am the only house that is a summer resident. I spent six months in Florida and six months here. So, the perception that everybody in Jesse's Landing is a
summer resident is is kind of not fair. Um, I also recognize and have no issue with the fact that the town board recently decided to um change the tax structure for summer residents or I
believe it's 35% more that we'll be paying and the 35% reduction will go to year- round people, which is fine. But you have to remember another thing. We do not require the services year round. I do not anyway because I'm only here six months. So there is a balance and I
think that uh I don't have have an issue with it but I think that people need to respect the fact that I believe and I know there's some people in the audience some of the select people who know the number better than I do. I didn't get a chance to go to the advisory meeting summer advisory
meeting but if my recollection is correct I think over 60% of the revenue coming into the town comes from summer residents. Is that correct? You're you're on 30 seconds and we don't answer back. Oh, okay. I'm sorry. But I think Mike can maybe speak to that when they get a chance to speak, they
will. Thank you very much and appreciate the opportunity. Of course. Feel good about it. Thank you. Yep. Thank you. Okay. No one lined up, so no. All right. I don't like Welcome. Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm Rick Levit,
uh 31 Barnhill Road. I too want to thank Rio Mark and the entire Penrose Design team for cooperating in this effort to move an important affordable housing project forward. It's obvious to most of us that public
concern with the project, which was expressed here today, stems not from Penrose, but from the town's failure to place an upper limit on the size of the project on small 3acre properties. But that's a matter for discussion at
another board meeting, not this board. My immediate concern is with preserving our privacy and quiet enjoyment of our home. from Eller and I in close proximity to large multifamily apartment buildings.
Eller and I and our neighbors, as has been mentioned, met with Rio and Mark on the main street property a couple of weeks ago. We we discussed the need for a dense vegetative buffer. The proposed plan of an evergreen wall
of trees and six-foot fence separating our properties is excellent. I would like to see the planning schedule and have it in have it and the fence made part of the building permit.
Finally, Eller and I have asked that the parking lot for three cars adjacent our property be eliminated and the dumpster loca uh relocated to another part of the
site in keeping with the RFP's request that traffic flow be internal and away from adjacent neighborhoods. This is a minimal ask based again on a need for on our need for privacy and the
quiet enjoyment of our home and I hope you will consider that going forward. Thank you. Thank you sir Mr. Oenheim. Welcome David Oheim Abs run. Uh I'm here to say um I think this has been quite a process. Uh having been on the
affordable housing trust for two years. Um we had to learn a lot. We had consultants come in to teach us the process and at the same time start to deal with getting this going and we learned a lot. We created the RFP and I think we ended up uh making the right
choice on the applicant. Um, you've been doing this for almost six months now, I think, give or take. And you've been learning the process in a different form than we did. Uh, you've had to deal with the abutters, the public public input, everything else, and consider all the
all the ramifications and and what's real and what's not real and what what what are things that you really should deal with and what you shouldn't deal with. And I think you've done a really good job. At the same time, I think Penrose deserves a lot of credit. They have been enormously responsive as far as I'm concerned. I've been to many
hearings like this in other towns. I can honestly say I've never seen this many requests in other towns and I've never seen as as uh much response as Penrose has done. They've tried to accommodate everything reasonable while defending what needs to be done here because the
goal is affordable housing, obtainable housing for people in this town. It's a desperate need. We all know what it needs. Um it is my hope going forward that uh you experience a few years back um a group of us bought a house on Croll
Road. Um we put it put it together and it was became part of the Marone thing and I think one of the things that all of us that were involved with that shared was going by there at night and seeing a family living there and knowing that they had home security because that's what we're talking about. I think
everybody sitting here on your board and certainly many of the people that think we we don't worry about home security. We have home security. Um having been an employer in this town, I know Bill Mcdanovich was here and spoke very very well about the problems that exist. I've employed many people over the years and
home security was something that we as an employer always had to deal with. There's so many times people that work for us year round didn't know where they were going to live in the summer. And um I think that that's an important thing. the the community building has been a a
subject of discussion and I I can't say anything more than what Tracy Cannon said um when she wrote her letter about the importance of having a place for people to gather. I think Penrose did a great job reducing the size of it as far as architecturally. I think it looks really nice in the front of the building
uh in the front of the project. It's a lower thing and it sort of accents it and and softens the entrance into the whole place. So, I think that's very well done. Um, I'm hoping that you can close the hearing, whether it's now or or the next meeting, and and get to writing the
conditions that you've all agreed to and and get this thing going so that they can get their tax credits. Um, Penrose has done a marvelous job responding. They're continuing. I I would guess as things are going on, they'll continue to respond to things as necessary. And I
hope we all sit here in a couple years or less and can watch knowing that we've helped people knowing that families will be in there putting Okay. Putting their kids in bedrooms instead of on the couches uh cooking on on stoves instead of hot plates. Thank you very much.
Miss Mlen, please step up. Thank you, Carolyn McClullen, South Cadam. I'm speaking for myself, not the committee, just so you read the committee's letter, but this is these are my words. Um, so I hope you can appreciate that the style of the
architecture all in white surrounding the central green evokes the classic New England village square. How charming. Breaking up the colors is going to make it look more like a multif family housing, which is what most people have reported that they don't want it to look like. Keeping it one color, a stately
white, will elevate its appearance. The color alone will enhance the cohesiveness and deescalate the scale, taking it from a development to a desirable neighborhood. A step ahead of every other housing development on the Cape, Chadamly has a chance here to live up to its hype and deliver housing with
class and character. Most of us are not professional architects or designers, but you know who is? This guy over here. Okay, we're very lucky to have the team from Union Studios working on this project. It's probably the only thing that Mr. Levven and I agree on at this
point. They do a wonderful job. I was absolutely amazed to hear the discord and the rejection of their professional opinion about the color, especially knowing it's keeping with the architectural style and the historical guidelines of a Chadam. It is my expectction expectction expectation that
Chattam will deliver a housing development that will live up to our high standards both aesthetically in regards to the quality of life of the residents. Um I feel that Penrose has already made a lot of concessions at this point. I would be very disappointed if you
continue to chip away at what's there to accommodate the abutters. I think we've we've given them the buffer zones, but there seems to be this misconception that it's acceptable to try to get as much as we can out of Penrose when the reality is that every concession they make diminishes the quality of life for
the 48 households that will get to live in these modest apartments. So, you're not getting anything out of them. None of them are going to live in this development. In fact, none of us are going to live there. No one who's probably commented on this will ever live there. um the future residents are
not here to advocate for themselves. So I'd ask you to please consider their interest along with the butter's request. In regards to the community space, you've already received a poignant letter from Tracy Cannon, the executive director of Shadam's housing authority, explaining how needed these kinds of spaces are. Personally, I find
it hard to reconcile further reducing or eliminating the community space when we're offering to enlarge the buffer zones for the abutters. And finally, I'll just close with change is difficult. And we all have blind spots. But if we're going to evolve and meet the challenges of our time, we need to have the courage to look in the
mirror and acknowledge the disconnect between our actions and our words. Many of us express concerns for the current h housing crisis, yet fail to see our own bias as a contributing factor and as an obstacle to real solutions. So please, let's pause for a moment and truly consider this thing we call character,
the thing we're so desperate to preserve. We need to be cognizant of the fact that the reality is that our character will ultimately be defined by our actions, not the height of our buildings or the density of our neighborhoods. Thank you. Thank you, ma'am. Mr. Shell, welcome.
Thank you very much. Um, let me start by saying uh I I want to offer my thanks to this board. Can you just give your name and address for the record, please? I did. Uh, Mike, I I said I It was an echo. Sorry. hard shell. Chadam, um I want to start by saying thank you to the
board. Uh I know this has been a difficult, trying uh extended um challenging effort on your part. Um I I don't think it's any secret that I wish you had done it faster and and more in one direction and all the rest of it.
But I having said that, I I I know you've had a a tough job to do. So I want to say thank you for that. I also want to say about this project. Um, it delivers to Chadam 48 units of housing that we will have
families living in. Specifically, 32 I believe are affordable in the classic sense of that term and 16 of them are um attainable. Um, and I also want to mention uh or refer to uh the comment
that David Oppenheim made. Kids kids not only in bedrooms but kids in our schools. We need to have kids in the schools. I'm not going to guess as to how many kids this can bring to the pro the the the uh the community, but I am
sure it is going to be a very significant number and I believe that should be a big deal for you. Um, finally, I just want to mention um I have my own metric of um what we call what what has been referred to as as
economic feasibility. Um I'm looking at what I'm comparing this proposal with the two others that we got back way back when uh it was in April I guess of 24. The other two, this
one, this one offers to give us money back for the land that we are giving them. Everything else they are bringing to the party through financing from other sources. The other two in simplest terms, one of them offered us I I believe it was about 42 units and they
wanted they needed from Chadam in order to complete that project around four million dollars of subsidy from us. The third one was only 30 uh 36 units and they wanted $5.5 million from Chadam and
they wanted another mill they were going to need another million half dollars from some other source likely the state. To me that te that tells me that they have sharpened their pencils. they are giving us value that by comparison is
superior to what was provided in a in an open process in which there was an open competition. So uh from my perspective I think they've done a phenomenal job. They've stuck with you. They've worked with you. They've worked with the abutters. Um I I like everybody else I I
hope you will um close the hearing and move on to the the mechanics of of issuing it. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Brian Phillips, you're up next. Welcome. All right. For the record, Brian
Phillips, 374 Orleans Road, and I do need affordable housing. For the record, um my first uh concern, real serious, is that uh the lack of handicap accessibility um kind of demonstrates a lack of empathy uh and understanding our
demographics. We have a very large senior population with mobility issues. So having like a parent or you know a grandparent over for dinner would be very difficult if they have mobility issues. So I think there should be elevators in all of the um all the buildings. Um the other is the low-level
water alarm went off six times last month. Um and that is under strict uh water restrictions. It's usually around uh 12 to 15 times. Uh this complex is going to use uh between 8 10,000 gallons of water a day. um what is it what is
that going to do to our water supply? Even if for some reason we could support that water usage, it would take away from projects uh we should be doing like home ownership. Penrose gets a 0% interest loan on the Buckley property land, which I don't think they have to pay monthly payments.
