Yeah, heat. Good afternoon. >> Good afternoon. Uh welcome to the zoning board uh of appeals. Uh I'm going to start off by readings our procedures. Um please note that this meeting is being
recorded and will be available shortly hereafter for scheduled and on demand viewing on any smartphone or tablet device. If anyone else is recording the meeting using the use of AI note-taking apps, please notify the chair.
>> Mr. Buckley. Thank you. Steve Buckley recording the meeting. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Pursuant to Governor Healey's March 28, 2025 signing of chapter 2 of the acts of the 2025 extending certain CO 19 measures adopted during the state of
emergency suspending certain provisions of the open meeting law until June 30th, 2027. This meeting of the Chattam Zoning Board of Appeals is being conducted in person and via remote participation. Every effort will be made to ensure that the public can adequately access the
proceedings as provided for in the order. A reminder that persons who would like to listen to this meeting while in progress may do so by calling the phone number 508-945-4410 conference ID 2953683 and then the pound sign or join the
meeting online via Microsoft teams through the link uh in the posted agenda. While this is a live broadcast and simal [clears throat] cast on Chattam TV Xfinity channel 1072, despite our best efforts, we may not be able to provide
real-time access. We will post a record of this meeting on the town's website as soon as possible. In accordance with town policy, the public may speak to any issue uh hearing or business item on the agenda during the meeting when recognized by the chair. Okay. So then
we have a few procedural steps that I will go through. We begin with a roll call of all board members. We'll ask if any citizens and non-board members participating in the call via the phone only. That we need your name
and the last four digits of um your phone number for identification purposes. We also ask that you turn off phones, anything that will be um set off an alarm during the hearing. A meeting notice is read by staff Sarah Clark who
is our principal permitting officer. Mr. Singer will present the application. Um I may read or summarize all letters received by the board. Anyone wishing to comment on the application may speak up to three minutes. Uh and we will have a
timer. Those present in the meeting room will be recognized first followed by anyone online. Uh, Penrose will have the opportunity to rebut written and oral comments. Board members may ask questions and share our comments. The board will vote to
continue the application to a date certain. All votes will be taken by roll call. Um, well, we're not voting today, but >> you would still vote to continue. >> Oh, okay. We'd still vote to continue. So, um, and voting today will be Dave
Vch, Paul Simple, Dave Nixon, Lee Jav, and myself, Virginia Fenwick. Um, and then at the end, we'll do roll call vote to end the meeting, verbal confirmation of the board members, and then we'll note the time of adjournment.
Okay. Okay. So, we're going to start with the roll call. Um, Dave Beach. >> Yes. David H. Feature and I approve this meeting format. >> Uh, Ed Actton, I approve. >> Paul C. Simple, I approve this format. >> Virginia Felmick, I approve. >> David S. Nixon, I approve.
>> Steven D. Deborne, I approve. >> Lee Huby, I approve. >> Uh, I also wanted to mention um in addition to Sarah, we have a couple of other um important members joining us. Jay Briggs, our building commissioner, and we have Jay Taliban uh town council
uh on online. Okay. Uh Sarah, now you're going to read the ad. >> Application number 25-077, Penrose LLC, 15 Milk Street, 16th floor, Boston, Mass 02109. Properties are located at zero meeting
house road, also shown on the town of Chadam's assessor's map 4E block 11A, lot AB, owned by the town of Chadam, and 87 Meeting House Road, also shown on the Town of Cadam's assessor's map 4E block 12, lot 23, owned by Corey Baker. The
applicants are requesting the grant of a comprehensive permit under Mass General Law Chapter 4B sections 20 through 23 and 760 CMR56 for the construction of 42 dwelling units in eight residential structures in a maintenance building. The applicants are requesting the grant
of various waiverss from regulations promuggated by the Chapman zoning bylaw and other local regulations. The combined properties contain 4.12 acres in the R60 zoning district. This was continued from August 14th, September 4th, October 16th, November 13th,
December 10th, 2025, and January 15th, February 5th, March 5th, May 7th, and June 4th, 2026. >> Good afternoon, Mr. Singer and Penrose, and members of your team. >> Good afternoon. Thank you, Madam Chair.
For the record, Andrew Singer here on behalf of the applicant. uh several of us uh are in the audience and um we're going to have a a series of not too long presentations for you today. Uh we're going to take it a little bit out of order of the cover letter that we submitted with our supplemental
submission last week, July 8th. Um I am going to uh answer some of the um latter questions. Then I'm going to ask Paul Adaman uh to go over the building the building plans uh and materials. Joe Henderson will discuss an update on peer
review. And then finally, I'm going to uh come back and discuss the memorandum on the Cape Cod Rail Trail and the materials that we submitted. Jeffrey Durk, the traffic engineer, you can't see him there, you can see him down there. He is online as well. Uh so
following kind of in reverse order for the from the supplemental submission we gave, wanted to just address uh five or six um questions that you asked that really don't fit anywhere else. They were questions that we um wanted to address. The first was on apartment
sizes and as you know the applicant's not proposing any studio apartments. That was something that was raised um by a member um or two uh for cons question and wanted to for the record note that the unit mix of one, two, and
threebedroom units was developed through the town's RFP process and reflects the intended resident population for the development itself. The unit mix is also more competitive for federal and state affordable housing funding sources that are going to be required to finance the
development. Replacing the proposed one, two, or three-bedroom units with studios would as adversely affect funding competitiveness while reducing the project's ability to serve families and workforce households. as it is. While the number of units have
stayed the same with the redesign and spreading out uh over the land of the project, there is actually a was a change in the count of one, two, and three bedrooms that Paul can discuss more. And so there is a net decrease of three bedrooms in the proposal, not a change in the dens number of units. The
density has gone down because of the greater land area. The units are the same, but the bedrooms have gone down. There was also a question um about would there be a generator for this property and the answer is that no generators proposed for this particular development. The project consists of
townhouse style apartments. It does not have elevators. There is no community building. There is no there are no lift stations or other facilities that would require emergency backup power. Uh utility service here will be provided in the same manner as the surrounding residential development. So, just wanted
to respond to uh that question. There's also a question about irrigation and what the applicant proposes is uh to um propose an irrigation system with the same conditions that the board reviewed and requested and approved at 1533 Main Street. So, that's you know would be
fine in a decision just having similar irrigation restrictions and provision. There's a question about bicycles with the redesign the um there in that center and you've seen it on the plan in in the center green where the maintenance shed
is now there is now space for 20 covered space for 24 bicycles which was new wasn't available before but with the additional land area able to provide that and that's in addition to the individual storage units. So, you're going to have the individual storage units and in the center of the property,
you will have this covered parking for 24 bicycles. Uh, one member asked if there if it was possible to have a second connection to the connector path closer to I guess further west, further south, uh, where the where the connector path turns. That
was looked at um by the engineering and by landscape architects. And um unfortunately because of topography there's a concern that it would ra if you put it in there it would raise ADA concerns because its location would require many steps in at
leings. So you'd have to have stairs landing stairs landing stairs. So there's no it's so steep if you came from that part that you really couldn't do it and comply with ADA whereas where the path begins is all ADA compliant.
Um the last piece I just wanted to mention and you have it on the exhibits uh that are with in uh in your packets and we can certainly go over it but um at the entrance um larger trees were uh proposed as requested 4 and a half to 5
in caliber at planting and there is a bus shelter uh on the um you can't you'll see it on another rendering but a bus shelter has been proposed as well. So those everything that I just addressed were in response to questions and comments that we heard from individual members during prior sessions. With that, I'd like to turn it
over to Paul Adam to go over the buildings and then we will keep going through. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Good afternoon. Paul Atman with Union Studio Architecture and Community Design. So um Mr. interesting to give us give you an overview of some
of our changes and updates uh since the last time we were before you. Something that we haven't talked to about in a while is the architecture and materials. I think the the last time we may have talked about that was early in the year. Uh and then so we did when we revised
the site plan, we did submit updated building plans for you uh to more technical drawings. Uh since then we've looked at the materials and the colors and also incorporated them with some renderings that the board had asked for
to see what the neighborhood would look like as viewed from meeting house uh road. And this here is a depiction of those the new placement and the new configuration of the site plan and as at at at the entry drive looking into the
development uh with the guard rail on the left. There's behind that that's where the ravine is. Uh the new plantings of the trees that were requested to be a larger caliper are also incorporated. And as Mr. Singer said, off to the right is the um bus
shelter which shows up in some of the other renderings. But what I'll do is I'll jump right into the uh design of the buildings. These buildings are probably familiar to you from another application, but they've also been before us for the last year for this
application. Uh there are some variations on the building plan. As Mr. Singer said, the unit uh mix or number of units has stayed the same, but some of them have been modified and we've reduced some bedrooms so to make the
buildings fit and uh within the original site plan. Uh we've also redesigned one building a little bit and I'll go over that in a minute. But the approach was to very much uh from what we learned at Main Street to look at some shingle uh
panels to be utilized on three sides of each of the buildings and on the front like in this one on building seven and number six there would be uh laps siding on the front and unlike Main Street where we propose white on white here
we're proposing some lighter muted colors uh for for the siding and with some accents uh uh for each individual building would have a different color palette for the individual apartment doors. You can see that in
these two, although they're the same color buildings, they're differentiated by different uh entry door colors. the roof materials, asphalt shingles, um they we proposed to maintain one color
for all the roofs for ease of maintenance, but also it would blend in a and hold the consistency from one building to the other in the neighborhood. This is uh one of the sixunit buildings,
the two-story one. Uh here we've introduced the board and batton up at the gables for a little bit more informal application of materials and detailing that those would be painted white to match the trim.
And the board and baton also you'll see is used in a couple of other instances but uh these four are the larger buildings. Uh they're also six units, but as you remember up in the upper right of each of those buildings, that's where we have a couple bedrooms in the
attic floor. This here is building one and this was uh originally in the far back corner. It also housed the um maintenance office and management office which is here on the one-story section of the building on
the left hand side. And when we reposition this to be more approximate to the entry of the drive lane and the neighborhood and more visible to the neighborhood and the residents on the far right side, if I can just Yeah, here there's a scroll. We had a maintenance
shed attached to this building, but with a new site plan, as you know, that maintenance shed was detached from this building and now is a freestanding structure in the middle of the island, which also houses the covered bike
parking, which and it's very approximate and easy to access for maintenance. Now, we had concerns earlier that the door to that uh that maintenance shed was too far away and was tucked in the corner
and a little bit difficult for maintenance personnel to access. So, this new new location here is really convenient because this double door faces right out onto the driveway. And for to distinguish this building
from the others, this is where we're using the board and batton. Uh again, so it's an informal accessory structure architecture. Uh here then is one of the views going heading north along Meeting House Road. And that there you can see the proposed
bike shelter which is in keeping with the proposed architecture of the other buildings. And I I should just point out and maybe Mark will too um Mark the landscape architect that there's a lot of dense vegetation along the edge of the road on
meeting house that we are not touching. So that helps uh screen the development from view once you pass the driveway entrance. And this here is another view uh from the opposite side of the street uh with
a capt capturing the bike shelter on the right and looking a little bit further into the neighborhood. And I just remind people that, you know, these are planted trees as they are now or in the next couple years in the first few years of
their life. But those will grow up and they will be mature trees within 10 15 years uh to create more of a canopy and uh for the road and um screening into the neighborhood.
So with that, I'll give it over to Joe Henderson, civil engineer from Horsesley Whitten Group. Thank you. >> Hi, good afternoon. Joe Henderson, Horesley Whitten Group, and um I just wanted to provide a summary of our kind of peerreview coordination since the
last meeting. Um so we Ty and Bond um provided us a peerreview letter on July 20 on June 29th um and that contained uh comments uh typical to what they've done on uh the Main Street project and other comments
that we received on this from the previous design. Um and they typically break it down into the the zoning um requ regulations and then they do the town storm water, the mass storm water policy and then um the general
engineering comments. So uh received a letter from them um had a series of comments in it. We uh set up a meeting with Tai Bond and we met on July 8th uh us and their engineers uh to talk about it and review and discuss all those comments.
Um, and based on that, we provided a um, a letter response to them on July 13th, and that contained all of our um, response to their comments, plus a set of revised drawings that reflected some minor changes to the plans that they
were um, requesting. Um, and again, that happened on the 13th. Um pretty closely after that on the 14th we did receive a letter from Tyon back um basically um saying all the comments had been addressed that they had done uh given
us. Um that was uh there were two comments that had some um kind of deferred to the board. One was related to the the DPW and their review. We we did meet with Rob Faley on June 25th prior to
receiving the letter. Um and we did submit the plans to him also on June 30th. So those were sent to him. Uh we we haven't been incorporating his comments from the previous iteration into this new iteration. I don't expect
to receive any comments from him, but I have not seen anything and we can obviously you know incorporate anything he has into the plans. We also talked to um or sent the plans to the um fire chief and he responded with some
requests as far as adding an additional hydrant. So instead of two hydrants, we have three and that is also reflected in the updated plans that we received. So um so right now we are up to speed on the peer review. I I I believe the time
bond engineer might be um uh in the meeting so they can you know comment as needed later but um from that perspective uh no comments remain to be addressed. I think with that I'm going to pass it back to Andrew.
