[Music] [Applause] [Music] Heat. Heat.
[Music] I'm calling tonight's meeting of the Salmon Planning Board to order. Today is I think it's September 9th,
2025. We are meeting at town hall. My name is John Drooie. I am the current chair of the planning board. Before we begin, I would like to ask remind everyone that this is a public meeting and is being conducted in accordance to 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 now proceed with the first item on the agenda, which is public comment. Anyone wishes to speak about something
is not on the agenda this evening, please come to the podium and state your name. All right. Seeing no one coming to the podium, we'll take item number one on the on our agenda tonight. We have uh an approval not required. And Jed, would
you like to? >> Oh, yeah. I'm sorry. I always forget the minutes. Paul. >> Nope. Tom. >> Tom. >> Mr. Chairman. Motion to >> Motion to approve the August 26, 2025 minutes as presented. >> Second.
>> All in favor? >> I I unanimous. >> Sorry about that. Okay. Now we have approval not required. Uh applicant is Steven Lopes. >> Um >> Belinda, please. >> Yep. This the plan before you meets all
the requirements of an ANR and recommend >> endorsement. >> You recommend what? >> Endorsement. >> Endorsement as shown on the plan >> without regard to buildability or zoning compliance. Okay.
>> I knew Pat would say that. I wanted to I can see it. >> Nice. >> Any comments on the ANR? >> No. >> Can I get a motion, please? >> So, I move endorsement as the plan of the plan as presented to us without
regard for buildability and whatever else. >> Zoning compliance. >> Zoning compliance. Thank you. >> You didn't help me on that, Melinda. >> Okay. You got a second, please. >> Second. >> Thank you. All in favor? I >> I unanimous.
>> Uh second public hearing is a continuation. >> And we'll hear from the applicant first. >> Hi, my name is Raphael Cading with 683 Main Street in Felmouth. So um
at this point I just came here to check with you guys if our green area is satisfactory for what you guys asked last time. >> Mr. Chair, if I may just very quickly so the the first item on the agenda is for
uh the public hearing the special permit for this application. As you remember, on the 22nd of July, you folks approved the application for the special permit with the parking in the front yard and within 5t of the property line. You closed the public hearing. Um, you did
ask us to draft a positive motion for the special permit. However, we've we've got one ready, but we've held off simply because the site plan review process is still ongoing. >> Okay. >> Um, and we recommend that you sort of tidy those approvals up together at your next hearing. So what I would suggest
is, you know, if the board is so inclined to move on from the public hearing because that's all that's already been closed and move into the public meeting where you can talk about the site plan review application that's before you and shown on the screen right now. >> Okay. So that's where we're at where we
move forward. You're going to have a landscaping plan and >> I believe there's a some concern from the engineering department about your drainage. So yeah, one of the things that they come up today that's like on this line here that's going to be where
the swirl is going to be and you guys asked for a bunch of trees over there. So one of the concerns from the engineer from town was that trees is going to destroy this wheel because the roots and everything else. So if is that like something else we can put over here
instead of trees so it doesn't damage what we're going to build for the water drainage. So, um, we have, uh, we we have not been able to get a positive referral from the engineering department on your drainage. >> Yes.
>> And I understand there's some, um, uh, concern with your engineer about our engineer. >> Yeah. It's being a back and forth from them. >> So, until that gets resolved, we cannot move forward. Mhm. So, uh, whatever, uh, the sound engineering department is
requiring is what you'll have to have a plan to achieve that. Go ahead. >> Am I saying it correctly? >> Yeah, if I may, uh, very quickly. Um, and we apologize for not being able to have the landscaping plan up on the screen.
>> Yeah, that's what I was waiting for. I wanted to see it. Yeah, >> we can we can I forward that to you, right? Yeah, we we have it in the board's packet and I can grab the stick and and show it to you, but um really quickly and for the record >> looks like coming back. >> The green the plan that you've asked the
applicant to submit shows where the landscaping would be proposed. Um one of the concerns within the engineering division's u most recent referral which is included in your packets. The multicolored uh referral indicates that
there are plantings uh proposed along the west side of the property in that swale area which would which could potentially compromise the swale itself which is sort of a you know a depressed rock fil um area. And so the engineering
division is recommending that trees and shrubs not be planted in that area because of the root system and the potential compromise of that drainage structure. So that's one of the components that um would be helpful for you to cover with the applicant this evening to determine if that is going to
be a problem for you on the landscaping plan. So, as as you may remember that you were concerned about the landscaping primarily in the front of the of the site, but also within that um that western side. So, I'm going to grab the stick and I'm going to try to get the
landscaping plan up on the screen to show you. >> Okay. Question. >> I don't have it in my packet. So, >> take a quick look at this. Bob, >> I have a question. Okay. I think uh >> before you start, I've never heard of a
compromised swale. That's a new one. >> And what is the danger of a compromised swale? >> Well, so my limited understanding of the storm water uh infrastructure is that you know essentially the roots well the swale itself
designed is a very long >> ditch basically. Um, and so it's going to be filled with rock. And the concern from the engineering division is that the root system of the plantings within that area could compromise the soil in such a way that it doesn't function the
way it's supposed to. So it has a certain surface area that collects water, allows it to drain, but also allows it to flow from the top of the site all the way to the to the bottom of the site. >> You have a question on that.
>> Okay. All right. Uh, any questions, Jim? >> I would really like to get a landscaper's opinion on that because I don't think I agree. I know what a swale is. It the surface water run off the roots are going to be below the surface
and they actually hold it together. And in my opinion, I I I I think the engineering might be getting into landscaping. They may not have I would like to know the engineering. First of all, the the the they're talking about what's
under the ground is going to affect the top of the swale. >> Again, >> I'd like to hear No, I'm not sure I agree with that. But if if there's if there's an engineer that also has a landscaping degree and wants to tell us you should never do this, but we need to put something
>> on on a property line here. It's really really important. Keep in mind that the engineering referral does defer to the planning board >> to make the ultimate decision on whether or not you want that landscaping there. >> Well, >> I believe it's similar when you have a tree that grows close to a sidewalk
>> and then the sidewalk gets disrupted and bubbles up and and because of the roots they grow and then it disrupts. >> Can the soil be moved around? >> Well, the roots for the tree are going to grow and and be massive. If you think of the tree roots,
>> that's problematic. That's just saying we can no longer put B trees not only in the front of the property on the side. That's really tough. >> I don't think it's necessary that you have to change the landscaping. >> There's other ways to to revise. >> Yes, Charlotte.
>> Could I comment on that? Also, it really depends on the size of the tree. Probably all of us have had experience planting stuff and the size of what you plant determines how problematic the roots might be wherever they are. So because I see if I'm reading this
correctly further closer to the street out of the soil now moving toward the street there's a plan to put in dwarf aelas aelas are already not a very big plant and these are even smaller than that and they could be larger up there
but if you put in smaller like arbiviti I know they do not have extensive roots it depends on what you plant whether or not they have the strength the roots to kick up any pavement or to create enough of a tango to dam up the water. The
water's going to run along the surface. >> That's possible. >> What about alternative plants like ornamental grasses? >> Just have those tall grasses like you get out. >> I need a clarification first. I I cannot determine on this plan where the drainage is. Is it in the front corner?
Is it along the whole side of the building? Yeah. >> The drainage goes right here. >> The whole length. >> The whole length. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. From >> And how how wide and how deep? >> All the way here all the way down
to uh two dry wells that back here. So that's going to be that's going to be a big pitch from here is going to be the highest elevation to all the way down here which is going to be the lowest elevation because of the pitch that's going to go to flow the
water until that goes to the dry wells. >> Any other questions? >> So go ahead. >> I would like to thank you for the effort that you've made to respond to what our concerns are. >> Thank you. And really, we just want it to look good when you get done. And I'm
glad that you want that that also the plan for the front. Um, that looks good. That's nice. So, maybe we'll know more about um planting. What's this planting under the overhang? This part here.
What's that plan? >> So, this part over here. >> Yeah. >> So, that's like a landscape we have over there right now. So there's like a bunch of like uh small bushes and some um >> some moch. >> It's it's there already. So we have like
some landscaping here already. >> So that remains. But what you're planning there at the front, you've made the entrance into the parking lot more narrow. >> Yes. This is the part you guys asked for and over here as well. >> And then do all this sidewalk.
>> Okay. And you'll be coming back it sounds like. Yeah, swale is like five to seven feet wide. >> Yeah, that's pretty wide. >> Yeah. >> Any other questions? >> Well, I have a question. Why Why is it
that your engineer isn't designing drainage in the parking lot like we see on other other sites? So as my understanding goes that they're being back and forth. My engineer talks to the engineer from the tower and then
he asks like so how you want to get it done. So because they're as far as I know they're giving all the calculations and the only thing that the the engineer from the town says that this is not going to work. So one of the
things that I can't foresee that I can understand is that if my engineer has a license can make the calculations work why the town is not accepting that and say that's not going to work. So it's being like I guess there's a
miscommunication or my engineer is not understanding what's going on. So I'm going to go to the b tomorrow. >> We're going to try to get an answer for you in a second. But my question to you is why are you not doing drainage in the parking lot like most people do? >> What do >> I've never seen a plan where there's a
drainage ditch on the side of the property to to catch the water. >> I know that. >> I still don't get >> usually the drainage goes in the parking lot with a great and maybe in the front and the back and
>> so because never never were all the landscape. I don't >> I don't know if you ever saw that that lot. The lot is like pretty straight like unless if you tear the entire property out and make it work. >> You wouldn't have the proper pitch. I don't believe
>> it's just it's pitch a little bit over this way. That's why we're trying to make this wall go over here and then >> falls in the back. But another thing that the engineer from the town is saying is that like we I suggest you to take some part of the
asphalt out which is like >> to be honest I'm feeling like that the entire town is is sort of forcing us to pretty much put the entire building down and then bring >> No, we're not >> build back on. >> We wouldn't ask you to do that. No, >> we initially just wanted to renovate the
entire the the the interior of the property and make it liveable >> for the population. >> Now we like getting to a million other different stuff on the outside. I understand everybody's concern and why is it's going but at the same time it's
getting more expensive by the day >> with everything that's being asked for. But >> right now the uh town engineer agrees with this plan here. >> No. No, >> he doesn't. He doesn't. >> No, does not. >> So, the town engineer doesn't want the swale. >> The the only thing he doesn't want the
trees. >> He doesn't want the trees. That's the only thing. >> The trees align with the swale. >> Yeah. That's the only issue. >> It's not If you read the whole engineering report, there is pages of things that are >> Yeah, there's more things to it as well. >> Right.