Um they get uh like $23 million from the state to build this project. They have a prevailing wages exemption that got snuck through town meeting. Um, so why do taxpayers have to pay prevailing wages for projects like schools but for a for-profit cop corporation doesn't
that's state funded. So Penrose pretty much doesn't have to pay for anything but gets to collect the rent on 48 units which around 30% uh it being over $3,000 a month. Um Chab's market rate for a twobedroom is about
$1,800 a month. So why is Penrose able to charge 3,000 if you are 110% AMI? Other than Dick Cheney using Hallebertton to rebuild the Middle East, this is the biggest scam I have ever seen. This project does not benefit Chad
and it hurts it. The only people benefiting from this project is people is Penrose and a couple employers who need cheap source of labor. Uh it's tough for me to calculate how much penrolls will be collecting each month because the AMI keeps changing, but it's about$1 to $120,000 a month. Instead,
that money be going toward uh instead of that money going towards a giant corporation investors, that money could be going to citizens of this town so they could gain wealth through the equity of their home if we had had a fair RFP process. There was no reason to
to not do the hack ownership project. Chadam has the money in the attainable and affordable trust to do the project. So new so no new money would have been asked at town meeting. Um a claim in a ZBA meeting um was made
that not having a pool at your beachfront property was a hardship. If that's a hardship, what is it when you do hard lowpaying jobs like banging nails, digging ditches, flipping bers burgers, being lucky, just so you know, uh being a nurse at Liberty Commons to
provide your family. In conclusion, and not having the opportunity to own a home in this town. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I don't see anybody else, so I am No. Oh, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. My contacts only get me so far in life.
Yes. Please welcome Leslie Sheenberger. Thank you, Leslie Schneburgger, 392 Main Street. Um, I really appreciate the consideration the board has given to neighbors requests to um pedestrian safety and develop the development's aesthetics. Um, I've heard some of the
proponents cite the adage, don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. I contend that this statement actually undersells what's been achieved here. The development is now presented, I think, is an excellent solution that'll provide housing for upward of 90 residents in a town where the majority
of large structures are single family. This is a result of a team of specialists with real world experience responding to a detailed RFP. When you provide specifications to an AIdriven application and the initial response doesn't meet your expectations, you refine the criteria. I'd say that
mirrors exactly what's been happening here by the members of the CBA and the public except that it's been done to real world real people who have experience to react. Penrose's response balances the needs of future residents with the needs of our current residents.
The landscape design creates a well um vegetated buffer between the residences and abuing properties while maintaining small backyards for each unit. The central green, which will serve as outdoor communal space with play and picnic areas, preserves existing mature trees, quite a few, and adds even more.
It's unfortunate that the town's previous housing initiative at Lake Street didn't incorporate or consider residents quality of life in that same thoughtful way. I've heard comments about the height and the siding. It's easy to assume that White Cedar shingles and one and a half story capes are the most fitting aesthetic for a town. I
argue that Chadam's most historic and prominent landmarks are often the buildings that have fe feature clabard sighting and are often the tallest. Um I recommend taking a slow drive from Haritchport to Chadam light as any visitor might and observe how many
structures are over 30 feet tall. How many of those have clapped siding and are located in very close proximity to the street. Um quite often these large towns are also the ones that ironically have been converted to multif family to um duplexes, ins and other type of
structures. Um I suggest siding and roofing colors be modest in their variation. Um at least they appear so or they may appear contrived and resemble unthoughtful kind of large multif family buildings of the suburbs of Boston. Um this development
is not anything like that. I believe the community building has been misunderstood and really should be described as a needed clubhouse that will house staff, maintenance, amenities for the property and gathering spaces for celebrations like birthdays, anniversaries, things that the small homes cannot um fit. Um the future
residents of this development will certainly still continue to frequent our town's community center for its broader offerings. Development and change are difficult to envision and challenge can be um hard to accept. If this property were being subdivided, I think we'd hear just as many concerns and complaints. However, I
have no fear of this development is becoming would become an eyesore to our town. Rather, I believe it'll quickly de dissolve into the periphery of our along Route 28. Ask you to conclude. Um, while its structures and their parking and their landscape fade from view, the contributions of its
residents, schools, businesses, all right, thank you very much. All community will continue. Next Welcome, sir. Good afternoon. Uh, Bill Bystrom, Chadam. I want to thank you for your service. It's a lot of work. I understand that. Uh, if I drive around
Chadam, I I see a lot of the conditions that people have complained about. It doesn't seem to adversely affect the quality of life in Chadam uh or the valuation of the town. The town, I believe, is evaluated now currently at 12.8 billion. So it seems that is going
up as I look around and I see people that are have served on various building committees. Uh Mr. Dykins, Mr. Wickham, myself, at least one of us have been on every building committee this town has had since 2000. Whether it be the Lake
Street project, which was affordable housing, the community center, the DPW building, the police station, the fire station, this town hall annex, or Monoy Regional High School. And it's the consensus, I think, of all of us that
there are many, many real positive benefits that the community would get from endorsing the Penrose project and that would increase the quality of life for the community. And in conclusion, I'd just like to take a brief moment and read the concluding paragraph from
today's Cape Cod Chronicle. And it affects uh affordable housing and attainable housing in Chattam. When it comes to affordable and attainable housing, the question of character isn't about parking, traffic,
or what kind of cedus shingles we'd like to see. It's a fundamental question of who we would want to be. Instead of looking at a project as too dense, look at the potential it might provide for housing more families. Instead of
fretting over how many safety workers or how I'm sorry, instead of fretting over how many more cars a project might add to our roads, think about how many teachers, policemen, uh, service employees that might house.
The ability to allow some of these emitted annoyances for a greater cause shows really great community character, and that's what Chadam's all about. Chadam's a wonderful place to live. We all like living here and the reason we like living here is because of the
people that inhabit it. This will give us a chance to add more. Thank you. Thank you, sir. You are next. Welcome. Thank you, madam. Thank you, Madam Chair. David Wood, 41 Indian Trail, West Chattam. I'm going to try to say a few
things that haven't been said because I know you've been to several meetings and uh I just would like to give my opinion. Um back in 2002, this same sort of project began. The town bought uh uh
1.42 acres from the uh to the housing the housing authority bought from the town 1.42 acres to add to the five acres that we had bought the Chattam Housing Authority bought in 1985. and we started building the um Lake Street project
which was the last project that went before the ZBA for 40B and was the last project that had any significant addition to affordable housing in the town. Since then we've tried to we went out we looked at all the town land. We have no land to build affordable
housing. We looked at the MCI property. We looked at several properties the middle road property to no avail. So we went out to bid for land to build affordable housing and this is what we've want come come up with. So in 22
years we had 47 units at uh Lake Street uh 10 I think or so units of uh uh Habitat for Humanity, a couple at uh MCI property. So maybe 60 units altogether in the last 22 years of affordable
housing. We have an opportunity, you have an opportunity to okay this um I hope you do that. Uh I'd hate to go another four or five years on a project that you've we've spent on on this particular project. So in ending I
believe the compromises and concessions that have been uh made during the 40B process make this project more beneficial to the town of Chadam than not. I encourage the ZBA to support the Penrose project and retain the viability
of everyone of the year round community in channel. Thank you. Thank you, sir. If there's nobody else in the audience, I don't think missing anyone at this juncture. I'm going to take the two two online, Elaine Gibbs and then Steven Buckley. And then after that, we're
going to take a short break and come back and talk to Penrose again. Uh, thank you, Madam Chair. Uh, Ela Gibbs Chadam, I ask that you uh visualize this project from the viewpoint of Main Street, not from the
renderings provided. Virtually all of the three acres will in fact be clear-cut from Main Street back. Uh, the renderings relied on show mature landscaping, which none of us will see in our lifetimes. 90% of the proposed
plantings are deciduous trees and shrubs that will be bare five months of the year. The nine residential buildings are huge. The larger ones are actually 2/3 the size of the brick portion of the community center and will all be seen
from the road year round. Penrose keeps comparing this project to Nosket Green, which they built, which is six miles north of the Orleans Rotary on a side road with six units per acre versus uh 16 per acre at 1533.
1533 is located on a heavily traveled state road and our main access to all of Chadam. 1533 has a potential occupancy capacity of 172 to 200 tenants based on
the bedrooms. The 95 to 100 projected based on NSET is totally unrealistic for Chadam. Uh West Chadam has no grocery stores, no pediatrician, no pharmacy and no bank. requiring cars for work and for
very basic necessities of life. To restrict the parking to 1.252 cars per unit, again based on Nazi green, is totally insufficient. Parking should be assigned near each unit and two spaces per unit. We have to consider
the quality of life of the people that are going to be living here. Family isn't defined by state agencies and could therefore be six or more unrelated individuals in a three-bedroom in addition to allowing each temporary
visitor up to 14 days to stay there taking up uh unassigned parking. Uh in terms of local preference, despite claims that 70% of the units will likely be local preference, that isn't determined by the state until after the
project is completed. Uh uh based on the AMIs, I don't believe teachers, town employees, including police and fire, will likely even qualify financially, especially if it is a twoperson income home. The annual
report of town salaries, which I've advised the affordable housing trust to look at. Just going to give you a 20 second warning, ma'am, just so you know. Um All right. I I think the test should be if we want our children or grandchildren living here in terms of
the quality of life we should expect. Once the lot is bulldozed, there's no turning back and there will be a lot of regret and a lot of fingerpointing. This is not conducive to children. And I would and thank you. Thank you very much. Um we're going to go to Steve Buckley now.
