Heat. Heat. Good evening everyone. I'm calling tonight's meeting of the family planning board to order. Today is December 9th, 2025. It is 6:30 and we are meeting at family town hall. My name is John Dulie. I am
the current chair of the planning board. Before we begin, I would like to remind everyone that this is a public meeting and is being conducted in accordance with the Massachusetts open meeting law. Please take a moment to silence any mobile devices or electronics to avoid
interruptions. Anyone wishing to speak should come to the podium, wait to be recognized by the chair, and state their name for the record before making remarks. We encourage respectful and constructive dialogue during public
comment periods. Thank you. We'll we'll now proceed with the first item on the agenda which is public comment. If anyone wishes to speak about something that is not on our agenda this evening, please come to the podium. State your name.
>> Yes sir. Uh hi everyone. Dave Morardi Fmouth, Massachusetts. I I I just like to um inform the rest of the town of Felmouth that uh and and the folks over in uh Mr.
uh I did I I was uh sitting up on Knobska Point this afternoon and uh you're not going to believe what I saw. Turbines. You believe it? A beautiful view like
that, a beautiful town like this. Uh, I just couldn't believe it. Thank you. >> Thank you. Anyone else? Okay. All right. Then um uh first thing on our agenda tonight other than public
comments is the minutes. >> Mr. Chairman, >> someone down there raised their hand. >> Somebody has their hand up. >> Yeah. I was just wondering if this is time to address the solar farm. >> No, no, no. >> Oh, not yet. >> Mr. Chairman motion to approve the
November 25, 2025 minutes as presented. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I >> I unanimous. >> Next on our agenda, we're going to um take a request for covenant release for Mweeney
Lane lots 2, three, and four. Um so I suggest that you go ahead and uh release the covenant in lie of a bond that was set um by the engineering division. Um so they looked at they took a look at
the applicants estimates and then put in a contingency and their total is uh $50,8259 >> and that's to complete the road at the end. >> That's to Yep. That's to um to do all the rest of the road work. Um so they'll
be you'll be releasing three lots. >> All right. Thank you. >> Now you got a motion to approve. Any discussion first? >> Motion. >> Motion to approve the covenant release. >> Second. >> Thank you. Any discussion? Just for the record, the amount that you're releasing
it for, >> $58,500. >> Okay. I thought because Melinda said that, we didn't have that. Okay. Okay. I have a motion and a second. >> Motion and second. It's done. >> All in favor? >> I >> I unanimous. Thank you. >> So, we're going to change the agenda
just a little bit here so we have an applicant that doesn't have to wait here many hours. Uh, so it's the applicant is I'll let you take over Tommy. I refuse myself from this hearing and I'll be back afterward.
Okay. Okay. So, this is uh the applicant is L. Jeanci. It's a definitive subdivision plan application and special permit application for a four lot planned residential
development PRD at 428 Carrot Shop Road. Do we have a notice that we need to read into the record? Okay. And um the applicant's attorney will >> Thank you very much. >> Summary of the project. >> Yep. Thank you very much, Mr. Zen. Um
for the record, Kevin Clower. I am before you representing Xiao and Cara uh the applicant on this matter. We were before you um about two weeks ago and uh based on the engineering comments and some comments of the board. We submitted revised plans which were filed with the planning board last week. I believe
those plans have been responsive to all of the comments set forth in the engineering referral and uh basically closed the loop on any outstanding questions. Um, I know there's a long night ahead of the planning board, so I won't say much more other than I think we've given you everything you need. And if you have any questions, I'd be happy
to address them. >> Does the board have any questions? We can start with you, Paul. >> Questions? >> We have an affirmative motion ready to go? >> Yes. >> Let's go. >> All right. Can I have a motion? >> What I'm asking? >> You got to read it. >> You got to close the hearing first. It's
a public hearing. So, make sure that you close the hearing, take it under adisement, and if you're ready to vote, you can read the motion into the record. >> The motion. >> I move that we close the hearing. >> Second. >> Okay. Uh, all those in favor? >> I >> I Okay, it's closed.
>> Read the motion. >> I would suggest that you have another member read the motion into the record, but um, whoever is ready. >> Charlotte's ready. Charlotte, >> I move that the planning board votes to approve the application of wild blancier
under article 4 definitive plans chapter 305 subdivision regulations of the town of Felmouth and grant a special permit pursuant to section 240-9.8 8 for planned residential development of the zoning bylaws to allow four lots to
be created with 261,120 ft of open space at 428 Carrot Shop Road with the following conditions and findings. The applicant has proposed a four lot plans residential development
subdivision that includes three 15,000q foot single family home lots, one 50,29 ft single family home lot, 261,120 ft of open space, and 500 ft culde-sac
style roadway named Honey Lane inclusive of all necessary utilities. Under section 249.8D2 8 D2 of the zoning bylaw. As this definitive subdivision plan is being submitted as a planned residential development with a single
family detached home, the minimum lot requirements are reduced to 10,000 square ft in size, 50 ft of frontage, and 75 ft of width. Additionally, because this planned residential development proposal includes the set aside of over 50% of the entire parcel
as protected open space, the lot coverage of all developable lots shall be limited to 40% by structure. Under its sole discretion, the board has approved the applicant's one lot density bonus request under the provisions of
section 240-98G of the zoning bylaw. The board finds that the proposed open space parcel abuts existing public open space or protected open space owned by a nonprofit land trust. There are rare, threatened, or endangered species in the
open space parcel to be provided in the planned residential development or the addition of the proposed open space parcel further protects rare, threatened or endangered species on any adjoining open space parcel, whether public or private. and that the applicant proposes
to donate the open space to the land trust or public entity to allow for public access. Through testimony at the public hearing, the applicant intends to donate the 261,120 ft of open space to the town. However, if the donation to the town doesn't come
to fruition for some reason, the applicant will establish a homeowners association and transfer the ownership and maintenance of the open space to the association to comply with the requirements of section 247.2 of the zoning bylaw. The applicant has
committed to installing individual innovative alternative denitrifying septic systems for each single family home in the proposed subdivision. The planning board finds that the site is adequately sized for the proposed use and suitable due to its location. It
will not adversely affect traffic flow or safety. It won't have adverse impacts on views and vistas. The methods of sewage disposal, portable water and drainage are adequate. Appropriate utilities and other public services are provided and that the project will have
no impact on the supply of affordable housing in town. The planning board finds that the application meets the minimum requirements and conditions found in section 240-9.8 planned residential development of the zoning bylaw and land set aside as open
space shall be permanently protected for open space purposes only. There are then waiverss that were requested. The planning board grants waivers and the following requirements of the subdivision control bylaw as requested by the applicant.
Section 305-11C3 traverse tables. Section 30512D traverse tables. Section 30530 sidewalks. Section 30534 street lights. The planning board finds the application
special perma proposal to reduce the minimum area of the lots will be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of this chapter and the proposed will not have adverse effects which overbalance its beneficial effects on either the neighborhood or the town.
Then it's follow the conditions and the conditions appear to be the town's standard conditions. So that if you're going to make any modifications it has to come back to the planning board. The plan has to be constructed as approved. No permit for occupancy of new construction shall be elicited unless
the planning board is satisfied that the conditions of this approval have been met. The applicant shall obtain a storm water management permit with the Department of Public Works engineering division prior to any land disturbance. The project should comply with the town's soil erosion and sediment control
standard conditions document. All telephone, cable, television, and electric service lines to the four proposed lots shall be placed underground. The applicant shall obtain an an approved street opening permit and posted any required bond with engineering division prior to the start
of construction. No further subdivision shall occur without modification at this decision by the Felma planning board. And finally, this special permit shall lapse three years from the date if it is granted. If a substantial use
there uh has not soon commenced except for good cause shown and the full uh decision will be available in the minutes and in the planning department. >> I just want to check I think you might have misspoke. You said 40% lot coverage. I believe that should have
said 40% lot coverage by structure and paving, not just structure. I don't think we can allow 40% coverage by structure. >> That's what you read. I don't know if that's what it says. That appears to be agreed by >> we are agreeing to a 40% lot coverage by
>> I believe that's what what's set forth in the planned unit planned residential development bylaw >> that's pretty intense. I didn't realize that. >> Yeah, it's the trade-off for the smaller lots. >> Yeah, >> I'll accept it. Just seemed I hadn't noticed that before. Sorry.
>> Good. You pointed it out to all of us. >> Good. >> So that's my motion. >> Okay. Second. >> Okay. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. >> Unanimous. >> Thank you very much. We appreciate your time this evening.
>> Thank you. It's a good project. >> Guess that's not why. >> Welcome back. That should be a positive motion, too. >> Um, yeah. Yeah, there we go. >> We should be able to
>> read this. >> I'll read it. >> All right. So, so our next hearing is um applicant Matthew Terry site plan review application to construct a new 7,475 square foot light manufacturing
warehouse building at 117 Bernard East St. Jeep Drive. It's a lot to say. >> It is. Welcome. >> Thank you. Good evening. For the record, my name is Matt Terry, attorney from the law firm of Aman Clower here in Felmouth
and uh attorney for the applicant. Uh this is our uh third hearing. Uh coming out of the uh most recent hearing, we made a a couple of additional revisions to the site plan. We had changed a a couple of parking spaces to gravel.
We've gone back to paved parking spaces and submitted a revised set of site plans last week to the planning department. We were also working with the engineering department to address uh some of their comments. Uh the
engineering department sent over a revised referral on December 5th which I'll get into in a moment. Um, one of the comments uh that engineering had asked was whether we might be subject in part to conservation commission
jurisdiction uh because a small part of the project development envelope uh may be uh within 100 ft of a wetland uh marked area on an adjacent property. uh the um uh uh applicant uh engineer met
with conservation and the conservation office confirmed that an RDA would need to be filed. So our intent is to do so uh at the end of this month um and be in front of the conservation commission uh in January.
Uh other than that um RDA from the conservation commission, we believe that we've uh resolved all of the other comments that engineering had raised. Um engineering had made a couple recommendations for conditions. Uh and
there was an open comment that the um uh fully submitted final plan set be stamped by both the engineer and the surveyor. the current iteration is stamped by the engineer but not the surveyor. And so we would ask the board uh if they're inclined to to approve the
project this evening that they include that as a condition that we submit a plan set stamped by both the engineer and the surveyor subsequent to approval. Um so with that as an update uh I will yield back to the board. >> Thank you.
>> Are there any other updates to this or set? >> No set. Okay, thank you. Anybody have any questions or any comments? If not, and uh go ahead. >> Seem to have responded to everything we needed and what the engineering
department has to say. The planning board review confirms that. >> Yes, it does. Thank you. Tell me, you have a draft motion if you so kind. Motion that the planning board votes to
approve the site plan review application of Rajisa LLC for construction of an additional warehouse building 117 Bernard East St. Gan Drive under section 240-12.2 of the zoning bylaw with the following
findings and conditions. Findings. The applicant is proposing to amend the previously approved site plan approval to construct a new 7,475 square ft warehouse building behind the existing building. The proposed
warehouse will accommodate up to seven new employees, bringing the total maximum number of employees on site to 25. According to the applicant, due to the lack of a retail component on the site, visitor traffic to the property
will remain minimal, rarely exceeding one to two individuals at a time. With a total of 25 employees, the proposed development requires a minimum of 20 parking spaces and 22 spaces are being provided.
Next page. Lighting will be installed on the new building similar to the existing building. A landscape plan was submitted in accordance with section 240-14.3B and the board finds that they generally
comply with the standards within those sections. The town of Felic departments have reviewed and commented on the abovementioned application and the planning board finds that the applicant has adequately addressed the comments.
The planning board's review does not include building code and zoning review and the board defers that to the building commissioner. The board finds that the information provided by the applicant conforms to all the requirements of section 240-12.2
two of the zoning bylaw conditions. Number one, the plan shall be constructed as approved. Any changes shall be reviewed by the planning board to determine if a modification of this decision is necessary. Number two, the applicant shall obtain a storm water
management permit with the Felmouth Engineering Division. Number three, any connections or alterations to public utilities would require permission from the appropriate town department. Number four,
construction of this project shall follow the town's soil erosion and sediment control standard conditions document which can be found on the engineering divisions page of the town's website. Number five, any fences erected
on the property will need to allow for adequate passage of small mammals and amphibians underneath. Any grading or retaining walls on the property shall not be greater than one to three incline to allow for the passage of amphibians
and small a mammals. Block retaining walls alone cannot achieve this adequate passage. Number six, the project shall meet all applicable standards set forth in the building code as determined by the building commissioner.
Number seven, the applicant shall see the engineering division for address assignment for the new building prior to applying for a building permit. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall post the address for this building per section 99-1 of the
town code. Number eight, the applicant shall obtain an approved driveway permit and post any required bond for the engineering division before the start of construction. The applicant shall complete the work
approved by the engineering division in the driveway permit. Lastly, number nine, pursuant to section 240-12.2 of the zoning bylaw, this site plan review decision shall lapse 3 years from the date it is granted if
substantial use thereof has not sooner commenced except for good cause. The determination of good cause shall be made by the planning board. >> Is there one more for the architect stamp? Is that another
>> I believe the plan has both sets on it, right? The one that you finally submitted >> hard copies. I submitted that the one that >> Yeah, I thought I saw them on there. So, the plans are all set. >> Okay. >> I'll second. I have a comment.
>> I have a question. uh under condition number two standard condition about the storm water management permit. There's been a lot of discussion in the uh from the DPW and elsewhere about the storm water report. Does that include the storm water report as requested in all
those discussions? >> So they asking for a new stormwater per uh report or just a permit. >> I um so this condition is actually it's a good catch. Thank you for catching this. It's actually an error. That condition
shouldn't be in this decision because the applicant is not uh clearing more or disturbing more than an acre of land. So we we actually have to pull that condition out. Thank you for bringing that to our attention. >> But so the answer to your question is under normal circumstances, an applicant
who is disturbing more than an acre has to go to the engineering division and apply for and receive a stormwater management permit separate from this process. >> So we should adjust this. >> Yes. to address that issue before approval. >> Correct. And by adjustment, totally
delete it. They submitted storm water calculations that were uh verified by our engineering division just like normal applicants would when they're disturbing less than an acre. So the storm water management permit is not applicable in this. >> If you delete this condition that
satisfies >> correct remove that condition. >> I'll make a motion we delete um condition number two. on stormwater management permit. >> Yes, >> I'll second. >> The motion. >> Second. >> Any discussion?
>> All in favor? >> I I >> I unanimous. Thank you. >> And then >> on the motion motion. >> And the main motion. >> So, it's been moved and seconded. >> All in favor? >> I >> I And thank you.
>> Thank you. All right. Uh, next on our agenda applicant, AS Cape Cod Holdings LLC, excuse me. Site plan review application to install large scale grounded ground
mounted solar arrays at 41 42 48 and 59 Theater Drive 0 Box Hill Road. Maps one zero 0300 01 163 1 17 0 1 028B
014 and 1 17 01 028 039 1 17 0 1 028 015 1 0 04007
035 five and um what what we're going to do, Mr. Chair, we had some questions from the last meeting. Mr. Chair is going to address that and after that I'm going to uh go to the public to see if they have any other comments or questions and
we'll go to the board. >> We also chairman Julie have a presentation as well. >> Yes. I'm sorry. >> So I'm not sure when you wanted to slot that into the hearing process. >> While you're up there. >> All right. Um thank you uh for the record again Matt Terry from Alower here
in Falmouth attorney for uh the applicant. Uh this is our second hearing uh for these three projects. At the first hearing we gave a general overview. We also came away uh from that hearing with a number of follow-up questions and and comments. We
endeavored to uh address as many of those as possible in a letter we submitted to the planning board uh prior to the hearing. We can go into more detail on the substance of the letter if the board is so inclined. We'll be addressing a number of those topics as
part of our presentation this evening. At the conclusion of our first hearing at the suggestion of um the uh director of development, um we uh had uh been
given specific subject matter areas to cover tonight. And so we have uh developed a presentation that's responsive to that. Uh we're going to have subject matter specialists come up and address each of their particular areas of expertise. Uh after I'm done
with the introduction, Brian Madden, an environmental consultant with LACE Consulting, uh is going to speak uh to uh our restoration plan to the wildlife corridor. There was some discussion last week around wildlife corridors in
general and whether we could divide up the west array uh to provide an additional wildlife corridor as part of the project design. So Brian will speak to that. He's also going to speak to the walking trails. We had a number of proposed walking trails and part of the
discussion at the last hearing responsive to both board and public comment was to see if uh the walking trails can be designed in such a way that they form closed loops where hikers
don't need to uh conduct a part of their uh walk um on Boxbury Hill Road. So Brian will be addressing that as well. Uh then Raul Lazardi, the engineer for the project with Capen Islands Engineering will present and he'll speak
to the proposed grading which will all be on site. Uh there'll be no uh soil removed from or imported to uh the uh project sites and he'll walk through our grading plan. He's also going to discuss
the nitrogen loading calculations that have been made um uh in compliance with the various regulatory requirements the Cape Cod Commission and the town of Falmouth and Raul will finally be
addressing um some viewshed uh uh issues that came up in the last hearing um looking specifically at providing additional information relative to views of the project areas from Kunamesa Pond itself. Finally, Lawrence Cook, who's
with Pure Sky Energy and a construction manager there, will present on the design and system components. Uh he's also going to address noise considerations as well as fire considerations and mitigation. Uh so, um
with that as introduction, I'll yield the podium to Brian Madden. Thank you very much. Uh for the record, Brian Madden uh from LEC Environmental uh Consultants, a senior wildlife wetland scientist. Uh so at the last
meeting uh we reviewed some of the areas that are proposed for tree clearing that are shown in red on this attach image and there's some adjoining photographs representative representative photographs of some of the areas uh that
are proposed to be cleared. In total there's 10.42 42 acres being proposed across the site that are comprised of both intact uh treat areas, forested upland that those are the areas that I had mentioned at the last meeting that
had the mature trees overtory and also uh intact shrub layers and ground cover that haven't been managed. Uh there's of that 10.42 42. There's 2.75 acres of these managed tree areas where the
understory is routinely mowed in between golf holes uh in standalone trees which you can kind of see in some of those thinner uh red line configurations. Uh but the intent of the project is to
uh maximize the protection of the forested buffers in and around some of the more sensitive resource areas uh namely Kunamesa pond round pond and the Bernal pool um that's located uh
adjacent to the west array. Oh yeah, if >> there's anything. Uh so again, these are just some uh representative photographs. This is the south array south of Round Pond. uh with
this red area in the middle portion between holes five and six being the uh primary area where the intact forested upland is proposed to be cleared and regraded as part of the the um project
footprint. Uh a as previously mentioned the restoration plan covers 34.22 acres of the subject parcel. Uh that includes 16.0 05 acres that is dedicated to
reestablishing forest and upland uh within res restoration areas. Uh there's 650 trees being proposed uh on site. Um 23.2 of those acres is within the
open space. Um there was a question at the last meeting about the size of the the trees that are proposed to be planted. In the letter that we had submitted, we had specified that the caliper sizes are going to range between 1.5 to 2 in. So that equates to
basically about 10 to 14 foot tall saplings being proposed. But in addition to those 650 trees, there's thousands of proposed shrubs that are being planted across the site within the restoration areas.