>> It's math. It's It's everything. It's the plants. It's >> There's a lot that's not correct. >> I'm sorry. What other than the plants? All we've heard. So far as the plants, what what's the everything else? >> Well, if you look at the engineering referral, >> somebody got to tell us >> list it in the map.
>> Got it. >> So, one of the most important items are the four dry wells that are located at each corner of the of the building. Best practice is that those drywalls are
located 10 ft away from a foundation. So, that's one of the chief concerns here. Um, Raphael, would you scroll down a plan? Um, sorry. Uh, on the other tab that we've been working on. >> Uh, which one? >> Uh, I think it's the third.
>> Let me just let me just come through it for you. >> This >> I don't know how much is running off the property now. >> I would like to know. >> You don't have that. Just ask. >> Okay. So what we're looking at here, there's a
few things. So these um leeching basins located at four corners of the building are essentially located too close to the structure. Uh the proposal is to locate them close to the structure as shown in this detail here and essentially create
a liner on the outside of the foundation. The issue with that is that what you're seeing is a 1 ft distance shown on a detail, but as you can see on the plan, it is very hard to tell if that one foot is actually shown
accurately on the plan. So that's that's a primary concern with those uh items. They are recommending that those be moved 10 ft away from the structure. Right. We've already covered the vegetation that's located. >> Hold on for a second. Is the applicant
doesn't want to do that and that's what we're arguing about? >> Nope. All I'm doing is summarizing the engineering referral. >> I just want to say I agree. I mean I the worst thing you could do is dump water right next to a foundation. I've been in business a long long time and especially because he's going to occupied basement.
>> Let's let's let him finish up and then we >> No, but I'm just wondering why. I think >> Well, let him finish. >> I'm just going to hit the highlight. Jed is trying to tell us. >> I know. It's okay. They're trying to get to buy something. We should. >> So, there's um a calculation issue with area C, which is the roof area. Um as
you can see on the plan, it's it's indicated at 1300 ft². Um in the calculations, it's uh appar according to the engineering referral, it's uh 1,412 ft². So, there's discrepancy between the actual calculation and what's shown on
the plan. Uh we've covered the drywall locations. They do have concern about um the use of the poly liner um as well as the note that's shown on the plan. And I'm just going to zoom in so you can
read it. Again, the clear indication on the drainage plan is that there's a concern with placing those items that close to the foundation. Um and so our engineering division has flagged that as saying if there's a concern that
shouldn't be done. Um, so then there's the swale, right? So if I'm reading the referral pro appropriately, there weren't calculations provided that indicate that
the swale is going to be able to hold the amount of storm water and be able to convey the amount of storm water that's anticipated in a 25-year storm. And >> and is that from the parking lot? uh from the parking lot and from the sky. >> Okay. Well, that
>> Yeah. >> goes on. Okay. >> Well, because you got to remember this area in here is all vegetated. >> So, the parking lot flow will eventually just hit grass and it will eventually make its way to the swale. >> I understand that's the plan. >> Yeah. And then there's the rest of that
area. >> Okay. >> There's also concern about the the as the applicant mentioned the flatness of the site. As you can see, the topography isn't there aren't a lot of breaks in the site. So, there's concern that storm
water that or water that falls here, there's concern that it will actually make its way all the way over to the edge of the site and then be able to flow down the swale. So, those are the high points. There's also new comments about math in the
calculations um and concern about the wintertime. So when as you know in this region we don't necessarily get a lot of snow but when we do get snow it's in small amounts it
sometimes can freeze right afterwards and sometimes we get rain events which actually clog up drainage and create flooding on site. So again, compound that idea of this site being as flat as it is and there's cars that are parked
here. If snow falls here, potentially creating a damning situation that water won't be able to flow into the swale and snow within the swale itself that may not allow water to flow into this area. Compound that with this area B, same
kind of concept. that there's snow blocking any of these areas, water won't be able to get into the drainage and drain off the site. That's the basic premise of the engineering referrals drainage comments. I haven't covered everything, but those are the items that I've pulled out uh of key importance.
>> Okay. Thank you, Judge Charlotte. >> Um we we pretty much have that all in writing and it's colorcoded so that we know which ones have been addressed and which ones are open. Mhm. >> And I'm assuming that you have this also.
>> Yes. Yeah. >> This is Yeah, you do. So that you know what needs to be done before we we meet again. So that that part's good. But I'd also like to underline that I'm pretty sure the whole board believes this is a really good project for the town. So
we're not trying to discourage you. >> Thank you. >> We're just hoping it will be a really great project and that you'll be back having addressed these pretty soon. >> Oh. Okay, Bob, you have any questions? No, comments. >> Tim,
>> uh, I think he's I'm not sure, but I think he's just trying to save a lot of money by not having to regrade the site and just put a simple swale in and catch it and avoid what I think is really good engineering. And I'm really concerned about that, especially going forward. He's This is a non-conforming building.
You know, it shouldn't have been it should have been drained in the beginning. He's spending a ton of money on the building. It's time to do it right. Or else we can't plant it and make it look good. We just have have to accept the mistakes are there and carry forward. And I I'm not comfortable with that.
>> So to be specific, what what would you like to see? >> Well, I think I'm >> You disagree with uh the drainage? Oh, I I I Well, I think that the uh I'm not an engineer, but and I I don't want to pretend I am, but I I can tell you I've solved an awful lot of wet basements by
putting dry wells 10 ft away and having the water collect into them instead of pumping it back in the basement. And I'm not an engineer, but if if our engineers have that so concerned, and that's probably why he doesn't I think I heard him, he doesn't want have to break up the pavement. He wants to try to save all that money.
And when we ask for a landscaping and a drainage site, those things are supposed to be coordinated, not compromised. >> So just for clarity sake, the first engineering referral that came from our engineering division did suggest that part of the western part of the site be
pulled up for imperous surface removal. So essentially making it easier to drain the site because there's less pavement. That was just a suggestion on their part. That's I think what the applicant was referring to. They don't want to get into that type of situation. But Mr.
Chair, what I think you were referring to is, you know, typically in these types of situations, dry wells or leeching basins are typically just put in the in the low point of the of the parking lot to catch all of the water that flows within that area and it just
leeches into the ground. And that's typically what we see in the area. This is a different design and so I think the applicant's struggling with that different design. >> Well, I'm struggling with it also because to do what is shown on this plan is going to be costly to begin with. But
I don't know what the what the grade is on the parking lot. This is not a it's an existing site. So I don't know if they put a drain in the front, they put a drain in the back if that would catch the water or not. If it was a new site, you could drain it, you know, grade it
correctly. >> Correct. Correct. It it must be if if this is the west side. Yes. >> It must slope to the west side for anyone to think that this is going to work. >> Right. It does minimally. >> It doesn't water doesn't need much of a slope to go somewhere. >> That's fair.
So, >> but that that creates the concern especially in the winter time when we do get those messy storms where those slush piles be at 3 in tall can create drainage problems on the site because it
doesn't have enough pitch to break through that. It simply will just sit on the site and it won't drain. So, that's the primary concern, at least that's what I read in the engineering referral that the applicant needs to fix. >> Yes. Okay, I'm starting to understand this.
And in the future, please. We used to have full sets of plans here. Fulls size sets of plans. >> Y, >> we can have those again because to look at the site plan like this, it's very hard to determine. >> Sure. >> Uh what what the scale is. So, >> we're secretly trying to push you into
digital plans. >> Well, in the meantime, let's uh have some pop them up. >> Let's have some >> Yeah. So, >> two sets, one at each end, please. You got it. >> You got it. >> Uh Pat, do you have any questions or comments? >> I've got a problem with the drainage,
whether it will be sufficient in in the winter for exactly the reasons stated is the ice damning. We have that around our own house, you know, where it it comes off the roof and it freezes. We have a quick drop in the
temperature and you've got an ice dam there, so it won't necessarily go into the swale. And depending upon what kind of storm we have, it could cause some damage in the basement apartment.