Sir, just make sure you turn your volume up best you can. Okay. Can you hear me now? Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair. Yes. Uh I wanted to uh respond to the statement
that uh about Cedar shingle sighting in which uh Penrose said in their uh letter of um September 10th. Unfortunately, Cedar shingles present financial maintenance and operational
fire safety and insurance issues that cannot be recently supported in an affordable housing development in which the government subsidies are being provided to support the creation of such housing. And I had said before in previous
meetings, if you can't do real wood, then use synthetic. Right now all the siding even the collaborate siding it's not wood it's synthetic. So I believe uh unless
I I would like to put forth that essentially the only thing that would change from synthetic cedar shingle is the appearance. It's virtually the same cost and I'm assuming if it's made out of the same material then any type
of fire safety and insurance would be virtually the same and it would last just as long as the synthetic collaborate site. So if they're truly saying that it's unfortunate that they can't use cedar shingles, then if we can address the idea that it doesn't have to
be wood, then we can take away that reservation and they can put it in and it'll look like Cadam. It'll it'll fit in like Chadam. That's one by selling the property to the town. I wanted this to look like a housing project that
would fit in with Chadam and the look of even if it's mixed 50% cedar shingles. That's typically what happens. A lot of houses have one side with clabard and the other three sides are cedar shingled. And that's the type of look
that I think would break it up and also by the way provide some uh if you be less apt to see gray uh to the back of these buildings from the abutters. If you're trying to screen then uh white is going to stand out a
lot more between the trees and the screening than gray. So it'll actually provide some from the abuter's point of view I would think be less obvious that there's a building on the other side of those trees. And so anyway I have a link that I would like to um share.
Just going to give you your 20 second warning like basketball. Okay. I provided uh Sarah heard that right to Yes, I heard it. Thank you. uh a link that I would like to be put in the minutes so that the the board and other people can see and watch a video
of how closely it looks to the real thing. You actually have to walk up and touch it to know that it's not seed silver gray cedar shingles. Thank you very much. Thank you, sir. That appears to conclude public comment for today.
So, we're going to take a short break, come back no later than uh 3:38, and we'll see you then. We are back. Zoning Board of Appeals, September 18th, 2025. Um, and we're going to continue the
meeting. And um this is the portion where Penrose um responds to what they've heard from the public and the letters. Great. Thank you. Uh Rio from Penrose again. Um so first
uh first comment I'd like to address um from Mr. and Mrs. Levit. um some concerns about the dumpster. Um we've which which are totally reasonable. We get it the dumpster near their property.
Um so we're trying to accommodate it as best we can. Um we've we we had previously pulled it back off the property. So we push it farther back, setting it farther from the property borderline. We've reduced those spaces
in that area from eight to three, which also allowed us to push our building farther away from his property as well. Um, some things to note about the dumpster. We're going to enclose it in a minimum of six foot high stockade wood fencing.
Um, and in addition to that, we have what Mark was showing earlier in the presentation, a new staggered line of um, evergreen screening. And this is in addition to the already uh, substantial
vegetation at that property border to begin with, which will stay. Um, also noting that the um, dumpster is at a lower elevation, too. So all of those things we think um will obscure the building. So I think it will have little
visual impact. Um they also had concerns about the sound impact. I think all of those things help reduce the sound impact as well. Um also we had regrouped with our director of um property maintenance for the whole Penrose uh
management organization. And for this this style dumpster, for these number of units, um it's anticipated that the pickup service would be twice a week and it takes the truck approximately five minutes to back in, hook it up to the
dumpster, and flip it into the back and then lay it back down. So that you know the the noise part which you know the beeping of a truck and a large truck moving in um that would be for a total of approximately 10 minutes a week. Um
also you there's some concerns too about um pests and pest control. Um this falls into what what we've been talking about professional you know class A type property management. Um, we'll have uh maintenance staff on site which will ensure that people aren't leaving trash
outside the dumpster near it or dumping things that aren't supposed to be dumped. Um, we'll also be contracting with a local uh pest control vendor year round for for regular pest control services. Um, so we think we have a
really good plan to mitigate all these impacts, visual, sound, uh, and concerns about pests. Um, so I I think the net effect there is a is a screened, quiet as much as it can
be. Um, and a well-maintained uh trash removal um area. Um, next I'd like to address and there were there were a bunch of comments here. Um, I'm going to go around um, uh, Virginia Fenwick's
comments from her her letter. Uh, I think I'll first I'll just start off with um her comments about the um cedar shingles and the copper lighting um which are really really the same issue and that you know we find them not
supportable. Uh, a lot of those features are beautiful. Um, but they're cost prohibitive. Uh, and putting money uh into that um shifts that those dollars away, which would which would go into
the units and the unit interiors, which we think would probably lessen the quality of life for the residents living there. Um, however, we can um relook at two things for her. uh for we could look at coming up with
some light poles that are less contemporary. There won't be copper, but maybe they're more fitting in with Cadam architecture and uh um Chattam design, maybe more nautical theme type features uh polls. So, we can we can look at
that. And um I would also like to note I think maybe it it it wasn't clear uh and I know I believe Mr. Buckley had mentioned um other um synthetic versions of shingle cedar shingles. So we
currently have our show um cementitious um non vinyl uh cementitious um um seat well not seed shingles um on the first and second floors on the sides of several of the buildings also on the
back of several buildings. Um, so we think that that's a nice design feature um that I think will uh hopefully that um Mrs. Fenrich will will accept. Um other
items from her comments are the um local preferences and the justifications that is out of our control. Um it's up to HLC. However, however, I will say
that at Village at NASA Green and at fair in Orleans, two very similar projects, um we were able to get this the max 70% ref uh local preference on both. Um so we're highly confident we'd
be able to get it here. It will need um information from the town. the town will be responsible for justifying to the state the need for that and that's something we can help with. We helped Orleans with that and we helped with we helped east with that where we were
successful. We were also successful in Wearham and these the Cape communities because of the housing crisis are they have a they have a built-in justification right there. Um it is just
for the lease up but however um that doesn't mean that Chattam residents aren't going to be able to rent these units if they don't make it through the initial lottery preference. Right now at um Village and Nasa Green um most of the folks that have moved in
recently I believe all of them that have moved in recently off the wait list um have all been from Eastam. So, uh, it's will be similar here. I think with the demographics of our lottery applications
in Orleans, it was overwhelmingly um, folks from Orleans and the lower and outer Cape uh, that applied. Um, other comments um, she had comments about the management building. Um,
I noticed one error in that and that you might not have it. I didn't notice it. It was brought to my attention from somebody a lot smarter than me. Um, that it even if you did what she asked with for that and we're not saying that it's not a valid request, it wouldn't actually change the setback of the
streak. You probably already picked that right up, but we picked it up too. But but that doesn't mean that the rest of what she talks about isn't still a valid concern. It just wouldn't alleviate the front setback. Got it. Okay. Yep.
All right. Continue. Thank you. Okay. Uh the management building um this this is an example of something we had pushed really strongly for because we from our experience um building these types of projects. We felt this was what
we needed to to be able to professionally manage it. Um, we have I'm sure folks are probably very familiar with the floor plan by by now, but just to go over it again, we have a maintenance shop, maintenance, storage.
Um, we have the property manager's office, a full-time property manager. It'll be a full-time maintenance technician as well. Um, the waiting room for applicants or residents who are waiting to meet with the manager. Um we have file storage rooms which isn't
necessary for tax credit applications. We have a lot of sensitive personal information that has to be secured. Um so th those rooms are a requirement. Um we have the social services office which is also something we feel 100% feel we
need to professionally manage this. Um and this is a person that that we also um project will be shared with the meeting house property. Um the conference room is used for the manager to interview um with prospective
applicants. Um that's also the used as the office for the regional director of property management who will be making periodic visits to the property. That's another level of this being professionally managed. Um, we have a
higher level executive person come in frequently to oversee what's happening at the property to make sure it's being managed by the folks on site to an acceptable level. Um, and and the common room of course. So this common room we
know it's used as function for the residents um uh for birthdays, afterchool programs. It's also uh an area of refuge. There'll be a generator to this building and um times when the power goes out, folks can all the
residents can come to this common room. They'll have electricity, hot water, have a place to stay uh if needed, if they would like until the power comes back on. She she specifically asked you a few things with that and um I feel compelled
to ask you to address them. Do you see it says um why don't you remove it which I think you just responded because you think you need it. Um relocate relocate to the meeting house project or move it to the back because in her opinion it um
the streetscape would be better served without that right front and center. So can you just at least respond to that? Sure. Of course. So moving it back would reduce the presence on the on the street. Um, but
it what it would also do is it would push back into well, we think Crowley Cautrol did an amazing job with this with very limited space this green space amenity area, recreational area. So, we talk about tradeoffs here, create a
little more setback up there and would significantly impact the main recreational area for the entire community. It also would mean that we'd have to get rid of a bunch of those existing mature trees
um that we had designed around purposely to try to preserve. Um we don't think the tradeoffs are worth that pushing it back to reduce that recreational space. She meant moving it. No, no, she meant moving it to the back of the site.