Let's see. There was a discussion at the last meeting about uh breaking up the west array uh at a pinch point that's proposed approximate to the site entrance off Boxbury Hill Road. uh and the applicant is propo proposing to
provide a break in the fencing um to enable enhanced wildlife passage through that area. We are proposing to submit uh revised plans that provide greater detail on that. But this is a schematic of effectively what it would
look like where right here at the front entrance there would still be a security gate uh but it would be your standard gate that's not connected to chain link fencing. The revised chain link fencing would extend through here connecting to
uh the battery uh converter areas and wrapping around uh and then the break here in the middle and then starting back over on the south side in and around the array itself. But the intent is to maximize that corridor to allow
wildlife migration through. And um just also to note there's a 100 foot setback of the fencing running parallel to Boxberry Hill Road to the roadway itself. Um where there's the screening being proposed. These are the BMS.
Uh there was also a question at the last meeting about the height of the gap of the fencing. Uh and just for confirmation, we are proposing to have that gap vary between 6 to 12 inches across the site. And that's going to be uh somewhat variable based on final
grade and topography across the site, but 6 to 12 in will be accommodated. See, hopping over to the walking trail network. Uh so there were some comments and questions about retaining kind of a
loop network and avoiding uh the need to uh walk on Boxberry Hill Road. And what is being proposed here is um initially we had the walking trail connecting to um
existing walking trails that go down to the beach uh on town property. Uh we are proposing to extend and continue that system that trail network so it loops around on site and uh continues down to
the existing crosswalk where there's a car path crossing along Boxberry Hill Road and then connecting to uh walking trails on the opposite side the east array and then continue off site onto town property as part of the the
Kunamesa reservation property. uh that specifically is part of the uh west and east arrays and the north end approximate to the intersection with ranch road. Um along the south array we are uh
proposing to more formalize a looping trail network. Uh you can see it here wrapping around but what's existing currently as I mentioned at the last meeting there's an existing trail uh that runs parallel to Round Pond and
we've uh approximated in red on this proposed uh plan but basically that provides a full loop around the southerntherly array to uh create that looping network. Uh we had also in the narrative had
provided a little bit more detail on the the restoration plan components and some of the questions that were asked specifying the seed mix that was included in the restoration plan that's on file. And um if there's any questions on on
that, I'd be happy to answer it. But for now, I'll turn over to uh Ro. Good evening. For the record, Rahuli Sardi with Cape Islands Engineering. Um, so this graphic that we're presenting here is the West Array. And in
particular, it shows in color the areas that are being cut and the areas that are being filled for this um this array. So in the west array, we are going to be cutting some of the steeper sides of the terrain um to to provide a slope that is
um adequate for laying down the the racks for the solar panels. So the areas that are steeper, the upper portion of that slope is going to be cut, the lower portion of that slope is going to be filled. Um so this is not like we're intending to be trucking too much
material um throughout the site. If you can see the area that is being cut is just getting bulldozered down to fill the areas below that are too steep. Similarly on the northern section we are creating some earth BMS. So we need to
bring material for that earth BMS. Right adjacent to it there is a slope that is steeper than what we desire to put the ray systems for. So we're going to be cutting that sl um that hill and building up those um earth BMS. Um and similarly as we go along the site um we
see the same um scenario happening again for this array there's approxim approximately 45,000 cubic yards of earth movement but all staying within the site for the east array which is the flatter of all three parcels there is the same
um idea happening but to a lesser degree the majority of the excavated material is needed for the creation of the earth berms we are creating these earthms to raise the graves um along Bucksbury Hill. So, we are going to be um making some cuts and creating some fills to
create those elevated um mounds. Um but as you can see, it's a lot less than on the west array. This array roughly requires about 17,000 cubic yards of earth movement. For the south array, um we have that
middle portion where Brian indicated um the clearing that's happening between hole number five and hole number six. That is a rather steep slope. Um so on the higher side, we're going to be cutting that higher slope, filling in the lower slope, and also building up
the earth BMS along um Boxbury Hill. There's additional cutting over by I believe this is hole number um eight um where there's another slope going down to the the green area. That area is going to be cut on the higher side and
filled on the lower side um for the same purpose. And this one is approximately 49,700 cubic yards of earth movement. Um there's been a few comments and questions about the nitrogen loading. Um on the nitrogen loading the first thing
I want to just reiterate is that the nitrogen is transported by water. First it is applied on the surface by different sources. The one of concern of most concern in this um properties is nitrogen from fertilizers. So nitrogen
is applied to the surface or to the the lawn and turf areas. Water takes that nitrogen and brings it down. A certain percentage of it brings it down to the groundwater. The groundwater transport that nitrogen from within the
groundwater underneath this um parcels all the way down to great pond which is the body of water where nitrogen has been um identified as the concern. So there's been three different reports for nitrogen um throughout this project and
throughout different presentations. Um Amy Lel the Fouthmouth wastewater superintendent provided the point of view from Great Pond. So at that point the water the nitrogen has already been applied at the site reached to
groundwater and being transported by groundwater all the way to Gray Pond. And the number that um she refers to and she calls out um the TMDLs that were done for great fun is 470 pounds per
year. Now that 470 had a attenuation from the ground the nitrogen that was um reaching the groundwater at the sites until it came down to to Great Pond. that attunation based on her numbers is
roughly 43%. Now the Cape Cut Commission um we provided calculations for the Cape Commission based on the Cape Cut Commission standards which is technical bulletin 91. Their concern is how much nitrogen reaches the groundwater. So the point of
view from the Cape C commission is at the site at groundwater not when it reaches great pond. So by the time the fertilizer nitrogen reaches the groundwater there is a reduction because the plant material absorbs nitrogen. So
there is a reduction and the Cape Cat Commission uses a 25% that from whatever fertilizer is applied 75% of that nitrogen is absorbed by the plants and 25% reaches groundwater. So that number is the one that's presented
at the KA commission um level and that's the middle number there 735. If that number we apply the same attenuation that is applied in the MEP uh TMDL numbers that number will relate
to approximately for 692 pounds per year compared to the 470 from the MEP that Amy Lel referred to. Now on the um zoning code for farmouth um the application is the number that is in
this in this regulation. So now we're talking about what is applied on the surface. The fertilizer is applied at the surface. Now something to realize is that the KA commission uses a three pounds per 1,000 square feet of um area that you apply fertilizer. The town of
applies the same number three pounds per 1,000 square foot. Um, so those two numbers at the very top row are the same because it is the same application rate. So if we use the the same 25% makes it to the groundwater
that the Cape C commission technical bulletin um has us do, then this same number for the FMA zoning code relates to the same 735 kilograms or 1,620 pounds that reaches the groundwater. And
after attinuation the same number is 692 by the time it reaches great pawn. So there are three different point of views of where to look at the nitrogen level and it was presented in three different ways. So it's not that the numbers are much bigger on on one um analysis
compared to another. It's also that they're different point of views. Um so and the initial um application of nitrogen for the CER commission and the local zoning we have approximately 6,500
pounds a year that is applied on the surface. Um the MEP um numbers that um Amy Lo referenced say that there's roughly 5,500. So, it's a less amount that supposedly gets applied as fertilizer
from the original um but just the standard maintenance of the of the golf course. Um at the last meeting, we also had a couple of comments about what is the view sheds like from the pond. So, one of the things that that we looked at
this and this came up to our minds because we did a similar analysis to look at shading on the panels. Um so when we were doing the design for this west array this panels on the north side of the vernal pool we were concerned
about shading from the vegetation on the existing tree line that is between the vernal pool and the panels. So we did an analysis and we use lighter um which is information that is available publicly by Noah and the USGS and you can get the
lighter information to capture what is the canopy of trees or structures. um in addition to just the ground elevation. So this color reds, greens and purples, this represents the canopy of trees.
Um the elevations of the pond is roughly elevation 36. What do I have here? 36 and a half. Um so there's a portion um if you're in the pawn at 36 and a half there's a section a band of
elevations that are in green and that represents elevations that are between 70 and 100 ft for the canopy. So that's 70 ft to 100 ft. That's already 35 ft higher than the pond. So, if you're in the pond, you have to look over when um
all that vegetation is in full foliage um to get past that vegetation. There is a section over to the very northn northwest portion of the property where we see this reds. These reds are elevation between 50 and 70 ft of the
canopy, not the crown. And we do have um proposed um array system that our at grade is elevation 86. Um so this will be an an area that we can't do much because this is um owned by the town. So this is the town
property. Um so there's not much that can be done here for um screening the array. But most of the array is being screened by all of this vegetation that is repo that is existing um with canopies between 70 and 100 ft. The
purples are between 100 and 140 ft. Then in the middle section, which is this area that I'm hovering over, this is currently hole number 18. This is the lowest um hole in in the golf club. An
area here we have um a shaded canopy of red. So this is a low area of the canopy trees existing. What we agreed to do in this location is all this hatch that is shown here, this is all going to be replanted. Hole
number 18 um has the most planting proposed for this project including I believe 160 or 170 trees. And the whole purpose of these trees is that in conversations with the homeowners association and neighborhood um we want
to screen this section right here given that it is the lowest point. We don't want to change the grades. We don't want to um install raised BMS here. Um the reason it is a a low section and we want to keep it that way. There is a hydraulic connection between the vernal
pool in the middle of the the site at elevation 37. a little wetland at also at elevation 37 and pawn which is at elevation like 36 and a half. So there's not much um height difference. There's not much
difference in groundwater. But we don't want to change that dynamic. So what we want to do is plant trees, plant vegetation that is going to thrive in this condition and just screen it with plantings. But that will provide a thicker screening through that view corridor. And then looking further south
on the west array, there is existing vegetation that's between 70 and 100 feet. Looking at the south array, um west of the south array, this entire property is owned by the town. This is open space property and is completely vegetated. We
have the same situation here where we have existing canopies between 40 um between 50 and 70 between 70 and 100 and between 100 and 104 140 um between the proposed array and Kamesa pond. So
anybody that's on the pond will actually have to look up through this canopy to actually try to see um anything behind it. But everything behind the ground level at this location is 7450. The highest elevation is roughly 84. Um,
no, I'm sorry, 74 at this south array. So, most of this canopy is already higher than than the ground level for the array system. So, we believe the the view shed that exists today is going to be obscured by the existing vegetation on all these properties.
And with that, I will pass it over to Lawrence or Matt. Thanks. I'm just going to tee up Lawrence's uh presentation. >> Okay. Thank you. Um the purpose of my
presentation is to provide the planning board and members of the community with a clear fact-based overview of the fire safety considerations and environmental protections associated with our proposal. We want to provide information about the equipment that we've proposed, uh how their systems are designed, regulated, and managed to minimize risk,
address concerns about potential environmental impacts, including noise, air quality, and runoff um during an emergency event, and offer a transparent, accessible explanation of the engineering controls, operational procedures, and the community safeguards. Uh this presentation is meant to inform, uh answer questions,
and support an EV evidence-based discussion. Uh the project will comply with multiple uh different uh codes and standards. Uh this is not a an exhaustive list, just the ones that would fit on there. Um
some of them will overlap as well. Uh the national electrical code applies to both PV and and the best. But uh just gives you an idea of the the number of regulations that are required um when designing, operating, and uh installing these projects.
uh the proposed system components um put simply out in the fields you'll have solar racking um there'll be combiner boxes um to collect all the uh the wires into a larger wire that goes back to the equipment pad where you'll have inverters, transformers and the battery
storage. Um it it's modular uh unobtrusive and engineered for reliable uh operation with minimal noise or environmental impact. Uh this gives you an idea of an equipment pad. Uh this is a another site that we built in Douglas. Um this is uh
an older site. Uh so the the technology is slightly different. Uh you have four battery containers here. Uh these are in repurposed 40ft shipping containers. The soul bank 3.0 system that we're proposing here. Uh the containers are 20T, so about half that size. Uh over in
this location on an equipment pad, you have uh the inverter, the transformer. Uh this is a sectionalizer cabinet because we've got two inverters here. So you got wires going in here, wires going in here, and then a single set of wires that go out to the street with the connection. Uh these small um white bits
of equipment here are the DC converters that act between the the battery and the inverter uh that make sure that all the voltages uh between the two in line with where we want to see them. Uh we have a small equipment rack here uh with a load
center uh and uh the data acquisition system. Uh and over here we have an orcs transformer which provides uh uh life support systems for the uh uh for the batteries uh HVAC and uh controls. Uh parcel B which is the uh east array. Um
no parcel B is the west array. That one >> yeah parcel B which is the west array has two inverters and transformers. an aux transformer, six DCDC converters, two containers, the equipment rack, and the sectionalizer cabinet. Parcel C, the larger one, um, has four, uh, is is is
the same except for 10 DC converters, four battery containers, and then parcel D, will just have a single inverter and transformer, uh, one container and four DCDC converters. Out in the field, what it will look like, this is a single axis
tracker. It's a it called one P portrait. That means one panel in portrait. Um so this is one panel across and it basically lifts up east and west as it goes through the day. Uh this is the combiner box that I referred to. Um so all of the string wires which you can
see in this uh cab system here. Uh they will go into this combiner box and then it will group strings together and then we'll have larger wires that go from the combiner boxes out to the inverters. Um, so yeah, that's the uh that's the equipment that will be in the field. Um,
there's been some comments about noise. Um, so uh I thought I'd be a quick overview on where we are with the noise. Uh, the project will comply with all mass uh D noise regulations uh under 310 CMR 710. Uh, the noise level of the components, the battery system, inverter
and transformer on the site all make noise. The levels are low and drop off quickly. Uh the battery system uh it is a is it main noise is a fan sound um which is similar sound to a domestic uh household air conditioning unit. The
inverter also has cooling fans um and some uh high frequency switching as well and the transformer gives off a low hum that I think most people are are familiar with. Uh across all the equipment that the sound sound levels drop off rapidly as you move away from the site. By the time you reach the site
boundary at 100 feet, the noise is comparable to normal outdoor background noises and at 150 to 200 200 feet the the noise is effectively imperceptible. Um we will be augmenting uh around the pads. There's uh BMS, fencing,
vegetation and grade changes which will also reduce the noise. And just so people can uh put a reference uh at 200 feet it's almost imperceptible and the nearest home is 5 feet 500 feet away from the nearest pad. This is what uh one of the battery systems looks like. Uh as I said it's a
it's a 20ft container. Um it comes with the integrated fans. It's primarily liquid cooled but there are fans as well. Uh it's 70 dibels when you're 3 ft away which is vacuum cleaner kind of sound. uh and then it drops off uh as
you move over distance. So at 50 ft you're you're at 40 to 45 dB. At 100 foot you're about 35 to 40. Uh and once you get to 150 to 200 ft it's uh below 35. Uh 35 dibels uh is the equivalent to
a rural location at night or quiet residential um uh neighborhood at night. The inverter broadly similar. This is a this is a skidded solution. So it's an integrated with the inverter. the transformer and a load center. Um,
similar similar sounds and a similar drop off. And then the transformer as well, we've all seen them. We're all familiar with them. Uh, because of how prevalent they are, they are one of the most studied components in acoustic engineering. And setbacks of 75 to 100 ft typ typically render the uh the home
indistinguishable from background sound. Uh, fire risk was brought up last week. Um the uh ground mounted solar PV is is low incidence of fire. When fires do occur, the primary cause is uh from electrical faults and it's almost always
limit limited to the electrical components themselves rather than the solar panels out in the field. Uh the electrical components being the inverters and the transformers. Uh the uh the reason for that is solar modules don't have any combustible materials. They can burn but only when put on top
of a a fuel source. out in the field through careful management of vegetation. There's not much fuel for it to burn. Any m any uh fire moves quickly without rendering any damage. Um the so the the fire risk is considered low uh well characterized and mitigated through
equipment standards, installation practices, vegetation control, and uh ongoing monitoring. We did have a fire at one of our sites um in White River. I I know that some people have have been talking about it. Uh this is the news report. Um when the
fire was then uh the it reported that 17,000 solar panels and 38 acres of the fire of the farm were on fire. Uh the reality was we had a small brush fire. Um there was about six acres that burned with with very little damage. Uh the
conditions uh during the fire, it was it was a posted red flag warning um which indicates an extremely high risk of fire. That's why the fire departments uh threw all available resources at it. um they were very concerned about wildflies spreading during um such a such a situation. Uh the cause of the fire was
never defi definitively determined. There were a few things that were discussed um preemptively on site with walking around with some management guys, but uh nothing was definitively determined. You get some closer looks up here. You can see that the the grass areas that had burned uh is approximately 6 acres uh that burned. Uh
but there was no damage to the array. Uh there were a couple of modules that were stored on the ground at the time uh that had the uh plastic wires and and connectors that had melted. Uh but that was it. There was no further damage. Uh we worked alongside NICE deck to ensure that um all the systems were
disconnected. Uh and there was uh no damage that required any uh ongoing monitoring or maintenance. Uh this is the farm today fully repaired, fully restored um and fully operational. Uh battery energy storage systems uh
they do carry an inherent but well- definfined extensively studied and managed fire risk uh that is mitigated through multiple layers of engineering control, testing and regulatory oversight. Uh the main fire hazard with a battery is the thermal runaway uh where the battery cells um get
overcharged, unbalanced and go into a situation where they they try and expel all their energy. Uh the first sign of it um is is generally a release of hydrogen gas. Uh there is monitoring within all the systems to to pick that up. Um all of the systems go through uh
UL uh 9540 thermal runaway testing uh where they physically test uh the how not just uh the cells themselves but the full containers how they operate in a fire. Uh everything is climate controlled inside HVAC systems and
monitor temperature and humidity. Um and then within the uh within the containers themselves, they have gas detection to pick up the hydrogen, which is the uh the first sign of uh of a failure. There's smoke detection. There's deflation panels which um prevent the
explosions. And then there's also automated shutdown sequences as well. Um the systems are designed to burn in place so that fire departments can be uh actively. Uh the last thing you want to be doing is spraying them with water to cool them down because that introduces
uh a way of being a of spreading it elsewhere. Uh the separations are such that they that the fires will not propagate from one one container to the next. Uh it allows uh the first responders to take a defensive approach to isolate and monitor. Um and we will
work with the fire department uh which I'll get to in a little bit. Um even with the properly designed system uh the risk can never be fully eliminated. Um and that that's true for for everything. Um but they are designed and operated with the expectation that a failure can
occur. So there is uh continuous monitoring, automated shutdown systems, thermal management controls and the enclosure itself is designed to burn without propagating to any uh um other areas. Uh the industry standards require that the the systems remain stable under abnormal conditions and that any failure
remains contained, isolated and controlled. So uh yes while we can never completely eliminate risk uh they're built on the principle of anticipate contain and protect uh and the combination of engineered safety uh measures certified equipment and real-time monitoring ensures that even
in the unlikely uh failure scenario the system behaves predictably and safely. Um uh so the mitigation that we've got um the Soulbank 3.0 has a number of uh early warning detection systems and alarms. It will detect smoke. It will
detect heat. It will detect uh any of the combustible gases like hydrogen. Uh they have fire panels that provide local and remote annunciation. Uh there is a fire alarm panel um that can be uh viewed by the uh uh any first responders on scene um so that they can see what
alarm is what is triggering the alarm. Uh there is 24 uh hour monitoring 7 days a week, 365 days a year through the EMS uh which is the energy management system which I'll get up to in a second. And they also have backup power and a UPS uninterruptible power system for the
fire alarm system. So even in the in the event that the power is cut, the fire alarms are still operational. Um there is uh continuous gas monitoring and automatic ventilation and pressure relief. Um if the uh if the system ever
moves into an emergency state, uh the battery moni management system is the the brains of the operation. It provides continual cell-level monitoring across the battery pack. uh it monitors voltages uh uh pack current pack temperatures overall state of charge and
state of health. If the monitoring picks up a cell that is uh offging or is out of temperature range the cell can be uh automatically disconnected from the system. So there's no discharge and and uh or charging or discharging of the
battery cell itself in order to prevent a thermal uh runaway. Um so the the BMS protects it from uh having uh unsafe conditions, prevents overcharging, overd discharging, overcurren, but it also works if uh if the cell itself is um
goes into its own thermal runaway even in uh even if it hasn't been overcharged. Uh it does cell balancing as well. Um it which extends the life and the longevity of the uh the system. Uh there's thermal management integration. Uh so it has liquid and air
cooling systems uh which help coordinate the temperature and keep everything within a range. Um and then there's also communication and reporting. Uh all the systems are as I said monitored 24/7 um and series of alarms if anything shows up will uh uh indicate a problem that
needs investigating. Also in the we we do a lot of planning and operations. We work closely with fire departments for all of the systems that go in. One of the things that we provide them is a hazard mitigation analysis. uh it it's uh required as a a safety assessment for battery energy storage systems. It identifies potential hazards and confirm
that engineered protections effectively control them in accordance with the codes. Um so it it basically a a drop down full information of the system what what's there what's proposed what emergency systems they are uh and that is all fully reviewed with the fire
department as well. Uh also as part of the planning and operations there will be a sight specific emergency response plan that's prepared. Uh this outlines how the project can be safely constructed, operated and maintained. Uh we work with all local stakeholders, the DPW uh and the fire department and the
police departments. Uh and it basically it's uh it provides all the information that they would need, the container layout, the access routes, all the isolation points, venting and off gas controls, uh all the the fire safety manual manuals, the commissioning plan, the shutdown procedures, ON&M plan. Um
and we are committed to first responder training as well. This is not a a situation we're looking to dump on Fmouth Fire Department. We work very very closely with fire departments uh in the area to ensure that they have uh not only all of the knowledge as well, but we we uh we provide the training to make sure that they know how to deal with
anything in case of an emergency. Um the cell chemistry used in the Soul Bank 3 is is an LFP lithium ion phosphate um which is uh it doesn't contain nickel, cobalt, manganese or or any chlorine bearing plastics. Um the if they do
combust uh the phosphate based cathode materials remain in solid form uh and they and the metal components do not volatize into particulate matter. Um as I said these are the battery systems go under extensive testing um in including
literally burning them in place to see how they react. Um and uh from those studies uh most of the uh uh uh what they produce is is gas emissions. So carbon mon carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, hydrogen and hydrogen fluoride.