All right. Thank you. I wanted to uh end off our initial presentation here with a discussion about the Cape Cod Rail Trail connector and the sidewalk question because that is obviously one that has generated maybe the most uh conversation and discussion over the past meetings.
We provided in our supplemental submission, I'm not going to go through all of it, but we pro provided a lengthier memo, a sketch plan, and numerous documents and exhibits which discussed the creation, use, and connections of the old colony rail trail
um to both this land um and elsewhere. Uh the rail trail uh was taken by the town by easement, eminent domain easement. They took back in 2002 both a bike path and slope easements. So the
town uh you know where the bike path is, that's the bike path easement. And then they have additional land area that slopes down where they graded off into where it's um not just adjacent to this property, but along the entire corridor uh where it's necessary. And I the plans
I provided to you, I'm not going to go over them, but they show all the dimensions of of the width of the various easements uh and the terrain. The what's interesting here, not only that the town took an easement and not the fee, but the
land that the land we're talking about with you is is land that's owned now by the Cadam Affordable Housing Trust and it was take and it was purchased expressly to provide affordable housing. Well, interestingly, the lot of land, if you look at the plans, actually extends
south of the rail trail easement. Not a lot, but it does extend south. So when right now the Chattam Affordable Housing Trust owns the fee in the main party of the in the main part of the land under the rail trail easement and that little area of land on the south.
Once this transaction goes through with the land disposition agreement and the deeds pass, the applicant will own the fee and all of this land. So it will as legal owner retain all legal rights to access all of its land which is on both sides of the easement. They will
own the fee under the easement, but naturally the town is in charge of the easement itself because that's what the town took and maintains the bike path. In addition to this, however, all along the bike path, the rail trail in Chadam,
there are numerous private and public connections uh onto the rail trail itself. Uh some of these are very formal, some of them are less formal, some of them are just informal paths that people have made. Um but there are several and in the letter um that we
provided to you uh we listed four of them and um you know we also have some photographs of those happy to discuss them but those are and the one that's maybe most analogous is Bailey's Path. It's a residential subdivision that has a very formal connection uh in onto the
rail trail. Uh so it's something that's very common along the rail trail uh when we walked it. As far as this overall issues, connections to public infrastructure, whether it be the old colony rail trail
or town sidewalks are not legally required for non-affordable housing market rate residential developments in Chadam by code or customary practice by the planning board or by anybody. It's not something that is a requirement. It is something that if it can be provided is an amenity uh but it's not legally
required in this case. Notwithstanding this, the town through the LDA has agreed because it was able to to uh construct a segment of sidewalk on the east side of Meeting
House Road from the rail trail parking lot wrapping around onto Route 28 where the sidewalk and crosswalk uh across 28 end now. So they're proposing to do that and that itself is not only going to benefit the applicants residents who are use the
connector path we're proposing to get to the rail trail and then can get onto the sidewalk system. It's also going to benefit all of the residents and visitors of the town of Chadam. So this is an amenity that is going to have broad uh impact and effect and benefit. The applicant though and this is why
we're here or one of the things we're talking about today is proposing to construct the connector path and we have various plans we're happy to put up. Not sure where they are in the PowerPoint right now, but um that path which as we've discussed is ADA compliant. It will be uh convenient
for the residents to get down to and up from the rail trail. There are proposed ballards at the connection which uh were requested um uh at the connection to the rail trail itself and that is going to provide um convenient access for the
residents to the existing public recreational and transportation resource. Now this issue has received a lot of attention and comments. It's an important issue. I believe it's a a townwide issue. There there has been an expressed concern for
pedestrian access up and down the Route 137 corridor, the entire corridor. Uh you've heard comments from that uh in various places. Um and because it is a an existing town issue
or townwide issue of concern, we respectfully believe it's a townwide issue that needs to be addressed. It's not [snorts] for one applicant, uh, particularly a applicant proposing an affordable housing development on
town-owned land that was expressly intended to have such a use. It's not economic nor practical. Um, and there are title questions and other issues with um, charging one applicant with trying to
fix a townwide issue. Now, that being said, the applicant is addressing this head-on. There are several things that they have proposed. One is uh an internal sidewalk within the entire development leading out to a sidewalk down, as you can see on the right hand side of this plan, out to the bus
shelter. So, that gets uh can get everyone down to where um buses can be. And there is the rail trail connector path that you see on that. Um, the problem, as you've heard before, and Jeffrey Durk is online
again to readress it if you so desire. The problem with creating sidewalks, uh, midblock sidewalks along my meeting house road only down, as shown here, and there were graphics in Mr. Durk's email, uh, his memo, I'm sorry, from last time.
you know, the the issues of uh extensive tree clearing, substantial fill, significant grading, the need for possibly retaining walls without grading, relocation of substantial utilities and other engineerings. It does this is this is an matter of concern that is not economic for this
applicant or potentially any applicant to address by themselves. And as Mr. Durk noted in his memorandum, it doesn't make sense here and it does not in it isolated as itself does not meet professional engineering standards for
where you would put sidewalks. Midb block is not as safe. So what the applicant has done, as you can see, is proposed something that will keep residents, whether they're children or adults, the farthest from the road as possible with a significant vegetated buffer between it. It is safe. It is
convenient. It will be lit and it is going to provide an a huge amenity for the um residents of the community. Now a member asked um would it be possible to at [snorts] the end of the rail trail
turn the connector path and come east you know come to get it as close as possible or closer to the intersection with 137. that was looked at um and um it's documented. We gave you a sketch plan that shows it and what that plan
shows and and Mark Waffle is here and happy to go over it if you would like. It shows the extent of the clearing and grading and interruption to the land that would be required to do that without gaining much of a benefit. Yes, it would maybe get you that area from
the end of the bike path from the end of the connector path to meeting house road is about half a football field. You get a little bit closer, but the cost the the same thing you can't interfere with the town's slope easement so it can't get too close to the rail trail. You'd have to be interrupting storm water.
You'd have to be cutting down all these trees to be able to make this work. it would be so much more disruptive and so costly that again it would not be economic to do that for those topographical and financial reasons. There was also a conversation about and
I love having meetings the end of this year because of the winter we had because snow is usually not a conversation we have a great deal of talk on at zoning hearings. Um but we had a winter for the ages and so it's obviously top of mind for all of us.
Horesley Whitten met with the DPW director and asked about it and said you know what happens here. It is true that the town does not plow the rail trail in the winter. It is also true according to DPW that this air end of town is the last to be plowed. And so it not just if
[clears throat] the rail trail was plowed, but the sidewalks out on 28. Any sidewalks in the area, they're plowed several days at [clears throat] least after a major snowstorm because this part of town is the last part to receive it. However, what the applicant
respectfully submits is that they then would be being treated the same as any other residential development, market rate development in town. If there's a lot of snow, they're going to have some issues walking. Every subdivision has that. Every development
has that. And since the whole issue of 40B is treating affordable housing the same way as market rate housing, we submit that our the residents of Penrose will be in no different position on the occasional heavy snowstorms than anybody else in town. This being said, they're
also willing to do two additional things to try to address the issue because it was one that was raised and it's it's a good question. First, they're reaching out to the RTA to try to arrange for a scheduled bus stop um at the bus shelter in front of the property, which would
help any residents needing it to get to work or wherever. Also, in the winter, if there are issues with transportation and assuming people are working, they're also willing through the management office they're going to have here to help coordinate ride shares for their residents who may need to get to work,
who walk and and can't, you know, for a period of time during the winter. So again, they are trying to do everything feasible and economic and possible to provide for their residents and in a way that allows the affordable housing
development to proceed expeditiously based on all of that. um requiring more of the applicant in this case. For example, even though it's against what the traffic engineer says and even though it's against or even though there is a perfectly safer, we believe
alternative access to it. If the board were to condition on having a sidewalk, we believe that that is not practical, not fair, not warranted, and would be significantly uneconomic as a condition of the decision. Um, we believe that
what you see up on the plan now is the safest, most environmentally friendly and cost-efficient method to handle this. This is a comprehensive permit application. The legal standard, as you know, is is the project consistent with local needs. Town of Chattam is well
below 10% affordable housing needed. And so there is a presumption of um consistent with local needs for this project. Conditions are allowed. You're going to have conditions in your decision, but they can't render a project uneconomic. On this issue, uh we
respectfully submit that anything beyond what is being proposed would not only be less safe, it would also render the project uneconomic. uh with the additional land area and the spreading out of the buildings as you have on this plan as I noted density has gone down
number of bedrooms has gone down parking has gone up every the central green area there's a much better play area there's the maintenance shed there's the bicycle area there have been so many improvements to this plan for what you have now we believe that this is a very good plan and is what we're presenting
to you for approval if you have questions of any of us including Mr. Durk who's online um uh for to discuss his prior memo and and anything here. We'd be happy to address them and we look forward to your questions. >> Thank you, Mr. Singer.
>> Okay, I think right now we're going to go into the correspondence. Okay, the first uh correspondence we have here is from the planning board. Um it's dated July uh 15th. Dear members of the
planning board of appeals, per the request of the zoning board of appeals, the planning board reviewed the Penrose >> the Penrose Cadam comprehensive permit for 0 and 87 Meeting House Road affordable housing development permitting
plans Chattam Massachusetts dated June 30th, 2025 with revision through May 28, 2026 as submitted by Penrose and prepared by the project team of Horesley Whitten Group Union Studio Crowley. Catrell and Illuminate. The planning
board received supplemental project information via a letter and email memorandum from the applicant's attorney on July 8th, 2026. The applicant submitted a response to engineering peer re-review comments packet to the ZBA office on July 13, 2026,
which the planning board members did not have in time for a complete review prior to the meeting. Planning board comments have since been revised to account for the responses. The project area within the residential uh well R60 zoning district for zero and
87 meeting house road once once merged will be approximately 4.12 acres in size. As proposed, the development will contain 42 units with a range of one two threebedroom layout options totaling 72 bedrooms within the complex. While this
is not a site plan review application, review utilizing the planning board's site plan review criteria as set forth in section 62E of the protective bylaw is once again an appropriate starting point for this board's recommendation
letter. So the following comments uh should be used as a starting point for discussion. The planning board does then go on and list the actual criteria, 11 of them in the letter. I'm going to not read those because those are um available public record. Items for ZBA
consideration based on planning board site plan review criteria are identified below. The L1 lighting plan was removed from the most recent submission but should be reincluded in the plan set and accounted for on the cover sheet.
Update survey notes to reflect both properties that are to be included within the development. registered PLS stamp with signature required. A butter information should be updated to include property designation, the address, and ownership information.
Given that another parcel has been acquired for this project, which includes an existing dwelling and access drive, a demolition plan should be included within the plan set submission. Has the applicant addressed access to the remaining abutter at 95 Meetinghouse
Road to the north? The applicant showed a sketch of this driveway access at the July 13, 2026 planning board meeting. The applicant should include the details of this access drive in the approved plans. The applicant has proposed a public way
for the access drive to support the town's grant criteria that requires the funds construct the drive on town land. However, the proposed access drive has nine parking spaces that are adjacent to the access drive and vehicles will be
required to back out into the public way. This is an unsafe condition and should not be allowed in a public way. It may also set a parking precedence that will be harmful to the town. We recommend the access drive remain
private and the grant f funds applied to other pedestrian access ways that would resolve this safety concern or have it terminate east of the proposed abuing parking spaces. See further comments below for more.
Also, all parking spaces adjacent to sidewalks should provide concrete bumpers to prevent the car overhang from obstructing the pedestrian walk sidewalk. All sidewalks should have a clear five- foot passage width.
All retaining walls on the site should have a fall protection fence placed adjacent to or on top of the wall. The sidewalk adjacent to the north side of the access drive should also have a fall protection fence placed adjacent to the top of the 3 to one slope.
The bus stop waiting area should be set back from Meeting House Road. The applicant indicated that 25 students under the age of 18 are expected to use this bus stop. So, the site is inadequate and should be um the size, I'm sorry, is inadequate and should be
increased in area to support the number of students who may occupy 42 units of housing. The waiting area should have measures to protect the students from oncoming traffic. The plan set does not show the required connection to the offsite sidewalk to
the south of the property per the RFP. The letter from the applicant's traffic consultant does not relieve the development from meeting the obligation in the agreement. The applicant has proposed using the bike trail on the site with a connection to the town's rail trail.