That's what it says. Um this and this is just addressing what she said. Relocated to meeting house. So address that in a moment. Move to the back of Main Street project as either the current proposed building or uh redesign it within the
existing buildings along the southern end of the property. So in other words, she's saying to move it way in the back because you talked about you have to admit you talked about meeting house and that um office being in the back and you like that idea. So
it's caused some cognitive I wouldn't I didn't say we like that idea I said that was extremely difficult site and the reason we could do it without a management space like this is because it would be shared with here
they would have access to here they would access to the staff who were able to put here if we looked at meeting house all on its own we would have to come in with a larger management building and and a lot more units and that site isn't physically capable of
handling it. So, we couldn't do it. Um, I think I also mentioned we much prefer our management buildings to be at the front entrance because that's where people come in and new applicants come in. They know right away where to go to see the manager. Um, same
with visitors. It also provides I I think Union did a great job with the layout here of providing uh in an area and designing around it. So where the property manager in her office has eyes on everything that's going on in the
property, eyes on uh the street people coming in, eyes on the recreational area, and eyes basically on the whole periphery of what's going on. It's it's really perfect from a site security perspective. um which is why we originally and have
always had it um at its current location. Okay. I think I think you addressed that. We're just trying to make sure that you address, you know, just out of um courtesy and um Okay. You you want to continue like the it seems like the next um
whopper is uh density. Okay. Oh, eliminating a a eliminating bill. At at a different meeting, she mentioned that that and um women don't like to be ignored and it's I'm asking you to respond to
her and then we'll take that up later in terms of any if any of the rest of us agree with it. But she's asking you right here um to tell us why you can't cut it down six units. She's asking you
I think from the very beginning at the RFP stage, this has been the number of units that we've said we've needed in order to professionally manage this property with all the things that like pest control that we must mention, the full-time property manager, full-time
maintenance person. And for us uh the unit count is even more important than the bedroom count to a certain extent because uh that number of units is really needed to support the
full-time maintenance person and full-time property manager. So what she says in in her document um so like I said that wasn't addressed in subsequent revisions and I remain curious. This is Virginia Fenwick. Um
what that would do to the economics of the Penrose proposal. You can either respond to that now or maybe later. It's up to you. But you know what she's asking. Yes. I think we'd be curious to know um Sure. the rest of the board's uh comments.
Yeah, we can we can table that. Um okay, go ahead. Um, anything else? That's it. No, I think that's it. Um, for responses that we had um for what we just heard in
the public comments, you know, that question that she brought up um in the very at the end, for example, questions in include um about just I'll just go with one. Please explain the following. A subsidy, a
grant, a tax credit. If it's in our lane to ask that, if you could kindly respond. If you think it's not in our lane to ask that, then just tell us it's not in your lane. She wanted to know that and how it related to this project.
Sure. Um so this project so projects like this which have um income restrictions and rent restrictions. So the folks who move in can't make an income above a certain level and the um
owner can't charge them a rent above a certain level. Um so a lot of these projects have a lot less cash flow than a market rate develop uh development. uh so they're not able to raise the
funds necessarily necessary to get it developed um because there's restrictions on revenue there and then there's restrictions on the sale too at the end. So um the uh primary so you you
you can't finance these with just conventional financing which would be equity of some sort or a conventional bank loan. it would never pencil out. So, um there's gaps in the development budget, what you could raise versus the cost to build it. So, this is where the
subsidies come in. Um they're financial incentives, taxpayer funded incentives, um to get to fill those budget gaps so projects like this have enough funds to get built. Um the primary uh subsidy
um that will fund this project and it funds most of these projects uh is the lowincome housing tax credit which is a federal program where if you have a certain amount of units at a certain level of um income and rent
restrictions, you qualify for these tax credits. You get awarded them even though they're federal. you get awarded them through the state through a competitive process. You the owner developer sells those tax credits, raises the money from that to help build
the project, but um those usually are not enough and especially over the past five years are definitely not enough. We're very fortunate that we live in a state like Massachusetts that has come to the table with lots of state funded subsidies to to help fill these gaps
which are still la left after the lowincome housing tax credits. Um so there's the state uh has their own state low-income housing tax credit. They also provide um home funds, affordable housing trust funds, housing stabilization funds. there is a lot of
different funding that will have to go together to cobble all the pieces to to get a a budget balances and that's why you know I talked about earlier about the sort of three factors we consider when making changes
um one being is it improve the resident's quality of life um the other one does it help us is can this be professionally managed does it help us in that regard and then the third one which we're sort of talk talking about now is will this be competitive um for
state subsidies and resources because there's a lot of projects that need to be built. There's a limited amount of these resources available for projects. So, we need to be as competitive as possible because the state looks at it as, you know, what's a responsible use
of taxpayers uh funding, which was the issue we we kind of brought up about the cedar shingles and the um copper light poles. Um so we would go after um all sorts of these funds um including and what we've
done on the Cape CPC funds and in fact we actually submitted CPC applications for this project to the town of Brewster and Wellfleet to um get funds from them as well. Um over the past five years
costs have skyrocketed for many different reasons. So, um, we've needed to bring more and more different funding sources. These funding sources that don't expect a return on investment or a certain interest on it um to help get
these projects built. So, that's why uh having to be competitive in getting these resources is is so necessary because if we're not, we don't get the resources, this a project can't get built. I think that was pretty helpful. Yeah.
Okay. Thank you. Thank you for doing that. Um, what else do you want to respond to? Anything else? I think we look forward to the board's comments. Yep. Sure. Okay. And we will do that now. I'm going to start with Mr. Vch. He's been a fan of yours from the
beginning. Um, geez, I thought about asking to go last, but I don't need to really. I'll I'll just say um this is true. So, I've I've been a fan um from the beginning um because
I'd like to think at least I like to believe that my primary concern here has been for the prospective occupants of these spaces and um and the being
welcoming to these folks who are perhaps already members of our community, others who will become members members of our community and uh recognizing absolutely recognizing that the extreme need and um uh for this type of housing
especially here in Chadam itself. Um, so I've always had that kept that's primary in my mind and my understanding is that's one of the balancing or one of the main balancing features that we need to consider in terms of our consideration with 40B.
Um so uh I also um perhaps differently than some other folks uh here in the room. Uh find that I'm kind of unabashedly have
uh a little more faith in the process that's taken place up to this point. Um, and I also, um, put and have no reason not to put a great deal of faith in what Penrose and their team has, uh,
responded to and done and answered. I um, not sure some of the changes that have been made, I'm happy about necessarily, but if they say to me that this is meets their criteria for quality of life, the applicants, I'm good with that.
So that's just in general what I'd like to say. Um the uh specifically um I've I want to reiterate um and and
uh that with with respect to the building heights um that I think they've responded quite well to that. I want to just clarify as well. I I I mentioned this to Carolyn in the back on break because one one of the lines in in the
letter from the housing partnership talked about the ceiling heights and and and all and and um I'd like to just clarify that they did that that Penrose responded in those C type buildings the the two and a half story buildings.
I recognized that because they were able on the other buildings to lower the roof pitch and still keep it at a traditional height but bring them down so that meet the height requirement in the two and a half story buildings the roof pitch was not as much they were not going to be
able to do that as much. However, they did have in the initial plans that were presented to us there were the ceilings that were proposed went in the in the second floor were proposed at like 9 ft and I'm not sure why that was but whatever what I saw
there and which they very graciously responded to was the opportunity to re take that down to the 8t plus or minus which were on the other floors and and I and I so I just want to call out that they did do that and they did
bring the height of buildings down by a foot, but those buildings still because of the we define building height uh are still asking for and seeking the waiverss. I don't think we've had other letter writers now say and I'm in agreement with that if when this when
this project is all said and done and those buildings are there as they as they've been presented which I hope will be the case. I don't think anybody's going to be looking at that saying these buildings are too tall. This is too much. It's
been too much. We were wrong. We We've been right wrong that all along. This I don't think they're going to stand out in that way. So, and it's and it sounds like u you know, Virginia, I can't speak for her, but it sounds like she's been okay. She's reached a point being okay
with the heights of the buildings. um the um uh I don't know I'm just going to throw this out. I don't know why I you know talking about the and the willingness to
um increase the setback in the uh in the rear of the property. And so I I what I will applaud with that is it does seem to be an opportunity to save some more existing trees. Uh and I and and I think to the degree they've
done more of that than what they started with, they've done a very good job of that. And especially along that line there, but I do sort of wonder and and looking at the situation, some of the photographs and things that were mentioned on is I don't know how much u
uh some of those trees are at risk because of the way the um topography was left after the development of Jesse's Landing. And I don't know, maybe some of the Jesse's Landing folks might be willing to put up some uh um retaining walls on their property so that the the
spillover and and runoff and things isn't going onto this property and and uh um um perhaps endangering some of the existing trees. Um the uh the other thing that I've tried
to be attuned to and in some of the things that we've asked about and has been mentioned as legisl is how much are we asking that we don't we don't ask of other developers? How how much have we been pushing these guys on on then on situations that we would not even get to
ask other developers to make concessions on. So all things considered and then now I don't know again of the most latest things I I I I I hear Thaad Eldridge's comments about a bus turnout but I would
I would assume anything revol regarding a bus turnout would be same kind of answer about the state that's that's up to the state um you know and it might be a good idea. The only other thing that I'd like to say um that when I look when I look at the uh
the um the drawings and the renderings and the uh and things and specifically in talking about the uh uh front setback uh and um Jenny's concerns about the setback to the road and all is I I I had
also picked up on that were they even to to move that building back it wouldn't solve because the ma the the other setbacks to the when they realized they had to be to the stoops of the other two buildings, not the corners, that reduced the actually increase the the um waiver
ask. But I would like to point out that uh just to the going further to the west of us and on the north side of this is uh a proposal that the planning board
put before and and was not able to get the required twothirds vote but it wasn't it was they had more than a majority of town vote for is they've developed this plan to do uh uh to redo the West Chatam
village center zoning and they've they've trying to adopt this um formbbased design of of of zoning that we really haven't had in Chhattan. But one of the things in reading through that proposal and what they're and what
the intent of it is is specifically to bring the buildings up closer to the street and provide kind of like a street wall as you might find in downtown Chadam which everyone looks at that says God this is what we want. So I'm not at
all concerned about the waiverss to the uh property line on the street. the the what the if if this zoning matter does manage to pass or at some point when it will pass if it passes in the form that was presented at town meeting they
actually are trying to in to to say they're trying to move so that the faces of buildings move to the zone from between 10 and 20 ft from the property line they're trying to bring the line of
buildings into that zone. So these buildings would be maybe slightly forward of what that is, but not much. So I think it'll fit. I don't think there's any question as presented that it won't fit in either with that future zoning or the existing zoning that's on
on the street. And I spent some time I've spent some time as a member of the zone HBDC and and um main street design advisory committee, various other things. So I have had some experience in in in in trying to evaluate proposals uh in their
physical nature and and that's these are the things that I see. I don't see problems there in that regard. Um, and and and then as far as density and and I know and and I think Jean's correct, I I don't think that I'm not sure that we really heard
uh uh pointed responses to when she suggested dropping those that building. Um, but I did say that I thought in in, you know, all the material that we have that we're looking at that talks about the creation of 40B and what it's about
and why it's there, density is is is probably the first thing that needs to be uh asked for is greater density. uh and and uh and and I don't think and I and I also am not without going back into all the details,
but it seems to me that the the RFPs that went out did set they set a maximum or and and that's what the responses were. So I I I think I just think the process
has been has worked very well to get other fellow on the other end is to mix things up. Um well I I I I just have a few questions I guess and they may have already been answered and addressed a
while ago but I maybe I forgot. Um and these are in no particular order. The signage that you mentioned in the front at each entrance it was it's going to be lit is it on some sort of a timer maybe go off at midnight or something or is it
going to be on all night? Do you know? So they only light the face of the um sign. So residents may be coming at all
times of the day. So it it is meant to be I guess I don't Is it timed like during the day does it do you photo cell? It's photo cell. So during the day it's going to go off. Yeah. So it's like dawn the desk it'll be on.