So I don't know how you satisfactorily totally seal that. So it's impervious into the um believed future life of this building. I don't know. >> I think that's what engineer is trying
to explain to us. I think so, too. >> Have there been any grades shot here at all? >> So, >> I mean, I'm asking Jed, but I mean by the engineering, have they they have any thing that they're going on? >> If I'm reading the plans correctly, the
answer is yes. So, in your application, >> we're trying to make this work for you. >> Thank you. >> Not trying to make it not work for you. >> Thank you. Like Charlotte said, we want to have we want it to happen >> on the site plan. Um,
sorry, I thought they were on the site plan. In the drainage plan, I believe that there are spot elevations um shown on the plan, but that is also very challenging to read. As you as you can tell and it you know as you're
probably seeing this plan is extremely busy and it is very difficult to determine exactly what the symbols mean. So I've got three S symbols on this plan for the drainage plan and I see no key indicating what those are. Um, so it's
challenging, but you can see in the legend that there are some existing spark rates and proposed spark rates shown on the plan. And that's what the engineering our engineering division will use to determine whether or not the flow will actually get to the west side
of the of the site. Uh I think for if I read the engineering division referral carefully before I came to the meeting. I think these are fixable problems. One thing I think that the applicant
will need from you because the engineering division has deferred it to you for your decision is whether or not you're okay with the landscaping within that swale area. Not necessarily within the swale itself, but in the area where the swale is
located. Are you okay with the aelas and the magnolia trees? >> Charlott. >> Charlotte, >> if it works out that it protects the swale, and that's important. Yes, I am. >> Okay. >> Um, so it depends. But it seems that he's got a lot of things here to take back to the engineer, he'll be back. But
I I ask you, winter in New England can be sloppy. >> Yes. >> We all deal with it. We get, you know, we get on our boots and we still live through it. And we wouldn't want the perfect to be the enemy of the good. He's trying to retrofit a building for residential use and would like him to be
able to do it. It may not be as perfect as it would have been if it had been designed for this from the ground up. And I don't think we should expect it to be. I do think we should expect the applicant to address the comments he's been given. And I I guess you're prepared to do
that. But >> yeah, I I just think sometimes a flat piece of land is harder to drain than than something that has a nice pitch to it or different grades. Um, and talking about uh drainage in the middle of a
parking lot, go to wood lumber after a rainy day, >> you got I joke about uh YMCA has already put their pond there or their pool there because uh it is it's uh even in the best uh scenarios with engineering, it
could still go wrong. So, um I hope these two can get together with the the guys at town and theirs and come up with something that will work and like you said may not be perfect but uh be better than what it is. >> Jim,
>> well I think uh combination of moving the dry wells away from the building and have impervious material around it and pitch the the water to it, but I'd like the engineers to do that. I'm not used to seeing dry wells right up next to a building. And I I the ones all the ones
I have in my extensive career have been nothing but problematic, especially when you have an occupied basement. And I I think we're we're trying to save the structure, but I don't think we have to save the parking lot.
That's my opinion. >> Okay. >> Aelas are fine for me. I'm not sure about trees. It depends upon the root structure. >> Okay, Paul. >> Yeah, I've read the engineering report, too. They have it problems with the
delineation so forth. Um, and there are there's only one contour going across here, so it's a little hard to tell what is really going on. Um, I agree that the drywalls close to the building are not a good idea, but the frequent drywalls about six of them
shown on the site. So, I wouldn't be so worried about the runoff into the swell area. However, I noticed they're putting in four magnolia trees in that area. I have two magnolia trees. They're black and brown and they're bigger than the house right now.
>> Mhm. >> So, those things get really, really big. And I don't know if that's appropriate there, but that's a different issue. But I think we should respect the engineering comments on drainage and see if we can resolve that issue. And there's a number of things thrown out
from swell areas to moving dry wells, increasing drywalls. I think they should take a good look at it and see what the engineering department recommends. >> Tom, not much more to add. I'm in agreement with all the uh concerns that were raised.
Okay. So, let let's just work on one issue. Um the the design for the drainage for the water along the side of the building. If that works and we don't have trees in there, are you okay with that, Charlotte? Bob? >> Yeah.
>> Jim, >> I mean, is that I guess I guess the pavement's so valuable, we should probably save it. Yes, I'm okay with it. Okay, Pat. Yeah, >> Paul, >> I think these are fixable problems. I don't I don't think so.
>> I'm I'm just trying I'm trying to narrow it down a little bit if we can here. >> Um would the board be acceptable to have the drainage in this area here if we don't have trees in that area? Yeah. You mentioned four trees that they get too big. And
if there is if it works, would you be okay with the drainage to go that direction? >> Yeah. I I think the swell area works fine with the trees there. I don't see that as a major problem. >> Okay. Well, it may be a major problem. They get too big. >> Exactly. >> Which was your problem?
>> The magnolia like mine. They're too big. >> Okay. Tom. >> Um yeah, if you're I'm okay if you remove those. Okay. And I I didn't read the whole engineering report. Are they is the
engineering department saying that the that the water will not get to that swale or or they're not saying either way? >> They're concerned that it may not because they haven't seen they haven't been shown that it will
>> because there's no grades that show it. Okay. That's why that's what I thought. >> No concept. So, there hasn't been a demonstration that water can actually make its way all the way over that. >> Okay. >> There's a drainage map that shows a drainage area, but there's no proof that the water will actually get to that spot.
>> Okay. So, second question. The um the the drainage for the roof runoff being so close to the building. Now, the applicant is showing that they're going to put uh a barrier between the foundation and the water to prevent it
from penetrating into the basement. >> Go ahead, Charlotte. Because if not, then they're going to have to move it 10 ft out from the building. >> I'm definitely not an engineer. >> Well, >> I'm not going to comment on that. >> Okay. I am wondering ordinarily by the time something gets to us we don't see
this number of engineering issues and at all you know because the engineers are going to deal with that we're not expected to be engineers so I'm wondering why did it come back to us tonight >> well so the primary reason is because of the landscaping plan what we're trying
to do is move the applicant through the process and if we keep delaying based on the drainage and one of the elements of the drainage is a suggestion to remove the landscaping from the drainage area. We the applicant is really should know
should they be considering removing that landscaping. >> Last thing we want them to come before you is to say, "Oh, well the drainage is all set." Well, now you got to change the landscaping. >> Okay. So, that's a question we probably can respond to. >> Okay. >> Okay. I'll respond first because I'm way at this end. Yes, that's okay.
>> Well, that's kind of what I thought our only talking point was going to be tonight was the green on this plan, >> right? uh and whether we're going to trees or not. And that was the question. Would uh the trees impede the uh absorption of uh runoff? And uh I think
uh I would be perfectly fine with uh grasses or other plants that don't have roots that are going to disrupt the uh hard top on the next uh property uh to it and still not compromise the soil. >> Jim,
>> I would move the drains. I think we're trying to save pavement and I don't think it's a good idea. >> Move the drainage from >> away from the house. >> Well, we're not talking about the roof drains now. We're talking about >> Are you okay with this Harry here? >> The green. >> The green
as is as drainage system if it works. >> I would I don't think so. I I I from the comments I've heard, it sounds like he's trying to save money by not there should be I think it's be could be better used with uh the proper drainage and maybe some impervious materials and say and
and having the landscaping that we're asking for because we're given a special permit and help help him through and he doesn't want to do where he wants his cake and eat it too. >> Okay. >> Can All right. Can I say something? >> Just a minute, please. I'm walking down
the the row here. and then we'll get together with you. Tom, >> I'm okay with the way it is. Yeah, >> Paul, >> no more. >> I'm okay with the way it is. I'm concerned about a wet basement if we
>> Well, right now we're just talking about the drainage on the side of the building there. >> Okay. Yes, sir. >> Uh just uh trying to explain here. I'm not trying to save any money. I'm here to do what it has to be done,
but like there's a million things that are being forced to us to do that I don't see enough reason why. This is my point. Not trying to sit here to save money. Of course, saving money is fine until you break even or lose money on a
deal. So, it's just just trying to clarify that. >> Okay. And and we have guidelines that we're supposed to go by. Mhm. I guess >> whether it's a new structure or >> Yeah. >> or an existing structure. >> That's why I'm here.
>> Okay. U Jed, do you think it would help if if the his engineers shot some some uh took some readings on the parking lot to see where the grade is? >> Uh certainly. Certainly. But >> because in my mind, it would help
determine whether this will actually work or not. What he shows on a plan. >> Yeah. or whether or not we're just going to have to require a couple of >> drywalls, >> you know, drywalls, >> right, >> in the parking lot, front and back or side or whatever. And and if that's the case, if he has to put drainage pit in
the front or in the back or both, he could also run his uh roof drains to that also at the same time. >> Make them bigger, have them do both. >> Well, that's why, right? But but I want to find out first of all >> if I I there aren't any grades on this plan. I we need to have some grades. Do
you understand that we need to have your your engineer shoot some grades on the parking lot? >> So we can see what the grade is, what the what the pitch is, >> whether any any kind of drainage you're going to do is going to work correctly or not. >> Okay.
>> I'll talk to him about that. >> May I make a suggestion? So his engineer has already met with our engineering department and it's been back and forth, I think, three or four times now. I think that it might be a good suggestion for their engineer to go through the
engineering referral and respond to each issue specifically and and and correct it and address each issue because this has been back and forth so many times and every time it they they met with them already and it's not getting fixed.
>> Did they meet with them on site? >> Uh they met with them in their office. >> Okay. >> And they went over the plans. >> Okay. Well, we have to do this anyway here. So have your engineer address what our engineer the questions are and
um choose some grades so and put them on a plan so that we can read them and the engineering department can read them so we can determine whether this actually work or not. If not then we're going to recommend something else to you. Mhm. >> We, you know, we have not only um
uh the use and and the goodwill here, but we have uh safety to be concerned about too. >> Sure. >> So, and in the end, it's going to be a great project, and you're going to be very happy as will the town. >> Thank you, >> Mr. Chair. If I may, just just point of
clarification, I I didn't follow the landscaping within the swale area. If you would like him to remove the magnolia trees that are currently there. Yes. Remove the magnolia. >> Is that what I heard? >> So there are
>> I I think that >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Yeah. >> The aelas are fine because those are bushes and likely that root system is not going to grow to the size of a magnolia tree perhaps. Would you like
them to extend the Aelas down the swale in place of the magnolia that are currently there? >> Yes. >> I would like the engineers to think about the issue before we say do that. >> My preference >> again they deferred it to you.