At the July 13, 2026 planning board meeting, the applicant showed a sidewalk on the east side of the town's rail trail at Meeting House Road extending down to the sidewalk connection on Route 28. The applicant should include the details of this sidewalk in the approved
plans. The planning board members raised several serious safety concerns for pedestrians associated with the using with using the site bike connection to the town's rail trail. The town's
rail trail is only open dusk to dawn, has no lighting, and is not maintained during the winter months. Children will walk down the street side of Meeting House Road from the a from the site access drive and cross at the town's rail trail crosswalk. The planning board
offered several approaches to resolve this safety issue. One, the site plan proposes to maintain an existing driveway access from the south as a drainage easement access. use the drainage easement and construct a sidewalk on it as town-owned land that
that connects to the access drive and connect to the west side of the town's rail trail crosswalk at Meeting House Road. Two, construct a sidewalk on the west side of Meeting House Road from the site access drive and connect to the west side of the town's rail trail
crosswalk. Three, the town's grant funds could be used and considered for construction of safe pedestrian access to the site and the access drive would not be used as a public way. The bike the bike way from the site to
the bike trail should be increased to 8 feet in width to allow safe passage in both directions. And there is no information on the plantings plan or the civil drawings for the bio retention basin plantings. And there are no length or width dimensions
for the bio retention basement basin. The general conditions set forth by the planning board for the site plan review approval applications which typically run with the title of the property as described below should be considered for inclusion by the ZBA decision.
One, per the request of the zoning board of appeals, the planning board reviewed the Penrose Town of Cadam comprehensive permit for 0 and 87 Meeting House Road affordable housing development permitting plans Chattam Massachusetts June 30, 2025 with revision through May
2026 28, 2026 as submitted by Penrose and prepared by the project team of Horesley Whitten Union Studio Crowley Cotrell and illuminate two certification by a licensed professional that all
work that all site work is completed in compliance with the approved plan is required prior to issuance of the certificate of use and occupancy by the building commissioner. Three, all exterior lighting shall be downward casting shall not exceed 3,000 Kelvin
and shall be designed to not illuminate areas off the property and a copy of said lighting plan shall be submitted. Four, submit a soil erosion and sedimentation control plan and details as well as stamped PE plans. And lastly,
five, a professional civil engineer stamped as stamped as built plan is required to be submitted to the planning board office for inclusion in the property file. The planning board members appreciate the opportunity to provide recommendations and would be
willing to re-examine the development as process continues. Uh, sincerely Arthur Sprew, chair of the planning board. On behalf of the planning board. Okay. Then we have a letter from Justin Tavano. Hi Sarah. It was communicated to
Horesley Whitten earlier this week. I do not have any other comments on the project at this time. We have a letter from Lou Hyde Chadam. The ZBA and we C Chadam citizens have been misled. I have read and studied the
articles in the warrant and the minutes of the town meetings of May 12th 20 of May 12th 2003, May 9th 2005 and May 8th 2006 that dealt with affordable housing in ' 03. The article passed article 28
did not mention the 10% goal plan. This article on the comprehensive plan was very broad and included eight chapters including land use, community facilities, economics, etc. It did decry development forces which deteriorate
Chattam's uniqueness and undermine its character and quality of life. New or rehabilitated affordable housing should fit into existing neighborhood. So neither the appearance nor the location would identify them as affordable. The 10% goal plan was buried
in a 93page attachment on all eight chapters that most certainly hardly anyone read. Article 27 was about multifamily housing projects and was defeated. In the article in 2005 was a zoning
bylaw amendment. This was this was head spinning to read, but one thing was clear that the affordable housing goals would be met by developments with 10% of the homes and units being affordable mixed in with open fair market value
homes in the same neighborhoods. The exact opposite of these Penrose projects. The 2006 article to approve the affordable housing trust board was presented as an administrative
requirement. No mention was made of the fact that this new law by the state legislature removed towns rights of self-ruule and self-determination that towns have had for over 200 years. There was no requirement to invite Penrose. A
very small group of individuals did this by publishing the request for proposal in the public registry. Four people with six votes determined the winner would be Penrose. Towns presently with win 16% of appealed
cases. Towns that appeal cases to land court have much better chances of success. There are no financial, legal, or state funding consequences for not meeting 10%. This case is about much more than zoning roles. It's about
Chadam's lost rights of self-ruule, self-determination. Our responsibilities are to the citizens of Chadam. Please take this opportunity to demonstrate solidarity with your fellow citizens and vote no on this project. Bluehive Cadam.
Okay, we have a letter from Carol Kenner. Dear members of the zoning board, thank you for your public service. I have lived year round in the neighborhood of the proposed project for over 25 years and fully support approval of Penrose's application. I respectfully request that you approve the application
as soon as possible. The town of Chadam has considered and studied its need for affordable housing for many years. Now is the time to act. Our son has special needs and resides in a group home nearby. The direct care staff on whom he
relies for every aspect of his life need affordable housing. The Penrose project will make it possible for direct care staff and others similar similarly situated to remain on Cape. As a result, Chadam will be stronger community for
all. Sincerely, Carol Kenner. And then last, we have a five-page letter from Mr. Michael Shell. Um he uh does not expect us to read it. we won't read it. Um, and I will ask it, you
know, dur at the appropriate time if he wishes to summarize any parts of this if he's here. It looks like he is. Okay. All right. Um, anything else? Did I miss anything? Okay. All right. So, that is the correspondence.
Okay. So, now we're going to transition to public comments uh on the applications both for and against. We're going to >> Oh, okay. Okay. I was just um notified by the previous chair. Um Mr. Singer, would you like to comment on any of the
correspondence before we go into public comment? We'll wait. >> You'll wait. Okay. All right. Thank you. Um and thank you for that reminder. Um so we're going to go to comments uh for and against. We're going to start with
in person. We have the microphone not in the center. So we'll go to the one over there. Um anyone wishing to speak up to if you would three minutes. There will be a timer. Um, we are interested in the public's input
on these revised plans. So, do we have anyone that would like to start off in favor? >> Just comment. >> Oh, comments. >> Any comments in favor? Opposition questions? All public comment. >> Okay.
>> Okay. Mr. Shell. Well, since I got a a quai invitation to summarize my letter, I I'll speak to you. I'm not going to try to summarize the letter. Um the the first of all, I I I want to note today's July 16th, 2026.
Exactly two years ago today, the the the uh uh the notice of approval of designation of uh Penrose uh went out as a result of all of what uh we've been doing here since uh 20 uh 2003 to try to
bring affordable housing to Cadam. So, we've been at this two years. Um I I I guess I think that um it it's pretty fully masticated. I'll leave it at that. Uh the message basically of my my letter
uh was this um we talk about friendly 40bs. This is the ultimate friendly 40B. This is a creation of the town of Chadam. Every public body uh in Chadam ver that has anything to do with
housing, real estate, ZBA, etc., etc. has had input on developing a program for affordable housing and specifically for this project. Um I would note that the the people are you know how many
people did this that and the other. Um the select board uh the affordable housing trust board both in its current uh formulation and back when it was the select board plus two has had an active role in buying the property and then
putting it out uh for RFPs uh to to to get us to the point where that where we are today. Um, I I have all the respect in the world for the responsibilities that you have, but to take a position either in effectively in
denial of this application or by including a an uneconomic condition. Uh, would essentially put you at war with virtually the entire municipality over the last 20 x years. Um, in terms of the
effort to bring us affordable housing, as I say, I respect your efforts. Uh, you have to do what you have to do, but I I really am pleading with you to these are problems. All of the things that we're talking about here are things that with cooperation of Chadam and Penrose
can be solved and we can get on with the business of building this project. And I I respectfully request that you do that. Thank you very much for your time. >> Thank you, Mr. Shell. Okay. >> I think it's fine. >> Uh, my name is Terry Charbano. I live on
Bishop's Terrace adjacent to um previous um affordable housing. The neighborhood that I live in should be affordable housing. It's not by anybody's standards. We've had our home for 27 years. It has gone up almost 10fold in
value. Um I wouldn't have been able to buy it now at by any stretch of the imagination. I fully support this project. I fully support every project that gets put forth because every project that does get put forth
is done with the utmost care and just trying to really evaluate and make sure it is cohesive to neighborhoods. Um, as Mike said, this really has been talked about for two years as the other main street development has also. And
it's almost like I want to say enough already. We need places for people to live. The Lake Street project, you know, is not where a lot of people would want to live, but after it's been there, at least the 27 years that we've owned our house, it's nice. I don't know that
Penrose had anything to do with it, but we need more developments like that. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Okay, Mr. Buckley. [snorts] Are both of these working? I guess so. Thank you. Um, yes, Steve Buckley. And,
um, I have a question for the request for clarification, I guess, about the meeting. Um, it would just said we we can ask questions, but I'm wondering if because there's about three or four things that are unclear to me and if I ask the
questions and then the applicant answers them, that does doesn't seem to be a point at which I can then make a comment. So, could you clarify? And I noticed that also on the agenda there's there is something that says other
business, public comment. So, I'm wondering if I could get my questions answered under the regular format and then make comments based on that new information. >> Um, well, I I think Sarah, tell me if I'm wrong, the way you should handle
your questions at this stage is to state what your questions are and then Mr. Singer and his team and others can take notes of what your questions are and address them in rebuttal. And if it's and do I am I the one who decides whether it's clear enough or do you
>> um well well I think I think it would be us because I don't think there's an opportunity for you to go back and forth with I don't know do you >> that's correct madam chair. Okay. So because a lot of times of course in any conversation somebody can say I don't
understand this. Somebody says something and it might go on for two or three might actually a conversation might a dialogue might come out that further clarifies it. But you I I rarely I'm just saying I rarely get >> your comments but I do want to remind
you that you're using your time. So >> okay then um yes I will say this and I will also make the point that I will not be able to get my uh questions answered. I'll be the the judge and I and of course I guess
I'll provide some correspondence after this meeting >> okay >> on the conduct of the meeting and so forth. And so I would say that uh yeah now there's not enough time. I was asking for a point of order and I don't think a point of order or point of
information should be counted against uh my time. So anyway, I see the time 40 seconds. Uh yes, there's very there's a lot of similarities between this and the main street property. They all have an island in the middle. They all have lighting.
They all have parking. So forth and so on. I'm wondering why there's no generator. Um, it could be because the uh board and I don't even I know the board took out a community room on the main street property, but I don't know if that also included having therefore
oh I guess we don't need a generator anymore. So I don't that's my question is and it might take like a set they might not be able to answer my questions and that I'm wondering like where does that come from? because all seven other
Penrose properties on Massachusetts have community rooms and generators. I >> I'll give you another minute. Okay. Just because you could use that. >> What's that? >> Is it? Yeah. Hunter, can you add one
more minute to the timer, please? >> I just want you to be able to get through your questions if you can. >> Sure. >> That we can. I say my I'm I'm it's more along the lines of what's going on with this, what's going on with that. Is there going to be they've been talking to RTA, the regional transit authority,
just mentioned a little while ago. Oh, well, I'm sorry. Is is there going to be one at the Buckley property, I mean, the main street property, former Buckley property, that is. And so, it's like because they're very close. They're not exactly the same, but I think whatever
was decided or has been decided thus far for the main street properly is having an effect in people's minds about, well, we decided on this kind of sighting. We decided on where to put a bus stop. You know, it's like, and then I'm looking at them and going, why is this different
here? That's what I'm trying to say. So, there's a whole slew and series of questions or topics that, you know, comparing the other property to this and why is it different? So um and like I said uh one of the reasons is that is the generator the lack now that we know
that there's not going to be a generator there won't be a place for the residents to go to uh run emergency equipment like medical equipment or anything like that. So and it may they their response may not be adequate >> okay >> for me un or for the public to
understand. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you Mr. Buckley. All right, we have the gentleman in the back. Good afternoon, David Farerrell. Uh, last meeting uh I understood Mr. Simple during um the board deliberations to ask
for some more public input on uh the construction and maintenance issues that I brought up. And uh I have six photographs I'd like to uh show. First one starts off with the one uh I I showed the board uh with Penrose present
uh in November uh with the trim around the windows and the cracks and the siding. Um not not bricks and mortar but wooden uh no plastic I think. Um there's there's water that's going to get in there. I I I tried to talk to the
um town of East Ham um director of commercial development and he said um no I I I have no comments. Bring it up with uh Penrose, which I did back in November. Um and they it's still like this. Uh I I talked
to a a homeowner's uh insurance adjuster who said, "Oh, there all sorts of water going to get in there. You're going to have insulation getting wet. you're going to have sheetrock getting wet. You're going to have mold. Uh he didn't like the idea of these cracks over here on the left side. It shows sagging. Uh
there the this is a problem and it it looks like it could be remedied, but now we're in July and it hasn't been. Uh next photograph, please. Um, clearly they've had some siding problems and they, you know, they
they've replaced it with a, you know, the color's close enough for government work. Uh, but it's um something something's gone on there. I haven't gone around the whole area and the back of anybody's houses and snooped around
to try and get every single uh gable, but this is just from driving through. Um there's a next photograph that shows mildew. Uh there's several of these uh coming off the roofs. Uh you know that mildew uh is going to get inside where
there's cracks. Uh the next this was taken in July. This also from July 5th of this year. There's another window with the frame missing. Um and I I think water is going to certainly get in there. Um so these are the the windows.
um from the first photograph that I showed you. This is this was taken on July 5th again nine months um after I first brought it to the attention and two meetings ago you recall that Mr. Rio, I forget your last name, said, "Yeah, this is something that we should
have addressed." But when and and after the winter that we've had, um, I just think I I I think this is a real concern. We have a lot of nice pictures um in the next photograph, but it's when
the construction gets done and the maintenance and repairs that needs to get done by Penrose afterwards. This kind of neglect very much concerns me. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> Anyone else? I
>> photograph is from July. Gloria Hicks, Meeting House Road. Um, correct me if I'm wrong, but what I heard today was takeaways. Now there's no sidewalk. Um, which is unbelievable to me. You've got all these people living here. There were kids going to
school. There are uh people going to work. Um, there is a compromised access with the parking, which is what the planning board brought to your attention today. And then we talk about inclement weather. To not have a generator there with 42 units of people there is just
unbelievable to me. Um, there's going to be frozen pipes and everything else that goes along with all of that. How do these people get in? How to get out? Um, and we're right. We're the last part of town for just about everything, quite frankly. Um, and to have all these people not be able to get in, not be
able to get out, not be able to get plowed out with that small road that goes to the rail trail and that they're not going to take care of the rail trail so that people can get in and out. This is basic access. Um, it just doesn't make any sense. This continues to be a
square peg trying to be foot putting into a round hole from the very inception. This is the wrong the wrong thing to be doing in this part of town. and the trust is already looking at buying another piece of property right on the corner there. So, how much are you going to put into the corner there?