Okay. Okay. Um you mentioned the dumpsters and the relocations and the sizes of the dumpsters and things. Is there what are you doing to encourage recycling? Um we always have um
so that enclosure will include um areas for recyclables as well. That's standard for us as standard in almost every community. Um so um we'll have sometimes we have separate recycles um in
buildings like a separate chute but here because they're all separate entrance town homes it they it would be the same as the trash. So where you see the two dumpster locations, those are also recycle locations as well. It would be in a separate bin instead of the large trash dumpster.
And in terms of like encouraging, this is the reason why the resident service coordinator role is something that we like to have because if there's like a chatam day of recycling, this person would be the one that would help coordinate an event in the community
room to have hand out materials or do encouraging like Earth Day events. So th that sort of programming and those uh kind of activities that we want to encourage people to adopt that's kind of one of the roles that the resident
service coordinator can play. Okay. Thank you. Um another question is and this may have been addressed again but do these buildings have basement? No basement. All right. So where do So there's no
secure area for people to keep their stuff because if families with one or two kids have stuff, where are they going to where are they going to put it? Yeah. Yeah. Skis, maybe a bicycle. Um,
that's a great question. Uh, so we have designed exterior storage. So you see these little bumpouts here at every building. There's exterior storage here, uh, here, exterior storage here. Um, so
it's not accessible from their unit. They have to walk out and go around. It, um, we have sizable storage rooms there for Christmas decorations, bicycles, might not fit a kayak, but um, you we
could always put straps on the side of the building. Are they individual or is it shared? Individual. Okay. One for each unit. Okay. And they're to the exterior on the exterior of the building. That's right. Okay. So then with the absence of a
basement, there's no conventional boilers or furnaces for heat. So I'm assuming you're going to use heat pumps. Correct. HVAC. Where is that equipment? Because I haven't seen that on any of the drawings. That's correct. Uh we haven't gotten to
that level of design yet. So the condensers will be located either attach onto the building or at grade. There'll have to be one for each unit. That's right. Correct. Yes. Likely would be around here. Would put them up on like a platform for the
screening around it. Um we we never typically put on roofs because people don't like it and they're much harder to service. Um and we don't like them near the front doors either. So, they're usually on the sides where there's not the exterior storage.
Okay. Um I know you have some I'm I'm wondering if it's not going to be enough bike racks. Um because of the limited number of parking spaces, I'm assuming a lot of these people or some people don't have
cars or access to cars, so they're going to have bikes or some kind of motorized scooters. We see them every day. What provisions are you making for what's probably going to be a large amount of bicycles or non-car vehicles?
We will include bike racks. In fact, we're obligated to under the state um subsidy programs that we'll be accessing. We usually go above and beyond what's required. I think they usually one one covered bike rack. We
usually um mark Do we I don't believe we currently show bike rack locations in the current drawings. Um but typically there would be um one or two around the management building
and then every couple of units would be smaller ones and they'd be the ones that would be um kind of bolted into um the concrete platforms, not you know the ones you can move around. They'd be secure heavy duty ones.
Currently, they're located here, but there's also opportunities for storage for the bikes as well because, you know, I don't think people are going to put them in their storage unit. I think they're going to be just out. Yes.
Wherever they can put them. Um, is there any sort of I don't know what they're called, tenant personalization? Can they make any changes to these building, paint their front door or something? Is there any
control over that or do they have any sort of leeway to make any kind of changes to their unit? Not on the exterior. And I I don't think on the interior. Uh, but I'm not 100% on that. I would have
to get back to you after circling up with our management folks, but definitely not on the exterior like hanging the painting anything or hanging like satellites sometimes or stuff like that. That's all prohibited. Okay. And on usually we let tenants make
changes only if it's a reasonable accommodation for like a something related to a health need, a dis something related to disability. Okay. Oh, like changing carpet to vinyl plank flooring or something if they're in a wheelchair.
Gotcha. Um, okay, that's good. Oh, one more thing. If and when this gets started, do you have any sort of schedule for how long this is going to take start to finish to
complete? Yeah, we have um a general contractor has at this and this is very preliminary stages of course but um estimated is 16 month construction schedule and sometimes that depends on when you get started right so if you get
started and because the first work is usually the earth work excavating which you can do any time of year but uh the pouring of the foundations can be difficult in the winter when it's cold and the ground gets frozen which could prolong and cause a longer construction.
So um but approximately 16 months uh it would take to to fully complete this and that's working uh through the year because we have summertime restrictions here normally. So is that another waiver
that you're going to have to apply for? It's not a waiver because the town doesn't have those restrictions. We do the town just Yeah. Go ahead, Paul. Okay. And we're not We have no intention of doing that, I guess. I I'm not going to speak for the future,
you know, but Okay. Thank you. It's not a waiver, though, so don't worry. Okay. And just on the bike rack issue, one of the things that our property management will actively be doing is making sure that residents are complying with their
lease, putting their bikes where they should be. if there needs to be more bike racks on the site, that's something that our property management and maintenance folks can easily order and install more. So, it's something that we can adjust over time also. Thank you,
Lee. And then we'll go to Paul. Just so you know, you're up next, Paul. Well, um, most of my questions have been addressed. Um, I had several on the dumpsters and the recycling as well. Um
so just generally I just um I want to say that I think this has been a very valuable process. I think that um everyone is in agreement that we have a better plan than what we started with and I really um
feel like you guys penrose have been very accommodating. Um I appreciate you working with the abutters. I appreciate you listening to what we've had to um say. Um
and I I I think this is is going to be great for Chadam. Um I'm not concerned with the height. I'm not concerned with the density. As um Mr. Vich said, this is part of the
40B thing. I mean that's what happens when you are trying to work with a 40B application. Um, and when it comes to the the look of the
the buildings, um, I actually took a walk a couple days ago from Chattam Lake into the town of Chattam and I noticed a lot of these historic buildings close to the street, white siding, only siding,
tall buildings, and they're beautiful. So, I I think this will fit in. Um I I think we've we've done a good job um as a board and I think you guys have gone to done a good job um listening to us as well. Um let me see if there's any other
I appreciate you. Oh, I did have a question about the sign signs. Um if there are two, they will be parallel to Main Street, correct? They will not be perpendicular. parallel to Maine. Well, I think it's currently shown,
Mark. I believe they're uh parallel. Parallel to Maine. Yeah, they're parallel. I'm I'm not seeing them right now. The orange. Yeah, the orange got parallel to Maine. So, therefore, one-sided. One side. One-sided. Yeah.
Um, and you don't have to answer this, but do you have a name in mind? Well, I think right now we're it's under the contra it's part of the contract of the sale of the property to the town. Okay.