>> Yes. >> So their recommendation is that you wouldn't have trees within that swale area. >> Yeah. >> Any trees. >> Correct. Now, I don't consider an aelia a tree, >> but if I'm wrong, >> let me know. So, if the aelas are okay,
then at least the applicant is aware and they can they can potentially replace those magnolia with the alias so that you have some vegetation on that side, >> right? >> I think we have agreement on that. >> Yeah. Okay, great. >> Just for the >> and the front
>> the front landscaping is appropriate. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. Very good. Thank you. >> So, resolve the engineering comments and >> shoot some grades and get them on a plan. >> Then we can determine where the drain's
going to go. >> Okay. >> And then John, are we continuing this to the September 23rd meeting? Is that likely to be okay? applicant September 23rd. >> Continuation to the >> continue to the 23rd. >> 23rd if that works for the applicant.
>> That's what I was looking in his direction seeing if that was going to be okay. >> Was that two weeks? >> Yep. >> Okay. Because we've got on this um a deadline of September 30th. So,
we might need an extension for the decision. >> Yeah. For the for the decision. Yes. The deadline decision. So, you might want to give the staff an approval for an extension and work with them as to how long that extension should be. >> Okay. >> Thank you.
>> Thank you. Okay. Thank you very much. >> We'll see you in two weeks. Next, we have uh Mr. Adams. Tom, do you have anything to read for us? >> I do. >> Public notice for this project was
published 8225 and also 82925 and 15 of Butters were notified by regular mail. >> Thank you. For the applicant, >> just a question. >> Is that Harry and Harry your father? >> Tom.
>> Harry Thomas. Oh, yeah. Tom Adams. >> Oh, okay. Uh oh. Oh, I'm thinking Oh. Oh, you're you're in for Seth. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Yes. >> But is uh Harry Seth's dad? >> No.
>> No. Okay. Okay. So, I can stay because I would have had to myself. >> Yes. >> Uh for the record, my name is Seth Adams. >> It's my brother. Uh Nathan. Um he and I are the owners of uh along with my dad Tom are the owners of uh Katama Sill
Reality LLC. My brother's the owner of Katama Saw. Um together we own the property 494 Thomas Landers Road and operate um that's the the home of Katama Sawl
along with uh um a few rental um bays. Uh and um I was in front of this board in 200 I think 22. Um and we permitted um asked for
permission to build and built and occupied uh this this building here. Um and um it's been a successful venture and um we
are uh our business is growing as well or my brother's business as well as mine. Um I'm in the construction business and um so we are here to permit this building um a 36 3700T building
broken into four um storage bays. Um, two for rent, two for owner occupied. Um, no plumbing uh is planned, no bathrooms. Um, and
there'll be storage heat only, minimal electricity. Um, and um, we feel like we meet all of the requirements. We're well under lock coverage. Um I won't read every single
one of the data points, but we're we feel well within um a jurisdictional right and we think the project is extremely fitting for the area. Um I'm
happy to uh flip through. Um I've got some diagrammatic pictures as opposed to I I mean I have drawing drawings as well, but the diagrammatic pictures I think paint, you know, pictures worth a thousand words type of thing. Um,
uh, I Oh, here we go. Um, so this this elevation here with these two overhead doors, this would be the facing um, Thomas Landers Road um, with these two other bays um, facing inwards to our
yard. Um building is uh 20 um 4 25 ft tall. Um real simple metal building to match uh this shows a dark
roof. Uh it will be a white roof. It match all the other buildings already on on on our site. Um and so we're here to to ask for for site print approval. Um I did get um all of the comments. um
from the different boards. I'm here to mo most of them were no comment. We did get a few comments from the engineering department. I did get the comments this afternoon. So, um I I can address them. Um I'm not sure if I can to the board's
complete approval, but I will try. Well, I think we're we have a um looking for marine environmental service fire department in the engineering department. >> We have the engineering department. >> Well, you received this afternoon. We have not had a chance to review it. >> I I got it. I understand.
>> We received the same time you did. >> I got it. Okay. >> Correct. >> Yeah. And I can summarize quickly the the engineering issues and and they're minor in my opinion. Um there again it's it's drainage related. I think there's
some small um adjustments that they need to make to the drainage calculations. Um I I would like to talk through that a little bit. I understand the comments, but I I'm not going to necessarily refute them because I haven't actually
had the opportunity to speak to the town engineer. I happen to be an engineer. Um but I am not the engineer of record. So I will not speak for my engineer. Um um but a couple things that I I I just
struggle with when I step back and have some logic. Um the for one, we we did provide a drainage map showing the pitch towards the basins. That's a drainage map. It my understanding of it, my definition, but if not and it needs to
be something else, fine. I This is an impervious site. dirt and gravel the grades as it currently stands. >> Is it impervious? >> I'm Excuse me. >> Okay, I thought you meant pvious. >> Thank you for the really make it confusing.
>> Yes, I'm good at that. >> Gravel. >> It is a pvious site as it stands. There is extremely small amount of grading that we are planning to doing. Essentially just putting the catch
basins in and doing slight bit of grading to pitch the water to the basins and we're putting a drainage system in at my behest, frankly,
in a gravel parking area. Now, I get it for the roof runoff. I I understand from a logic perspective, totally get it. I I the fact that we're doing it at all blows my mind, frankly. But we're doing
it because That's what it says to do. But it says that it doesn't conform to the standards and I can't find on the website of the town of found the standards. I don't know what they are. I'd like to have a copy of them because
I struggle. I read the engineering data. it doesn't that the calculations excuse me that we provided to the engineer here and >> I think I could call the engineering department and they >> yeah so I'm I'm just talking through it now I realize I'm going to have to add
for a continuence I do want to lay the groundwork for the theory here and the project I think that it's >> um important um but like I said I haven't had the the opportunity to uh to speak to him um and and I will through my engineer, not
direct. I think that just is better, more professional and reasonable. Um, but other than that, um, I don't think the engineering department or any of the other departments, frankly, have any issues with our project. Um,
and, um, we think it'll be good, um, addition to what we already provide, which is, um, uh, a mix of contractor rentals. Um, we rent to some local businesses and we rent to the Steam Chip Authority. We,
um, get some businesses out of neighborhoods and get them into spots where they should be. And, um, we operate in an environmental, excuse me, an industrial area. Um, and this is just simple, very simple, straight storage building.
>> Okay, great. Thank you. >> Yeah, >> we'll go questions now. Tommy, any questions? Now, you said uh two will be rented and two would be owner occupied. Yep. I just just a comment. I I I like that it's a pvious surface with the
gravel driveway because water goes back into the ground and back into our freshwater aquifer. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> No comments. >> I agree with Tom's comments. >> Jim, you said these are unheated structures. Did you say that?
>> No, I didn't say they're unheated. I said there's no plumbing. >> Okay. There's no plumbing. >> Yeah. >> Are they heated? >> Um I I we're we're >> we want to leave that open. >> Okay. I have no problem with it on on gravel field though.
>> Yeah. I I just see where I can understand the confusion with the engineering comments because uh >> it's almost like he didn't look at what proposed. >> Well, he he he he goes on and in in in comment second
um in the grading and drain se um section and comment 7B the value C allowed are one and point4 one being for impervious which would include gravel parking that that >> that defies logic to >> Yeah, that's that's what I had a problem
with. >> I >> And if the standard is written that way, I I mean, I can't argue if that is a standard and it's been adopted and voted on and approved. Okay. But if this is >> Well, maybe it's a misprint.
This is why I would I I want to understand that um >> cuz I cuz what I think that will end up meaning >> the way I read this is that my drainage system will be two and a half times bigger than it currently is
>> which >> yeah we we understand >> so >> is is a tough pill to swallow. >> Well, you have time to talk to them about it. Yes, >> Charlotte. >> Um, I'm familiar with that site because
I've been there for different things over the years. This will fit right in. And I agree that a landscape plan isn't necessary. There are trees between this building and the road where they're planning to put it anyway, and they keep the whole site pretty tidy. >> Australian site. >> Yep.
>> Y Okay. Uh, Jed, what are we going to continue this uh because we haven't we don't have the referrals, >> correct? Um yeah, I I think a continuation to the 23rd
subject to us um providing a positive motion because I do think that these are minor issues that can be cleaned up relatively quickly and I think you can be in a position to approve the plan as presented. Um there are three things that you've touched upon here that I'd just like to cover before you you move
on. The whole idea of a landscaping plan. Um, so technically if you were going to grant a waiver for the landscaping plan, we would need a letter. So it would be good to indicate to the applicant if you're if you're willing to grant that waiver for the landscaping plan,
>> send that message so that we can get that letter, put it on the file, >> letter from the applicant. >> Correct. Just requesting that waiver of the landscaping plan. Um although I don't think it's going to be a an issue here. um we can reach out to the marine
environmental services just because it's in within the wildlife quarter or the wildlife overlay district. So we want to make sure that you know we we dot our eyes and cross our tees. So we're happy to reach out to see if there's any issues here. >> Okay. >> Um I don't believe that it's subject to the coastal pond overlay district. I
think this is an industrial use and that's clearly not something that would be captured within that overlay district. Um so those are the three items that I had for the board. And so we're happy to draft a positive motion for you if you're comfortable and get you ready for the
>> So even if they're in that district, if they don't have any bathrooms, does it make a difference? >> Say that again. >> Even if they're in the overlay district, they don't have any bathrooms. Would that >> coastal pond? >> Coastal pond, right? >> Um yeah. I mean, coastal pond isn't just
flow from, you know, wastewater. It's anything that goes into the groundwater. Um but again this is such a small site and it's a like I said it's an industrial use and coastal pond overlay clearly says commercial property. >> I just want to ask that question >> for sure
>> and it's still awaiting uh referral from the fire department. >> Right. So that's the other thing. I mean it's a tight site. Again I don't anticipate that being an issue but um you know we just want to make sure that the fire department's comfortable with being able to get on the site if they need to. >> Yeah. I mean
>> in theory there's a lot of wood there. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. No, I mean it that's the one that but they they come and they've visited a lot. They come and do inspections. I I got a good relationship. I'm comfortable their comment. Yep. >> So, it's really just getting all of our ducks in a row.