Uh there's negligible particulate matter. Um the the container itself is steel. Um any that there's no wood or anything like that. The uh uh it would only be the plastics within the system that uh uh that can offer any kind of particulate. Um there's been no
detectable downwind solid deposition and no explosive over pressure events. Uh there have been a number of fires um in New York, Arizona, California, the UK and Australia. Uh all of them show um afterwards there's no soil contamination, no water contamination, no particulate remediation required. Air
quality impacts were short shortterm and localized. Um it it would produce irritating smoke. Um the emergency response will just set a perimeter around the area uh and uh monitor the air quality. Um but uh once the uh the
fire is out, air conditions return to normal um with no long-lasting damage. We're proposing containment measures. Um so the battery pad itself is a uh is a non-permeable service. This presents infiltration of any contaminants into the soil and groundwater uh and ensures
that all liquid remains above grade. Uh it's also going to have a a containment burm around it to ensure that uh it nothing can wash off the panel and go further out. Uh there's also a roof uh structure over the top of the battery which will ensure that no rain water will mix with anything in the uh uh in
the contained area and eliminate uh the uh the possibility that the the water will uh will leave the site. Um and it it all of this has been done to align with the MA mast's core principles for protecting surface water groundwater from potential contaminants.
PAS has been brought up um and so I wanted to sort of address that now. uh the mass DP classifies PAS risks by the by the potential exposure pathways. How is it going to get into groundwater supplies? How is it going to get into the soil? There is no exposure pathway between solar panels and and battery
systems. The reason for that is that they do not contain PAS in any mo mobile or solid soluble form. Uh the uh array and lithium ion phosphate contains no liquids um capable of of of reaching groundwater. Um the uh the P PA pas that
are in there it's unavoidable. Every everywhere has it especially with electrics. Uh they're mainly in uh cables uh gaskets wiring. Uh they are all solid. They are immobile and they are fully contained within the se the sealed equipment. The system presents no
credical no credible mechanism for PAS migration into soil or groundwater even in failure scenarios. So how does PAS get into the system? It's it's primarily through uh mobile and liquid forms of PAS which are found in herbicides, pesticides, fertilizers, industrial
cleanants, suffocants, lubricants, uh PAS containing plating and industrial waste water. Uh once it's in waste water from household products um and plastics, it um it goes into the sludge bioolids which are then used in the uh the the the fertilizers
um and wastewater effluent that can infiltrate groundwater. These PAS are water soluble. So after rain or irrigation, the chemicals infiltrate through the soil and into aquifers. Uh and these are the biggest ground sources of groundwater PAS in the US. And none of which are being proposed either
during construction or during operations. So to compare it to the golf course because I'm sure some of you heard as soon as I mentioned herbicides and things like that, the the golf course regularly applies herbicides, fertilizers, fungicides, insecticides on the on the uh on the courses. It then
irrigates them. Um it it if if you're looking for a PAS risk, the current existing use is is is far higher than anything that we're we're proposing here. Um that the the pathway is a known groundwater contamination uh contamination pathway recognized by the
DP and EPA. Um that there can be localized fuel and chemical storage on site. Um they've got machinery and equipment that needs refueling on site. Um battery powered golf course. I haven't been on the site, so I don't know if they use battery powered ones, but these are all have the same inherent
risks as as with with batteries. Uh, but they they tend to be lead acids, so they've got liquid forms of of batteries that damage can leak out. Um, they don't have any of the uh the additional controls that we do. And as I said, the with the irrigation going through, then you're constantly putting that pathway through. We're going to be
decommissioning the irrigation system to prevent the uh uh which would uh prevent the the pathways from going. What we're doing is we're going to concentrate all of the equipment into an engineered footprint uh with multiple layers of spill prevention and containment. We're going to shift from an actively managed
and chemically intensive land use to a low impact uh enclosed electrical use uh with a net decrease in potential environmental exposure pathways. We will not use any mobile or soluble PAS chemicals and uh that means there's no credible ground pathway to water. Uh the
large restoration areas which will increase biodiversity. Golf car golf courses do look pretty, but like like our lawns at home, they aren't very particularly biodiverse. A pollinator meadow um will increase the number of insects. The number of insects will increase the number of birds and other small mammals as well that that feed on
them. Uh and also we're proposing water quality monitoring as well um in the in a kunessic pond uh to uh to to study the impact of of it coming off from a golf course use. Uh so it it would be a net environmental
impact uh benefit to uh to move from the intensive golf course to uh uh to to the solar to the solar farm uh by reducing and eliminating those exposure pathways. Um and uh it will materially reduces the long-term effective burden relative to
the current site activities. And that is the end of my presentation. I'll hand back over to Matt question. Okay. And with that that concludes our presentation. Um we'll yield back to the board and um
are happy to proceed uh at the uh um however the board would like. uh if you're going to deliberate uh or open it up to public comment, we can respond um to questions and comments as they're raised or or we can wait until the conclusion of board discussion or public
comment to address um comments on a wholesale basis. >> Thank you. Right now, we're going to let the public have an opportunity, then we're going to go to the board members. >> Terrific. Thank you. >> for questions and comments. So, anyone from the public who wants to
speak, come up to the podium, give us your name for the record. And for the record, I said this at the last hearing. I want to reiterate it again. The planning board is not in a position to approve or deny this project. That's
not what we're here for. We're here to condition this project to make it the best that we can make for the town of Felmouth. With that, Good evening um planning board chair and members. Um I'm Elanor Ling. I'm from precinct one and some of you may know
that uh I'm a member of the energy committee but tonight uh I'm speaking on my own behalf as a community member. Um I just want to uh make a few comments and also I have a few questions. Um I
want to um bring up some um information to address some concerns about fire risk because um as you know there are you know concern in the uh recently and there's um LTE in
in the um enterprise um just to provide some context uh for you um why fires have been reported at battery storage sites. Overall, these uh incidents have
been very low. And um the following is a quote from the US EPA main considerations for safe installation and incident response published in July 2025. Quote, "Communities should also note
that despite some highprofile incidents, improvement in battery energy storage system quality and design have led to a decrease in the number of failure incidents per gow hour deployed. uh
shown in um let me see I have a chart here and um you know if if you want um I can provide the information >> that would be >> to you later >> that would be great. Yes, thank you. >> Um this is the increase in the bar are
the increase in gigawatts per hour um globally and this uh line is the rate the incident rate. So you can see it dramatically dropped by 2024.
>> You're talking about battery fires, correct? >> Yes. >> And well actually is um total incidents including battery fires. >> Okay. It uh probably includes other um you know type of incidents
and um it also be noted that even as global battery storage system capacity has risen from 11 gawatt hours in 2018 to 303 gawatt in 2024. that the failure
rate per gawatt hour of global capacity has dropped from around 1.5 incidents per gawatt hour per year in 2018 to less than 0.03 in 2024.
So that's a 56fold reduction. And another failure analysis study published last year reports that between 2018 and 2023
the global grid scale storage system failure rate has dropped 97%. So as you can see as the technology of battery design and containment and um you know
management system improved the fight the the the risk has reduced significantly. So as you know um I should have also um stated that I supported this project in
the past and uh I still continue to support this project. um because this is this project is you know really um will be a big benefit and assets to the town and um I have a few questions. I really
appreciate the um presentation earlier because it went into more details into the battery design and the um the management system and the inc integration of the battery uh storage system with the you know other um
electrical equipments and so forth and um however I have a few questions I'd like to um ask >> if if the questions can be answered quickly, fine. Otherwise, we'll >> Okay. Yeah,
>> we'll take your questions and then answer them. >> I will try to um be quick. >> We have a lot on our agenda this evening. >> I I just want to make sure I understand correctly. Uh in regard to the emergency response plan, uh water will be the
primary material used to suppress the fire uh you know, any fire. Okay. Um will there be um nonpfa pas fire uh suspression foam be used in addition to
water and also uh if water is still the you know is the recommended best material to contain battery system fires. Um where is the water source at this site?
um because at other fires um there are some challenges because you know it's very distant to the water. >> We don't have the referral yet from the fire department for this. So I can't can't answer those questions right now for you. >> Okay. Thank you. And and one more
question is um I know I know that um in the site plan um there's like about 15 feet um wide access row plus 10 ft uh shoulder. Would that be uh
enough area for um staging for the emergency uh response when there is an incident? Thank you very much. Next, sir. So, Mark Cool, precinct 6. So, I'll try
to be brief. I've got four questions for Pure Sky. Unfortunately, the fire department is not here to answer five questions, but I'll ask them for the record. >> Okay. Um, I've got five questions for the planning board and then I have a
brief final comment. So, um, to the through you, Mr. Chairman, the, uh, Piercar rep, I think it would be probably Mr. Cook. Um, would you agree that the, uh, lithium ion
phosphate batteries are safer, but they're not fireproof? >> We're going to take your questions first. >> Oh, I see. Okay. Then we'll address the answers. >> Um, in the event of a battery storage fire, has it been Pure Sky
recommendation to firefighting units to just let the fire burn out or to use some sort of suppression? Um, are you aware that the National Fire Protection Association says on its website
these layers of protection that you had gone through, uh, built-in fire suppression, hydrogen detection, smoke and heat detection, redundant thermal controls help prevent damage to the system, but they don't make the battery
container fireproof. Are you aware fires involving lithium ion phosphate batteries emit toxic gases? The industry terms venting incidents
and the one that emits gases or one of the elements that is emitted in the gases is hydrogen cyanide. Uh, were you aware that fires involving lithium ion phosphate batteries emit
toxic? Well, this is a repeat. Um, in the event of a fire involving said batteries, um, toxic gases would require, uh,
evacuate evac evacuation order of surrounding, um, residents. Um, has there been something, and this was going to go to the fire department, has there been something to address that and recommendations by Pure Sky to the fire
department? Uh, in the event of a fire involving a solar B battery storage facility and Okay, I'll I'll move on. I'll move on. So, this is for the the board. Uh, Mr. chairman. Um given the fact that you
were Cape Cod Commission um you're familiar with the regional um impact decision obviously. Um can you briefly explain why well actually you can't I I realize that but
I'm curious why groundwater and aquafer contamination was not identified in the decision as a probable detriment. That's concerning. And then um I'm concerned I would like
you to explain briefly, but I understand uh why toxic and flammable gases associated with solar lithium ion batteries um storage was not identified as a probable detriment as well. Um and
this is the one that really gets me. I mean, one of many. Um I don't understand what the bylaw the solar overlay bylaw reads not more than 2 acres forest land
should be deforested yet the proposal in front of you is for 10 almost 10 and a half acres. Um it sounds like though I'm not certain that it's been
approved but can we clarify is there a waiver that I'm missing cuz um you know I went through the zoning bylaw and I can't find anything about some sort of waiver. So I appreciate any input on that. And so um for the last one for the board
um has there been any referrals from the uh order of health conservation commission water while or the water quality management committee addressing water contamination risks associated with social so um battery storage solar
energy installations. Uh let's see and this last one I think go through the fire department. Uh I I'll end by saying my final brief comment. What it boils down to for me in
my opinion is um Pure Sky might be pampered with fires due to design issues or component defects or improper battery storage, but still there's no amount of control or conditions you could impose that will
make the solar fire or the solar farm fireproof. the only me uh method guaranteed that would prevent an aquafer contamination. You just don't build it there. So, that's all I have to say. Thank you for your time. >> All right. Thank you. We'll address your
questions probably at the next meeting. We'll get some answers for you because you have a lot of questions. >> Yes. >> Yes, sir. >> Right. Of course. Ask them. >> Uh good evening everyone. David Morardi
Balmas. Uh even if uh pure sky meets national fire protection association standard in battery storage containers are equipped with fire suppression systems environmental contamination impact isn't guaranteed.
For instance the investigation of pure sky energy white river solar fire October 2024 is still going on. The investigation is still going on. Uh,
the New York Department of Environmental Conservation, DEEC, has reported that long-term environmental contamination impacts are not yet fully known. Not yet fully known. Can't have an answer yet.
Um, contamination, contaminating the communities perhaps and regions drinking water resource. Is is is it really worth the gamble for for a few megawws of electricity to put
our drinking water at risk? My me personally, I'm no scientist. I'm no engineer, but I know the answer is no. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. And Mr. Cole, before you leave tonight, we like to have your questions and so we can address them.
Thank you. Yes, sir. comments of course >> questions or comments? >> No questions or comments. >> Uh good evening. Dr. Henry Dick. I have I'm a geologist with a PhD in master's
degree and bachelors. So I have a little bit of familiarity with groundwater flow. Um this is a very unique area. The Cape Cod Country Club. Less than 5% of the Cape is suitable for new municipal wells.