You know, you have to look at density under the umbrella of density, not just one project at a time. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mrs. Hicks. >> Anyone else? I don't see any. Okay, Mr. Dykins. Uh, good afternoon. Jeff Dikens, 1745
Main Street, West Cadam. Um, I really, as you there's no surprise to this group um that I urge you to vote in favor of this project. Penrose has has done a lot of work here in terms of making it a better project. They they've bought property so the project's less dense. So
now they've increased the number of parking spots. They have a separate maintenance building. I think they've artfully used a trail down to the rail trail to provide access uh for for the residents. Um it looks to me like perhaps uh some notion of of generating
activity would be important I think to the project sitting out there in the woods. But I want to take a a a more macro vision of this. We the town purchased this land from the fall the Fall River Dascese for the purpose of affordable housing. So, if we don't we
don't do the the Penrose project, we're going to do something there. And we invited these folks in an artful, talented, professional um developer to develop this property. If not them, who? Because we're not going to return it back to the Arch Dasis. They sold it to
us at a discount. So, let's please think carefully about what the waiverss are that we'd like to see for the project and move forward in an intelligent manner. Um, I I think Penrose has done a very good job, listened very carefully to what what the
ZBA has asked them to do and has come back with very reasonable responses. So, I do urge you to support the project. Thank you very much. >> Thank you, Mr. Dykins. >> Okay, I think that's Miss McClen in the back.
Hello, Carolyn Mlullen, South Cadam. Um, I just want to say that, you know, my concern has always been for the future residents of this uh property. Uh, we know we have a significant number of people in the community who are desperate for housing. I find it really disingenuous for some folks to uh feain
concern for the future residents who currently probably are homeless right now are going from couch to couch. I'm more concerned about that. Um, I think the the the bike trail is an asset to this property. It's something that should be celebrated. The fact that residents might have to walk 20 feet to
get to the on a bike path, a public bike path to get to the official uh crosswalk is not a hardship, is not anything to be concerned about. I think it's incredibly concerning when many members who a
number of people who complain about that sidewalk issue also just a couple of weeks ago refused to accept a $5 million grant from the state to improve our crosswalk downtown and safety wasn't a concern for them then. And a lot more people are going to be using that intersection than that will be using
this one. Um, I just want you to please, please consider the quality of life of the future residents of this community and knowing that they're also going to add to um the stability of our year- round community. So, thank you. >> Thank you.
Okay. Uh, Brian. >> Oh, >> I'm sorry, Virginia, but I I didn't use all my time. >> I did have one point. I'm sorry, but I didn't use all my time. We're we have a working group with the town of Haritch to discuss the future of
the Monoy school system and both 1533 and zero meeting and meeting house road are critical to our supplying more students to our schools. Right now we're contemplating well right now as a as a matter of fact we have one class per grade level in our elementary schools.
We it it's not acceptable. We need more kids or we're going to have to do something fairly precipitous or or with our elementary school situation. One class per grade is not healthy. This project and coupled with the main street project will provide more students for
Chadam schools and for the region regional schools. So I just forgot to make that point and I really wanted to make it. If not these guys, who? We had one other outfit, one other developer that bid on this project. If it's not Penrose,
who's it going to be? Thank you very much. >> Thank you, Mr. Dyens. Um, Mr. Phillips. >> Ryan Phillips, 374 Orleans Road. So, how do we get this point? uh poor leadership over the last 10-15 years of inaction
and bad decisions led to this housing crisis we're having. Now we're going trying to cover it up by making an even worse decision and put these uh huge developments in. Uh these developments are going to cause more problems than they're going to solve. Going to repeat
that these developments are going to cause more problems than they're going to solve. There's a right way to do affordable housing. There's a wrong way and this is the wrong way. Last hearing I referred to uh these types of developments in parallels as a virus. I'd like to clarify this. Uh it's more like a parasite. Um and [clears throat]
I mean this uh by um I believe they say they're out of Pennsylvania, New York, Boston, but I believe they're Pennsylvania based company. So all the money for the rent uh is not is going to leave this community and go to Pennsylvania. And then the taxpayers of Chadam are gonna have to further subsidize this company by paying uh you
know for the problem that these uh largecale um developments are going to create like upgrades to our infrastructure. Uh one of the secrets to keeping Chattam nice was keeping corporate entities like this out. In the [clears throat] main street housing uh hearings uh Penrose
submitted a falsified financial document. Uh that project should have never been approved without an expert going through that. So, we're rolling out a red carpet to people have been dishonest, not only about that, but other things as well. What is most frustrating to me is that
people who had their chance to do a good job and didn't, they're going to be dead in 5 to 10 years and uh will not be able to be held accountable for these projects and what they're going to do. Um, and people my age are going to have to deal with the consequences of these projects. When you run the aquifer too
low, which is a concern not just about these projects but other things, saltwater gets in, it screws up things for everybody. So, you know, I think we had to look 20 years down the road, not just, you know, 5 years down the road. And then I went door todo [cough and clears throat] on the our affordable housing developments and I
came up some very, you know, tough things that I mean, this is a broken system. It's 40B. This is this is the wrong way to do affordable housing. Uh the first uh thing I came across was wonderful couple both work two jobs have three kids and because of that 30% you
know they take that every month they couldn't afford health care for their kids so there's something wrong with this system you know and implementing it is a good thing and then the other one is people who are trying to buy a house they can't save up enough money when they you know when they report it because they take more money the more
money you make the more money they take the 30% mark and if they try to make money off the books, they can't get a mortgage because it shows that they can't they don't make enough money. So once you get put in into one of these uh you know projects, it's very difficult to move upward and
to be able to buy a house and live the American dream. So please know on this project. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Phillips. >> Shireen, Miss Davis, welcome. >> Shireen Davis, Chipping Stone Road. Um I
was part of the team that negotiated with the arch dasis for this property um back with uh select board member Kakolas and one of the things that was really important to the dasis was that this we purchased this for affordable housing.
Um I think as a dascese they probably see some of the more challenging things to housing across Massachusetts and um than we do. But one of the things that I really um have to say is watching this process and seeing um the great questions that have been answered and
asked by both the ZBA and Penrose. I think the process is is moving forward and um I'm hoping that at the end of the day that this is approved um for a couple of reasons and one of them was really personal to me today. I went in
to work and one of the employees that I work with, young a young mom with a little eight-year-old boy that goes to Haritch Elementary School, she was like, "I have to find a house to live." She's one of our most valued um employees.
And you know when you start to see uh housing insecurity which is really deep in my heart um when you start to see uh housing insecurity amongst your your the people that you're working for it really becomes more important to all of us. Um,
I think the future is for Chadam to not become a gated community uh with a great with great big houses, but to have diverse city uh of income and uh the opportunity that
housing stability does to for for people for their children is really quite significant. uh having seen in the past, having seen um my daughter's friends whose little boys and girls were in
school ha watching their near and dear friends have to move someplace else. It's just really heart-wrenching. So I think that for what we're trying to do for Chadam is to create a more enlivened community and part of that is projects
like this uh that are matched with other projects um because this is this is the heart of our of our community. Thank you. Thank you, Miss Davis. Anyone else wish to speak?
All right. I don't >> We have Miss Gibbs online. >> Oh, online. Okay. Uh, Miss Gibbs, you uh have the floor. >> Yes. Thank you very much. Uh, first of all, I'd like to say that the children uh that we want to house are not widgets
uh to fill a school system. The first thing we should consider is their quality of life. I can't figure out why Penrose bid on this project at all. I Tonight I heard a lot of excuses. It sounds like um they believe the lot is
unbuildable because that's what Mr. Sanger basically said. We knew from the beginning that the town shouldn't have bought this property because of the topography. It's unbuildable based on its location and the dangerous area it's
in with the the topography drops. Um I think that it is uninforceable unless anything that uh Penrose promises is uninforceable unless they're in the order of conditions. I believe they are today they abdicated their
responsibility for this project in this location. They never should have bid on it. They didn't do their own due diligence. The eye level uh renderings that they showed are they look lovely. They're very bucolic, but that's not the reality. It looks like there's a lot of
green space and no parking from my level. And that's absolutely unt and true. It's the reverse. Um the parking spaces and the road width are not included in those renderings. There's no common building, no generator, no elevator, no public space
for adolescence, ravines used for play space. They're actually encouraging that. No balconies or private space or patios for individual family members. no basements because they're not required to, which makes no sense in Massachusetts. They do it in Florida, but not here. And that's where with no
generator, the pipes are going to freeze. Um, let's see. Uh, no assigned or guest parking and no place nearby to park if it's full. You have shift workers coming in. They, uh, visitors could take up available spaces with no
monitoring and enforcement by Penrose because they're not going to do it. You could have five unrelated people living in one unit and they could all have cars, but Penrose doesn't track them. So, you won't know who's there and you won't be able to get rid of them and people will come home at the end of the
day with no parking spaces. Uh upkeep and maintenance should be a serious concern based on NSET green. Mr. uh Frell covered that very well. uh no revised financials have been required uh based on their desired purchase for 87
meeting house. They redacted all that information. Prior to this, prior to deciding they were going to purchase that, they said that this this project was financially infeasible that they would have to cut expenses. So, I'd like to know how they can now pay upwards of
600,000 for 87 meeting house. What else are they going to cut? I would say it's going to be the quality of the proposal. I don't believe for a minute that anybody on at the planning board, the select board, the ZBA, or any other committee would want their children or
grandchildren living here. Uh again, we're not here to supply widgets to the school system. Um I it it's simply I I can't stress this enough. It is simply not fit for children. >> Miss Gibbs, you're know
>> Sorry, Miss Gibbs. You're at You're at time. You're at time. I have to >> Okay. Just one final thought. The town and Penrose both know it's dangerous. That is an inherent they have a liability because of that that they should have reasonably known this is dangerous for children.
>> You should reject this out of hand. It is not a good property for children. There's going to be a deadly accident. Thank you. >> Thank you. Thank you for your comments. Anyone else online? >> No one else online. >> Okay. No one else online and no one else
in the room. Um, yeah. So, uh, Mr. Singer, would you like some time for rebuttal? >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Uh, just a few comments actually because, you know, as you read in the announcement uh leading
up to the notice of this meeting, you know, we've been before you, I think almost monthly for a year. So, you have heard almost everything we have to say. You've heard everything almost everything the neighbors have to say. There are supporters in the community. There are opponents in the community. I'm never going to change the minds of
the opponents. Um, and I'm not here to try. What I'm here to do uh on behalf of the team you have before you is review the professionally prepared documents and materials that have been submitted that went through a very public process. They've been going through a very public process with you. They've been
peer-reviewed by Tai and Bond. We have traffic engineers who've been looking at these. And so request is your deliberate you begin your deliberations eventually and you're asking your questions that you know you you look at what's before you and you look at all of the professional material that's there.