>> Yeah. >> So, uh you guys good with a positive referral? >> Sure. >> Definitely. >> Okay. >> And see them again on the 23rd. >> See you on the 23rd. >> I can connect with you on exactly what I need to do. Yes. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. >> Thank you.
>> Thank you. Okay. So, we have a couple of uh planning board discussion items and DBA referrals. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, as you remember from the previous meeting,
we have two um, well, actually from the previous meeting, we had we started talking about 809 Sandwich Road. So, I'm just going to pull it up on the screen. That is a comprehensive permit application with the board of appeals. They've um, asked for your input as a
referral to their um, process. This is an application for 36 units on the site that's shown on the screen. So, as you know, it is the uh former Smithfield Farm horse farm. Um that proposal is I'm
going to call up here includes the following. So shown on the screen are or is the layout of the 36 units. Um there will all be duplex structures uh with the with the
exception of these two buildings on the front which front on Sandwich Road. Asheville Road is over here. So you're looking at this portion of the site. That's essentially a duplex that's cut in half and each one of the sides will
be located on either side of of the driveway. Um Melinda has put together um essentially a uh summary of each one of these sites um and will hopefully help me with that because I can't remember
exactly the details but we wanted to go over some of the details that you had asked about uh at the previous meeting such as number of affordable units what those AMIs look like um and then some other characteristics of the site uh that might be important for you to
develop a referral. to then send to the zoning appeals. >> Okay. So, um the lot is 4.65 acres, which equals out to about 7.7 units per acre. Um it's going to be a proposed
private driveway, we assume. Um and we don't know the length of it. It wasn't shown. We couldn't find it on the plan. Um but it is 22 feet wide. Um there's going to be an innovative alternative septic system. Um, there's a little open space shown on the plan where the
leeching area is going to be, but we don't know the actual size of that and how how much what it will look like pretty much. Um, as Jed said, there's 36 rental apartments. There's going to be 90 bedrooms total. Um, there's 13
affordable units. So, I can go through the breakdown of the AMI um with you. There's going to be eight two-bedroom units at 80% AMI and those are the the lowest rate for rent and that's $18.85 a
month. And then there's one threebedroom at 80%. There's one twobedroom at 100%. There's one threebedroom at 100%. There's one threebedroom at 110% and there's one threebedroom at 120%. And
that rent is 32.81. And it's broken down in the packet information that I gave you. I was just reading it out because it's just easier. >> Could you say again what the rents are for the market rate? >> There's uh I don't have the market rate rent. I just have from the the
affordable unit rent. >> Ah, and it ranges from 1885 to 32.81. >> Is that with or without utilities? >> Um that is I believe without without utilities. >> Yeah, it's without. >> Yeah. Um there are 94 parking spaces
proposed. Um 72 are required. There are three um handicap spaces and 10 guest spaces included in that whole calculation. >> Are there any handicap units? >> They you know I don't I don't know about that one. >> No. Uh I don't believe that there are
any proposed as fully accessible. Um but my understanding is because it's a rental property. Again, John, you might know better than I here. Um there are a certain number of them that are uh required to be of a certain group. Group one and group two. I believe group two
is the more um how do I put this? >> Accessible. >> Yes, the more accessible level. Um and there will be a certain percent. I think there's 5% that have to be in group two. Um but I don't know that for certain. >> Okay.
And um the applicant has requested um let's see seven waivers. Um a lot of them have to do with um the zoning board of appeals. The the waiver that they're requesting that would um
have impact with the planning board is from site plan review. Um but the other waiverss that they have asked for are um regarding occupancy permits, one house per lot, maximum lot coverage, um 20% is
allowed and they're proposing 22.8%. Um setbacks. So the front yard setback proposed on for the units on Sandwich Road, those units are supposed to have a 35- ft setback. Um and they're proposing
a 23.1 foot setback and their side and rear um setbacks are actually um more than what is required. They're 15 ft rather rather than the 10 required. Um, and they've also added asked for a
waiver from the street opening permit, which I don't know what the details are in that specific waiver request, but um, >> expense. >> Yeah. So, that that's that's the summary. Um,
>> okay. Thank you. >> Tom, start this end to your left. Yeah. Will all these units go to our safe harbor? >> Yes, because it's >> Sorry, go ahead. >> Because it's a rental property um and
they've satisfied the requirement of 40B for a certain percentage, all of the units will count towards the SHI. >> And will these units be on this year's production plan? >> Yes. If they're if if the comprehensive permit is issued within the calendar
year, yes. If not, should we pause? >> I love that ringtone. That's great. >> Vikings, >> if if the comprehensive permit is not issued in this calendar year, it will go into 2026. >> It's January to January. Our production plan,
>> it's a 12-month period. If >> when does it start? >> My memory is correct. >> Yeah. So it depends on when you actually claim safe harbor and you Okay. >> Yeah. So you would take I believe a year period and essentially um demonstrate to
the state that you've created the number of units within that year period. >> Okay. Great. Thank you Paul. >> I had some extensive comments on this project two weeks ago. I think seven or
eight of them. And the ones that still concern me are the um road access on sandwich road. I think that's a major problem. Another one was I would like to see the explanation for the underground
wastewater system. If you look at the drawings 11, it shows it along the a nice system there. And it looks like if you look at drawing five, it looks a little different there. And it ought to be explained.
>> So you're talking about this one right here? >> No, that's different >> as shown on the screen, Paul. >> That's on five up at the upper upper right hand corner. >> Right. So, >> and if you look at 11,
it has a whole series of tanks on the underground wastewater system, >> which is, I believe, this area right in here. These are the trench trenches for the for the uh septic system. >> So you're
>> system is up in the upper right. >> You're referring to this one. >> Yeah. >> So are you saying that the detail doesn't match what's shown on the plan? >> Are there two locations of drainage or is there for septic is there one? >> No. Um the septic system >> sheet 11. Look at sheet 11. Sheet
>> 11. I think that is 11. 11. >> See, on the upper portion of that, it shows a detailed wastewater system. >> Okay. >> Referring to as a subsurface sewage system profile. >> Yep.
>> I don't know how that relates to what they're trying to do on sheet five. >> Okay. I get what you're I think you need to explain what they're doing there and how that ties in with that area on sheet five uh five, but you mentioned the
lower left hand side. It's very confusing the way they they show that. So that the the tank the recycling tanks for the denitrification, that's what they're for, >> right? And it's a series of connected tanks. >> Mhm.
>> Right. Which I believe is shown here. This >> it goes through a series of tanks, gets pumped back to the original tanks, >> right? >> And then goes back through again, which gives a chance for the the hydrogen to be removed. >> Mhm.
>> Naturally. >> Yeah. I was hoping for a note um up in this section. >> That looks like that's drainage up there. >> That looks like drainage as well. Yeah. So, we have >> I think you need to come in and explain it lines. >> Well, that's why that's why I've been asked we need full-size plans in here. It's hard to read off these these small
plans. It's difficult. >> So, just so that we're clear, this is just a referral. So, you would not receive full-size plans from the zoning board of appeals. If you do need them for the meeting, we can ask them uh to borrow them and we can bring them down for the meeting. >> Okay. Okay.
>> Um, so it sounds like in the future you'd like to see those those full size. >> Yes. Because this is there's a lot of complication here. >> Sure, >> Jim. And the >> this is the lip we talked about last meeting, right? Wait a minute. I'm sorry. >> Paul wasn't finished. I'm sorry. >> Your last item is the fence in the swell
area up north. I say retaining wall with a fence on on top. It says by others. I think we need a better description what's going on up there. Yeah, >> this modular block retaining wall note here. And this is the No drawing. It's just by others. >> Yep.
>> Does that mean it's existing? >> No. Retaining wall. >> And who would be the others? That's what I think. >> Yeah, it would likely be another engineering firm that designs that retaining wall. Yeah, it's pretty typical. >> Okay. Sorry I interrupt you. Any other
questions or comments? That's enough. Good start. that I still don't know if there's a basement under these. >> Let's go there. >> We couldn't tell last time. I think >> I asked and I
>> There's no basement. There's a foundation. Basement plans. It's only the foundation. It's like a crawl. >> That's what I thought I saw. Right. >> It's a crawl space. >> Crawl space. >> Okay. >> So then my question is where in the world are the residents
going to store anything? There are no storage units anywhere. Um, no basement that they can store anything. I think my comment would be that they're putting too much on the site. It's >> too dense.