That was 1999 USGS report. Today it's much less. This area is unique in that to the north of it you have the mass mil military reservation. You have the uh
crane wildlife management area and you have the large 300 committee parcel that was acquired. All of which have very little housing on them around them. So it's an area where the aquifer gets recharged
without much input from the natural contamination from housing and road runoff etc. In addition the Otus plumes bypass this area. They go to the east, they go to the west. This is one of the few areas
in town where we can have new wells. You may have noticed the water restrictions every year in Felmouth. We have a water crisis in this town and this is the best place for new wells. Now
to my knowledge, Pure Sky has made no provision for the town to be able to construct a well put in new wells in this area area. Maybe they should consider that. Secondly, um while the groundwater flow is from north to south
next to these large ponds, the water level of the pond is actually slightly below the groundwater table. And when the pond goes down, as Kunos pond does in the summer, it draws in water from the east and the west. And for that
reason, many years ago, the appeals board refused to allow a large number of condos to be built on a piece of property that was located at the middle of the golf course adjacent to Boxberry Hill Road. The groundwater flow is critical here
because a it feeds it's the recharge area for Kumsa Pond where we get a lot of our drinking water in this town because the Kuruma well is on the south side very close to the pond. that's actually drawing on the pond. It is incredibly important that we protect
this resource both for the future, maybe in 40 years, maybe in 20 years, that we do not create a disturbance in the groundwater flow by all this grading that will divert water even more strongly towards Kumsa Pond.
The second thing is is that we don't want the area contaminated because this is the potential area we were going to need to have new wells. So I think that one of the things that we need to know when they site batteries and their uh components of this solar array is where
the groundwater is going to go if there is a catastrophe. If there is pollution created out of this, that means there should be a full groundwater survey and modeling to determine how the regrading is going to affect the groundwater flow
in this area. So, I've asked the planning board to condition this that there be a full groundwater survey to map out the flow fields around this area both in summer and winter. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Anyone else? >> This gentleman right here. >> Hi. Um, I have a question and a comment. My name is Julia Zagachin. Um, I have a house fairly close to the um to the golf
course and my parents house literally borders it. So, as a comment, my parents have recently had a fire in their house which was due to a faulty electric um wiring of a dehumidifier. The amount of damage that that caused
and the amount of effort that it took, it was a tiny fire as far as fires go. The amount of work that the fire department did was beyond impressive. And how many There were so many fire trucks that were there. There were so many staff. Everybody did a great job. I
cannot imagine a huge fire, the amount of resources that would take from the town. And they were, we asked you, you know, is there another fire? And they said yes. And we're completely, you know, sort of there's no more fire trucks. So there were maybe two fires,
my parents, and another one. And the firemen said we have no more trucks. So I'm assuming that the fire department with the way it is staffed now would not be able to handle uh a huge fire. Okay. Uh and not be detrimental to other
houses in the area. The second question I have well it's that was a comment and the question is do we who did the environmental study? Like all of this what these gentlemen said sounded I'm not a professional. It sounded really reasonable to me, but I like to have
these things crossch checked and I'd like to find out who did a massive environmental study. Okay. Um, and like I said, this is very concerning to me because there are two houses in my family very close. My parents are are
butters and mine is one street over. So, thank you. >> Welcome. Thank you. >> Yes, sir. gentleman right here first. >> Thank you for the opportunity uh to uh present a question. My name is Sam Slarski. I live at 127 Kunameset Circle
in Lockstead. Uh the Lockstead Association is 72 houses that are approximate to Kunameset Pond and about a third of those are actually uh uh actually contiguous. Um, my question there's a great deal of attention to and
I appreciate this to the groundwater sight lines and so forth. The question I want to make sure is addressed is sound. Um, there's a the real question I have with a with a lake being a great uh conductor of sound. Uh, what have you done and
have you done everything you can do to eliminate any kind of a hum or any kind of a sound that would affect our neighborhood? There's uh at this point uh the re the react real reality is most hours of the of the year it's near
silent in the Kunames neighborhood our side the other side the houses are in that area. If you add just a hum to the neighborhood you're going to change our neighborhood substantially. I don't want the outside to sound like the inside of my kitchen. Uh, and so have you done the
question is have you done everything you can to design silence at at what distance? There's a reference to a neighborhood, a quiet neighborhood at a certain number of feet. My neighborhood is nearly silent for most of the year.
No, forget forget the summer. Of course, we're we're Falmouth in in those months. But my question is simple. Uh, have you designed everything you can to control sound? I I think I think that we had testimony that the the trees are going to be the screening between the solar
panels and your property. >> Understood. >> And if I remember correctly, your association was very supportive of this project. >> Yes. Uh there's no question. Uh I'm on the board uh at Lockstead. You you you have the opinion of the board and the support, but we want every condition.
You saw that's a lengthy condition uh sheet and I know you've been attending it and it's appreciated. Uh this is one that's become I mean groundwater is a real concern. It's a very important topic. You'll make good decisions I hope. Um sightelines are important. I'm
not sure what 10ft trees and 12t and 14 down foot trees are going to do in some situations. Only if people are going to live 30 or 40 more years. I'm not sure about that. But you you'll know better than I do. Uh but my question really for me and for my association and everyone
else in the neighborhood uh sound mitigation not that you've done a good job. You've done everything you can do to control the uh sound. >> Thank you very much. >> Yes, ma'am. >> Good evening. My name is Judy Atinson.
I'm an auterum road. I sent a letter in yesterday and Melinda was nice enough to get it out. Um, I'd like to express my concerns regarding the installation of the solar arrays in my backyard and the surrounding residential area. While I
recognize the importance of renewable renewable energy, I have serious concerns about the impact of this project on our community, property values, and local environment. The construction and presence of solar arrays will fundamentally alter the
character of our neighborhood and diminish our quality of life. My key concerns, has the town done a safety or environmental study on its own? I have concerns about fire hazards, batteries, potential toxic materials from damaged
panels, and changes to local drainage and flood systems. Is there a plan in place with the fire department in case of emergency? Many of us have stated that tonight. Loss of scenic value and wildlife habitat. The installation will
disrupt the natural landscape, remove trees and vegetation, and negatively affect local wildlife, including deer and birds that frequent our property. Property value decline. I know there's
people that say it's little. It's my property. It will decline. I can tell you that. Studies in local experiences show that homes located near solar arrays often experience a decrease in property value. Noise and disrupt
disruption. The construction phase will bring months of noise, heavy equipment, and increased traffic making it difficult to enjoy our backyards. Has the town done a noise study? and thank you for your time. >> Thank you.
>> Your name? Yes, sir. >> I just have one quick question about >> your name again, please. >> Uh David Morardi Palmouth about the sound and uh the DP these are three different projects. Now, now what we saw
up there on the um board, was that one project, two projects, or three projects? The sound >> three different arrays. >> Three different arrays. So, what were the numbers we saw tonight? Was that just for one or was that for all three of them? >> All all three
>> combined that they they did a sound study. >> They were showing. >> Did have there been a sound study done for this project? >> A sound study? >> Yes. >> We have not done a sound study. Well, I would suggest that we do a sound study. That would be my suggestion. Okay. For three projects. It's not just one
project. It's three separate projects. >> Thank you. >> Welcome. Thank you. >> Yes, sir. >> Good evening. For the record, Carrie Murphy, Greek Singing7. Um sort of the chairman of the Friends of Cape Cod Country Club. Um I'd be remiss if I
didn't thank this board for their 4 to2 vote prior to town meeting. um supporting article 14 which was to remove these panel this this this area from a solar overlay district. Um I think it it significantly acknowledged
that this project has issues has very big issues to this community to the history to the culture um and to that land. It's going to be industrialized. It's going to have a generational impact. It's never going to be the same and it's going to be
forever. Um, everybody's brought up fire runoff. The noise the noise can't be mitigated. It's the noise will change due to wind conditions, atmospheric pressures. We went through this with the wind turbines. Everything changes. So, to
answer that question, I don't think anybody could have an answer to that. Loss of property values are going to be significant. No one's going to want to live in that area. And you're going to be selling your property. You're trying to mitigate this as best you can. um was the letter writer to put in an
article in the paper, a letter to the paper and he talked about least harm. So when John you talk about in this board conditions these projects the only thing you the only control you have over this because of the do amendment is to condition this. You can't deny this,
which you probably should be doing. And I thought your vote was to deny this if it took the out of the solar, but this amendment, this Dover amendment that is created by the state gives cart blanch at this project to move forward on a piece of land that doesn't need it. Um,
and it's and it's unfortunate and it's going to change that neighborhood forever. And it's more of an argument that's emotional than than than sort of statutory. Um, I'd like to know if this company has a power agreement with Eversource. They're making pretty big
claims about where this power is going to go and who is going to benefit. They have an agreement. >> Yes, >> they have an agreement. Thank you. The last time we talked to them, they did. Um, so is who who currently owns this property? Mr. Freel own this property
currently. >> As far as we know. >> As far as we know. Is Mr. Fel here this evening? Has anyone at this board had a conversation with the owner of this property over the years? No one. >> No. >> Yes. And that's and that's really unfortunate. You know, we're sort of
this is this is not community planning. This is planning. This is planning by an out ofstate owner who doesn't live here and doesn't care about this. It's almost like an extortion planning process. And it's really unfortunate that we have to find ourselves as a community. >> I I want to I want to make this very
very very clear. town meeting uh approved this as a solar array district. >> Not this not this previous town meeting but what four or five years ago? >> Correct. >> When it got approved at that point,
>> this board could not deny it. We cannot we're doing a site plan only >> because we're not approving it. We're not denying it. We don't have that power >> because of the do amendment. >> No, because because it's zoned the way it was zoned. We could condition it, but we cannot deny it.
>> All right. I We understand that. I I understand. >> There's a couple comments made that I have to take objection to. We have to operate. John mentioned that we an open meeting. We cannot have individual meetings with people. It has to be done in public. If we met with the owner,
it'd be an expartite conversation with someone in front of our board. We can't do it. We're required to sit an open meeting in front of everybody and have it be public. So, you're mad at us for not breaking the law. come out of you. I'm wondering why the the owner of this property isn't here to ask the questions.
>> You use some terms that are pretty harsh, right? Then describing the planning board and our methodology and I'm just pointing out I believe we're required to do everything in open meeting in this forum here and that's why we're here. >> Well, I agree with that. >> Okay. I'm I'm very I'm very aware and I and I didn't I I didn't make an
intention. So when when you took a 4 to2 vote to take that out of solar overlay, why would you why would this board do that when you you you didn't have significant problems and considerations with this project moving forward? I I think you did and I think this town does and I I think the lack of control that
planning board has speaks volumes to the lack of of good quality planning that's going to go forward. that that 4 to2 4 to2 vote was to send it to town meeting to let town meeting decide whether they wanted to change the zoning or not. >> Yeah, >> I'm aware. >> It had nothing to do whether we liked it
or didn't like it. >> Right. >> Yeah. >> We wanted to give the town >> to give town meeting a voice. >> Give them a voice. >> That was why I voted. >> Exactly. So, is there anything else, Mr. Carrie? >> Anything else, please? >> I do not. >> Okay. Thank you. Yes, Charlotte.
>> Um, I'm a town meeting member. I was there. I can recall how this came up and many of the people who are here now supported putting it into the solar array district to prevent turning into an enormous housing development. We thought that was a good idea. Probably is a good idea. The things that are the
matter with this and there are things that matter with it are things the planning board can address. One of them might be the scale of the project, the sighting of it, the things that in fact we properly can look at. But it wasn't a bad decision then and many other people supported it, not just town meeting
members. So, >> and that's not a good way to plan having having having a worse having a bad option and a worse option. That's not a way to have to plan the to this significant piece of parcel and this >> given private ownership look at the
options. >> Oh, that's why I asked about where the ownership is. >> Thank you. >> Anybody else? Yes, sir. >> Mr. Cool. >> Mark again six. Just a point of order. Um from what you had said before as far
as um what options are available to the planning board on this particular hearing? Um, I would contend and argue that you do have the ability to deny based on
um bylaws. If if a element of the proposed project is non-compliant with the town's bylaw, you have to deny it. It's a violation.
You can't approve it. You can't start making conditions. I >> I I don't want to debate this. Council is here this evening. Maybe we can ask her to come to the podium and address that. >> Please.
You're on the spot. >> Everybody. >> Good evening. Maro Keefe Town Council. >> Welcome. >> Um thank you. Thank you for asking me to come up and speak with you. I hope I can help. Is there something in particular that you wanted me to address?
>> There seems to be a concern that we can deny this project or we could have denied the project. >> So, this is a byite project, which means that you you can't deny it. You can put conditions on it, but the conditions um because it's a dop protected use
um must be reasonable. unreasonably placing conditions or restrictions on the project would run a foul of the law very simply. And here it's easy to say what's reasonable
because you have a bylaw that you can follow. That bylaw has been reviewed and vetted by the AG's office. Um, as recently as the recontification, um, during the recontification process, the AG's office did take a hard look at
this section of the bylaw, section 240-7.4. Did I get that right? Nailed it. Excellent. Um, and at that time the AG's office actually disapproved of part of the part of the
bylaw and the town was required to remove that part and the remainder is considered a reasonable regulation of solar. So, as long as this board sticks to the parameters that are contained in the bylaw, um there there's a good
chance that any decision that this board issues as to site plan review will survive scrutiny. Where you might run into problems is if you push the boundaries of what's already contained in the bylaw and create more stringent conditions than what what's there. Um,
if it's a unilateral imposition, it very well could be considered unreasonable regulating the unreasonably regulating the project. >> All right. Thank you very much. >> You're welcome. >> Anyone else in the audience? Any other questions or comments? >> Yes, sir. Mr. Dick.
>> But again, your name for the record. >> Um, yes, Henry Dick. I have a question for the um uh uh solar company. Um did I see that you had as one of your gases that would be dissolved in case of a fire HF,
>> otherwise known as hydrofuloric acid, >> one of the most deadly acids you can possibly think of. Not because it has to be fast, but because you can't stop it. It's very hard to neutralize. And you want to put HF in the air around my house? I'm very sorry, but um that is a
real concern. So, you need to address how big a concern that is because I worked in a lab with H. You touched it, best thing to do is chop your finger off because you can't stop it. It just eats on and on. It's a very, very nasty.
Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Anyone else? Last time. last time. >> Last time for Last time for tonight. >> For for clarity, I just wanted to read the social the solar overlay district
bylaw. Um >> Oh, no, no, no. We're not going to We We all have it right here. >> Okay. So, we don't need you to read it. >> So, so just do me a favor then. Review the um 24051 purpose, second paragraph.
>> Thank you. >> Thank you. Anyone else? Okay, thank you very much. All right, board. Any any uh comments, questions for the applicant?
>> Charlotte, I want to thank the people who sent us their concerns in writing. It makes it easier for for the board to really attend to them when we get them in writing. Probably the most thoughtful one and complete one we got was from the Lockstead Board of Trustees and I really
appreciate it and they suggested a number of conditions. I thought they were really good suggestions and I guess I have one huge question for the people representing the different aspects of this project. Have you looked at all of the conditions that
have been suggested? And it's true that we could sort of try to match what you're saying to any one of these, but it's difficult at least for me to do that. it would be easier to go through these conditions one by one and see what your response might be and I think a few of them are really worth taking a look
at maybe tonight I don't know what time you want to give to this >> do we still >> the locked to the lockstead we have two more the lockstead commissions >> this is the lockstead response the conditions that they were asking that we put on this project
>> I think we're going to probably read the letters so >> I want to hear their answer. >> Okay. >> Could I make a suggestion though? I would rather them have if they've received these, they could uh come up with their responses for the next time we meet.
>> That's reasonable, but I point out the ones that are particularly of interest. If you haven't, and I think that you all from uh from Pure Sky have it. Number two, about clear about all the grading that's going to go on and it might be
unnecessary given the improvements and the way that solar panels can now be flexible. You might not need to regrade. >> So these are questions for Pio Sky. >> Yeah. >> The applicant. >> Okay. >> Yeah. That they would answer that. And number 10 particularly
the visual buffers to maintain and importantly commit to maintaining them permanently. Those would be the two and for the street trees. But to look at each one of these and give us a response to them, that would be very helpful and make it available so that the people
who put all their effort into writing it can know it. >> Thank you. >> Awesome. Uh maybe this is a question for Jim since you were involved in the uh solar farm at the landfill. Are all the systems that are going to be part of
this system already in place at the uh one at the landfill? The battery component is new. We didn't I think they might have added batteries since then. Yeah. >> To it, but we did not they did they didn't have the battery capacity then.
So that's the that's the biggest component and that's where some of these issues are coming from. >> And uh has the uh Briocal Lawrence Lynch uh gone forward? Have they started installing uh their solar panels? >> Yes. >> Okay. So, so we have uh two solar farms
upstream from uh Long Pond and other watersheds. Um and then there was a uh concern about uh the fire department and their ability to service uh a large farm a fire rather. Um all fire departments
have what's called mutual aid. Uh so we would have Sandwich, Mashby, uh Bonstable uh Wearham. Uh my father was a fireman uh from a small town outside of Boston. He spent a lot of time fighting fires in Boston. So uh that's all that's
part of the response. So uh if there was some sort of uh if there was a forest fire in BB Woods, all those uh departments would be there. So and I think uh and just uh Charlotte brought up uh the number of uh housing units
that uh could possibly go on that site. you have uh what 167 acres. You could possibly have thousands of housing units uh built out there. Currently, right now, we've got a proposal for 36 units on Smithfield Farm on Sandwich Road. Uh
we've got a 12unit proposal for 1.6 acre parcel on Broken Bow. So, if people are building on these small parcels, you can imagine what would happen if uh 167 acres was just sold off to a developer.
So, that's That was my concern. >> Jim, >> a lot of questions were brought up, but one thing I I brought up myself and I thought I've heard address clearly and I'm surprised it keeps coming up. I I thought we heard testimony about the decibel levels of what they were at the
at the transformers themselves and the inverters what it was 50 ft of 100 feet away in the nearest house. And I thought that was a was settled and yet people keep bringing it up that they're worried about the sound. I thought they addressed that. I thought it was addressed pretty clearly.