Couple um just quick points I I forgot to mention before I did submit an updated waiverss list um just earlier today after the planning board they um wanted us to make sure we were complete on the request for waiverss under the subdivision rules and regulations. So, I
augmented that. And also on the final um building heights, the buildings themselves aren't changing, but with the final grading, with everything you saw in the plans, the engineers and the architects are working on the final review of the grading. It's a calculation, not a change to the building itself.
Um and finally, uh there was comment about the uh bus stop and the number of students and and Penrose did note they might have 25 or so students. However, that's an aggregate number. So, a number of students are going to be too young for schools. A number of students who
are of school age will be dropped off by parents. And of those who do take school buses, elementary, middle, high school, they're all staggered times. As you know, the buses are coming at very different school start times and stop times. And so, um, it's you're not going to have an overcrowding situation at the
bus stop. It's going to only be, you know, whatever that particular school level is at that particular time. Um, that's really the only rebuttal we have right now. We do welcome your comments and look forward to, you know, responding to those with your questions. >> Okay, great. Well, that that is what we'll do next. We're going to close the hearing.
>> No more Well, no more questions from the board. >> I I meant like transition, not close the hearing, but questions. >> Go to board questions. [laughter] >> No more question. >> If you would like to close the hearing, that's fine. >> No more questions uh for the audience.
Um and we'll we'll go to questions from the board um and comments. So, um I'm gonna start actually with Lee. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Um so, I've got a couple of questions. Um
[sighs] uh let's see. Is so my main concern honestly is um access for the residents. I think that the connector to the bike path is a very
lovely thing. It's an amenity, I think, to expect people to walk down there every time they need to catch a a bus or walk anywhere. There's going to be some people that are going to be fine with that, but then
there's going to be others that are not. And I really I really want to see a sidewalk either on the east or the west side. And is there any way that the town and Penrose can work together to get some sort of a sidewalk
um on either side of Meeting House Road or is there a way that the access road can be utilized? I think the planning board mentioned something about that. Um, and then you could just do a small connector
um to where the crosswalk is um on the let's see east side of the property. I don't know. I I just I feel very strongly that there needs to be some way for people to exit the property other than in their car or down the bike
trail. Um, I I'm happy to hear that talks have um occurred with the RTA bus, the bus, the municipal bus to
potentially have a stop there at the um end of the driveway. I think that's a good step. Um, I would love to see that happen. That would help, I guess. But I still believe I still really believe you have all those people up there. You need some
way for them to exit on foot other than the bike path. Um I h I also I'm assuming that Penrose if it is we do get a snowy winter, Penrose will be clearing their streets and their sidewalks in the project in the um
development. Um, and perhaps they just take the initiative and clear the bike path as well or clear the sidewalk that's in front of their house or their development. So, I don't know. There's just I'm I'm still very concerned about
the whole access um issue. Um, I'm also concerned about the um maintenance issues that have been pointed out at other Penrose developments. And I just hope we don't have to deal with that,
but is if there's any way we can have a condition. I don't know. Um I know that um town council Jay Tolerman is on the line. I don't know if that's something we need to talk about yet, but I think that that's something that should be explored. And um my other question has
to do with 1533 Main Street. And I know we're not talking about that right now, but I don't really see anything happening there. And I'm wondering when that might get started. I guess my gut is I'd love to see I mean in a perfect world I'd love to see
how one development is working out and looks before we do two of them. So th those are my questions concerns. Um the parking sit Well I I'll stop there. I'll let other people say say thanks.
Thank [laughter] you. Um, okay, Ed. >> Um, uh, I've been a supporter of this project from the beginning and I'm still a supporter of this project. Uh, I think
it's been improved by the applicant as as we've gone through the process. I think it's time to to move forward on this project. Um, I don't have any real concerns. I I think the bike path as a as a user of a
bike path daily is is a good option for access. Uh, there's lots of walkers on the bike path. There there's bicycles, but uh in that particular area um they have parking across the street where people come and park their cars and and
bike from that area. a lot of walkers are in that area and I I believe, you know, that is a a good access point. Um, I don't think it would be too much to ask for Penrose to perhaps plow it or
shovel it. It uh seems like uh would just be like a rounding area error for them to to to provide some maintenance there. Um uh when I was interviewed by the um the selectman for this job, I the one thing
that I said was important is the lack of affordability in Chadam and you know there not being enough attainable housing for for for the community and it hasn't changed. We still have have yet to develop either
one of these projects. They need to go forward. The town overwhelmingly supported these projects. The selectman acted. We we purchased the properties. Uh the church discounted the the price of the property for affordable housing.
They recognize the need for affordable housing, attainable housing. Uh I just feel it's time to move forward. Okay, Paul. >> Well, I'll echo I'll echo the comments that have been made by uh by Lee and Ed.
Um, and I guess I' I'd like to ask some uh perhaps more specific ones. Um, do I understand that uh, Penrose will be responding to the comments of the planning board in their uh, comment
letter that uh, came in was dated July 15th. >> Would you like me to respond to that? >> Yes, if you could, Mr. >> We were not planning on preparing more formal comments than what we presented to you today, which did address several of the comments that they had in their
letter. happy to discuss them with you further, but um you know their principle. One thing I could note, they talked about submitting final plans and everything that's not done in a 40B. You're only supposed to have preliminary plans, although the plans you have are extremely well detailed. Um the final
construction drawings with everything bells and whistles go to the building commissioner upon um application of building permits, you know, to build the buildings. So, uh, there aren't final plans that are done,
uh, ahead of time, but things like final construction drawings, demolition plans for the house that's being removed, all of that would be would be done, and that certainly can be a condition of your decision. You know, that all final plans are prepared and submitted to the building department in connection with seeking permits to demolish and build.
That's, you know, absolutely, um, regular standard practice. Um, as far as access, you know, I'm happy to discuss it some more. Um, the planning board had some interesting comments and for, you know, for, you know, for example, reusing the existing
way that is out there that raises similar uh title and grading and topography questions and ADA and everything that that we that I mentioned already. As far as however working with the town, um, I I I I hope I said that.
It was in my notes. I hope I said that. Um, if the town sees Route 137 as having a pedestrian issue uh on on its corridor and we're hearing that, then the applicant absolutely is willing to work with the town, try to co co-apply for
grants, try to partner with the town, you know, to help uh obtain those monies. Um, there was a question that the planning board had, Mr. example about as you know there was a grant that was uh obtained from the state to design
and permit you know the entrance way which would be a public part of it would be a public way they talked about could you reorient some of that towards the road I don't know what's possible you know Penrose doesn't know what's possible um the grant that is there was a grant for design there anticipates
future grants and so again the applicant wants to work with the town is happy to continue working with the uh select board and the town departments. There are at least two select board members in the room right now. So, I mean, they're hearing this live and so, you know, absolutely willing to work with the town
to try to partner on that. But, as I noted, not approving this specific project that's before you without resolving that global issue, we submit is not economic to this development to provide
affordable housing on this land. That's what it was intended for. It's you have an excellent plan we believe you know to propose that have addressed all those issues. The access um there is a good it's a good driveway in it actually reduces a curb cut because right now there are two there would be two
driveways. Now there's only going to be one uh effectively driveway in. So there's a reduction of one curb cut from meeting house road. You have this bike path connector path which as is an amenity that is being offered. It's not uh as I said it's not these are not
things that are required of market rate developments and I grant you don't see market rate developments regular subdivision will go to the planning board you know you get to see projects uh under 40B but we believe the access is safe you have peer review of the project peer
reviewer is on um I believe the peer reviewers online they were before um Mr. Durk is online if you have specific questions uh for transportation and sidewalks, but those we really don't have other formal responses to the planning board, but I think we've tried to address the main issues that they
raised. >> So, you expect to have responses to the planning board issues before we take an action here? >> No, I just gave you the responses. >> Okay. Well, let me give you give you an example. They talk about the uh configuration of the parking on the
entrance way into the development and they talk about the fact that the way the parking is designed right now you have cars backing up into the entrance way where cars are entering off of 137.
>> Um are you going to address that issue? No, we we feel so that a uh public way is pretty much public way in name only for purposes of getting the grant to fund access to the site. It's going to
be operated, maintained, repaired, everything by Penrose. In practical terms, it will be acting as a driveway, not people. We don't expect that to be like a normal public road through Chadam
where you wouldn't allow the backing out. >> That's what the planning board was saying. Yeah. If you had a regulous commercial development, you wouldn't allow parking into a road that people are using. As Rio noted, this is a driveway. It legally it's going to be part part of a way, but it's it's
functioning and and operating as a driveway. You're not going to have much use of it except by residents going back and forth. So we don't believe that in this case with all due respect to the planning board concern that it is an issue. >> What about a car coming down from from the north to the south on 137 and taking
a right into that entrance way and coming upon cars that are backing up into it. >> Yep. We looked at that. So Mr. Henderson can address that. >> Sure. Can we share the site plan? Is that Yeah. >> possible?
There you go. >> There it is. Yep. Now, so I think you're talking about this section, right? So this is there's 50 feet from the the stop line to the first parking space. So that in our view is adequate time for a
vehicle to pull into the development and see that and stop. So there and then as far as a public way, um the functioning of this parking is the same as this, right? It's just designated as a public way here because
we're doing it for the grant funding. So no, we don't we don't see a safety issue with that 50 feet between the edge of the parking space and the entrance. >> All right. So you you think the planning board is wrong in that concern?
>> I do. Yes. I don't see a safety concern. I think they're thinking of it, like Mr. Singer said, as like a public way where there's a throughway, but this is a public way in name only. It's not it's just it's just a um being called a public way for the purposes of
the grant. [snorts] >> Okay. >> Paul, would it be helpful We have Gloria McFerson on the line. Would it be helpful to have her? And we also have Jay Tolivan online. Um would it be helpful to check in with either of them? Gloria was responsible more around the
grant the granting of that and Jay of course is council. >> I'm I'm just wondering if we have a safety issue or we don't have a safety issue. I whether you call it a driveway or whether you call it a public road. Uh either way, you've got cars hanging a
right in there from the north and uh our planning board deals with parking and parking issues all the time. We don't. But uh they had concerns. So I wanted to make sure you were going to address it one way or another. >> Their concern was I believe and I don't want to put words in their mouth, but
you're asking for my I was you know what at the meeting virtually. I believe their concerns were you legal question because of the designation as Mr. Henderson said of the way not necessarily practical. Again, if these were spaces backing out on Meeting House Road, we wouldn't even be having this conversation, right? But as Mr.
Henderson noted, all of the parking at in any I mean any development is going to have spaces backing into their driveway. It's how we operate, how you get your car in. This is no different. That's how we feel. And we and as Mr. Henderson said, we believe it's safe. And and to add to that, sorry I should
have said this earlier before when I spoke the first time, but for the record, Rio Sicetti, uh, senior developer with Penrose. We do have Jeffrey Durk online. He's a traffic engineer with FAS. Um, I'm not sure if he's able and has the ability to speak,
but he can also address the um the safety concerns with the 50 foot uh distance from the entrance to the first parking spot. >> Okay. Well, as long as we get a response to that so that we know that we're operating on a safe basis, that would be
the concern. Let me move on to a different issue. Do you can you tell me what the mix of residents will be in the in the uh housing in terms of adults and children? How many >> you're expecting? Uh I mean it's it's it's a it's going to be based on some
assumptions um based on what we have at village in Nazi green where we have 40 children I guess 40 people under the age of 18. Um see and we're expecting very similar uh population because this is a
very similar project in terms of affordability and unit types in a similar town. Um, we expect something between 20 and and 25. >> 20. >> We were saying school children, but I'd say 20 to 25
>> res. I didn't quite understand. 20 to 25 school children >> under 18. >> Under 18 >> persons under 18. >> Okay. And adults. Uh I I think um we would expect
um based on the ratio at Village and Nasa Green, we're probably expecting uh which is a 121 residents. Um I think that's an average of 1.8 residents per unit. I think we come out to something
like 78 residents >> total. Okay. total >> with the children with the under 18 >> inclusive of >> so 78 minus 25. >> Are you are you anticipating that uh that these residents are going to be using mass transit?
>> No. In fact, one of the items that had been pushed on us by the planning board and the public and and ZBA members was um they thought our original plans were inadequate parking because of this location. So we ended up inc and and the
peer reviewer did as well. Um so we ended up adding a significant amount of parking spaces. I think right now we ended up we're at 1.6 spaces um per unit which for reference uh our main street project is 1.3.