>> Yeah. Too dense. >> Yeah. >> Okay. So, you would like to see storage. >> It's got to be some kind of storage for the residents. >> Okay. >> You got 13 units here that have no storage. >> Okay. You've got supposedly a play area
that's going to be where the septage is treated. My understanding >> it would be the Yeah, it would be on top. >> Mhm. >> Space >> and a drainage swale there. I believe we were told
which you cannot use as a play space. >> So, it's a it's a proposed bio retention area. So, >> um I'm sure that we can go to the detail. I I want to limit the amount of scrolling up and down, but um we can
make sure that we address concerns related to children playing in that area. >> Correct. >> And potentially landing in the swale, >> correct? >> Retention area. >> Mhm. >> Okay. >> Because presumably there are going to be children if you have two and
threebedroom areas here. Um, with the buildings being so close to Sandwich Road, well, guess what? They're very close. And there's no waiting space there for the children for
the school bus. >> So, there's no safety. >> Yeah. >> So, it's a big safety issue. So they've created this pavilion area which would be the waiting area um for
at least the the the children who are going to be riding the bus if you will. Um but there is obviously stacking area for parents who are going to be in cars. It's >> and the bus is going to turn in there to pick the children. >> I don't believe it would turn in there.
would I mean I I can't say for certain um but I can't imagine the bus turning into here. I think it would pick it up the children of us. >> Well, it makes no sense for the kids to be waiting in a pavilion area off the road where they're going to be picked up. I just it's unsafe. The whole thing
is unsafe there for school children. Are you saying you'd want the pavilion closer to the road or? >> Yeah, I'd want it maybe to take the place of one of those units there, too. >> Okay, >> makes sense. >> Or maybe or maybe shorten.
>> Agreed. >> Great. >> This is a a divided entrance with a with a center median. >> You could squeeze this a bit and then throw a pavilion or a bus shelter perhaps on the side here that's closer to the road. >> That would be okay, too. But considering
we're also thinking at least down at this end that there are too many units in there. It's too crowded. >> Okay. >> Lose one of the units >> and use it for a bus shelter. >> Now that's being kind of asking too much. I understand that. >> No, it's not.
>> Nope. Okay. >> Well, back me up, John. >> We can ask. We We get to ask. >> So, there were a number of things. I mean, they've got this lovely doggy park there. What about a children's park? >> Yeah.
>> Yeah. I think the intent was this would be sort of the call it the human area. >> Um and this would be the uh four-legged area. >> Mhm. >> Yeah. >> I would like to see those two areas co-mingled. >> I'm I'm a four-legged owner. >> Yeah.
>> But there's all there's all kinds of stuff in those two areas that they need access to, >> right? >> Okay. >> Not just open space. And they do have a proposed play area right here. I'm not sure if you saw it, >> but there is. >> Actually, I didn't. The doggy park is
bigger than the play area >> as well. It should be. Anyway, moving on. >> Any other comments? >> Those are my comments right now. >> All right, Jim. >> Um, this is the lip we talked about last week, right? Yes, it is. >> And who is the developer?
>> Um, it's Northland Development. >> I'm all set. I was I thought I've heard about this. I don't know about it. I don't disagree with all the comments, but this is a lip, right? So, our team has already been through with your whole staff and
zoning and said, "This is a compromise. We've gotten us this far, and you're just asking us what we think." >> Correct. >> Okay. I'm okay with what you guys done so far. Paul. >> Um, I had comments, of course, I always think of things after the meeting and I sent to Jeb and he answered me on a
Sunday, which uh, but anyways, my my concerns were uh, >> oh, I want you to get some overtime from a time and a half. You know, >> uh, the Thomas Landers Road between Thomas Landis and Carriage Shop, it's only a quarter of a mile and you have
all those heavy trucks coming out of Thomas Landis all the time. I come out of Hatcheville just about daily. Um, and that's a real tough place to get in and out of between those two areas there. So, I think there's going to be uh problems with the number of vehicles
that going to be traversing in and out of uh this area here. >> And then the other thing I brought up was uh something that we talked about uh when we were writing the comprehensive plan was the quality of buildings. you talked about making buildings in the
future more resilient and more uh energy efficient and I asked Jeb uh about um whether these were going to have solar panels and the answer was no and I started getting into hers ratings you know is there anything about that that
these houses should be uh pretty much uh built to net zero uh because we are trying to build a more resilient and renewable communities and this doesn't fit any of that. So, uh I would like to make a comment on that that uh here
we're trying to build for the future and the future is uh solar panels and heat pumps and uh I didn't see any of that. >> All right. Thank you, Charlotte. >> Um I agree. I think the site is much too crowded. This was being likened to the
uh the development that went in on um uh 28A going up into Katamut um just beyond the post office in North Felmouth and where but I go by those frequently and they're about 30 to 40 feet apart whereas these are nowhere near that.
These are I think it says 18 ft apart that's it but I can't really read it. the numbers so tiny, but the this is a very crowded site and it would seem you could alleviate some of the problems. It wouldn't have to be as close to the road if the site were less crowded. You would
have more room for the children's pavilion if it were less crowded. But uh there's an attic indicated um for uh if you look at the plans, >> but there's no access to the attic. So if there were a door into the attic, you
would have some storage. >> Yeah. Well, they have to have like it's trusses, but >> Yeah, they're trusses. So you would >> they can still have access to the >> Y >> I mean it's a fire code. You have to have access to the attic. >> Yeah. >> Oh >> yeah.
>> Yeah. Just just a scuttle. >> That will be corrected anyway. >> Well, not not for use, not for storage or anything. >> It won't be a pull down. panel you push out of the way and you got to put a ladder up so a guy can get up or woman can get up and do the electrical work >> and it's just access >> or in case there's a fire
>> fire. Yeah. >> So I just wanted to try to get to sorry try to get to the idea of what is in your opinion. >> Could I just add one? >> Sorry I apologize. Are these projects not required to have a landscaping plan?
>> No, they are. They are. And that would be part of um the process with the zoning board of appeals. >> Oh. >> Um unless of course they um are allowed to not submit one, but they should submit one. Yes. In fact, I know the
zoning board of appeals is is very focused on that because what they're trying to achieve is the allow they want to allow folks to develop their properties but not at the expense of the abutters, right? So, they want to try to create as many as much of a buffer between this new development and the
existing developments uh next door. And so, they really look for as much of a buffer as possible. >> This is an amazing change in character for the existing neighborhood. I agree. >> Amazing change. >> You'd need an enormous buffer to really,
you know, separate those or you would have to give it more space within this development to begin to make it um neighborly. >> Okay, Tom, >> can I ask you a couple more questions? >> Of course. >> Where are the dumpsters and can a plow
turn around in there? So they have shown um a fire truck coming in and out. Um so the likelihood of a of a plow truck being able to get in and out um is high, but again this would be a private development. >> So they would be responsible for their
own snow plowing. Um dumpsters on the site, >> they probably have rubbish pickup. That's a that's a street. Okay. Right. Right. But it is also possible because of the fact that it's a private driveway that they won't do um rubbish pickup for um
for the town town. >> They can request it and whether it go through the ZBA. They can request it whether it gets approved or not. It's up to >> Exactly. Right. Be up to DBW. >> I just have a question on that. How many trash cans would there be out there on >> be quite a bit? Quite a bit. >> Yeah.
>> 36. >> I >> at least. Right. >> What was that? >> 36 at least. Yeah. >> So, in my development, um, we have one big like dumpster. It's a it's a development similar. I don't know, kind of. We have one bigger dumpster that
fits a lot more and trash pickup is private and he comes every two weeks. Um, so it could be something like that. So, it's not small trash cans, it could be one like bigger dumpster that the trash pickup actually supplies um to each unit. And it of course is
incorporated in the cost of the private trash. people would have to wheel their trash cans down to the >> Nope. Just at the front of your unit and they come down the driveway and they pick it up at each unit. >> The >> So it limits the amount of trash cans that have to be >> That's the way we handle on commercial properties on Main Street. The tenants
have a dump and Kosa or somebody comes in and takes some away every week and they're >> I don't see how you could take 36 barrels to the end of the street. I just >> No, it would it would most likely be down that way, >> wouldn't it? Trash day be interesting.
Sandwich Road would be interesting. >> Again, Tom. >> Yeah. Is there a minimum distance that a home should be from um like Sandwich Road? Because that's 40 45 miles an hour. Is there a distance that a structure? >> It's 35 ft. >> So 35 ft.
>> Yeah. And they are only 20 >> They're 23.2. >> I think it's 23.1. Yeah. >> Mhm. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. So that's one of the waivers they've requested. >> Oh, they're So that's one of their waivers, right? Yeah. So that's actually one of the components that we wanted to
cover with you folks is, >> you know, the ZBA is looking for input, especially on the waiver requests. And so Tom, to your question, is the board comfortable with this type of setback being less than what is typically required?
>> Is anybody in favor of the houses? >> No. >> No. >> No. >> No one's comfortable. >> No one's >> Do we have the list of waiverss? >> Yes. In fact, it's shown on the screen. So, they are requesting uh a waiver for occupancy permits. Um,
>> do we have a copy of that? >> I I we're not going to get into that one. Um, the use table, you know, that's an easy one. It's it, you know, right now we only allow one structure per lot. Um, they're asking for 36 or technically
17 structures. >> Um, the maximum lot coverage as Melinda covered before. So, uh, level of comfort in allowing, um, the proposed structure lot coverage at 22.8%. And then as I, as she mentioned, the,
um, parking, structures, and all pavement at 49.3. Are there any concerns with those numbers above what's allowed? >> Well, the paving obviously. >> Yeah.
>> Which would mean fewer units. Yep. >> So, any other >> Yeah. >> any other questions or comments? >> Is there any enough provision made for parking for visitors? >> Yes. >> This is sort of like a a Southport density and they have quite a lot of parking for visitors, but I don't see
where that would be here. Have I missed it? >> So, there are 22 guest parking spaces. I don't believe on the plans they've uh they've designated where those are, but >> So, they have >> Oh, they have. Great. >> Yep. So, each each unit has their own
garage and space in front of the garage to park their required cars. Those those spaces that you see around the area of the the driveway throughout the neighborhood, those are the guest parking spaces. >> I was wrong.