>> I think one of the questions was the traveling of the sound across the water. >> They particularly mentioned dis I brought that up too previously, but they they did >> talk about the distance and where these things are located. I I unless they're
not telling the truth, I think they they have addressed the issue. >> Okay. Thank you, Paul. >> Yeah. Um, that's a very good presentation. I have one suggestion. All but one or two of the slides had a
lot of room and you could increase the font size to follow that much more easily. There is a there is a stand in town of Falmouth for town meeting presentation. It doesn't apply here but would be very helpful. Aside from that, at the last meeting we talked about the
concern that emphasur had with the battery storage. you addressed it to a limited because like we caught you surprised and the comment was made that you're going to talk to them and come back to us with a more formal response. Is that still going to happen? >> Sorry. You have to come up if you're going to
answer. >> So just on that interconnection thing, the the application that we submitted to Eversource that they assessed uh the sites on included the battery and the solar. So there there's no concern from Eversource's point of view about us putting the battery there. The the
interconnection upgrades that they're requiring are all factored in based on what we've proposed, the DC size, the AC side, the inverter type, and the battery system that we're proposing. Um and so we we've had impact studies on each site individually and we've entered into interconnection agreements with uh for
each site individually as well. >> Thank you. That was an initial concern. Thank you. The gentleman who spoke about the corridor just come up to the mic, please. Thank you. >> You want to put it up on the screen?
>> Yeah. Could you put it back up on the screen, please? >> Sure. doing this uh here. >> Yeah, >> I appreciate the card. I just want to make sure I'm clear on this. So, there's going to be a security gate. Will that be obviously that won't be closed? It's
just a gate that can be closed. So when you talked about a security gate. So I guess my question is can a coyote or deer walk across Boxbury Hill from the east to the west array through that that corridor and reach the edge of the K co Kunameset pond freely?
>> Yes it would. So the security gate um would just be like two ballards with the the swinging bar um basically to prevent unauthorized vehicles from accessing the drive. But this this area would be open,
no obstruction for fencing and so anything would be able to pass through. >> Okay. And uh how wide is that? Just so can an emergency vehicle pass through there? >> So some initial schematics and we need to refine this and we are going to submit final plans. Um, initially it was
looking that at a minimum the gap would be 59 ft at a minimum and then widen up to towards like 89 90 ft. >> Okay. And one more question. Um, so MEEPA review uh this is over 25 acres.
Should this have triggered a meepa review? Just curious. >> I I can answer that question since I'm familiar with MEPA. Um, so the MEPA review process is a twoprong test, right? You have to have state agency action
>> and trigger a MEPA threshold. Uh, to my knowledge, there's no state agency action associated with the project. >> Okay. >> All right. And um, just a question for anybody here. So, it's a 40-year lease,
correct? U Matt Terry, I can speak to that. The term of the lease has yet to be finalized. >> Okay. >> Um it would be the non-binding that we entered into with the board of selectmen. >> Uh that was the subject of the town meeting authorization vote a few weeks
ago. Uh and again non-binding contemplated a 20 to 25 year initial term, right? uh with uh five-year extension terms that could run as as far as 40 to 45 in total with no further rights to extend after that.
>> And after the lease, the what's the town takes ownership back >> um that parcel of the land? >> Yeah. So the way that it would work the uh we would donate all of the acreage the 137 acres that are the subject of this application to the town that would
be done you know our our uh hope within the next year uh if not sooner we would ground lease back for each of these three projects a smaller portion u so when you're looking at these plan sets
the project areas with the fencing would essentially be the ground lease areas plus access driveways um and easements for utilities and the like. Uh so the balance of the acreage when it's donated to the town would be in the town's care
and custody immediately upon donation. The portion that is within the project envelope would be covered by the ground lease. And so that would be for the term of the ground lease, however long that ends up being. uh at the conclusion of
the ground lease both within the terms of the ground lease and in a separate decommissioning agreement that we're required by the zoning bylaw to enter into but also enter into in the ordinary course in these negotiations with municipalities uh when we work with them the
decommissioning agreement will provide that pure sky is obligated to remove the array at the completion of its operation and to provide assurityity to the town upfront uh which would be based on a decommissioning estimate uh an estimate
provided by Pure Sky and then reviewed and approved by the town and we'd come back before the planning board uh for that approval as well where the uh amount of the shity would match how much it would cost in today's dollars to
remove the array. That amount obviously increases with time. The shity which is typically a bond uh which would be issued in the name of the town and could be drawn upon by the town unilaterally gets increased over time as the cost decommission uh ostensibly increases as
well uh so that the town would be protected against having to come out of pocket in the event that pure sky wasn't around to remove the array on its own. >> Right. Thank you. >> Any other questions? All set, Paul.
>> No, I'm good. >> Uh, just one more comment about uh noise. >> Uh, I work outside in neighborhoods all over the Cape. >> And if you want to talk about noise, uh, listening to uh, leaf blowers and lawnmowers all day. Today, I listen to 6
hours of a gas powered leaf blower. Uh, so, and it's and it's all the time. Any neighborhood I work in, there's always something like that going on. So, we live in a noisy world and I think they've addressed the noise uh uh concern uh very well. Uh when you're
looking at the distance from uh the units to where it is mitigated or indecipherable from uh regular background noise, I don't think the noise is going to be that big of an issue. >> Thank you, Charlotte. >> Maybe it's going too far into the weeds,
but I'd like to ask a question about the soil and the grading. >> No, >> that's all right. >> You want to ask? Well, >> I'm a gardener. I've dealt with the soil a lot. The soil here is not great. When we started gardening at our place, we had to bring in lom, 8 inches of lom to
grow anything. And if we wanted to grow a good bed, even pollinators, the pollinators, after all, are perennials. They require good soil. You have to bring in lom. And I wonder if that's part of your plan and where it would come from. If you're using only materials that are there,
>> how are you going to deal with that? If you've scraped it all off, how are you going to reom it and then seed it? >> But we will at the end the soil map showed it as being good soil. >> For the record, Raisley for for the project and representing the applicant.
Um so the intention is um this site as a golf course has a good loom layer um on site. Um the intention is to scrape the loom layer. Um keep it in a pile, grade the site to the levels and the angles and slopes that we need to place the
array, relay the same loom over that graded area, and then spread the the meadow um the seating. So the the existing site is going to provide all the loom that that we propose to use um and all the site.
We're not proposing to export any material or import any material. There is imported material. There is some gravel that is going to be used for constructing the driveways. There's the gravel pad for the equipment pad that that's going to be import material, but that's gravel um material typical that
for any site like this. But in terms of earth material, it's all on site. >> How will you irrigate as things are starting to grow? There is going to be a contract with um a landscaping contract that will maintain things irrigated. Um like it was mentioned the existing irrigation
system is going to be decommissioned. Um there's existing um wells for irrigation on site that's going to be decommissioned because of the grading that is taking place. Some of the existing irrigation lines will go will be ripped out. So the system is not going to be operational. Um, but there's
going to be a contract with um, landscaping management to maintain the the plantings alive. >> And has any consideration been given yet to restoring any of the proper grades when it's decommissioned? >> That has not been considered.
Would those be the original grades or the grades that the golf course was graded at? Because obviously the golf course was designed and and built so the original grades no longer exist. It's just the golf course. >> That's true. It'd be more nearly the ones that they are now before you start. And yet what you're proposing to do is
build up five or six foot BMS along the roads. Yeah. >> And that's not going to be very natural looking. it will look like the landscape around reservoirs actually where they've made an effort to to do that kind of thing. So, it wouldn't look natural. How would you restore a more natural look to
it? >> Um, yeah, something to consider. We we do purposely create these earthworms for the purpose of screening. Um, but we intend to use this site for about 40 years and the planting will take place
in the early stages of this project. So, I if if you're thinking of recreating the site, you're actually asking for deforesting um an area that's going to be 40 years now vegetated um with all these earth berms, all this
screening that is being proposed, which once the town owns the property, I guess the town could could choose to do that, but think about at that point you're eliminating planting that is roughly 30 to 40 years old.
And and just on the grading, pushing dirt is is expensive. Uh we will only do as much grading as is is necessary for the solar. Um I think it's a is it 10% that everything's sort of set up here. So 10% grade is what we're looking at at the moment. Um we are identifying
racking manufacturers which may have slightly uh higher tolerances in terms of slope and and so we would uh reduce uh any grading accordingly. As I said, we're not we're not interested in spending money unnecessarily. So if we don't have to grade it as as as extensively, we would certainly not do
that. >> Good questions. Any more? No. Anybody else? Okay. I've got a few questions, please. Um, as far as say your grading goes, excuse me. When we uh reviewed this at the Cape
Cod Commission, they're going to move approximately five to six thousand truckloads of soil around the site. It's not going to be a little bit of grading here, a little bit of grading there. >> And the testimony that I I saw before was the golf course that it is now is the way it was. They did very little
grading in in 1927 to make the golf course any different way that we see it. But they're going to level it so they can put the panels in. >> Uh, one of the questions I have is I would like to know what the life expected life of the panels are that are
proposed to be used here, please. >> So, the expected life of the panels are for the life of the project >> that you're proposing to use here. >> We're proposing to use here is is a 40-year lifespan. >> 40 year. Yeah. >> Okay. Thank you. And um
the >> sorry four or 40 >> 40. Yeah. It's the number of the project. >> Okay. Thank you. Um see the paths that are proposed to be
here, walking paths, are they going to be constructed or are they just going to be people walk on the ground and where they'll make a path out of eventually? It it'll be a mixture. There'll be some natural pathways. I think we're repurposing some of the uh the the old golf cart trails. Uh and there'll be
some other areas that will uh will be >> most of the ones I used to go around like the water and stuff. Those are not there now. >> So, are you going to >> They'll be cleared in natural. We're not intending to have a uh >> You're not going to put like a little tense grade down or anything of that nature. Just >> I don't think that's the plan.
>> People are going to walk on it and it'll become a trail. >> Mhm. because you have the blue lines. I mean, it looks very nice on the plan. >> So, right, um the the project was presented to the KO commission and the Cape C commission. One of one of the
goals um um that was um being targeted is remove as much impervious surfaces as possible, including the car paths. Now, there's a few existing car paths that are down steep slopes. Um we presented the project to keep keeping those steep
um car path that are currently paved because if you remove the pavement those car paths currently become the avenue for runoff water and then it becomes gullies and erosion problems and things like that. So there are certain sections of the existing carpass that are
proposed to be remaining. Um the big section of existing um paths is within hole number 18. hole number 18 at the low punch portion of the um the topography is very close to groundwater. It's kind of um wet at times. Um if we
remove the um the pave surface, then people are likely going to be walking in mud. So to prevent that, we're going to keep that section as paved. So there's other sections that we're keeping the existing paved car path. um these car
paths already go onto um town properties, those pathways um that's not part of this project. So those paths that exist beyond the property limits will remain as they are. If they're paved, they'll remain paved. The majority of the new path um through the
KA Commission process, they're not going to be paved. So they're going to be um dirt or lift leader um just clear um paths for pedestrian to be able to walk through. >> So it's not a path that you're going to create, it's just going to be created,
>> right? So >> as people use them, >> the ones that are going to be intentionally created by the project is because the proposed fencing cuts off the existing paths. So this new path is going to be just outside the fence and just follow along the outside of the fence. cuz that that's those are the
ones that we're creating. We're creating some along Bucksbury Hill. Um that's going to follow the topography from the proposed earth BMS. So it just follows the um the curvature of those earth berms. Um we did agree to include an
existing path along the south side of Brown Pond um for the south array. So that's an existing path. It's not a paved path, my understanding. Um it's just a path that car paths can actually drive through and get from hole number I believe hole number five to hole number
eight. Um and it's not paved. Um the other one that we're proposing is the one on the west array on the northern part of the west array. But this is within areas that we are already grading and putting a fence. It's just going to be outside of the fence. >> And there was a question about the path
that ends uh on Boxray Hill Road. you're going to make an adjustment on that so people don't have to you said you're going to cross over the the what now is the existing cart path. >> So, right um I believe this is the the one in question.
>> Right. That was their concern. >> So, currently there's a a car path crossing at this location. >> Yes, >> there is existing beyond this image. There is existing town own space land and there are car there are paths trails on that area. We're proposing to connect
to those trails um for the town own open space land with this network of trails and at this location we propose this crossing to connect back to the town parking um that also has ways of connecting to other trails.
>> Okay. >> All right. Thank you. >> And just to be perfectly clear, the e the intention is to install and create these walking trails to the extent they don't exist now. Uh the applicant is committed both through uh an agreement
with the Kun Messa Pond Association that was made a number of years ago and through the Cape Cod Commission process uh to uh create these walking trails to the extent they don't exist today to connect to existing walking trail networks. We wouldn't just leave it to
folks chomping through the woods over time to create the trail. They'll be constructed by the applicant in coordination with the town. >> I agree. Thank you very much, Charlotte. Another question or comment. >> It's comment really more than than a question. What is or isn't reasonable is
a very subjective thing. One person's reason is different from anothers. And if what we're directed to do is go only by what's in the bylaw, the bylaw doesn't really set you up to limit the size, the scale of this project because
it gives you setbacks from streets and so forth. But that's the only limit set on it. So the other limits have been chosen by Pure Sky who are not choosing to develop the entire amount of land that they're proposing to buy. They're proposing to develop part of it and
leave some acreage open. But we could look at that and see is it a reasonable amount that Pure Sky has chosen to leave open given the neighborhood that it's in. >> It it appears that they're purchasing everything but about well they're purchasing everything
there. The project doesn't include everything includes everything but 7.3 acres. >> Mhm. >> And maybe when we do our site visit, we can discuss that with the applicant about the pass. >> Right. My concern scale of the project,
>> right? Um just one point to to that um uh comment. Currently, the applicant is proposing to conserve more than twice the amount of open space that would be required both by the Cape Cod Commission and by the
Falmouth zoning bylaw. Um each uh of the regional and local authorities have a formula for mitigating areas that are disturbed. So if you cut down 10.2 two acres, then you're obligated to either restore or permanently conserve or a
combination thereof twice that. So, it would be slightly over 20 acres. What we're proposing is to permanently conserve over 42 acres. And then when you add that to Round Pond, the amount of acreage that's either legally going
to be conserved or is functionally conserved will be around 55 acres. So out of 137 acres, you'll have 55 that are permanently conserved. In terms of the um acreage that will be subject to each of these three projects, it's about
57 acres. So relative to the total 137 acres, uh the project envelopes are uh a fraction of the total acreage. There's a a maximum size to solar arrays that are set by state regulation.
at 5 megawws. So you can't exceed those. We don't here. And in some cases, uh the proposed projects are are smaller than that. But the size of the projects have been designed um to balance impacts on
the environment to comply with state and local regulations and also uh to ensure that the projects are economically viable. So shrinking the size of the arrays um risks the financial viability
of the projects and could potentially be construed as as an unreasonable regulation because it would be a reduction in size for the sake of the of a reduction in size. Um so the um part of our goal was uh to create a balance
where our open space conservation well exceeded what we would be the minimum we'd be required to conserve under both uh regional and local requirements. >> It's a well-designed project. I'm not saying that it's not. I'm just saying that for the area that it's in, it's
industrial size. So it's out of place. >> So it would have and I understand all your arguments. I realize that those are the arguments that would be made. They undoubtedly would be successful so that you could go ahead. But it is too bad. Wait, wait.
Anybody else on the on the board? So, uh, we've had we've had a lot of, uh, concern this evening about batteries, battery storage, battery fires, and, uh, one of my concerns is, uh, any kind of a
fire from the wiring. Um, we see what happened in California. A lot of damage, loss of life. And it's in it's in our uh guide guidelines here. 240-74 E number 7.
Reasonable efforts as determined by the planning board shall be made to place all utility connections from the solar voltaic installation underground depending on the appropriate soil condition shape and topography of the
site and requirements of the utility provider. Electrical transformers for utility interconnections may be above ground if required by the utility provider. The la the last road that I built uh about two years ago, maybe
three years ago now, every road that that someone builds in the town of Falmouth, the utilities have to go underground. And I would really really like to see the uh instead of telephone poles run
the electricity underground in conduits to uh sandwich road where it's going to get dispersed. It saves us from having to worry about hurricane, any any any storm that can knock the wires down, any kind of a spark or fire.
It doesn't solve the battery situation, but um I know when I when I put electricity underground, it's about $150 a foot, but that includes the wiring, conduit, etc. And I would really like to see the applicant consider uh uh going
underground from the I guess the batteries to S to Sandwich Road. >> Sorry. >> And I see you have a utility agreement for all three arrays if I understand it correctly. >> Can I get that? >> Uh yes, that's correct. >> Yeah, recently. Very recently.
>> Um I'll let Lawrence speak in a second, too. I just wanted to uh note that the um the polls and how the powers run once we get on the Boxbury Hill Road and outside of the private property is at
Eversourc's uh under their control. And uh so they're the ones who really determine uh how the power, you know, they own those poles. >> I understand, but I'd be very very surprised if they wouldn't be happy to see it go underground.
Yes sir. >> Um just on on the point that all of the wires between the pad equipment, the battery, the converters and the inverter is all underground. There's no above ground wire with that. And our portion of the interconnection agree infrastructure is also going to be padmounted equipment going up to whatever point ever sourced does. And if
if they I agree with you uh coming some of you may have detected an accent uh most of our power is run underground. We don't have windy country never have uh the same issues with with vote. I think it would be well worthwhile. But unfortunately I I I don't control what utilities do.
>> Well, I think I don't think they'd be uh upset if you said you want to go underground with it. >> But we we have no choice in the matter. >> Well, then we'll have a conversation with them. >> That conversation would go nowhere because they can't I It is more expensive than the polls. They wouldn't be able to charge us for their their decision.
>> I know I know it wouldn't be their costs. It would be it would be your cost, not >> they can't penalize us by by saying that they're going to do it and then charge us more than every every other interconnection. >> I understand that. >> Yeah, >> I've done a lot of utilities. So, >> yeah. So, we everything that we control
will be underground. The utility is is is up to them. >> Well, it's in our guidelines to to ask and to pursue that it go underground >> from your site. I >> I will gladly provide you with the contact at Eversource for those discussions to happen. Okay, good. If
you can leave that for us at some point. Thank you very much. Then we have this young lady right here has a question or a comment. >> Um, it's a question. Uh, my name is Lynn Shad, precinct 3. Um, and I wanted to speak to the um concern that was raised
with regards to what happens to property values when a system like this goes up in one's neighborhood. And I was wondering if as uh part of the conditions from was it the lockstead association um did they ask to have some sort of study done to see what does
happen to property values? I did a very cursory look into it and it really varies. Um your property values can actually go up not necessarily down. So it would be uh perhaps beneficial to find out, you know, cuz it could it
could um the findings could be positive um and then that would be a good thing to know. So I was wondering if that could be considered. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> So we have some letters. Lot of letters.