That the property be named Buckley Gardens. Oh. Oh, yes. I did hear that one point. Okay. Um and um I think the key to it all um will be the
landscaping. I think the fact that you are willing to save a lot of trees, not clear-cut, heavily plant is going to be the key to this. So, thank you for that. Thank you. All right, Paul, do you want to go next or do you want me to come to
this side? Either way, whatever you fine. I don't mind going ahead now. All right. Um, I still gathering information. Uh, and there are a few questions I had. Um, I've asked, I think on two different
occasions at separate hearings, um, what you project to have for children at this location, and I haven't yet gotten that answer. Sure. Um, apologies if you haven't got that answer yet. We have, um, we have a
significant number of two bedrooms and three bedrooms here, which is what the town wanted for families. Um, and so what we've seen at at Village and Nasa Green, which we've been using as an
analog, um, I think they have 38 or 39, um, persons right now who are aged 18 or younger, which we would consider kids, uh, not adults. So, very similar property, same type of unit mix in terms
of twos and threes, um, very similar demographics. So based on that I think a reasonable expectation here would be I mean the the math if you create a ratio is6 kids per unit. So for this that
would end up to uh 29 kids persons 18 years old and younger uh you know up through the end of high school. So approximately 30 30 children is what you're anticipating would be here based on this kind of a mix based
on your experience. Yes, that's right. And that that would uh that would also apply not just to NSET green but to your other experiences Swift Landing or wherever else? We don't have the update. We don't have as much information on Swiss Landing
because we're still in the process of going through applications and moving folks in. Um, and there I don't have the exact number of children, but I believe it's coming out to be just a slightly less than a village in NASA green. So
maybe four and a half instead of 6 kids. But yeah, and part of that is that Swiss Landing also has a senior component. So the marketing for it and the people that attracted to the property kind of change a little bit. Well, my impression is
that you have a number of properties that you manage like this. Uh, do you have experience based on those properties that would provide you with more specific information? We do, but I I I guess Chadam is and the
Cape is very unique and I wouldn't want to compare the number of children we have in a property that is in kind of Boston or Philadelphia to what would happen here in Chadam. But this ratio
uh is based on the sampling we have on the cape uh would make sense. Well, one of the reasons why I I pursue this a fair amount is that one of the comments that we had received
uh from uh Mr. Buckley in connection with this property was that uh in his experience, children uh would have a tendency when when he was in that area to go across the street and uh play in the area on the other side of the road
um which was more attractive uh for the kids to use. And as a result, that was one of the reasons that prompted us to talk about a crosswalk that would be necessary in this area. And I know that you are uh willing to petition uh the
state to the extent that it's necessary to get a crosswalk in there. Um from our viewpoint uh it may be that the crosswalk would be necessary uh as a condition to having the project at all regardless of whether the state would
agree. If the state did not agree, then perhaps the project would not go forward if we felt there was a sufficient danger uh to children from traffic going through that process. So that's why I've been pursuing in part the question of uh
the number of children that would be expected to be there. Uh anyhow, that's just an explanation for that. Um the other thing that um that I have been pursuing is the streetscape and the front area. And I know that we've got
several different conflicting uh processes going on here. One of which is to bring buildings uh under some of the West Chatam uh zoning closer to the road. Um, and I think that can be uh beneficial depending upon the kind of
buildings you're talking about and the and the uh uh the use that they're put to. But one question I've got with respect to this project is that um the we're we're accommodating a number of neighbors which we should be doing in
terms of setback and their exposure to the uh project. But really uh the project is for 90% of Chattam residents and any visitors is the front visage that you see when you go down uh 28
towards Chattam. And uh so I've been concerned about what is that streetscape going to look like? Um and we've gotten some responses to that by having a design plan that shows us some some of
those uh issues. But these are large buildings and they're going to be within in one case 9 ft of so of the property line. So, um that's one reason why I've been pursuing this streetscape. Your
site plan shows uh several trees in front of the buildings on 28. Uh I'm unclear as to and these are I think new trees. I'm unclear as to what size those are going to be.
We'll ask Mark to come up and address that. Yeah. And I guess one other comment I'd like to make about the setback from the street is that the as you can see the property line is actually not at the road. So with the commu the management
building, you're probably closer to 40 feet away from the road because um there is a significant distance between the property line and the road and um it varies across um Main Street. Talk about
I I understand that. Yeah, I understand. I mean the property building is not the closest building anyhow, but uh can you explain what the size of the plantings are? Sure. So currently the the trees are specked at um 3 to three and a half inch
caliber and uh which are sizable trees to plant. They would be going in roughly 10 to 15 feet tall to start. So approximately 10 to 15 feet tall uh
would be the ones which are indicated on the roadway there side. Yes. And those are all new trees, correct? And there are no existing trees there. There's only along the frontage on the
property uh in front of the management building, there's um two existing pine trees that are in uh questionable shape. So when I look at the uh union uh portrayal of the road frontage
there um to me those trees look much more substantial than the rendering than what is actually what you're talking about putting in there. Am I incorrect on that?
Possibly. I mean will be they'll be new plantings. They're not they won't be full mature trees. They will be at some point. I guess it's at what point in time will these be like this? So these these buildings will not be will not be shielded as nearly as you
can see as it's portrayed on these these these submitts. I I would estimate those are shown roughly 20 feet tall. So it's not too far off from what is going to be installed.
And you know, every tree is different. So some will be wider and shorter and some will be taller. Okay. And they're always they're just going to get bigger from there. So it's we'll we'll reach this I think fairly soon
after installation. I see. I also believe we we spec fast growing trees as well to All right. And uh you provided us with a bunch of information which has been really very
helpful in terms of uh uh signage and uh how that will look. Um we've got a crosswalk that's been added. You've offered options on color. Um I agree with Virginia Fenwick uh that probably
white makes more sense than perhaps using other colors. Um her memo has been very helpful in terms of consolidating a number of the thoughts that all of us on the board have. I think um the uh
and you've you've adjusted for height I think which has been good. Uh you've adjusted for setback for uh Jesse's landing and uh the leadby left levit um you've responded to the suggestions
of different traffic flow uh in the uh project itself uh and parking um and I made a request for a lease a copy of a lease and you provided that which has
been very good uh and interesting. Um more a lot of these things have come as a result of feedback from the community which has been very helpful to us in raising issues that we could then uh address. One question I have is how much
turnover do you find that you have in these projects once you get a tenant in there in this location, this type of product, very limited turnover. Um, we can get the data for Village and NASA Green, but
I believe it's just a couple units a year at Village and NASA Green because I did I did notice that the I mean the the leases are very thorough uh and uh and they they need to be for a lot of different reasons, but uh they also put a substantial burden on the
tenant to help maintain the interior of the project aside from all of the utilities and so forth that they're responsible ible for paying for. They also have, you know, if the if the oven goes, the stove goes, if uh the
dishwasher goes, whatever, they they pick up the tab for that. Um I believe that's only if it's caused by their damage. Pardon me. If if it's caused if they damaged it somehow. So if it just wears out or it stops pro
functioning that it's replaced by uh Penrose. Yes. Oh, okay. And I guess just to address that a little bit, I think our management company manages properties like this all over the country. And these are populations
that have often limited means. And the goal is tenant preservation. It's not that, oh, you violated this lease clause by a little bit, we're going to issue you a lease violation. It's more just protections, but our goal is always to
work with the tenant. Uh, even during COVID when there were a lot of reviewers, our goal was to how to work with the tenant on a payment plan that actually makes sense for them as opposed to exactly to the every penny, every dollar that they owe. It's always about how do we work with the tenants because
these are all the individuals and families and seniors that we uh are we care about and we want them to stay in their unit and to kind of be a successful tenant and and I appreciate that and I'm sure
that uh all of us appreciate that. Uh my background is a lawyer. So my tendency is to always look at the issue of if Penrose isn't there and they sell to someone else for whatever reason, you have to have some protections or consider what the situation may be for
the tenant. Um I would just like to add in there. Um so we're going to be a longtime holder. Um just a minimum for the compliance period of the tax credits which can be up to 50
years. Um and also um this is so these types of projects can't be built and then flipped because we're on the hook with the investor for that stream of track tax credits that go out 15 years
and then also above that for any compliance. So there's re there's little to no transfer of ownership of these tax credit type properties at all. Okay. Um, and then one other thing that I did want
to sort of clear up. Um, we've had some comments from the public about the fact that, you know, we need this housing for, uh, our police and our firemen and our teachers and so forth, but really those persons are probably earning more
money than uh, is going to qualify them for any of these projects. Isn't that correct? That's probably true for the fire chief, but probably not necessarily true for the person starting out. So, a starting fireman may be okay, but
not if they've got two incomes coming into the apartment. Yeah. So, so approximately, and these are about to be updated again, that the rents are are based on HUD who issues every year uh new area median incomes,
the AMIs. Um but based on a current unit mix and affordability mix um the people could live here would be making between 30,000 to 140,000 a year because we have different levels of affordability
broad range of people. So if they're making over 140,000 a year then they would unlikely be able to u get a unit here. And in terms of starting a salary for a policeman or fireman or or teacher in in Chadam, that
tends to run where? I don't I don't have that information. Okay. All right. I don't have any other questions. Okay. Um, David Nixon, I'd like to go back to uh Miss Fenwick's
point about the density and tell me again your answer to her question of would you consider lowering I think the way she put it lowering the number of units for 48 to
42. I I don't think you fully answered that question. No, I I Hey, hey, Rio. Rio. Whoa. Whoa. Whoa. You have to be recognized from by the chair. Um I'm not saying I
won't recognize you, but you have to be because you know. Okay. Your name, sir. Would you? Yeah. This is Charlie Adams from Penrose. Yes. Um Okay. Do you mind if I if I if I answer that question? No, I do not. We just want an answer. Anybody can answer it. Yeah. So, so, so
what we did did have this this question did come up and we have answered it before. Um, you know, the the if we we need to go back to sort of remember, you know, the whole history here, right? The the town put out an RFP for housing on this site. Um, we submitted a proposal.
The town the the RFP required basically they wanted to see as many units as was feasible and comfortable on the site. And as and so that's what we we were we looked at that and we thought okay our denos as we've heard you know from the beginning we've shared at other meetings
that our standard model is 60 units to be able to uh support uh the kind of development that we want to support by having a full-time manager and a full-time maintenance person there. So when we first looked at this site, we said, "Okay, we told our architect, let's see if we can get 60 units on the site because that's what we need
essentially to uh to meet our um our requirements." Um that model having 60 units on the site did not feel comfortable to us. Um we didn't feel that there was enough open space, that there was enough recreation area, there was that we didn't couldn't create a sense of community that we're trying to
create by having a central green. Um that's really important to us to have that to have that sense of community for the folks. So we scaled it back uh down to a number that is that we felt that we could the bare minimum that we felt that we could accommodate on the site given
uh and the reason we got there is because we have other assets in in the in in the area. We have assets in East Ham, we have assets in Orleans and we have assets in Wearham that are close. So, we felt that with that uh with those other assets in that area that we could we could bend here and stretch a little
bit to to to do a lower number of units and still provide the high quality of housing that we feel is important for uh for us, is important for the town and is important for our residents. And so, that's that's the number that that we that we're off that that that we're at with with 48 units. And it's not it's
it's it's not feasible for us to to do it to do less than that. So, so, so let's make it simple. Was that no, we've said we we we cannot we cannot do less than 48 units. We So, so big picture like we've when we've gone
through these meetings with you, right? You know, we've we've we've we've tried to accommodate as many things, you know, as we can. And I think, you know, that that's what we're trying to do. I think we have been consistent from the beginning that, you know, that the 48 unit number is what's really is is something that, you know, is very difficult for us to to come off of. So
there's other things that we can do, but it but it's just it's very difficult for us to come off of that that 48 units. Um we're we we've looked at all kinds of other things and made all other kinds of accommodations, but that's that's the hard one. So just to be clear, just to use the the right parlance, so you're saying that
reducing it from 46, no 48 to 42 is financially infeasible. We're not we're not comfortable dropping it to that number. And I think you know we we you know one of the things that you we we were on the site plan you know that we've made changes to you know we
were asked to look at different things and we you know we never you know we're never asked to sort of look and look at what that was and we wouldn't be able to do that anyway. So yes we would not be comfortable doing that. Yeah. But are you saying that it's financially infeasible to do it? It's it's not feasible to provide the
kind of development that we want to provide for you and the town and and what we're we're comfortable doing. We couldn't we wouldn't be we wouldn't put our couldn't put our name behind it. Do I have to ask you again? We're we're saying that we cannot professionally manage it to the level
that we want to do it at less than 48 units. We're not saying that it's not it's well no I mean it's not it's it's not financially feasible to do this project with with that. We're not we're not we you know and that's we've been you know we you know that's
all right we heard that one. That was good. I mean, it was an answer that we were asking. Is it financially feasible? Because we'll get back to that later. Um, all right, David, did did you have anything else? No. And Okay. Second to the last the penultimate.