>> Storage space. So, I mean, they have a garage, so they could store stuff in the garage, too. Yeah, >> sure. >> Yep. >> So, they're not totally without storage space. It's all having a garage. There's they can hang stuff on the wall, a bike here or there. Few few things. >> That's what they do in California. No one has any storage and they all have
garages filled with stuff. >> Right. >> I have one more question. >> Sure. >> The waiver process, I mean, not the waiver process, the lip process. Uh, right now your new position, you kind of control all the boards that negotiate
the LIP, right? This is this is a friendly 40B, >> correct? >> And this is coming to us. The zoning folks are getting ready to approve this if they let them put it on paper. This is going forward, right? >> They're getting ready to hear it. >> Hear it? >> Yes. They haven't even opened the
hearing yet. >> So, they haven't had a review it at all. So, we see it before they have a hearing. >> Well, it's part of the referral process. So, just like your applications. >> All right. So, they just want to hear what we say and then they make up their own mind. That's okay. I I just wanted to get the process right. >> You got it.
>> So, we're not the decision makers. We give opinions to them and they are the board that grants the >> Exactly. >> Okay. I'm good. >> Okay. Pat, >> we have no indication of what kind of heat they're using. >> Okay. >> Okay. They've got a mechanical room
there. >> Okay. >> Is that mechanical room going to house an oil tank? Would you prefer uh it sounds like net zero, so you would prefer electric heat and cooling? >> Heat pump. >> Heat pump. >> Heat pump. >> Okay.
>> There's got to be some kind of No, I don't >> They only work if you have solar panels. Uh >> bingo. And also Well, if you only have a heat pump, you need a backup source. If you have solar panels and a heat pump, you're good to go. Well, also heat pumps, they've
improved them some, but I don't know the minimum temperature that it will go down to that they will actually heat the home, >> right? So, they lose their efficiency as it as it gets goes down. They do lose their efficiency. >> Yeah, I know. Supposedly, ours will heat to 20. No. >> Yeah. >> The other one supposedly would heat to
40. No. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> So, when we're looking at the construction details and how they're going to cheap out on so many things, they're not going to have the kind of insulation in there that they need. >> There's codes they have to meet. >> Okay. The only way you can do it uh is
uh with a super tight house. >> That's right. >> Uh and new construction uh where you've got uh R uh 25 in the walls. Uh you've got R50 in the ceiling. uh are uh 30 in the uh underneath. Uh all the windows
are super tight. You've got a air exchange system. Uh that's the only way heat pumps uh will will really be efficient. >> Correct. >> The question is if you don't have solar panels, then you're paying for that electricity. It's just like having electric heat in the house, which is
very expensive. The uh solar panels offset that cost. But uh there will be times where uh a house will even if it's super insulated will struggle to right to maintain heat. >> And so my comment is if it's going to be oil heat, I don't want that on the first
floor of my home, >> an oil tank. >> So we'll find out what the heat's going to be. >> Absolutely. >> Or just recommend that, you know, it be heat pump >> and and they have to meet the energy code no matter what. >> Yeah. Mhm. >> So, they can't get a building permit or occupancy without meeting the energy,
which is getting stricter every year. >> It is. >> Any other questions or comments? >> So, going through the waiverss again, um we're not going to deal with the occupancy uh the use table. Um uh I'd
say uh no to that. I'd say no to the maximum lot coverage waiver. Uh the setback waiver is a no. in uh uh waving the site plan review by us is a no. >> Yeah. So um the planning board waiverss
here the uh article 2 which is supposed to be article 3 chapter 309 through 12 those are the requirements of the site plan >> submission. >> Um we can walk through those with you if you'd like. Um I can you know walk
through that on the screen. Um I haven't had a chance to look through those those items. Um, but the I just want to go back to the use table item. So they're they're essentially asking for a waiver to allow them to put more than one structure on the site. So >> Oh, just on the site. Exactly. Okay.
Because they haven't divided into lots. >> They have not. >> Okay. Okay. >> Cuz they're rentals. >> Yes. >> Okay. Yeah. >> So they wouldn't have to come for site plan review. That's just the site plan details. >> Yeah. >> That are required. >> So let me let me get there because I
think it's an important component. So, it's 300-9 through 12. Well, maybe it is. So, uh yeah. So, when I initially looked at this, I was um anticipating it being the site plan filing requirements. um
but they have referenced um site plan review by the planning board. So what we can do is we can follow up with the ZBA and make sure that that reference is accurate because again that wouldn't apply. This is a comprehensive permit that wouldn't come before the the planning board at at any point. It would
always be with the zoning board of appeals. >> So we'll just make sure that we understand that waiver correctly. >> Okay. >> Okay. Everybody all set? >> Mhm. >> Okay. So, uh, uh, my comments would be,
uh, don't we have a bylaw that a road supposed to be a certain distance away from another road? >> Yes. >> And they're right across the street from a triangular intersection here, Hatchville Road. They need any kind of waiver for that or is this considered a
driveway? >> Yeah, I mean, it's it's considered a driveway and it's an existing driveway now. So, okay. I think that would be a little murky. >> Okay. And my second uh question is the drainage that we see uh next to the leeching field for the septic.
>> Yes, >> that's going to be a swale. >> Yeah, they they call it a bio retention basin if I've got that right. So, I went right past it. Let me get there. H there it is. So they call it bio
retention area subsurface infiltration system. >> So how deep how deep is it first of all? >> I'm sorry. >> How deep? >> It's hard to read here. Uh that
I cannot read that. It looks like 18 inches, but I don't think that that's accurate. >> Can you read it if you look at the screen? I doesn't it say 18 be it just beehive grade lowest opening >> maybe >> J if you read it 18 read it there >> 18 in
>> beehive great >> elevation bottom elevation >> usually around 4t usually about 4t deep >> that looks like 58 bottom elevation and rim elevation at >> I'm I think that's >> 59 >> 59 9
>> inches. >> That's elevation. >> Well, yeah, you can see it here. >> 59.5. >> So, here's 59. Here's the contour of 59. Here's 60. So, it looks like the bottom. So, it's it's roughly 2 feet. >> Okay. Two feet. >> Yes. >> Right. >> That's the way I would read it. These
are 1 foot contours. >> And what goes inside of it? Stones, grass, combination. So, what we can do >> that they're usually a a great breeding ground for mosquitoes, [Applause] >> just looking really quickly to see if
we've got the >> basin. So, it looks like this is the drainage basin. So, it just be lman seed. >> I'm sorry. >> Loan seed. So, you'd have some seed mix here. Uh dirt on the edge.
The uh the the plan on sheet four references stone as well though. >> They're too close together. >> Stones too. >> Yeah, >> they usually put stones in them. Big stones. >> Anyway, I would prefer to see a regular drainage underground drainage system.
>> Okay. >> Cheap construction >> rather than it's healthier for everyone. >> It's a little more expensive, but and it's out of sight, out of mind and another little area for people to play in. Right. >> Use a heat >> rather than that retention area. >> Yes.
>> And then um we've had some really good comments here. My final comment would be that I think that buildings 14, 15, 16, and 17 should be removed and they should put a circular turnaround there for
snowplow, garbage, fire trucks, etc. So these four units, >> those four buildings should not be there and there should be certain >> a turnaround. >> So that's eight units, right? The duplexes. So we can't take out eight units >> for for the the group I just mentioned,
fire department. >> Yeah. >> Snowplow garbage. I also need to head into that post office, Amazon, FedEx. >> Gotcha. So four units removed. do this
more of >> buildings more buildings. >> It's a ter it's a terrible site plan design. Terrible. >> It's just all it's just stuff is there. >> It's cluttered. >> And it's not going to be like that. >> The traffic's going to be terrible. >> I I I I just I live in a neighborhood
where there's a dead end street and we have a nice turnaround. It works beautifully. Big vehicles go right around and out. Snow plows, everything. >> Okay. otherwise in there trying to trying to make it work and beep and it's just going to be terrible. >> Whoever lives there is going to wish they didn't.
>> Yeah. >> Because of all the turnaround. >> So hopefully nobody lives there. >> Mhm. >> Gotcha. >> So that's the end of my comments. >> Okay. >> Maybe if maybe a lip program, but I think this board has given it a thumbs down.
>> Well, we gave it some lip sideways. >> I know. We gave it some lip. >> Always room for improvement. Exactly. >> That's right. With the planning board. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Next
we have 48 Benjamin NY's 40B ZVA referral. >> I will have to refuse myself. >> Don't leave though. >> You get to do that. >> Bob, you can listen. You just don't you just don't need to give any comments. >> Okay. So, I I can sit. >> Yeah. Because we're not voting on
>> Okay. I'll just sit here. keep shut. >> You can make some comments. >> Okay. So, before I get into the plans, I'm going to summarize like I did before the last um with the last application.
Um and we'll go to the overall plan. Um all right. So, this is a Habitat for Humanity project. It's a fully all affordable um 14 single family homes. Um a total of 39 bedrooms and their
application states that there will be basements as the site allows. Um I'm assuming that's a topography reason. Um >> some of them are walk out. >> Okay. So it equals 1.8 units per acre. um even though they are in their own sub
individual lots, the whole acreage as a total is seven and a half acres. Um there's going to be a shared innovative septic system. There's two open space areas. There's an undisturbed buffer area of 136,000
a little over that square feet of an undisturbed buffer. And then there's also 20 almost 24,000 square feet for the waste wash water and um soil what is it? Soil absor absorption system >> s.