Um our project in Orleans is 1.2. So there's significantly more parking here. Um, so because we we think there will probably likely be more vehicles and people with vehicles be at this location
versus Main Street. Um, we would like the CCRT to have a stop here. Um, a regular stop. That's what we had been talking about before. Uh, but the CCRT also does ondemand pickups, call pickups. So, you can call them. And that's where we were thinking to go back
to issues with the winter conditions. you know that that's an option as well on call on demand CCRT as well as the ride shares. Um so we we and that's one of the uh reasons we put our bus shelter
where it is because the C CCRT uh what they typically do in your town is they just stop in the street with the flashing lights um rather than pulling into the development. or right now the CCRT does not go up
137, does it? It goes down 28 towards Chadam. >> Yeah, that that's right. I forget the um the actual line. Was it H2O? But yeah, we would be requesting a new stop and I think they would they would make a decision based on the number of
residents that have once it's built and moved in. They weren't they won't make a commitment before anything's built. >> All right. Uh I know that you you indicated in your last correspondence that there's going to be 24 bicycle covered uh bicycle spots uh in the uh
storage unit. Um are you still going to be doing a larger storage unit for the residents such as you were then going to do at Main Street? >> Yeah, we have um the exterior large
exterior um storage units appended to each building. I think you see on if I move the >> I'm having a tough time getting the cursor. >> We'll go with this. I know it doesn't show up on the screen, but in the backs here.
>> I think those are >> and then there there was I I think some concerns I forget if it came from the public or where it came from about um you know the size of some bikes and if the bike might take up too much of the storage unit. So that's why we added the
significant amount of um bike rack and bike storage uh in the uh interior green space. >> Okay. >> It was one of the benefits of being able to expand the site. We would created some opportunities where we could add more amenities >> and that was in addition to in that enlarged green space, not only the
keeping the grove of trees in the middle, but a a much larger play area has been relocated, the ability to have the maintenance shed. So that area is now much more functional and recreational than it was before. >> All right. And Mr. Frell has raised once
again the question of maintenance and uh construction at NSET Green and some of the board members have expressed concern about that. Can you tell me why the issues with respect to the condition of the buildings that are shown in the
photographs have not been dealt with in a period of >> Sure. >> nine months? >> Sure. Uh I can um just just to put everything in context first. Um there's 18 buildings, residential buildings on
that property and over 400 windows. There's two problem windows that were identified. They should have been repaired by now. Uh I had actually gotten involved with that. There's we went through a transition where where a property manager left and then a maintenance manager left and that caused
a little bit of a delay. The repair has to come through the general contractor because it's under the seven-year sighting warranty. So there's paperwork and timelines dealing with getting the contractor and the manufacturer back to
fix it as a warranty item. and and so we're basically on their schedule. We could conceivably just go up and fix it ourselves quickly. U but it could potentially impact our warranty. So we prefer not to do that.
>> So when do you expect it to be resolved? >> It'll be resolved by the next hearing. >> Okay. Do you have I don't think I've actually heard, but do you have a projected cost of installing a sidewalk on the west
side of Meeting House Road from your entrance way down to the rail trail? If we could maybe turn to Mr. Durk because he analyzed that. I don't know if we have a specific cost, but he analyzed all that you would need to do with clearing and grading and fill and
retaining walls. Um, it was extensive. And Jeffrey, are you on? Can you address that? I see looks like he's on and might be muted now. Um the >> Joe Henderson might be able to help. >> Yeah, >> it was detailed and the the complexity
of it was detailed in Mr. Dirk's memo last time. Joe, >> sure. Um >> there he is. [laughter] >> Can fill in. >> I'm sorry I missed the question. What was the question? >> The question was, do you have a
projected cost of putting a sidewalk in on the west side of Meeting House Road from the entrance to the project down to the bike by path? I know people have said that >> it's it's uh ostensibly you're saying that it's a a way too expensive
proposition. I just had no idea how much you think it is. >> Yeah. So, we we didn't we didn't qualify as to saying it's a way too expensive proposition. What we did say is that in order to construct the sidewalk along the uh west side of uh Meaning House
Road, um because of the slope that's there today, you would need to you have to install a a um granite curbing along the edge where the sidewalk's going to go. You would also then need to install a retaining wall to retain the back edge of the sidewalk which is toward the
project site because I know as the board is very familiar with that section of road there's posts that really are there to keep the vehicles airing vehicles in the traveled way. So, and the reason for that is because it's a there's a a hole or a a depression on that side of the
road. So, to be ADA compliant, it's a it's um curbing and then a sidewalk and then a retaining wall to support the sidewalk. So, uh, we didn't estimate it, but you know, needless to say, it's not a simple regrading and constructing a sidewalk. So, it would be expensive, but
we didn't put an order of magnitude to it. >> Okay. And if I add, Mr. Simple, as you get closer to the rail trail, if you've gone out there, all of the infrastructure, all the the the flashing beacon, the solar panel, all of the utilities are right there. I mean, that
sidewalk Mr. Durk just described, if you even if you had one would plow right into all those utilities. So that's another cost. >> Okay. I thought you had said it was uneconomic. I'm just curious as to what what the economics are. I assume you you made some projection of that in order to
come to the conclusion that it's uneconomic. >> Yeah. And I think more importantly it's it's not practical as practical. It's not as practical considering we have a safe um ADA compliant alternative
which we evaluated and determined would would be a safe and practical pedestrian access to the public amenity. >> Okay. I I don't want to take any more time. Thank you. >> Uh Dave Nixon.
Well, this is just a merrygoround round and around the things that I've been interested in the kind of housing, meaning studio apartments, elevators for disabled folks, uh
Mrs. Hubby's sidewalks and whatnot, everything just comes back. No, no, no, no. And it's it's all well, it's just too expensive. And today we have that with the uh oh gee, you want a generator? No, we don't have to put it
in. So the heck with it. It's just too much money. You know, as far as I'm concerned, it's time to close the hearing and go into deliberations. >> Steve, >> um I've got a little list here of things
I'd like to address. the the CCRT, the bus stop, you know, that's a great idea if you can pull that off, but I think uh the route is mostly along Route 28 or Main Street. So, for them to come up to your bus stop, you they would either
have to change a route or make a route that comes south on 137 because I don't think they're going to go come off of 28 and go up and pick somebody up and turn around and try to back up and go back to 28. So, you know, you might want to just I I
would like to see something definitive about how you're going to address that. Um, you know, maybe encourage them to make a new route that comes south on 137. >> Yeah, I mean, we would love to. Um, you know, unfortunately it's it's out of
our control. We can only ask. >> I understand, but you know, if you can put some pressure on them to make that happen, I think it would be a good idea. Um, the I'm going to be kind of all over the place here. I'm sorry. The retention
ponds for the storm water runoff. Do they come into play after every storm or or is that sort of just spill over from when the the the traditional system can't handle any more runoff?
So the the system is made up of tree trenches and a bio retention which treat the the one inch of runoff which is the first flush of runoff and then the overflow of runoff goes into that natural depression. >> Right. So
we had a 3-in rainstorm a couple weeks ago. Those those would then come into play those retention ponds. >> Yes. just the the one retention pond, the the large natural area. >> And what do you think? I know it's probably hard to tell or I don't know if
it's been engineered, but do you know what the depth of those ponds might be in a 3 in 4 in rainstorm or a hurricane? >> When you say the ponds, you mean the the water quality treatment systems or the larger >> the retention the overflow for the groundwater?
>> Yeah. So, we have a we do have an elevation on the plans. I can look that up and it we we show that on the drawings for the peerreview engineers so they see how high the water will come and that it won't >> you know detrimentally affect anything [clears throat]
>> and that's an I believe it's up to a hundredyear storm which is 9 in of rain. >> Would the depth of the of that retention area be a foot deep or two feet deep? >> Possibly. >> It's possible but it'll it'll drain over
time. Well, I saw in one of the documents that they're supposed to be uh it's supposed to drain within 72 hours or something. >> Yes. Yeah. And the soil at the site is very permeable, so we don't expect >> Are there any are there any sort of precautions? Do you think you need to try to keep kids out of there or going
down? Is there any do you think you is are there any safety issues with having two feet of water in a in a pond that's unprotected? Well, I mean, I I imagine the pond will drain very quickly, but yeah, I don't I don't think you would I wouldn't call it a pond. I would expect it to drain very quickly.
>> Okay. >> Looks like we have another answer, too. >> Okay. >> Then again, maybe not. >> Okay. [laughter] >> Um, getting to the parking a little bit. Are there provisions for um EV charges
for any of the cars or even the uh ebikes in in that rack where all the bikes are going to be? >> Uh not ebikes. Um EV uh chargers. Yes. We we don't have them identified. That would be something we add. In fact, I think you're you have to add uh certain
amount under the current code. We usually go a little above and beyond it because we find that that's something being used more and more. We usually install the the dual head chargers. Mhm. >> Um so I don't think we're at the stage where we've designed the electric
utility throughout the site, but um we would add uh in and we wouldn't lump them all in one location. There would be, you know, probably in certain areas >> in front of each building or something like that. >> Yeah. Something. And I think if the board wanted a a condition that the
applicant because based on a finding the applicant just said you know that you know a condition that EV charges will be um for vehicles will be placed as requ minimum required by law. >> Okay. >> But you are going to make provisions for that
>> definitely. Okay. Um the generators is the is the um the management office at least going to be open during emergency situations so people can get in there and charge
devices. What sort of >> the management office really isn't sized for that. So, we usually always have generators in projects where we have a community building that that can house uh 20 30 folks. You know, we went
through the main street permitting. We were told the town of Chadam offers these spaces to people. The town offers community spaces. We rarely ever have generators uh for non-life essential things like uh we don't have elevators.
We don't have a waste treatment plant which we do at village and green. those required generators. When you go to those properties, the generators aren't at each residential town home. They're at the the facilities that need to keep working during uh the outage. So, um we
have as currently designed, we do not have a generator that typically doesn't meet certain conditions where a gener generator makes uh a lot of sense. >> Okay. Well, I think you should maybe consider putting something there because, you know, it was sort of
compared to well, you know, they're living the people that are living here are going to be living under the same set of circumstances as somebody in a single family home that might be in the area, a neighbor. >> Um, single family, >> oh, I'm sorry. >> Single family home, you're dealing with
maybe four or five people that can go to a a neighbor's house or relative's house or somebody across town. here we're dealing with a hundred people that may not have another place to go. So I think you know generators in this
situation might be something you should consider or some have some provision uh for these people to to charge their equipment because they might not be you know if they don't have a car they might not be able to get into town to one of these other locations. So, I think it's something you should put a little more
effort into trying to to to figure out some kind of resolution for that. Um, the the maintenance of the buildings was I think you were addressed already. That was on my list of things to talk about, but you said that's going to be uh handled within the next few days
hopefully before our next meeting. Um, are there ballards around the bus stop? because that's right along Route Run 37. There's crazy things that happen over there. >> Yeah, I I don't think we currently show any ballards there.
>> Okay, maybe you should. >> We can add those. >> Okay. And then the last thing, you know, I think it's been on everybody's mind. Everybody seems to bring it up is the sidewalk. And you just we just talked briefly about something along the west side and it's difficult because of the
topography. But maybe, you know, thinking outside the box might be a little a little something that we could do here. We get applications all the time for um elevated stairs and you know pads over marshes, elevated uh walkways
over marches. Maybe you could consider something that's built on peers there that can accommodate the topography and just have like almost like a boardwalk along the road. um built on peers that would could
accommodate the topography there and you wouldn't have to have any fill or any kind of retaining walls or anything. It would be like an elevated catwalk basically from you know the exit of the property down to the bike trail.
That suggestion is certainly innovative, but you're also talking about what you just suggested would become would be in the town right away and would become townowned, town liable, town maintenance as soon as it was done because it would become part of the sidewalk system. So,
you know, there's there's again lots of challenges with with with trying to address the concerns that have been raised, but that's why we keep saying that if the town sees this as an issue, and we're not disputing it, >> the applicant's happy to work with the town, but it's going to be something that we believe needs to be above and
beyond this specific project. [clears throat] >> Okay. >> Appreciate the idea. >> All right. Thank you, >> Dave. >> Thanks, Janine. Um, I have a couple of minor questions, but first of [clears throat] all, I would
say I I com completely am in alignment with what um, Ed had to say about supporting this project from the beginning and continuing to support it. Um, we're still in the midst of a housing crisis here in Chadam and this is a necessary response uh, among other
things in my judgment. Um, and the sooner we can do it, the better. Uh, so I'm [clears throat] uh just trying to get a a little bit clearer picture in this in in the discussion
about a sidewalk on the west side of 137. And um and so I heard um Jeffrey's um descriptions. [snorts] Would that be so would it be granite curbing and the and the sidewalk
directly abudding the travel lane for route 137. >> Jeffrey, can you help answer? >> Yeah. So, sure. So, so the grant the purpose of the granite curbing is is two things. It's to, you know, protect the sidewalk. So, you need to have a
vertical 6-in curb to separate the traveled way from the sidewalk so that vehicles and just like you were talking about the bus stop, vehicles don't end up into the sidewalk is the first thing. The other part of is it it needs to control the drainage. >> Um, so it's going to have the water flow
to the edge and instead of going over today it flows country drainage over the road into the depression. So now it's going to be collected by the curbing and directed into a closed storm water system, but its primary purpose is to protect the pedestrians that are on the
sidewalk from errant vehicles. >> Thank you. That's kind of what I what I that's the way I like to think when I drive in situations like that and there's a granite curb. Um so were this project go forward in in conjunction with the town and town decided well
we'll we're going to put a project this what we might be looking at is a a a sidewalk directly abuing the travel lane route 137 which I think is a less than ideal circumstance under many on under you know who's
if it were up to me and I lived in this project as proposed and I wanted to get down into the bike path and get to Route 28, the sidewalk on the other side, and get across the road. And I had the option of going down the path, the winding path that they've
shown, or going down and walking in a sidewalk that's directly Route 137. I know which way I'd go. So it just doesn't, you know, I mean, I if if and I feel like all of these
objections being raised about the safety and and and I think that their response has been as good as as as they can offer under the circumstances. And I do think it's important that if the [snorts] town and if we feel and the town feels that u that the creation of a sidewalk there is
is what's going to be necessary to to make it safer in in everyone's judgment. um then so be it. But I I just think that a asking them to absor to uh to absorb the engineering and the cost and
everything else to create something like that is is beyond um well they've they've presented to us that that would be an uneconomic condition and I think I would agree with that. But uh >> and we have a safe alternative >> because I think the alternative they
presented is safe and you know I don't think that and as far as the issue of the plowing and and and snow removal on the on the um bike path there there could well be ways to solve that as it
as the need arises that that aren't even don't even necessarily involve formal arrangements. I don't know, but I don't think focusing on that is a reason to uh be throwing objections to this project.