Lot of letters. Okay. >> Can you speed read, Tom? >> I can. All right. This is from the Lockstead Association. Dear planning board, we are writing to register our support for the solar farm on the road in East Felmouth proposed by
Pure Sky Solar. And I'm just going to turn around and get right to the letter. Here we go. Dear Planning Board, Lockstead is a residential community established over 40 years ago. Many homes as well as our community center and beaches have frontage on Kunamset Pond. and enjoy views of the water as
well as the golf course located on the eastern shore of the pond. We agree that the proposed solar PV development is hugely preferable to housing but there are conditions which as a butters we ask the planning board to incorporate in their decision. We make these requests
to maintain the natural beauty and healthy environment of the pond in surrounding areas. We use the pond extensively for swimming, kayaking, fishing, and other recreational purposes and want to work together to propose conditions that will assure the peaceful
nature of the area and safe water quality of the pond. Specifically, we ask that the following list of items to be incorporated as conditions of the permit for any potential development of the property currently being used at Cape Cod Country Club. Number one, include the memorandum of understanding
between ASD Cape Cod Holdings LLC and Kunamesid Pond Association, Inc. dated 68 2021 in its entirety as a condition of the planning board decision. Number two, the project currently proposes to
cut over 1,000 TBC trees and level the rolling fairways to maximize solar capture on the panels. As today's panels can adapt to a wider range of solar angle and do not require flat mounting service, we question whether the extreme
proposal is really required. Flattening the land artificially will result in an obviously unnatural terrain now and will be far less suitable for conservation use 40 years in the future. This project presents a unique opportunity to restore
and rew wild the 100 acre parcel abudding Kunames pond. Further, it will endanger tree roots of the trees slated to remain. Consequently, we suggest that the planning board engage a large solar
panel engineer at the developer's cost to peer review the developer's layout and recommend ways to allow as much of the natural slope to remain. Number three, require part of the regarding I'm sorry, require as part of the regrading
work that all existing top soil will remain on site and reused for planting. Number four, require the recreational require that the recreational trails that connect the Crane Reservation to other adjacent conservation and
recreational areas will not be interrupted by the establishment and/or operation of the solar farm. The developer shall work with the local trail associations to provide a mutual agreeable route through or around the
solar development to connect the trail systems. Number five, require that any chemical treatment to manage or destroy plants or animals will not be allowed. Number six, require that grass cutting will only be allowed between 7 a.m. and
7:00 p.m. on weekends or weekday. That is. Number seven, require that fixed lighting systems are not allowed and any temporary lighting must be dark sky compliant. Number eight, require that maintenance except in emergencies will only be allowed between 7:00 a.m. and
700 p.m. on weekdays. Number nine, the planning board will engage an acoustical engineer to take sound readings at the perime perimeter of the project boundaries to document the full spectrum existing sound baseline. These readings
will include but are not limited to decibel level, pitch, cadence, cycle, morning and night, weekday and week ends. Based on these readings, the planning board will require that the project will not create noise which exceeds current
loudness, pitch, and at the property lines. 10. maintain and as importantly increase the visual buffer along the pond since sight lines across the water will otherwise see solar panels instead of green rolling fairways between high
canopy trees. Plant understory trees and shrubs below existing trees carefully to not endanger root systems of existing trees. Maximize use of native species. Trees of the same species will be of varying heights and cultivars to better
reflect a natural setting. Trees must have at least a 3-in caliber. New plantings must be properly watered by the solar developer for a minimum of two years. Any plants, shrubs, or trees that die within the time of the lease will be replaced in kind and size by the solar
developer. Maintain the existing slope down to pond to preserve existing vegetation, especially existing trees at the top of the slope since they provide the greatest visual buffer. A planting plan indicating species size and quantity shall be produced by the solar
developer and approved by the planning board prior to any clearing, grading, or construction work on the site. The planting plan will be peer-reviewed by a Massachusetts registered landscape architect familiar with use of native
species to create a natural venue and who as Cape Cod experience and expertise. The peer review fee will be paid by the solar developer. 11. require that the solar developer provide Osprey stands on the solar farmland every 600
yards are as recommended by the International Osprey Foundation and the local Autobon Society and maintain them for the duration of the lease. The stand shall be a type approved by the International Osprey Foundation and the
local Ottabbon Society and be located along the Kunames pond shoreline. Number 12 require that the overall project will be done in conjunction with the Ottabon guidelines and recommendations for a wildlife sanctuary and the solar
developer will seek wildlife sanctuary certification. Number 13 require flower and seed mix to be sewn between solar panels will be native grasses suitable to attract pollinators and other elements as
recommended by the umass.edu website link below. Number 14, required that all fencing be installed to allow minimum 6 to 8 in from the ground to the bottom of the fence to allow for critter passage. Top bar installation is not
allowed in any chain link fencing. Number 15, limit the equipment placed on the site to photovoltaic panels and necessary related equipment only. Do not allow wind turbines or
other methods of energy production. Okay, next letter. Dear planning board, I am writing to you regarding the December 9, 2025 meeting for the site plan review process for the solar farm proposed for Cape Cod Country
Club property by Pure Sky Energy. The following is found in current town of Felmouth codes chapter 240-94 zoning standards after or under article um XX wildlife corridor pages 74 to 76
section A subsection 3 where it clearly states in quotes fencing or any structural barrier to wildlife movement within corridors shall be prohibitive unquote. Therefore, I ask the planning board if this proposed solar farm is
cited on Cape Cod Country Club property in the Soval district, which is also in a wildlife carter. According to town of Felmouth Maps, isn't the site provided from having a fence of any type surrounding the three solar farms? I
believe this bylaw should be enforced as it applies to the site plan review of this applicant. Sincerely, Robert Young. Next letter. Dear members of the Felmouth Planning Board, as a resident of Lockstead Association and butter of the Cape Cut
Country Club, I have a comment in relation to the Pure Sky Solar Array project. I am in support of this project, but would like to but I would would like to board to request that Pure Sky improve the current plans for walking trails for the
safety and enjoyment of the users. The walking trail does not unfortunately include a loop and therefore users are likely to walk on Boxberry Hill Road to return to the parking lot. This narrow winding road has no sidewalk or shoulder and
would present a danger to to the uh pedestrians. I would suggest that the planning board request that Pure Sky number one safety either create a looping trail within the property or create a simple trail shoulder sidewalk along Boxbury Hill that would make it
safer for people to return to the public parking lot at the northern end of the pond. Number two, enjoyment. Improve the view of the tall chain link fence in the parts that run along the walking trail. This can be done either by adding some plantings or by adding a more natural
wooden and attractive type of fence. Number three, wildlife friendly fence. Furthermore, I am concerned that the 6-in space at the bottom of the fence may not be sufficient for small medium-sized animals like foxes and coyotes uh to move around. Leaving a
larger gap to allow for animals to crawl under should be considered. Thank you so much for your consideration, Sylvia Ravachi. Next letter. Dear planning board members, has any study been done to determine that there are adverse effects of the solar farm on
neighboring properties from the noise these solar farms emit? If not, why not? Multiple studies indicate that properties in close proximity to largecale solar developments, especially those on green field sites in rural areas, can
experience a decline in value, especially due to noise. the noise these solar farms emit. I would strongly urge everyone to research the East Windsor, Connecticut solar project and see how that has impacted the surrounding
neighborhood in town. What seemed like a good idea at the time has now become an issue with noise and safety, which has been ignored by the developers. These farms emit a high-pitched hum noise from the inverters and transformers, especially when it is sunny. This
project represents a potential financial detriment to nearby property owners which the town of Felmouth has held to deal with in the notsodistant past. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Lauren Elliot.
Next letter. Good afternoon. My name is Nate Bent and I live at 47 Boxbury Hill in Felmouth. I am writing to you. >> Just just read the uh last paragraph. >> All right. The entire fifth hole was to be planted and returned to its natural
state. The latest engineering drawings have deviated from this plan. The natural barrier between the fifth and sixth hole preserves the topog topography and trees and functions as a very good screen to the array. The proposed earth BMS will not serve as
functional screening from my house and our neighbors since our dwellings are elevated from the road. We will have stadium seating to the south array if this isn't changed. I hope you understand the stress that this project has caused all the residents in
proximity to this proposed project and that you will work with the applicant to ensure this request is met. I am confident that the other trees can be taken down in this parcel away from our resident from residences if the current
energy generation is desired. Thank you Nate. Next one's from Mr. Morardi. We already took his testimony. Okay. Go to the next packet. >> Greetings. Please study the climate benefits of integrating sheep into the
solar facility at the old country club. If holistic grazing is used, frequent movement of the herd to prevent overg grazing, significant carbon can be sequestered in soil. This helps to heal
the climate. This is from Kin Elsa, East Felman. Next letter. We are neighbors to Cape Cod Country Club and live on Boxberry Hill Road. We don't want to see the land flattened and trees destroyed for a solar project of the size that clearly
does not belong on Cape Cod. Please consider this as you continue to the permitting process. Also to note, if this project moves forward, please consider making all of the construction vehicles access the site by way of Route 151 and Ranch
Road. Oxray Hill Road has some blind curves and no sidewalks. And many residents walk their dogs, ride bikes, and we ride our horses from our farm, Red Pony Ranch, and it will become very dangerous to do so with all the giant dump trucks and other vehicles. Thank
you. That's from Rachel Neville. Dear planning board, at your most recent meeting, there was a lot of discussion relating to mitigating mitigation regarding creating burn wildflower planting seedlings to replace trees that would be cut, walking paths, corridors
for wildlife, etc. If is there an actual budget for all of this? And who would monitor whether the company follows through on their plans? It was stated that the wildlife would be able to get under the fencing or be able to use created corridors. However, I do not
believe the effect on bird life has been addressed and it would be significant. Also, there's much emphasis on the intention for the sledding hill to remain, but will there be designated parking for that specific use?
Sincerely, Lin Young. Next letter. There are many places that solar could go in Felmouth. the rooftops of all sorts of buildings, covered parking lots, etc. The golf cost course should be kept as undeveloped land and if at all possible
or as recreation open land. It is foolish to sacrifice open land for solar panels. Sari Freriedman. Hi Jed. I wanted the meeting on November 20. I watched the meeting on November 25th as I was unable to attend.
Unfortunately, I will be unable to attend on December 9th and want to get an additional request into the record as follows. I would like to request that the developer include sound studies that calculate the noise generated by the battery storage systems and any other
equipment or system are less than 5 dB above ambient at the property lines. I am making this request on behalf of the Lockstead Association residents and that's from James Polando. The
>> next one already gave testimony. >> This one's from Mr. Cool. I already took his testimony today. >> He left us some questions. >> Okay. >> Hi Kathy. Could you please be more specific? Are you referring to the site plan review
application for the large scale solar array at the Cape Cut Country Club site? Thank you, Melinda. Um, so she wrote that she voted a strong no and there was no specifics of what she was referring to besides it said solar.
So I just asked her >> this is what Massachusetts pushing for. >> So she was just confirming that's what she was referring to. That was from Kathy Needleman. Okay, getting close. Almost done here. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah. There was a post on anything Felmmet by the planning board asking for public comment a day or so ago. You can look it up, but okay. Here is my opinion. I understand this project will not lower the cost of the town's electric bills. So, who is
benefiting? It will cost millions of dollars and will ruin a huge natural area, not to mention put our water supply at risk. When those pan panels become defunct, that that presents a huge load to be disposed of and more
money to reconstruct. Put panels on rooftops if you must, but don't ruin a gorgeous natural area. Given all the downsides, I don't know how this project got so far through the development stage. >> Do you want me to read your response?
>> No. >> In the last one, she stood up and she read this. >> I think Judith stood up. Okay, that's it. Water. >> And I have a question for the developer. Just to refresh my memory, what is the
program that the state uh is it smart? There's some kind of is what is that when did that come out? Is that that's the one that gives you all the incentives, the rules, and everything you follow. The state's really telling you how to do this, right?
>> Yeah. So, when solar was uh originally released into Massachusetts, it was under a program called the SREX, which was renewable energy credits. Um when the SREX went through various different iterations uh it then became the smart program and I can't remember what it stands for. We just always refer to it
as the smart program. Uh there is uh as of Friday um they've just released the guidelines for smart 3.0 which is the next iteration of the smart program uh with the rules and regulations and >> qualifiers in that. >> Any other questions from the board
comments? No, >> Mr. Terry. So, just to put a bow on things for this evening, um I wanted to see we obviously have a fair amount of questions um and uh comments to respond to both uh from testimony this evening
and from letters that have been submitted. So, our intention will be to do what we did for this hearing, which is to um put our responses in writing and submit a letter to the planning board in advance of the next hearing. Um,
with that in mind, I just wanted to see when the next hearing will be so that we can >> Yeah, the next hearing is December 30th. >> Okay. >> December 30th. >> 30. Yep. >> And we we would love to do a site visit
before then as a group if we can. I know you're trying to work on with golf cards. >> Um >> trying to be away. >> Um I believe the 16th, but I turns out I'm coming back the 29th. >> Nice. >> Changed my plan. >> Okay. >> Um if the 30th doesn't work, um the next
one is January 13th. >> Let's do the 30th if we can. >> Yeah. I just didn't I'm just making sure it works for him to with the holidays and getting the response. >> Yeah, I don't see any reason why. >> Okay. >> It doesn't work. Um so other than the
responses to uh items that we um discussed tonight or or from letters, is there anything in particular any other topics that the planning board would like us to prepare for the 30th or >> I think we covered them all pretty much. >> Yeah. Okay. Excellent. >> Underground would be really nice.
>> Yeah, we'll look into that. Um, all right. Well, thank you very much for your time. We really appreciate it. >> Can I make a motion to continue this till December 30th? >> Yes. >> Okay. So, moved. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I >> I >> thank all of you very much.
>> See you at New Year's. >> Mr. Chair, >> would you entertain a two-minute recess? >> Yes. >> Spot four. >> Uh, bathroom breaks, let people get out, etc. I just >> People realize that Massachusetts is
going to require everybody to be elected by 50. >> They're ripping up gas lines. >> The fire department will likely not be here. >> I want the stretch code. What's that? Um, and they will submit a referral just like all of our
>> and you can access any of that information. >> Yep, you got it. From oil to gas. >> Well done, John. >> Well done. a lot more. >> The only thing about reading letters is
it brings up points we've discussed over and over again and that's a waste of time. >> No, but if we don't do it then >> Okay. >> So, >> well, we didn't used to do it. This is your policy. Wendy's now. discuss.
go back into session. So, our next public hearing is Fashion Foods LLC special permit application to allow a portion of the restaurant parking to be located in the front yard and for 18 parking spaces on the south side of the lot to be within 5
ft of the property line at Zero Worcester Court. map number 395 048 0001B and for the applicant. >> Thanks Mr. Douly. Members of the board
uh for your record I'm Bob Ahmed attorney for the applicant Fashion Foods LLC and uh this is a continued hearing. You're already pretty familiar with the uh property. The first thing I'm going to ask uh Raul uh Lazardi Rivera from
Capen Islands Engineering to uh just go through the revised plan that's been submitted and tell you what changes uh were made and then I have some uh comments about the project. Besides Raul, um here tonight is again Randy
Hart, the traffic consultant from um VS uh VHB >> open door >> and um Usama Alshawari by >> somewhere close by. Terry Smiley and
Josh Lavine u from the applicant um Good evening. For the record from Cape Islands Engineering, we're the engineers and land surveyors for for the applicant and for this project. Um, so as Bud mentioned, this is a continued hearing.
Uh, and there was some updated documents submitted for this application, one of them being the revised site plan. Most of the revision were to address um comments and um items that were noted in the um town of Amouth Engineering
Department from DPW. Um and just having the the site plan right here in front of us on the display. Um I just want to go over some of the um revisions that were done to the plan. Um, one of the comments was revising the the layout of
the parking um to accom accommodate a particular depth of the parking stall itself. Um, so we did that at this location which is the northerly most parking row and also on the main parking area um on the south side of the
property. So the whole purpose was to elongate the painting of the stripes to make that the actual parking stall is 18 ft. Um that was done with the compensation of reducing the width of the aisles. So the width of the aisles
here I believe it was 22 feet before now it's 20 ft to add one foot to the strength to the lengthening of the painted stripes. Um on this northern part um we did the same. Um the aisle was reduced from 16 ft to 15 ft and the
striping was um increased another foot. We did receive um comments from the engineering department again today. Um and this one in particular, they want one more foot of painted stripe and one less foot of the width. We can actually
do that. The the site allows for it. Um, another revision was having to do with the grade on the exit only drive, which is this exit onto Springs Road. Um, the original design had a slope on this driveway of 10%. Um, the town
engineer said, um, they should not be more than 8%. So, we did revise the site plans to regrade the site and produce an 8% slope. for that to take place. Um, you would notice that this landscape island between the exit drive and this
first parking space got bigger. Um, that was done to be able to separate the flatter grades on the parking to the steeper grades down the slope. There is roughly a four to 5 ft drop at this location from the existing site to the grades on Springs by Road. Um, so that's
the main reason for that that change there for the grading. Uh, another revision in this same area was that there was a proposed catch basin at this location on the eastern side of this exit only drive and it was partially the
structure was partially beyond the property line by about a foot and a half. Um, the the town engineer noted that. So, we revised that to bring back that entire structure within the property. Um, another comment on this
same um, driveway was that portion of the driveway and again this is because Springs by Road slopes um, from low grades on the east side towards a high grade on the west side. Um, and the driveway has to meet that exact slope in
order to connect to the driveway. So this whole driveway is sloping from left to right, but also sloping from south to to north as it goes down to meet the grades. So there's a dual grade change here. The only physical um structure
that I envision that can collect runoff from this driveway for the entire width is to add to the catch basin a trench grade. So we did propose a trench grade the entire width. We did receive in the town engineer comments that they don't
want trench crates. Um we do ask for this board to allow this trench grade at this location. It is only to collect the little triangle piece of pavement of this driveway that is that would otherwise be bypassing the catch basin. The trench crate will intercept it, send
it back to the catch basin which will send it back to the leeching system. >> Why why do they not want the trench crate the drain? Um they have a position that they don't want trench trench grates in the town of Famouth. Um >> is it going to flow is it going to flow into the the uh other drain that you
have designed there? >> So yes um it is there's a detail there's a detail on the design plans and the trench grade has a pipe that connects to the catch basin. The catch basin has a pipe that connects to the leeching system. So everything is connected um to the same system. is just capturing I
believe it was something like um 100 square feet of pavement area that's that would otherwise bypass this catch basin. Um, it was commented first when I first saw it, it was a comment through the DPW um,
referral that would the applicant consider a walkway or sidewalk connection from the sidewalk on Springs Road to the facility. It was commented at this hearing on the first um, hearing night for this project. Um, we talked
with the the applicant and we came up with this idea of a parallel walkway along this side of the property. Um, what this forced us to do is to create a six gap separation between the dumpster
area and the loading zone area to create a a crosswalk and that will connect anybody who wants to use this way of accessing the site to have a pedestrian walk. In the referral or comments that we received from the town engineer today,
um he says that the town should consider whether this should not be a proper sidewalk, should it be nothing, or should it be somewhere else. Um but he leaves it up to the board to to decide um on that walkway.