Um, well, first of all, I wanted to thank you for for working with the Abutters. Um, and I want to thank the Abutters. I think they've been reasonable through this process. Um, I've been in the minority. I I look at
the site plan, if you don't mind pulling up the site plan again, and I look at the development and I look at the community building in the front and the placement and the fact that there's no abutters around it. And it
screams to me there should be more units there. And I know I'm in the minority, but I think the demand for this type of housing outweighs the need for a community
building. And I feel the town of Chadam is subsidizing this project and the town voters voted for this type of housing. So when I just look at it, I just
it makes more sense. Someone made the comment earlier tonight, roofs, roofs over their heads. There could be five more families here. So that's the last I'm going to say about it, but that's how I feel. And I'm going to move on to
our new Chadam residents and what I'd like to see for them. And so I I have a few questions. And you know, while we're talking about community buildings, this is Cape Cod. If you want a community, we need some
community gas grills on this property. I I see in the rent uh in the lease, there's no gas grills uh allowed. You have this big green space, you know. How about throwing a gas grill in there for for these people?
Yeah, we could definitely do that. We have done that. I believe we did that where him. We usually don't allow it at the buildings because we can't for insurance purposes. Sure. Um but we can in the recreational areas off the buildings. That's definitely
something we could add. Okay. But we have done that would be great. Um, we have all of this landscaping and uh we've added to it and we have all of this green area and
I used to work in multif family housing and uh built some multif family housing and initially it goes in and it looks beautiful but unless you water it, it does not make sense. So, I would
request that you put in an irrigation well and provide some irrigation, which I I don't see anywhere in the plan. No, no, we we typically don't include irrigation um because there's usually
maintenance issues with it. Um freezing and cutting it. Yeah. And cost. But, uh we did add it at Village and Green. Um and we would definitely consider adding it here. Um what we've typically just included in the base specifications
is the contractor is responsible for the establishment of it. That's just for the first year. It's the most critical year and they're responsible for the watering. And then after that it would be um the maintenance folks would be responsible for watering certain areas.
Um, so even though we typically don't include that as a standard, that's something we're reconsidering and well, especially considering the amount of additional landscaping we're putting in here. I mean, we ourselves don't want to have to put in a a huge amount of
expensive landscaping and have it not survive. I mean, if you you have beautiful green space in the middle, I you know, I don't see it necessarily and if it's going to get a lot of traffic flow surviving unless there's some type of irrigation.
Yeah. What what we found too is it's much easier to put it in when you're under construction than to come in later and have to do it and you have to dig through your roads and concrete walk. I'm not suggesting you use town water. I'm suggesting you you own well. Yeah.
Um, put a well in. Put a well in. Yeah. Um, and the other question I have is there's uh notations about the property being solar ready. Um, if this is all heat pumps, uh, state of
Massachusetts requires, you know, no fossil fuel now. um which uh bothers well doesn't bother me but the cost of electricity in Massachusetts is one of the highest rates in the town. So I'm worried about the residents and the cost of
electricity. So I would like to see the solar panels and I'd like to see the solar panels the electricity somehow credited to the actual residents you know not necessarily just going back to Penrose. I I I'd like to see that so
that their rents are, you know, not subsidized, but you know, you're taking into consideration they're going to have high electricity bills. I know you're going to build uh somewhat passive building. there'll be extra insulation, but still um I would
like to see that solar installed and I would like to see the solar energy credits somehow make it back to the residents and um yeah, I think we'll have to look into every utility does it a little
differently um and how if they can allow us to actually have it offset the how the meters on the units. Okay. So, we'll have to look into that. Or even if it's uh if it's goes back into one meter or whatever credit is,
that could be dispersed. You know, it's just a math problem, I guess. Um that's uh that's it for me. Randy, yes, please go ahead. Sorry, I there was one thing I forgot that I wanted to tell I got off on my rant and I forgot.
Um I would like to comment with respect to u the the siding and the coloring and all that. I I I actually can go any way. I I do agree, I think, with Jenny and others have expressed. I think the original proposal was fine. Um and uh I
I appreciate the response with the muted colors, which I think were fine as well, but I think the original proposal and if you're showing shingles siding type on back sides and and and um clabers on the front and that kind of thing, I I'm fine with any of it. I certainly trust um
union's abilities to um handle the aesthetics well. So I want them to know my feeling on that. Thanks. All right. Thank you. So um I'm going to go to the sign. Um it's when you ride up and down, you know, the HBDC area on
Main Street, properties have one sign. And so I I'm I'm interested in one double-sided sign on your own property. I don't know if you realize it, but the sign you have on your um diagram is not on your property.
So, one sign double-sided on your property um is something I'm interested in. We can do that. Sure, do that. Yeah, that's an easy one. We got to warm up. All right. Oh, there's harder ones coming.
Okay. Um crosswalk. Um you've said that you would apply. Um, we would like I think more than just me. Um, but I would like you to put it it it be a condition that you show us that you've applied and then provide us the answer you get from
the state. Um, and you would need to do that before you get a building permit. So, just to not that we don't trust you, but trust and verify. I I think our incentives are aligned here. We we're not against the crosswalk. It's a great idea. Yeah,
we were just worried that it was becoming a condition and it's outside of our control. We understand that other people tell us no that then we're then we're stuck, right? But we'll do our best and push forward as hard as we can to get that.
Okay. Um Okay. So, um I noticed on the lease um it says no work trucks, but I think coun somebody somebody had said that that's not going to be the lease for this um project necessarily. But if it says no work trucks, then that sort
of um causes an issue. If you think these people are going to be, you know, workforce housing, they might be carpenters or, you know, plumbing. Yeah, I don't know that specific clause, so we'll need to get back to you on that. Sure. Absolutely. And also um short-term
rentals. We wouldn't want to see these used as short-term rentals. So it would be nice for the lease to have a provision that um pro prohibits that. Yeah, it does. It's going to be even more than that. The tax credits don't allow short-term leases anyways. You we
would lose the tax credits and that money. Yeah. But I guess you know Sarah was looking at your lease and uh you know she noticed those things and I agree with her. Um, one part it did allow for subleting under the occupant with with permission of the, you know,
of Penrose. Um, in writing, it allowed for subleting of the units. The parking was um commercial vehicles was under the parking section. My guess is you probably meant you don't want someone
parking a tow truck there. Um, but often times, you know, from what we've experienced in the building department, there are contractors that have a commercial vehicle which pickup truck that has a commercial plate.
Yeah, I'm sure that would be fine with our property management staff. So, we can take a look at that. Um, that'd be great. Um, okay. So, back to um 48 to 42. I you finally um did say
that it's financially infeasible. We um I'm going to ask our Sorry, this is Charlie probably Charlie. Um no, that's my hang on a second. I think I can answer that.