Um, you know, I think I was just finished reading a book recently. It was I hadn't have rereading a book about the history of Chadam and some of what uh Mr. Nickerson who wrote the book talks about is back in the day of snow removal. Well, they everybody got out
and shoveled the road in front of their houses. So, I don't think we're needing we need to do that. we and we're not doing that. But I also and I also live when it when and I and I do understand this question of the plowing of the sidewalks because I live in a in an area
where the sidewalks get used a lot and and and even in the offse and sometimes they don't get to those sidewalks between downtown and the lighthouse for days and so people end up walking in in
Main Street on Main Street and that's that's a you know The snow removal doesn't happen instantaneously. Certainly not on the sidewalks. It happens first on the roads. So, uh I just don't think that I mean I think we all want to promote safety, but I think
we have to think about what what's practical and what makes sense and and that the proposal that they're offering is a safe alternative. Aside from that, I kind of I'm not I guess the question I wanted to ask and and andrew, you said something about
this, but I was going to ask maybe ask uh Rio, you know, I saw that comment about the bus stop and I thought, well, I don't think I've seen any bus stops in town that might be as large as to accommodate 20 or 25 people or something, wherever the planning board's comment was. And I
thought that's kind of unusual. So I thought I would ask I mean you I you you probably have similar kinds of structures in your some of your other developments and would you say that what you proposed is of a similar size which
>> yeah it's it's actually slightly bigger. When we were looking at this, we we looked at the one we had at Village in Nas and Green. Um and then Union Studios and and this is, you know, a good example of their type of work. They said, you know, those off-the-shelf
ones, they don't look nice. You know, for not much more money, you can build uh just uh handbu one uh on site, make it look chattamaskque and uh and it could actually come up with he came up with some dimensions that were actually
slightly bigger than the typical ones you get manufactured and delivered like like the one we have at EAM. So, we we think that's pretty decent size. I think that was also based off another project, not a Penrose project, but another project that Union Studios designed of a
similar uh type of affordable development. >> Okay. Because I I I I'm glad that some other questions have come about the the planning board's letter because as I was reading it, I kind of was wishing I had a a real world
interpretation of some of what they were trying to say, but I I think I understand it now. I understand the access road question inits issue. think that's been explained well enough to for me to understand and I don't but the another part that I didn't understand
that gets into this sidewalk question is they seem to suggest that somehow using the drainage easement I I don't know if they're talking about that access road that's there now as a as a and and Lee had mentioned this earlier too about trying to and I I just would think that
many of the same issues of grading and and all that would and ADA a compliance would rule something like that out. So I was a little surprised the planning board was mentioning that. But then I thought maybe I'm not understanding what they're saying. Any thoughts?
>> Yeah, I think you're understanding it correctly. But I think like Mr. Dbor, I think people were just trying to come up with options, alternatives. Some may work, some may not. But I think it was it was just an attempt to, you know, is there something else here that might work? Um [clears throat] and no, I think those
I mean out of all the things that have come up and and I and I just would note that um I've heard a few comments um um maybe in our previous meeting and also this meeting that there was some um indication of that there's a
[clears throat] a lack of of um common uh community space being provided on this plan this project. And uh I I would note that um I think this board basically um um didn't feel that that
was necessary in on our final um decisions on the main street project. Didn't feel that having common space was was something that the town uh felt we needed to have. So I'm kind of hearing both both sides of that uh u discussion.
Um, and other than that, I think that's it. Thanks. >> No more questions. Okay. >> Can I just note one thing um to to chair um to board member Nixon? Uh we recently just said yes to two items, the ballards
and the EV. So, we don't always say no. >> EV charger. >> Thank you. Mark, do you have >> uh Lee had a followup? >> Yeah, I just I just wanted to say that um I want to make this work. I mean, I I
really do. I just want to make sure we do the best job possible that we explore all the different options and um get the best product possible because it is a tricky site. Um so I I just want to say
I I I I do want to make this work. >> Okay, I have a few questions. Um bear with me there a little um I want to start with um I watched the planning meeting they mentioned or you mentioned a new mix of units and I think Rio you
referred to it as well at the beginning of the hearing. Can you go into more detail about um you you mentioned no still 42 units but just the change of bedrooms. What can you be more specific? >> Sure. And maybe Paul you you can help me
with this. This was actually something that had been presented I think two or three hearings ago. We um as we've redesigned to hit the new um the new site plan um to reduce the size and height waiverss in some of the
buildings. We had to change uh some twobedroom units into onebedroom unit. But getting getting rid of one of the bedrooms allowed us to get I think the roof pitch is lower >> three bedrooms. where it ended up was so
we're at the same number of units >> but we're we have three less bedrooms in the project compared to our original application >> 16 onebedroom 22 twobedroom and four threebedrooms so was what did that
impact the parking at all I mean is that how you ended up getting more parking >> well if anything we I would have reduced parking but um we ended up increasing parking uh for the peer reviewer. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Park parking is based on the unit
count, not on the bedroom count. So, the parking was not changed as a result of what you >> Yes. Okay. Parking is a ratio per unit. Okay. Um Okay. Thanks for clarifying what changed in the units. Um I'm sorry, the bedrooms.
All right. Also, um Mr. Singer, you mentioned in your memorandum that was dated July 8th, you used the word addi the u referring to the rail trail the word additional amenity and somewhere else later on you said
it's an optional amenity and then Rio I saw you say something at the planning board meeting you said this is the most safe option and in fact the only real practical option. It's a little bit in conflict I thought with what you know
Mr. the way Mr. Singer's um presenting it because I mean I think that is been the main issue with why the additional sidewalk has been so uh heavily discussed is that the rail trail does
the the sidewalk to the rail trail uh it it doesn't feel optional. It doesn't feel additional. that feels the only way to get uh out of that building if you're if you're walking and not in a car. I just wanted to ask you to
reconcile that. What when I used the word additional what I meant is that in affordable housing market rate housing regular subdivision additional option in the sense that for non-affordable housing connections to
the public infrastructure are not required. The town of Chattam does not regulate it. They don't require it practically or legally. So what I meant when I said that is we're providing an option because it is an amenity now and and then what Rio was saying I think is completely ties in with that it happens
to be the safest most practical way to do it if you're going to do if you're going to do it you know if we came in here and said no we don't think we have to do it you don't require for any other towns any other developments you know arguably I would say that that is if I said that that would be a legally
justifiable statement but what the applicant says no we want to do something. We want to provide this amenity to get so that the residents can get out to the rail trail. That's just getting out to the rail trail. And in this case, it happens to be able to also get them to the sidewalk, right? In some places, you could get to a rail trail
and just only have the rail trail because Penrose has also agreed to build under the LDA build the sidewalk from the rail parking lot around 28. This is actually going to do serve a dual function. It's helping the residents get out to the rail trail, but it's also helping them get into the public
sidewalk system. Okay. >> I think they're consistent. >> Okay. Uh well, I mean, I think most of the discussion has been around the the sidewalk and it's been seen as meeting house, walking on meeting house is not safe and no one would do that. So, it's it has seemed to be the only uh real
access off of the property was the point I was just trying to reconcile. >> Yeah. Other other than coming down to the bus shelter. I I >> Yes. Yes. That that option. Um, I did want to um ask while we have Jay Tolman on the line. Um, at our last hearing
with Penrose, we talked about the permit, a permit perhaps being needed for, um, the rail trail, and you had there was a comment that I had written down that you didn't necessarily agree with something that was said. Are you comfortable that uh, with the follow-up
comments about the permitting not being needed? Are you comfortable with that? And based on your research, >> I I am I am and I think I think um Andrew did a dec a good job researching and and giving us some of the information that we needed with respect to how the rights are allocated with
that. I think my point was until we know more about what's going on there, does it require some kind of permitting the same way we would for some kind of opening per driveway opening permit or something else like that? I'm satisfied that it doesn't. I
mean I think there are some other issues here with respect to the use that the board can still work out with them you know the maintenance and for the stretch of it to get have that connecting the plowing or whatever those things can all be discussed as part of the condition but from a legal perspective I thought
Andrew did a a nice job in terms of >> assessing what the avail what the rights are out there who controls it um and and how we might uh access it. I'm satisfied uh on on that issue for sure. >> Okay, great. Yeah, I thought it was very
thorough, but legally I didn't know if it if it met me that. Okay, thank you for confirming that. Okay, I don't know if your traffic engineer is still online, but um I want to talk this term midblock has been referenced a lot at the planning meeting here. this sort of,
you know, midblock uh crosswalk or mid and so I keep going back to I kind of either asked this question or alluded to this question the last time. Do do you not consider coming in Mr. Singer? You mentioned the distance of that uh rail
trail was like a half of a football field 150 180 feet. Do do you not see coming in at that point of the rail trail also? I'm not positive, but I think the rail trail is actually wider at at
around that point like 20 feet and then it narrows like right around there. Any concerns or any comments about that not being a midblock? We've been talking about midblock with respect to uh meeting house road. You wouldn't put a
crosswalk in the middle of that, right? That was the context with which that term was used multiple times. But I want to use that term in the context of the rail trail the entry into that at that
point. What do you think of that? >> So madam chair I can start if it's helpful. So the the the difference really when we're talking about midblock is it deals with connections to uh vehicular traveled ways. Um and the and the reasoning behind it is really about
it's really the speed of traffic and the differential in terms of you know motor vehicles versus pedestrians in this case of a crossing. And so as as we're looking at it from a safety perspective and you know focusing on meeting house in particular the speed of traffic on
that roadway is close to 40 miles an hour which is higher than posted or desirable for that section of roadway. The reason why if we take the rail trail crossing of meeting house in particular, the reason why there's a rectangular rapid flashing beacon there is because
it's a midblock crossing um and and the trail exists in that place and so that's where naturally the crossing would take place. So as a traffic engineer we're looking at the safety of the crossing because it's not an intersection. It's a midblock crossing and so therefore you
have a rectangular rapid flashing beacon to accommodate the crossing of roadway where we have speeds of about 40 miles an hour approaching that. Um if you were to have a crossing where the driveway is to this property to get to a potential future sidewalk on the east side that
would also be a midblock crossing as it relates to the motor vehicle traffic and would require the same level of care in the design rectangular rapid flashing beacon. Now, as we shift over to a intersection with the rail trail, um obviously we'll, you know, set aside the
whole conversation about ebikes, um the speeds and the interactions are much different at that location. It doesn't mean that we don't need to have proper sight lines. You do need to have proper sight lines so that you can have a bicyclists or pedestrian on the rail trail seeing a bicyclist or a pedestrian
coming from the development. uh but the speeds and the interactions are much different there and the causitive reaction of a bicycle and a pedestrian coming from this trial let's say coming from the project site interacting with a bicyclist that dynamic is much different
in terms of the reactions and the perceptions that need to take place in those distances than what you'd have on meeting house. So we don't always look at crossings of rail trails and classifying them as midblock versus at an intersection. Um there are in connections to rail trails that happen
all the time in the middle of the trail. Um and that's not uncommon, but the level of detail in terms of the design and the interaction um of a 40 mph motor vehicle versus a connection to a rail trail are much different. And that's why we we look at those interactions much
differently, classify them, and design them much differently. >> Understood. It's not a vehicular midblock. And I should have clarified that, but um the the point level of care. I'm I'm sorry, man. The level of care as it relates to sight lines is still there. You still need to be able
to see each other and so I don't want that to get lost in the conversation either. You can't put lots of nice landscaping and then have a pedestrian just walk right out into the rail trail, right? >> There needs to be sight lines. >> Okay. Um so is it true that it's wider
at that point? The rail trail is 20 20 feet wide. Just a little bit I guess. Um, >> we'd have to look at the plans that I gave you of the rail trail, at least as it was laid out. I can tell you cuz I was out there. I took a picture of it
where there's a fence. Now, if you're on the rail trail coming from eating house road, there's a like a there's a fence, >> three bar fence where that fence ends, just past it, there's a clearing. That clearing is approximately where the path would come out. So, where the path will come out is actually excellent sight lines. The engineer will have to
>> corrobor what I'm saying, but excellent lines. I don't know the exact width of the rail trail there. seems pretty consistent to me. Actually, the paved path seems very much the same. >> Oh, >> I I would just I'm going to guess, Jenny, but it it looks like pretty much 10 feet wide.