Um, another revision is there was a series of um, parking signage on the site plan and not all of them were clearly identify what they were. The ones at the end of the accessible parking spaces were obviously the um,
parking spaces um, limitation parking signs. Um, but there are three other signs that is for pickup orders and two other signs that is for delivery pickup orders. So that has been identified on a plan. There was some comments about where will
the snow piles be. Um so the plans now shows that this landscape area to the north would be a designated um snow piling area. The landscaping area to the east will be another landscape area. Um it is possible that the the westerly one
is another landscape area, but typically um developers don't like plowing and piling the snow in front of their business because it hides the business. Um but if it's a big storm then that area is also available. Um turning out of this proposed exiton
drive we do add a new set of signage at this location. This is an exit only and we call it out that customers um will take a right turn out of this exit. But we do want to allow the dumpster truck
and the delivery truck to take a left turn. This signage is intended to alleviate congestion and traffic on the intersection. So instead of having everybody, all the customers go out this side, the ones that will eventually
carry on driving east on Springs by road have the opportunity to come out this driveway and go quickly onto their destination. The delivery trucks and dumpster, the delivery truck for one has no business taking the right turn here. Um you can imagine the next intersection
which is another um headache on on Mar Vista. Um there's no reason for delivery trucks to go that way. The delivery trucks that service Wendy's will service the site and will find their way back to Route 28 where is their main route to go to to their next destination. That can
only be done or it could be done if you take a right, but the preferred and easiest and comfortable way to do it is to go back left on Springs Road. So that we want that um driveway and that signage to allow delivery trucks and the
dumpster truck to take that left turn. The landscape plan was revised and submitted. Um, one of the things that was added to the landscape plan was a hedge along this parking to screen the parking spaces from from the pl and to screen the
lighting from from those headlights. There was screening added to the easterly property line. Um, our validities are proposed there um to provide more privacy to to LPP which is Little Park um place.
um several other comments um that I want to touch on from today's um town engineers um comments. So most of the comments about half of the comments um he shakes stuff as being um addressed already. Um he leaves the the one
comment regarding the trench great as something that he does not um recommend or um approve. Uh and the way he puts it is the plans were revised to include trench drain to capture all storm runoff
from the driveway. We do not allow the use of trench drains to prevent storm water runoff from entering public driveways. Um the trench drain is not capturing all the storm runoff. There is a portion of that driveway that will bypass the catch basin. So it's only that triangular portion that the trench
train is capturing. The trans train is proposed completely on the development or the property site. It's not on the town road. Um so we asked this board to allow that portion to be captured by the trans train. Um
there was um a submission in the early filings that we showed a triangle side distance for this site for both entrances, the existing entrance on Worcester Court and the proposed entrance on um Springs by Road. Um the
town engineer agrees that the the site distance that was proposed and shown on the graphic um off of this exit only for vehicles traveling eastbound on Spring by Road is adequate because there is a stop sign at this intersection. So
trying to chase a 335 ft triangle distance where the car is going to be stopping somewhere around 200 feet makes no sense. So the triangle for that direction makes sense. the triangle that we show for um vehicles traveling westbound on Springs by Road, we show
that we exceed the 335 foot um minimum requirement according to to the town engineer. He wants that triangle to just be cut off at 335. uh we show that there is more um I mean this this board can approve the plan as
is if the town engineer wants a revised one to cut off that triangle to 335 for the curb cut permit purpose we can do that similarly to the curb cut on Worcester Court from travelers going northbound on Worcester Court we have
that there's more than 600 ft of a visible triangle sight distance it wants that triangle to be cut off at 335 drive on the people that or drivers that are driving southbound on Worcester Court, we have over 400 ft. It wants that same
triangle to be cut off at the 335. So, this is just a just a triangle reduction. Instead of showing what we show of 600 feet and 400 ft, cut it back at 335. It's just a graphical illustration. It doesn't change the project at all.
um our answers to his first initial comments about extending the existing sidewalk on Worcester Court. So, right now there's a sidewalk coming up Springs by Road. It makes the bend at the intersection and it just stops. There's
a crosswalk at the intersection um across Worcester Court and then there's an existing sidewalk all along Worcester Court on the west side of Worcester Court. Um the town engineer asked why not continue this sidewalk and stop it at this property line. Uh a couple of
concerns I have with that. Um although the existing stub um sidewalk it's kind like a dead end and once you get to that point you have to make a decision. You either cross the road at that point or you keep walking on on yards of of the properties or or the sideyard of the
road or you go back about 10 15 feet and cross the crosswalk and use the sidewalk on the opposite side. If this sidewalk is extended all the way to this location, we face the same situation. We have a stopped end with no destination.
You just end up at a property and you have to make a decision. keep walking on grass um or bare soil or you cross the road at a location where there is no crosswalk to use the sidewalk across the street.
The main concern with that is if somebody is in a wheelchair, gets to that dead end and has to make a decision. The actual curb cut on the sidewalk is way back here. So they will have to just wheel themselves back to that location, cross the road safely,
and then use a sidewalk. So we don't think it's a good idea to continue this existing dead end um sidewalk to make it another dead end at a location that seems a little worse than what it is. what it is right now. It would serve as
a purpose for this project in that we're actually capturing that dead end and giving it a purpose as the destination or the beginning or destination to Wendy's. So, it would allow people to go into Wendy's. So, um we still are asking this board to
allow the widths of these two sidewalk um curb cuts. Um and the reasoning is the delivery truck movement. We did provide a graphic of the width of this delivery truck what it needs. If we don't have this width, the back wheels of the trailer of this truck is going to
be running off the pavement. And we've seen it at on different sites where they run off the pavement and they just make the rot lines on on the landscaped areas. So, we're asking for this board to allow us to proceed with this curb cut. And the town engineer in this
follow-up comment says that it's up to the board to to decide, but he did did say that the graphics for the turning mill win show the reasons why, but it's up to the board to to decide. And with that, I'll pass it back to to Bob. Thank you.
question. >> Yeah. >> Just on the sidewalk. Did that you you weren't clear. You were saying you really didn't like the sidewalk. You kind of put it there. The one uh going down to Spring Road. What's the slope of that sidewalk? That little piece.
>> So, at this section, um this is about a 10% slope. It's fairly steep. >> That's going to be a skateboarder shoot right after the road. Uh thanks for bringing up that that question. Um we actually are not uh very
happy about uh that um sidewalk there. Um it is steep as as you've um surmised. Um the other concern we have is that if there is a access route from that Spring
Bars Road location, it has to be handicap accessible. It's not required. >> Can't do that 10%, right? >> No, we can't do 10%. Um, >> let her go. >> And we we have talked uh Raul has been
in touch with the architectural access board. They said you don't have to put that in, but if you do, it has to be handicap accessible. Now, the distance from somebody walking on the existing sidewalk to this point, all accessible,
all appropriate grades up to the patio where the entrance to the building is, is only about 50 ft uh longer. Then if you come up here, go all the way to this point, cross on this sidewalk, then come
back and go to the same point. Um, we've thought about it and think that what a a good solution might be is to not construct this difficult to construct um sidewalk. And by the way,
if it is uh pavement, the curbing needs to be different and it may also affect the the existing trees. So we we just have a lot of problems with constructing that. Um, but maybe what we should do is actually provide for this crosswalk
here. And then people, I would guess mostly kids who want to go up this path and they may make a path, but it's not a a route that needs to be accessible. They could do that. will provide a safer
place for them to cross but leave the uh otherwise leave the handicap accessible route um as we showed on the original plan. Now that is a decision that the town engineering office in their
referral today really said would leave it to the to the boards. So you can make that decision and I think it's worth something um to talk about. The other thing I want to say because it's a now
because it's a change is that uh we also um have a revised uh building plans. So let me get that for you. Um and we call it Cape Cod style
architecture. So the other plan was a flat roof. It was a building 18 ft high. Um this is a plan that um has for Cape Cod traditional uh gables and u
materials. Um this drawing does not show the um the patio which would extend out here. Um this is the this is the view from Worester Court. So, if you were
looking at Wister Court, we'd also have the patio, but we of course will produce plans that show that and um I'd like to suggest we'd be allowed to do that administratively when the project is approved. We would submit
plans uh consistent with these drawings uh for um for approval administratively. Um this uh building with the slope roofs and the um
Cape Cod style is 28 ft high. So it's 10 ft higher than the U previously proposed uh design. Um but of course that's still well below the uh that's allowed. And the otherwise the building is the same.
That is the footprint is the same. It's only 6.9% of the um lot area in terms of of of coverage. So, the other thing I wanted to show you just because I think it's interesting
you note the the the branding color Wendy's uh red. Um try to get rid of this. I want to show you this.
This is the FW Web building just 100 yards or so farther um south on Worcester Court. Um, you know, people talk about this corner being the entrance to the subdivisions
that are some distance in Felmouth Heights or towards Mirror Vista. And um, even closer to Felmouth Heights is is the FW web building with its um, significant red facade. This
building is the finished area of it according to the assessors. I don't know about more areas of it, but the finished area of this building is about eight times the size of the proposed Wendy's building. Anyway, that's a change um
that we wanted you to be aware of. We do have uh those plans. Now, we're before the planning board for site plan review and two design related special permits um related to parking
location only. And the proposed use, the fast food with a drive-thru um is not the uh really the purview of the planning board, but because that's for
the ZBA to allow and we have a pending special permit um there and the next hearing is the I think it's the 8th of January, whatever that Thursday is. But that said, I do want to talk a little
bit about the use and the B2 district. There are uses allowed in the B2 district by right uses that do not require a special permit that only require a site
that can have impacts similar to a fast food restaurant that we're proposing. The proposed restaurant including a patio area as I said is only 6.9% of the lot area 40%
is allowed in the B2 district retail and offices are among a number of byite uses that are allowed and that would include a convenience store by right use a typical convenience store
is about 3500 square ft And the Institute for Traffic Engineers says that that would generate 172 peak hour trips. Remember, each trip in or out is a trip. But that number is
40% greater than the estimated number of peak hour trips at Wendy's. And even at just 20% lot coverage, not 40, but 20% lot coverage, a building on
a 41,000 square foot lot could be 8,200 square ft. So there could be a convenience store of 3500 and another 4700 square ft of commercial space available
for any number of uses which generate traffic. The result is that by right development of this lot, depending on the uses, could generate about twice as much traffic as the proposed Wednesdays will
be. A convenience store could be open 24/7. And above those stores also without increasing lot coverage there could be apartments with additional parking and traffic by right
if under Mr. Cod with only 20% lot coverage. There are legitimate concerns, site plan review concerns about any proposed fast food restaurant and there have been various objections
raised to this project, some of which are not credible and some of which are exaggerated. So, here are some responses to some of those issues. The lighting on the site will be dark sky compliant,
meeting dark sky compliant industry standards. The photometrics plan which we submitted, I could show you if if you want to see it, I have it here, shows that except for a few feet on the southerntherly side of the property,
the lighting is at the lowest they measure, one/tenth of a foot candle at the property lines. That means onetenth of the amount of light from a single candle
against a a surface a foot away. And I talked to the designer uh who did that uh plan and he explained to me that after that it's almost unmeasurable. There will be no light
no light that reaches any residences from this project. That doesn't mean it's pitch dark at at those sites because there's a lot of ambient light whether it's from the moon or other
properties uh near or far. Now that doesn't account for lights from vehicles, right? So that's a an issue. The only a butter who would have
concerns about light from vehicles would be the Little Pond Place housing. Uh that's to the east of the property. As as you well know, the dumpster location and the screening around that is right in line with the
driveway. That will help somewhat. We suggest that there could be plastic black or green um screening on the back of the 6 foot high I think it's 6 foot
high fence that the housing authority housing corporation sorry um has installed along the property line on their property. The closest uh residence is about 100 feet away uh
from the driveway. We're keeping existing trees. We're adding a row of fast growing arborite to create privacy and screening. Eventually those are going to be 15 or 20 feet high.
There actually is a row of arbivide that's along the back of the commercial properties to the u to the south abudding the little pond place and there they seem to be uh make a pretty big a pretty effective screen
and we're proposing as Raul said the 4ft high hedge that will block car lights um facing spring bars road. is a B2 zoning district. Any commercial development is going to um have lighting. Any
residential development for that matter. I note it appears that all of the apartments at Little Pond Place have have blinds in their windows. Little Pond Place itself is brightly lit at night by its own lighting. I have just
show you some pictures of neighborhood lighting. Uh this is looking into um Little Pond Place at at night. I'm not sure what time out of the night these pictures were taken, but
>> in the evening. And um this is the uh um a view of the O'Hare car dealership right across the street from Little Pond
Place. Um this is the the credit uh union. Now the these lights are not screened. they are not um
>> compliant. Um and that's what we have in the area. And of course a little farther away, this is looking towards across um the subject property towards Cappies and the back of Aldi's zone.
We think we are effectively dealing with the lighting issue and that that issue can be checked off. Noise. The closest apartment at Little Pond Place is about 135 ft away from the
order kiosk, 85 ft away from the dumpster enclosure. The applicants can control that is Fashion Foods, Wendy's can control the uh sound at the order kiosk and they are
agreeable to a condition, a requirement in a decision that the sound from the order kiosk cannot be heard, is not audible at the property line. I've discussed that with them. They can agree
to that. It's not okay for on a butter to speculate that the applicant who has a long credible record, they've owned Wendy's on Cape
Cod since 1986. This would be the seventh Wendy's that they have on their cake. It's not fair to suggest that they won't take care of their trash and it will be wrong for the planning
board to assume that conditions wouldn't be followed. And any business will have a dumpster and garbage and delivery trucks. any business on this site. Fashion Foods agrees to install a
state-of-the-art filtering system for its kitchen so-called captive air um system and they've done that in in Hyannis. It's not okay for an abuter to argue
that they might not maintain it and therefore shouldn't be allowed to have their restaurant. The board can make annual inspections and reports of condition if it feels that's necessary.
In the comprehensive permit for Little Pond Place, the ZBA required that the housing corporation maintain a debrisfree site, a same condition can be added to
a decision for um this Wendy's and they'd have to police their site every day. The housing corporation says that they already have a problem with trash
blowing across the proposed Wendy's site through their fence onto their property. Well, that's obviously not being caused by Wendy's. Wendy's will address that existing problem. The screening mentioned above
on the back on the fence could be part of that. It would help. As far as the housing corporation is concerned, the proposed project should be a benefit in terms of trash control. Everybody agrees
that the intersection of Worcester Court and Spring Bars Road has been the site of too many accidents. There's evidence that the installation of the flashing beacon that occurred last December,
almost a year ago, is helping. Last month, the police department told Randy Hart that there was been only one reported accident in the first 10 months of the year,
compared to five or six every year for a number of years before that light was installed. The existing problems with the intersection haven't been caused by Wendy's. The applicant proposes at its expense,
working with the town to install flashing stop signs at the Spring Bars Road approaches similar to what was installed at another problem intersection um Dillingham Avenue at Gford Street.
And in addition, we would propose at the applicant's expense, working with the town to install digital radar speed monitors um showing the speed of cars at appropriate locations on the Worcester
uh court approaches. So, the intersection can become safer because of these improvements that would accompany the the Wendy's proposal. If there's development by right,
if no special permit is required, if there were a convenience store or any number of other uses that generate traffic, there would be no mechanism to require the developer to pay for those traffic
improvements that we're proposing. The housing corporation's letter to the board says in error that trucks leaving the site have to turn right onto Spring Bars Road. Raul has already um pointed out that that's not the case
at all. That's not what we proposed at the initial hearing and it's not what the plan says. Plan says the opposite. Customers will be able to go any direction, whether it's
west on Springbar's Road, north or south on Worcester Court, or east on Spring Bars Road by exiting onto Worcester Court right after they come out of the uh drive-thru area.
Only customers who want to head east on Springbar's Road will go out that exit only way, but not all of them. And the estimate from Randy Hart in the
360 page traffic report that you have copies of estimates that in the peak hours there will be only four or five cars exiting
onto Spring Bars Road from that exiton uh curb cut. He does not consider that driveway to be unsafe or unusual. In fact, he doesn't think if it was a
exit in either direction, it would be a problem. But it isn't logical to think that there can't be or shouldn't be any exit onto Spring Bars Road for that
almost acre size um B2 corner lot. The zoning bylaw section 2401414C allows a driveway to be as close as 20 ft to an intersection. The proposed exit driveway is separated
from the Little Pond Place curb cut by about 60 ft. And I'm talking edge of driveway to edge of driveway. From the center line, it's more than 80 ft. This low volume exit
with that kind of separation is not going to create a hazard. The relatively few cars exiting a slow at a slow rate of speed should pose no greater danger, less in fact, than faster moving cars coming from the
intersection. Certainly, when there's a bus stop at the bus stop, nobody's going to go out of that driveway and create a problem trying to go around the bus or anything like that. Concern about sight distance has already
been addressed by by our role and the engineering department now seems to agree that looking west on Springbar Road where there's an intersection with 200 ft away. You don't
need uh 335 ft of visibility. Um, moreover, as Raul advised in his correspondence to the board last week, the zoning bylaw
specifically requires only 150 ft of visibility. That's in the our zoning bylaw. >> We're going to address all that. So, >> good. Um and and that's only for roads on
state highways, drives on state highways. There's concern about storm water runoff. There's currently no runoff interception on the site at all and 65% of the of the lot is just paved.