Yes, please. Go ahead. So, um the question the feasibility, right? So, maybe this is a easier way to describe it. um to have a professionally managed
facility, there's there's a lot of costs, staff costs, um landscaping, snow removal, uh resident services, porters, grounds cleaning, and all these costs, they're going to be the same for this
site whether there's 40 units or 48 units. And so when you get down, what we found when we're getting down less units those units in order if you were to pencil it out at that much lower number,
you'd have to really reduce the amount of operating expenses, which is the stuff that you know the stuff that we need to professionally manage it as a class A building and development. So that's what we're saying and that's why
our sort of standards like 60 because once you get up to 60 now you you have the economies there those costs are the same but now you have enough units that really support it. Um, and I think what Charlie was saying here, we got a little lower than that, which is very rare, but
the reason we were able to do that was because we can share some costs with our other facilities nearby, sharing some staffs, sharing the secondary maintenance person. So, that's what got it that's what got us comfortable going down to 48. We're not comfortable going
down any further than that. I understand what that you're not comfortable. So, now I'm going to call on our attorney, um, Jay Tolman. I know you're here. I'm here. Yeah. So, what do we do now, Jay? When the
applicant um tells us it doesn't seem to be a good idea to go down, what what what's our remedy? So there there's a process that was spec specifically contemplated in a regulatory revision to the 40B regs on
this issue. It used to be because the standard under 40B as I think was noted earlier is that conditions um are measured in the first instance on upon a challenge on whether or not they're economic or uneconomic. And the
housing appeals committee in an effort to um let the process unfold in an orderly way adopted a regulation I think about 12 or 13 years ago. It's 760 CMR 56.056
I believe. And what it says is don't get asked for proformas or analyze economic impacts until there's an impass because it might be needless. So what the regulation suggests is you
get through with all your technical review which in large part you've done here the traffic and the engineering and if a majority of the board members are of the position that a condition should be imposed that would be particularly
sensitive and as we know density is where the rubber hits the road on these projects. Then it can ask the applicant as you've asked the applicant does the um this proposed condition which is a a density condition render the project
uneconomic. So if in fact a majority of your voting members and I know there's associate members too but if in in fact a majority of your members are interested in knowing the answer to that question then it's incumbent upon the applicant to
demonstrate and it wouldn't be tonight. I wouldn't put them to that level of proof to demonstrate. Yeah. To demonstrate to you that it would render the project uneconomic and then you would consider that. I mean, it doesn't mean you can't impose that condition, but then you could
potentially do peer review of that uneconomic showing. not required to, but you're at least allowed to ask the applicant to demonstrate to you if a majority of the board members want uh a costly condition imposed as to why this
project why this particular condition would render the project uneconomic. So, I know that Ms. Fenwick references it. I know that Mr. Nixon mentioned it as well and now you've mentioned it as well and the other board members had varying opinions on the
subject some not concerned with density and some you know maybe um have informed an opinion on it but if the board or majority of the board is interested in that subject then I think it's it's required under th that particular regulation to at least answer the
question so that would frame further discussion at your next session of your meeting and at that time I guess you could consider whether or not you needed further review of that that um the answer to that question, but the regulations are clear on it. We used to
have these pitched battles in 40b projects at the beginning of the process on this subject. So, this regulation was designed in a way to put it more towards the end of it when you've already looked at things like traffic and engineering,
setbacks, all the other stuff which you've done. Um, so now is an appropriate time to do that if if that's what the board wants to do. And I know that, um, uh, Penrose has kind of framed out a very general opinion on this, and I
imagine that they would probably want to have the opportunity if the board wanted to go down this road to uh, frame it in more detail. And I think that's what you'd have in front of in front of you for your next meeting if that's if that's where you want to go. And again,
I'm not suggesting that is where you're going, but if the board voted to go down that road, then um as a straw poll, so to speak without making any hard and fast decisions on density, then that would be the process that the regulations requires.
So, we would vote as to whether to get a ask them for a proform to show us that it's financially infeasible to reduce the density or financially infeasible. Either way, How many of us need to say yes to that?
Because we're going to we're going to put Virginia Fenwick in that camp. Um well, clearly Virginia's in that camp. So I don't know right now who the voting members are, but Okay. So the voting members are Virginia Fenwick, uh Mr. V, Mr. Mr. Nixon,
myself, and uh Paul Simple. So I would say there's three of us that would like to see that. Well, I think if that's the case, then I think that that that it would be incumbent. And I'm not saying you ignore the the views of the non- voting members
because I think they're informative. Yeah. And for all I know, Paul could want to see it, too. We haven't asked him yet. Um, right. I don't think we need to ask Mr. V, but no. But, um, okay. So, three of us would be enough. Three is enough,
I think. So, and again, it doesn't lock you in or anyone into anything. another information point for the project and the fact yeah and I would assume that even though Ms. Fenwick had an interest in in seeing if reduced
density was possible. I don't think that she has signaled that her vote would be dependent on an answer to that. She has absolutely not signal that in in fair and I wanted to make sure in fairness to Virginia who's not here, she wrote a comprehensive and well thoughtout menu, but I don't read that
as saying that that's how she's voting ultimately. So, it is not and it's not how I'm saying it either. And uh I don't know about Mr. Nixon and Paul, what do you want to do? Well, I think uh I think if you want to raise that issue, we should raise it at
the next meeting with Virginia here and we get her uh idea of how she wants to vote on it. Uh I'm not in a position right now to say that uh I think that the proposed density is definitely too high. I don't I'm not I'm not willing to
say that it has to be 42 instead of 48. Uh I'm willing to consider that issue at the next meeting. Okay. So we don't have a lot of time in our timeline. So we wanted to raise it now out of respect to Penrose. Um we feel comfortable that we have three
people that at least want to see that. Again, not saying that we would going to our votes dependent on it on the answer. Um but it's information that we feel is important before we take a vote. Well, let's get the information,
right? Council. Yes. Thank you. Um before you all reach that vote, I just want to emphasize that it's an ask and you may or may not be um
empowered to ask that. But it's also it's also an ask that is going to take more time. It's going to go against the um
it's going to go against the contemplated goals of the RFP, which was to create enough units on the site that would fit on the site. And so, um for those reasons, we'd like
you to stop and consider whether you want to ask for that. We want to ask for it and I just want council to respond to what you just said, please. Yeah, I I think that, you know, we've been very careful here and I think
you've done a really good job, Randy, of respecting the space that the the select board and the affordable housing trust has been in in these two projects and not interfering with their space. But you have an independent job to do. So, I'm not taking sides on this one way or
the other. I do some work for the select board and the affordable housing trust as well. But from a rules perspective, this is exactly the process that's contemplated. Ultimately, I think that Penrose has already kind of framed a a
general response as to why they think it's not a great idea and why it would be difficult for them to do. But I think that they should be given the opportunity and it's required that they respond to your question. They don't have to in which case I think that you
know you're left with a lack of a response to deal with. But the regulations state exactly this. I I want to be clear. The state is the state and the housing appeals committee generally resolves these economic
uneconomic issues in favor of um a set of mathematic principles that are very favorable to the development community. It's not it's kind of a different form of math so to speak. So I don't want to uh fill anyone
with any kind of illusions as to how these things may get framed ultimately but it is still part of the process and there are some cases out there that are supportive of town's kind of rejiggering of the math so to speak on this but um
I'm not never going to lead the board or the applicant down a primrose path here but I think it's a necessary step you've invoked your rights on it. And I think that that's where we're going. And Penrose, who I respect a great deal, is entitled to respond as they see fit. If
your next meeting is October 2nd, that should be enough time for them to put together um a narrative or a new proforma as to why um such a reduction would either harm them fiscally or why it would be a real negative to the
particular project. And I'm sure your board would consider that genuinely. We would consider that genuinely and there was there had to have been an initial proformer. Correct. Yes. So you have something to you know to pivot from. Yeah. There there is one I'm sure on the
back of a napkin to figure it out. Honestly, we had a very thorough performer that's showing it worked at 48 units which we gave publicly to we didn't get that process. We did not receive that. We've we've rummaged through that. We didn't just come up with this.
Who? I don't know who's talking, but you're not recognized. Um, but we don't have it. And we we didn't just like think of this this morning. You know, we trying to look for it. We don't have it. Our board doesn't have it. I guess from our perspective, is there
there significant concern about these eight units reducing these eight units a significant or six units uh that cause a public safety negative health impact? That's exactly right. Eight is even better, but um we did say
six, so we'll stick with that. you know, if the board feels those six units, building those does create that significant negative public impact and there's water and, you know, just general um wear and tear on the town.
So, we just want to see that, you know, before we make such an important decision, we're in a very difficult spot here, as you know, and we want to make sure we have all the facts and that's probably essentially one of the most important facts.
So, please provide that to us. Okay, great. So, um I guess right we'll ask for actually I want to ask council to um sort of give us sort of a timeline on
this. Um we started on April 16th, 2025, Jay. And um I guess we sort of have a a date of 12. Well, I'm gonna let Sarah do it. Let Sarah do it. Okay. So, town council um application
was received no uh April 16th, 2025. Um original public hearing was opened within 30 days, May 8th, 2025. Um 180 days from that is November 4th,
which is a Tuesday. Um I we're backing it up right to to October 30th um which would be a date that we could do. Um and then after October 30th if we close the hearing that day um then
we have until 128 that as you know the drop dead date in a sense for the decision to be stamped with the voted on and stamped at the clerk's office. Does that sound right council? You you're muted. Sorry. I haven't done the math the way that
Sarah has, but it certainly seems right to me. And one more thing, I have a question. What's the What's the real difference between the negotiation portion and what we're doing now? I feel like we've been negotiating since the first day. Does it
look different? No, I think that I think the only thing that's a little bit different here and and Penrose has been a good partner with the board in terms of negotiating in and around some of the concerns the boards and the neighbors have raised. It's
encouraged these negotiations and discussions is encouraged throughout the 40B process and and I think it's been a really good process. I think that um the it never really stops. The only difference here is that there's a
specific regulation that talks about this subject matter. So, Penrose has willingly come to the table and negotiated and and compromised on a bunch of of items. That's encouraged. If they had said no at any given point in
time to say the increased setbacks or the decreased height, then we'd be in the exact same position we're in now where like, well, tell us why you can't do that. So far, they've been willing to to do things as part of the ongoing
iterative process that obviously don't render the project uneconomic, otherwise they wouldn't offer them. Here they're, you know, they've drawn a line in the um I don't want to call it in the sand because who knows where we end up with it, but um they have suggested that this
is not something that they can do. So that's when the regulation gets kicked in. So that's all. Okay, good. So we've followed along and um now I guess we'll ask for a motion to continue it till October 2nd if that if that's okay with you.
Penrose. Yes. Yeah. Okay. Great. Great. Paul, I'll move to grant the request to continue until October 2nd. Dave Beach uh seconds and votes yes. Does Ed vote on this? No. No. Okay. Dave, yes.
Paul votes yes. And I vote yes as well. So that's 4 Z. We'll see you. Who's voting for Jenny? Oh, somebody's voting for Jenny tonight. I'm so sorry. One second. Could be any of the three of you. Maybe Lee. Lee.
Yeah, Lee. How do you vote? I vote yes. All right. Very good. And it's unanimous. 5-0. We'll see you on October 2nd. Now we need a motion to adjourn. I'll move to adjourn. Dave seconds and votes yes. Ed votes yes. Yes. Paul votes yes. Yes. Steve votes yes.
As do I. It's We are journ. What time is it? 5:14 p.m. Okay. Good night. [Music] [Music]