>> 20 feet wide. >> I No. Oh, sorry, Jay. Did you want to say something? >> 20t wide is like Route 28 on uh between uh the lights going to North Chadam. Route 28 is 20 ft wide there. >> Okay. But on one of the site plans I saw
where it was wider and it narrows down right about the point of the intersection. And one of the reasons I'm bringing this up is there's all this talk about midblock for vehicular traffic. And Miss Hy has the reason she brought up the bringing the sidewalk
down parallel little a little bit closer to where traffic bike traffic and pedestrian traffic but mostly bikes um slows down. So, so that's why I was asking and I do I do think it's wider at at some point. I I'd have to look it up,
but anyway, I just feel like that is channeling. It's it's 150 180 ft, Mr. Singer, to your point. Um, and and I think there's a concern about the same concern that we have, just not as devastating as a car. But still, what
about ebikes? You said, let's take ebikes off the table. I think you said that. Why are we taking off the table? Are they allowed? >> Well, the the bike path, if you look at the rules and regulations, it has rules for giving for pedestrian use, for bicycle use. I think it's silent on
ebikes specifically, but it talks about bicycle use, non-pedestrian use. I mean, if you look at the bike path, and again, I don't have the photographs in front of me, but the layout's changed because again, remember, there's the bike path easement, there's then the slope ement. So, the p plans you're looking at actually show both, and I can't tell you
off top of my head which is which. But when you're out there, and I've done it several times, you you've got the lane on this side, you got the line down the middle, you got the lanes. It's we might have something here. I think the actual paving of the bike path remains the
same. And in this case, in this particular case, when you're standing at that part I told you about just after the fence, >> you have a clear shot to meeting house. I mean, you can see the flashing beacon from there and you look back and you're going all the way back. So, I mean, >> I don't think that's a concern here. Now
that being said, at the intersection of Meeting House Road and the bike trail, the town has Ballard so people can't drive on the bike trail and the applicants also agreed to put up a Ballard at where the connector path intersects with the rail trail as it was
requested earlier. So I think it's being taken seriously and I don't think there is an issue here. >> Um this >> we have we have an image of the bike path. I'm not sure if you're able to put it on the screen.
>> This is the one I These are the ones I was referring to. So on the left there between the there's a sign on the on the left and then that clearing right there. When you're standing there, you see straight down to I think you can actually even see the meeting house road street sign at the end of that photograph. There's a little green sign there. And then this is the other view
from Route 137 looking back towards where it curves. So where the connector path hits is right in the middle of the curve. So it's got the best view down both directions. >> Okay. Okay. Um
so the planning board for maybe five members brought up safety over and over and over again. Um has there been any accident summary review or anything? It's I think it may have been brought up in a letter or two over time over these
months. I just wanted to see if there was any real um I don't know supporting evidence that it is or isn't you know the accidents on for example um >> accidents involving cars or bikes on
meeting house road the rail trail any any thing that you have on that or would that be >> something that would help allay the concerns around safety >> Jeffrey is that something. Maybe we can switch back to him. Uh, was that something you looked at probably not on
the rail trail, but is that something you looked at on Meeting House Road as part of your traffic review? So, we did and I'm trying to we we absolutely did. We looked at motor vehicle crashes along Meeting House Road at the intersections that we evaluated as well. And we also consulted with the
um, police department as well. And I I was looking through my report to see if there was anything that um came up as being, you know, an anomaly in short in terms of disproportionate number of crashes. Um and what I would
say and I actually just found the the um table from our report on there were when we look at the route 28 and route 137 in particular we looked at um and there were two crashes reported there over the over a 5-year period and the police
department also confirmed a low incidence of motor vehicle crashes um as well within the area. So there was nothing as a result of our uh due diligence in not only looking at the data that was available through the department of transportation uh the
registry of motor vehicles uh but also cons consultation with the Chattam Police Department that indicated there was a um safety deficiency that showed up as as um a disproportionate number of crashes. So there were no safety concerns raised.
>> Okay. Thank you for um sharing that documentation. One last question I had. You know, Mr. Frell has brought this up several times. Rio, I know you offered to uh or you offered an explanation about the material, but one of the things you said I thought was um was
interesting is how old is NOS Green? How how long has it been? It's only been a few years, right? >> Uh six years, I believe. >> So, one of the problems with the speed of repairing it, I think you were saying, was that there's a warranty situation involved. So, if the materials
are looking that poor after like not even the warranty is over, um you know, it's not just about fixing it. It's about having it occur in the first place. Is it the same material that were >> [snorts] >> uh you're using for meeting house proposed for meeting house that that is
on um currently on the East Ham property? >> No, that vinyl siding we did not have a great experience with it. We're proposing here cementicious board. >> Okay. And so you changed it. based on cumulative experience. Okay. >> Um All right. That's
>> I will just note again um village in Nasa Green is a beautiful property. There's 18 buildings, 400 windows. There's two problem windows identified. It's I think it's, you know, I want to be fair that it's it's also a project
that Eastam is is proud of and the town manager uses as a as a as an example of successful affordable housing building. No, I I appreciate that. It um I only really just wrote it down right at the end because as I was hearing your
explanation, it made me wonder about the confidence of the siding that we're proposing here and you have explained that it's not the same. So that's all that I have. Okay. So with that we are um going to discuss
next dates or our next steps. >> Yes. >> Jenny, can I um just chime in on something for a moment? >> Yes, you can. >> And maybe I can get a clarification from Rio or or Andrew and it was that comment
and it may not really be very important because it's more of a legal comment than a practical comment. The whole issue regarding the the public way issue, that stub or that portion of the roadway that shows as public way is not
eligible for con being considered as an accepted public way. If it could be characterized in a way to be available to the public in a way that helps the grant, that that's fine. We can work towards
that. So I mean it's going to be constructed the same way. So this is not a practical concern but town meeting cannot legally vote on it for acceptance as a public way. It just that's just not legally possible. >> Okay. >> So and I I don't think that matters
really in terms of the project itself how that fits into a box with respect to the grant. I', you know, I'd be looking forward to working with the stakeholders on that. >> But, you know, it >> Okay. >> It's it's a driveway. >> Yeah. >> Yeah.
>> And just so the board knows because this is part of what we're asking you to do and it's in the waiverss as well is so to Jay's point is absolutely correct. >> Part of this application is a request to subdivide the property into two lots. This stub, for lack of a better word,
and the main lot that's going to be built on. What the grant requires that the town own the area where the driveway is being built. So Jay, it doesn't have to be away. It's to be but it has to be town owned. So it would be a lot. We will have a definitive subdivision plan that the board will sign as in your role
as planning board here for the comprehensive permit which would create those two lots. And lot two, let's call it the little lot would be the one that ultimately the town would own for purposes of the grant >> for the grant. >> Right. And and and that's fine. In fact, Andrew, I had a conversation um by email
yes uh yesterday or the day before with Sarah and the chair where I said it can be a publiclyowned way, but that's different than a public way. And I know this is an issue that only lawyers care about. Um and even [clears throat] then
it might be boring, but um >> which is why I forgot about it. [laughter] >> Yeah. So, it's a it's kind of I just wanted to make sure that because I think the planning board seemed to be honing in on that issue a little bit as well. But >> yeah, >> um I I think that's an acceptable
solution as long as it's helpful for the grant process. >> Okay, Jay, thank you for that. >> Of course. >> So, respond. Not now. Um [clears throat] Jay,
uh so the board is wondering what what they should do for next steps. Um would you like them to talk any negotiations, conditions, close the public hearing, start deliberations? What are your thoughts on timing? I know
we have to have our public hearing officially closed. Next possible meeting would be August 6th. Um if that is the date of the close of the public hearing, then that would put our timeline to have the decision filed with the town
clerk no later than September 15th. >> Either way, um I think we can work with the the time frame. Um, I I think it really comes down to does the do the board members feel that there's any
factual information that could be forthcoming? Uh, Penrose feels like they've kind of reached where they need to be. If there's a burning interest in the board in seeing some additional information with respect to any other
issues, uh, obviously the sidewalk issue is still out there. Um, but I think Penrose makes some valid points in terms of things. I don't agree fully with Andrew, but I do agree in part with him
the way he has assessed it kind of from a legal perspective um and I have some thoughts which I've already shared a little bit with um the chair um on on that particular issue. But um if you're
ready to close, I think we can go with what we normally do. One thing to maybe think about is reserving the 6 in that I think we have the extension through the 6th or whatever the time frame through
the 6 and reserve that day for kind of deliberation within the public hearing itself which will help us more easily draft a decision rather than to have maybe two uh full board meetings within the 40 days if we started now.
So, I think there's a benefit to continuing the public hearing to the sixth in terms of making sure you get the conditions you want on this and we could rather than spending a lot of time taking in new factual information actually chewing on conditions, the applicant would have an opportunity
because the public hearing would be open to chime in at at that point. So, if that might be my recommendation, but I could work with closing today as well. It just means we may have to um hustle on some scheduling where we could get a
the board together, all five of you. >> Well, I I don't know that I'm uh I I don't feel like we've deliberated. I mean, today I specifically said questions from the board and comments. I didn't say deliberations and we didn't deliberate um fully. So, I I think we do
need that time to deliberate um as a body. That's what I think. What do >> um would the board members have any conditions that they could provide or thoughts on conditions that they could provide the applicant today? That way we could have a substantive com start off
as a substantive cons conversation on August 6th. [snorts] >> Um I do I I have a quick question as to how does one charge an ebike? Do you need a special charger? Don't know. It comes with the bike and you can plug
it in in your home. >> Yeah, the batteries. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Uh yeah, they batteries uh are removable from from the ebikes and you can bring them right into the house. Usually they're kind of expensive, so we usually take them off the ebike and
charge them in a regular 110 outlet. >> Okay. Um >> so we don't necessarily need chargers out on the property. Okay. Um I I would like to discuss a condition regarding
you know overseeing the the maintenance management if possible. I don't know. I just don't want to run into issues where I don't know things aren't things aren't addressed appropriately or in in a time
frame. But that I mean that's something I'd like to talk about. If if I can mention just something in terms of maintenance obligations, if folks hearken back to our last 40b decision, we put in a lot on maintenance
and responsibility of the applicant. And I'm pretty confident that with whatever you decide is the required level of maintenance for the board to impose as a condition that we can we can put that
out there and and I think the applicant by and large is is happy to accept maintenance responsibilities. Obviously, there's a few things in the margins here that we have to sort out, but um I think the conditions of approval that we used for the prior one had a lot of um
durable obligations on the part of the applicant to continue to maintain their property here. There might be some different issues that need to be maintained um that need to be the focus of maintenance conditions, but I'm pretty confident that we can uh work
that out as a board. Thank you, Jay. Okay, so I think we've discussed and we have a motion. >> Yeah, I think uh there's there's some feeling about closing the
hearing, but I understand the importance about leaving it open. So I would move that we continue the hearing to August 6th leaving the hearing open not closing
anything but the first order of business on the 6th would be to con discuss conditions and then following that we would go to closing the hearing. But I think I think the first thing is on
August 6th discuss the conditions, get that done with and then we can move on. [snorts] So I would need a second if anybody like that idea. >> I'll second the motion.
>> And how do you vote? >> I'll vote yes. >> Votes yes. >> Jenny votes yes. >> I vote yes. >> I vote yes. All right. >> And that meeting will start at 2 pm, our normal time. [laughter]
>> Hey, thank you very much for your time. We appreciate it. >> Thank you very much. >> Okay. >> Oh. Oh, I didn't know if you >> I just need a motion >> to >> ready for a motion to adjurnn. >> Yes, we need a motion to adjourn. >> I'll move to adjourn. >> Dave seconds and votes yes.
>> And I'll move to adjourn to August 6, 2026. Uh, Jenny votes yes. >> All votes yes. >> Ed votes yes. >> Sure. Steve votes yes. >> All right. The and we'll note the time of adjournment is 3:36.
>> Okay. 3:36. Thank you.