The natural topography is slightly towards the rear of the property that is towards the east towards Little Pond Place. We're going to capture all of the runoff
except the very small areas less than 10% of the lot that is existing landscaped area and is sloping towards the uh the streets. The project will actually greatly
improve storm water impacts. Sharon Muller, who's here? Did I introduce you earlier? >> I'm sorry. >> And her husband bought the former car wash site in 1984.
That was a while ago. It's more than 25 years before the town acquired the Little Pond Place site in 2010 and the 40 apartments there were allowed in 2019 and built shortly thereafter.
Multifamily housing is not allowed under our bylaw in the light industrial district where little place is. >> We need to stick to the site plan review. Okay, >> I'll move pretty quickly through this >> please. Thank you. B2.
>> I do want to say though that I really support what Felman Housing Corporation does. I won't go into projects I've done, including 704 Main Street, really the flagship property of it.
Those projects, a bunch are in the business district. To my knowledge, no one has suggested that the development of multifamily housing should limit what an ab butter can do with their property. The position of Felmouth Housing Corporation clearly adversely affects
Mrs. Mueller's property, which is contrary to the language in the zoning bylaw that multif family housing shall not um adversely affect the business district. >> Noxious.
We think the concerns about lighting, odors, noise, and traffic safety are exaggerated. They would be concerns with any use of the property. Um, but we also think that the interests of the housing corporation
and the applicant are not incompatible at all. Fortunately, I guess the multif family housing is not that close to the property line as I've as I've said and
the distances between the restaurant, between exhaust, fume, location, and so on are such that with proper design and management, Wendy's will be a good neighbor and its investment will benefit the community. And I also just want to comment about
the other butter uh GVW Unlimited Limited Liability Company, which owns the building to the south that is a um um I believe an auto
body shop, an auto repair shop. They mistakenly think that the nonconforming nature of its building only 44 44 ines from the property line gives its rights over Mrs. Mueller's
property. That's not true. A property owner's nonconformance does not change the setback requirements of its abut. And we're not proposing a structure close to the line. It's GVW that doesn't conform to the
zoning setbacks. Not Mrs. Muller and not the proposed plan. She can install a fence upon her property line. >> And we thought that was >> we're just doing site plan review. We're not This is not the zoning board here.
Well, we're talking about a fence, whether there should be a fence. And I'm about the location on the on the site plan, and we'll discuss the fence, but you don't have one. You don't have to tell us that you can do one. >> I'm almost done. Uh, >> thank you.
>> The planning board can allow parking to be 2 feet from the line. We can put a fence up. We don't need to. You don't want us to. With a fence, the abuter shouldn't be worried about cars hitting his building,
which is what his letter says. We'd rather have that parking close to the line because it makes for a better sight plan. It allows us to have angled parking more easily. The angled parking when we have a one-way traffic flow is
beneficial because it keeps people from pulling out of a 90° space and turning the wrong way. Angled parking space is 60° or 20 ft deep whereas 90° parking is only 18 ft deep
and 45 degree parking which is what we have along Spring Bars Road requires 19 ft deep. We have some flexibility and one possibility is to is to change the angle so it's 45
instead of 60. That's an option. We have a couple other options. We have an opportunity perhaps to talk with staff about what is better. It may be that you agree that a special permit to allow the parking to be as we proposed 2 feet from
the line is best or um maybe it should be four feet. We have a plan that would work with that and if necessary it can be five feet but it's may not be as good a plan. There is no setback requirement at all
for a driveway. And I note that GVW has encroached onto Mrs. Mueller's property with its fencing, which we show the parking up to. We'll live with that. And I also note that the abut parks vehicles closer than 5T to Mrs. Mueller's
property. It's been restated misstated by um the abuter and by others that Randy Hart's traffic memory at doesn't take into account Aldi's but the 2024 study did anticipate
and add in traffic from the then future Aldis and the updated 2025 report not only takes that into account but also increases the numbers based on passage of a year and considers other future uh development.
I just want to um close um referencing the concern about the neighborhood. Um see if I can do this. This is uh the neighboring property that
I've been talking about, the car repair. This is a picture that's taken from the street. Um, and this is a picture of the of of it. It's a rather crowded um site. So, we think
that this is a in a B2 district. this use is allowed. The site about a cramped car repair facility. Um, and we don't think it's in a a misplaced to have have it here.
Thank you for your attention, your indulgence. If you have questions of me or Randy Hart or Raul, we'd like to try to answer them. >> Thank you. Any questions? >> Not right. No.
>> Thank you. >> Is there anyone here to like to speak? Uh, yes ma'am. >> Good evening, Mr. Chair and the board. I am Linda Clark, the president of Felmouth Housing Corporation, an executive director also of the
corporation. So, I am in the trenches with tenants every day as well as on the development side. Um, I want to disagree with attorney AIT uh coming forth and saying that I'm already saying they're going to be
bad neighbors. Well, they are. So I I'm just want to say nobody approached me, the owner or attorney Armit before the process even began. That's not being a good neighbor. Every project that I have done in the
town of Felmouth, I've personally contacted every abuing neighbor with concerns prior to submitting any type of planning or to ZBA. So I am
concerned about what kind of a neighbor Wendy's is going to be to our tenants. I happened to spend back in 2019 into 2020 a year and a half on the site. I was the development team. I was there
every day. And every day out on the site, you'd hear the screeching. A lot of them were near misses, but we're just waiting for the crash. That is a horrible intersection. Any more traffic brought into that intersection
is going to end up catastrophic. We have 21 schoolage children that get on the bus at the edge of our driveway every day. Of course, nobody's going to hit a school bus, but you do have children that are waiting for a school
bus in the morning or getting off a school bus. We have 37 vehicles on the premises. There's a total of 40 units. 37 cars come and go off the property daily.
I am on the property four to five times a week and I can tell you when I take a lefthand turn, don't know how many times. Look right, there's no one coming. Look left, no one's coming. Look right again
and then try pull out and you'll have somebody come across from Spring Bar Road because they want to avoid over they go at a high speed. And then all of a sudden there they are.
So that driveway is even further up. I think that that intersection I do have some statistics here. The person that did the survey uh did not calculate this. They missed some years. I don't know if you read my
packet. It was pretty extensive. I do have photographs. Um 51 accidents in nine years seems a lot to me. That's a lot of accidents and that's not what was revealed in the
study. Mass DOT had information that we secured the found of PD and that's how many accidents were at that intersection in 9 years 51. I also have concerns about exiting on
the other side. I mean, this is just as a resident onto Wista Court directly across as Cappies and now you have Aldi's. I mean, I believe it's directly across or in the closed vicinity. Raul can correct me if I'm wrong. Um,
I was really a little I was I was very upset. I did you see the photographs of the uh storm water that we managed? That was back in 2019. Mike McGrath wrote a letter
to the town to town council at the time and said, "Why are we forced to manage somebody else's storm water?" And it went back and forth and nobody
knew. And then now they're saying it's a coastal bank. And the next thing I know, we got a price to mitigate the water. $17,000 to keep moving on with the project cuz people needed to move in in September of 2020 during CO.
So, we're managing part of their storm water now. Um, I don't choose to manage any more of their storm water. I don't know what's going to happen to it. Um, I guess the engineers can deal with that.
I'm not that's not my forte. Uh, but I will not manage any more storm water from that parcel. As far as the trash, we've been picking up trash for five years. Five years right through the fence. We picked a very a beautiful row
iron slatted fence. We didn't want to put up a typical wood horrible fence. If you go by, it's pretty attractive. Well, the gaps are like this, so the trash flies through. I don't think Wendy's is going
to have a person out on the site 24/7 or during working hours picking up trash. I don't believe it. So, that's going to be more trash that's going to come our way. Dumpster, it's right on the property line. I know how the dumpster
companies operate. They want to get in and out of there. 4:00 in the morning, ba bang, bang, bang. Now, we don't have a good neighbor as I know. Who am I going to call when they're waking up all the tenants at 4:00 in the morning? They tried that with me at my project, but that didn't work. Nope. Do not come
before 7:00 a.m. Who do I go to? I know how to manage my properties. Am I going to be able and have the ability to manage fashion foods? Probably not. Um, I disagree with the photo that was put up. That is not what Little Pond
looks like at night. I don't know who took that picture. I am there at night. I am there during the day. I don't know who took that picture. It is not that bright on our site. It is not 100% no. So, if any one of the board members would like to take a drive by there at
night, please feel free because it's not that bright. Um I also I mean I have six pages here, but we're not going to do that. You you have the packet I submitted. Um,
and as far as the Wendy's in MASHP, there are two people that sent letters of support. Um, and they're associated with Duff Duffy Health Center and they put the mobile um outreach van, which is that's
wonderful. That's awesome. So does the service center and so does St. Barnabas Church. They also do Duffy Outreach Van. Um, as far as Girl Scout cookies, I do believe that the Stop and Shop and Shaws and various other places in town do also
allow the Girl Scouts to sell their cookies. Uh, neighbors over in Mashby, this is what you have for neighbors in Mashby. You have a This is a Butters for the Mashp uh location, a liquor mart, a plaza, a
business offices, and an abandoned restaurant. So, I'm sure they're good neighbors. Who are you going to bother? Right. Um, like I said, the 51 cars. I'm not going to go through this. I have six pages
here. Car stereoss. I don't know who's going to control car stereoss at midnight when somebody's had a couple of drinks and they're going through the Wendy's drive-thru. I don't think that's going to happen. the elevation. I the pictures, the photograph I submitted, you'll see the
elevation. Headlights will go right in bedroom windows. There's um I just don't want to read the whole thing. I want to save you some time. That's what I have. I have concerns. I
have concerns for my residents, the tenants. I look at I we don't only build affordable housing. We also take very good care of our properties and we look out for the residents that live there. >> All right. Thank you very much.
>> Thank you for your time. And we do have your uh >> Thank you. >> your packet. >> Anyone else? >> I'm not leaving. I'm just cold. >> Are you going to turn the heat on? >> It's freezing. Why do they keep turning it off? >> I don't know. Thanks for warm.
>> Yes. Thank you. >> What time is this? What time is my sleep? >> Town meeting closed. >> What time the office is closed? >> Yes, ma'am. Go ahead. >> Hi, Gina Weber. I'm here speaking on behalf of GVW Unlimited, the direct a butter to the south of the proposed
Wendy's. Um, I'll try to be brief because I apologize. I know it's very late. I'm sure we're all exhausted. Um, when it comes to the proposed Wendy's site,
while Abutters can't necessarily do much about what someone does with their own property, we should at least be allowed the bare minimums of setbacks, particularly when Sorry, I'm going to see if I can find the what seems to be really overlooked is
that Sorry, I can't see Oh, there we are. Trying to figure out where the arrow is here. This right here, this little looks like a bracket, is actually GVW's building. And if you're looking at putting 18
parking spaces in less than 10 ft from the property line, that actually has 11 to 12 of those spaces directly face the building. And if anyone knows what happened
yesterday on Main Street to the Exfinity building when someone thought they put their car in reverse and instead put their car in drive and drove right into the building. >> I don't know how many people have seen that news yet. That is a very strong
concern when you're talking 44 in from the property line for this particular property. It happens all the time. People make mistakes. They're rushing around and those things do happen. So, while we can't control what other people do with
their properties, having less than the minimum of the 10-ft setback here is a significant risk. Additionally, I think a lot of the um traffic in the area seems to be really under
represented in the traffic studies. having traffic patterns with Aldi's whatever they thought were going to happen back in August of 2024. I don't think anyone saw the significant increase in the usage of the driveway
that goes between Kappies and Aldi's where there is one entrance there to that plaza. There's another entrance off of Spring Bars Road. The entrance off of Spring Bars Road, people tend to avoid it for two specific reasons right now. One is because of the elevated um
plantings that are on the sorry trying to think the north side of that entrance. It creates a much smaller area for cars to come and go. So people tend to avoid that. Also, in that same lane, once you pull into the parking lot, there's a
large deep pothole that people don't want to go through, and they end up going out the Aldi's parking lot, which actually is directly across from where the main exit and entrance right here.
Here it says driveway on here. Paved driveway. It's actually It's not just a paved driveway. It's it's a pretty main entrance. That's where all of the um trucks come in for deliveries to cappies. That's where they also exit most of the time.
So, some of the other issues, um GVW Unlimited's building is obviously a non-conforming existing structure. While that's not the issue for the current um owners who are looking to put, you know,
a restaurant, a drive-through restaurant there, it does, however, affect the building in ways depending on what kind of fencing they use and things like that could be blocking air flow, could be blocking access to the building. Um, there are
significant concerns about emergency vehicles accessing, whether there's a a fire or some other kind of an emergency. There is a door. There's actually a door on the GVW building round about this
area right here. It's a 36-in door that when open 44 in 36 in it doesn't give much room to get around it, especially if they are right on top of the property line with their parking and fencing. Um, I just want to check and see what
else I'm missing. The traffic um patterns really should be should be updated. The traffic study was done at a time when the traffic patterns are not current. They're not what we see now. Um, let's see.
And then I'm not sure how it's it's really hard to tell on here. I can't really see how far from the property line the parking is anticipated to go on that south side here. But, um,
Mr. Ahmed, I believe, mentioned 4 feet, which is significantly less. It's less than half the requirement of 10 ft. Um, >> there's no 10 foot requirement. You've mentioned that a couple times. >> Where do you get this 10 foot requirement from?
>> In the zoning, the two, it's in 240 subsection. >> I believe it's 5t for parking. 10 ft for a building. You're 10 set for a building. >> So, that's setbacks for a building, but not for parking though. I think parking is five.
>> Parking is five. >> I may be wrong, but you keep quoting it so much it's going to sound like it's the truth, and I know it isn't. >> Okay. I apologize then because I when I looked it up, that's what I was reading was that there was that the um generally generally 25 ft from the front of the
property line, 10 ft from the side, and >> building not parking setbacks. >> Okay. I thought that it was for structural. So whether it was parking or fencing, >> I know things like that. And >> you don't even need a permit to put a fence on. I just keep I hear you saying
it and I after the third time I I had to interrupt. I'm sorry. >> Okay. Okay. Um so give me just one second. I'm off my um some of the things um that the housing authority had for concerns were also concerns of ours too, especially
the school bus stops. There is one right right at their exit to their um housing facility and the across the street from there, O'Hara's deliveries. When we were coming here to the last meeting, O'Hara had a car
delivery being dropped off and they literally block that entire side of the street. So that also causes issues. Um the other thing is the comments about the number of accidents that have been at the Worcester Court and um Spring
Bars Road intersection. Those are some of the numbers that are are being quoted are not what we can see from the property. And additionally, some of those are some of them are not ever reported because the police don't come to the scene. So there's not a police
report for it. Um but let's see. And then um yeah, the the lighting, the dark scar compliant except for a few feet on the southerntherly side. Again, that's something that affects GVW's property next door.
Um, there was just an accident a couple of weeks ago where someone drove up on the rock right in front of the bank just driving up toward the intersection there. Um,
I think that's pretty much that's that's probably enough for now. It's been a long day, but thank you very much for your time and consideration. You're welcome. Thank you very much. Anyone else want to make any comments? Okay.
Uh Tom, we got a couple of letters here. You want to just summarize them, please? >> Um they both spoke. >> They both spoke. >> Both of them spoke. >> Yeah, both of them spoke. Okay. So, we're good with that. >> All right. Start with this end of the board. Questions, comments?
>> Will we be continuing? >> We're definitely going to continue. Yes. >> I'll wait. I'll wait till we continue. >> Okay, >> sounds good to me. >> All right, >> so motion to continue to December 30th >> if that works for the applicant.
>> December 30th. >> So moved. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I >> I unanimous. Thank you. Thank you. >> Okay. The next application we've already voted on. So,
>> we're in planning board discussion now, right? >> Yes, we are, >> Mr. Chair. Then we're going to do the zero >> just Yeah, just for the record. Um the continuation is that for both the site plan review and special permit cuz
remember you've got a special permit application pending before you and that is for the parking within 5 ft of the property line in the front in the front yard. >> We should do it both, right? Y >> open that hearing.
>> The hearing's technically still open. Um unless you want to take any testimony from the public on the parking within 5 ft. Sounds like you heard some of that tonight. >> So as long as the applicant's aware, both matters will be continued to be.
>> I just like to confirm that all the testimony from everybody we spoke tonight will be considered part of a special permit. um record as well as the site. >> Yes, Mr. Will.
So, we're finished with that hearing. Now, we're going to go on to our next one. Um zero broken bow 40B referral to ZBA. >> So, with the lateness of tonight, uh we can have it on as a discussion on the next meeting. um because the
referral is not due till after the next meeting. So if you'd like, we can just put that on the 30th, >> please. >> Okay. >> Excellent. >> All in favor? >> I >> I >> Okay, >> next thing we have is a planning planning department report.
>> That's me. Um >> I don't see anything. >> Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you. >> Yeah, we don't have anything to report. >> Okay. >> I have nothing. And then committee reports. >> Oh. >> Huh.
>> Real quick. Yep. CPC meeting. Uh we did our CP fund project funding recommendations. Um and Taff playground. If anyone's interested, Thursday, December 11th at 5:30, the rec department CPC will attend a community
meeting uh regarding the TAP playground at the Woods Hole Community Hall. That's it. >> Awesome. Thank you. Any future agenda items other than some we already have? >> Okay. General correspondence November
26th to December 9th. Do we have any? >> I think we read it all. >> We've been reading a lot of it. >> All right. Thank you. Next meeting will be December 30th, 2025. Okay. >> Motion to adjurnn. So move. So move. Second. >> All in favor? I. I.