>> Um so they're all affordable. As I said, there's going to be four twobedroom ranches. There's going to be four three-bedroom ranches, five three-bedroom capes, and one fourbedroom colonial. Um the four two-bedroom ranches are
going to be 174400. That's the rate, 174,400. Um and then the other units um which would be 10. Um are going to range between 60 and 80%
AMI and and there's a range for each of the types of house there are. Um if you'd like, I can go through that. That's for the four three-bedroom ranch. It ranges from about 235,000 to 262,000.
For the three-bedroom Cape, it's about 195,000 to 262,000. And for the fourbedroom colonial, it ranges from 211 almost to 283,000.
283,000. So those are the 60 to 80% ranges for each of the different types of dwellings. prices or that that's incredible. >> Um, >> so the subdivision road, it's going to be a road. Um, it's um 1,57
ft. >> Um, and I'm assuming from the drawing that that's actually the whole >> distance traveled around the circle. Okay. Um, so they have asked for a a pretty long list of waiverss, um, including
density limitations, uh, minimum lot dimensions such as lot area, frontage, and width. And there is a handout in in your packet that breaks down each lot and what the dimensional requirements are for each lot and if
they meet them and if they don't and what they're going to need a waiver for for each individual lot. But overall they will all need some sort of uh dimensional waiver. >> They're all very small lots. >> Yes. Um they're about 8,000 square feet. A little bit over 8,000
square feet. Um, another waiver is the setback from the street for the houses. Um, there's a setback for signs during the construction process of the um for the site and then there's
the waiver from the landscape plan. And then there's a waiver for many parts of the definitive plan approval such as um the length of the road um sidewalks, grass plots and street trees and street lights.
So that's an overview and then as now I can just go through the the plan with you. Um as you can see this is the site plan. This is Benjamin N right here and the proposed road comes in and loops around. And this is this is
the area that's going to be a vegetative buffer. Um, also in the packet here, which was kind of an interesting addition, um, it looks like the Habitat Habitat for Humanity reached out to the
neighbors and they compiled a list of questions and answers that the neighbors had. um or at least the community had um and those are in your packet. Um as well, but that's
all right. So, let's see. So the sub uh the wastewater the septic innovative septic system is going to be in the center area here. Um >> it's going to be what a nitro or nitrex.
>> I don't know if it's we can plans if it's specified. >> I read it already. It's just it's one or the other. >> J do you know what page that's on? I don't opinion, but I do know it's one of the other >> Yeah. >> uh components. >> The reason I say that that's that's the
model that the health department is going to be recommending for. >> Okay. >> It's the it's the most effective. >> They've commented on it. I don't see it. [Applause] >> Oh, nitrx. >> Nitrix. Yes.
>> Yep. Um so they did comment that um a large part of the property is mapped in the natural heritage and they have been working with um the Massachusetts division of fisheries and wildlife um
and conservation with um regards to the eastern box turtle which is um the endangered species that is found on the site. Um the landscaping they have made a point that there is a natural buffer um
to preserve um a lot of the trees and they will incorporate um tolerant tolerant plants, flowers, small trees and shrubs on the site. So I can go into the
um the house design now. Why don't we do some questions first? >> Sure. >> If you're all right with that, >> Charlotte, >> I don't have a question. >> I'm Bob, you don't have any questions or >> can't. >> I can't. >> Okay, >> Jim.
>> None so far. >> Pat, >> I do not have any so far. It's my first look at it. >> Okay, Paul. >> Yeah, I have a question. Um, I was surprised to see there's a one four bedroomedroom >> in there. Was there a rationale why
there's a much larger building in this complex? >> Oh, there might be. >> No, I don't see it off the >> It's a colonial, so it's totally different than the others.
>> Yeah, I think I think the intent was to just create a >> mix a mix of structures. Remember, these are home ownership, not rentals, >> right? >> Home ownership. So, it could be someone with three children or two children. >> Well, for volunteers constructing, it's
a lady to use the same design for all the the threebedroom, have a new one in there. >> Yeah. Three children. >> That's their choice. I'm just >> Yeah, it's a good point. >> Any other questions or comments? >> No, I think it's a good layout, >> Tom.
Um, I don't think so. Um, it backs up to an old cranberry bug. Does anything kick in? Having a cranberry bug that close? >> Let's see. >> I think it's part it's part of the uh the um Augusta property that was purchased and
uh 300 committee. >> All right. the 52 purchased the majority of this and >> and when they went to CPC I was on the CPC at the time and >> they're looking for funding to purchase it and we indicated that we felt there should be affordable housing there also
so they cut out this portion of it to make for afford it's 100% affordable okay it's really a great combination >> was a partnership right >> partnership yes >> so it was originally just over 55 acres and they came before us not that long
ago go and and um subdivided it through an ANR process for the 7 and 12 acre lot to um to develop this. >> So I I have some comments. I I went uh went to the ZBA's office and looked at
the the full site plan today and these are basically less than 9,000 square ft per lot and uh they have a fair amount of open space. I know the terrain is different, but they certainly could have put more homes there than
take a look at this, I suppose, with the previous applicant. >> Not every square foot is housing. Uh I think they've come up with a really nice design for the road. Look, it's a nice circular turnaround. There'd be no issues with uh deliveries or snow
removal or anything of that nature. And u 100% affordable. It's just can't be any nicer than that. And that's my comments. >> Great. >> So now I will go through through the architectural plans
uh for each. Um so this is the twobedroom ranch. Um this looks like the same style that maybe was used for Willlet Way um in East Fmouth or WoY area. um full
basement and then there are two bedrooms. >> Do you know how many square feet that is? >> Uh yes, it is. I think it sells somewhere.
Pretty sure it listed somewhere in the application. Um let's see. I'm looking. I I'll try to find it. You can move on. >> It's um 972 square ft. >> Yeah. >> Small. So, this is 72 ft bigger than an
ADU the state now allows. >> Correct. >> Y >> amazing. And not to dovetail too much into the meeting that we had yesterday, but this is the kind of home that the
starter home bylaw looks to create. A single family home that isn't 2500 square ft to 3,000 ft², but modest at capped at 1,850 ft, which is actually quite big uh for a
family of four. Well, >> so it's just an example of what can be built, >> but not to go further into it, but a little bit, but the starter home thing is it came through as a recommendation for a zone, >> correct?
>> In fact, Felmouth is filled with houses just like this. >> This isn't new for Felmouth, >> but it does give us a good picture of potential ADUs. >> Well, the only difference is is that this has a full basement. So I think two meetings ago we talked about how ADUs if
they wanted to have a full basement then they would have to have a smaller house because the basement is part of the square footage >> or less than 7 ft. >> Right. So Exactly. So they'd have to have a a not a full basement or um a smaller ADU I think but we said 450
because it would have to be 950 >> but the foot it's a nice footprint though. >> But this is Yes. Um, >> let me know if I'm going too fast because I'm just going to scroll to the next design. Go ahead. >> My name is Ad. >> Just a comment. It's It's a heck of a
lot bigger than most of the houses that were built in the 40s in Marav Vista, >> right, >> on very small lots and market rate lots. And those were starter homes back then. There was hundreds of them. We're we're actually tearing them down now and putting bigger ones. But >> but except for the price, they're still starter homes,
>> right? It's easier to clean. >> Yeah. >> So, this is the three-bedroom ranch, and that is uh 1,256 square feet, and it's very similar to the two-bedroom. >> Mhm. >> Again, a full basement. And then the
three bedrooms are on um one floor again with the living and dining room area and the kitchen. >> Is it one bath or a bath and a half? >> Just one bathroom. Uh no, bath and a half. Yep. It says it right here. And then the next
design is the three-bedroom Cape. These are,276 ft. There's two bathrooms. Um, so it looks like this full basement that kind of I can turn this.
This is the first floor with one bedroom. Looks like a full bath kitchen, living and dining room area. And then the second floor with two bedrooms and another full bathroom.
And that's the back has a little dormer. All right. And the last is the one one the only four bedroomedroom colonial. It is 1,568 square ft and it has two bathrooms.
So again full basement um bedroom on the first floor with a full bath and then three bedrooms on the second floor with a full bath. >> That's very nice. The architect did a nice job. >> It's remarkable.
So well designed >> amazingly priced. >> It can be done. >> So do we have a positive referral? >> Yes. >> Comments other than that? No. >> Okay. >> No issues with any of the waiverss that were requested.
>> No. >> Okay. >> It can be done. >> Sure. >> That's great. >> All right. >> Okay. Thank you, Melinda. Uh next we'd like to have the uh planning department report please.
>> So as you know uh we've been very busy with our zoning amendments. Um board closed the hearing. We are at your next meeting going to bring forward uh your recommendations for your uh voting uh on those. We'll also provide you with some
explanations. Um so essentially verbiage that you would be putting into the warrant. So, we've been working on that. Um Paul will be happy to know that we've we're very close to finalizing the Shiver Pond sign. So, what we're looking to do is replicate um some of the
existing signage that's on the Kunames Greenway and other 300 committee sites and conservation sites, the Little Palm Place um and give it the same sort of style. Uh what we're trying to do is, you know, give a theme to all these um
really nice recreational sites and open space areas in town. So we're very close to finalizing that. We just need to figure out the exact location where we want to put that. Uh engineering division is very close to doing a final walkthrough with the um construction company that constructed the platform.
So almost at the end. Um Melinda and I have been working very hard on the community play space request for proposals or the procurement process. Uh for those of you who don't know, it's a CPC application for basically an all-inclusive multigenerational
playground to be located at Goodwill Park. So fully accessible play space that would be located right next to the existing play. Um and so we uh the town was given or awarded approximately $75,000
in CPC funds. We now have to go out to procurement to select a designer to design the facility and then we can get a cost estimate, move forward in construction and whatnot. So we've been working on that. Uh town property analysis that just continues on. That's
a ongoing uh weekend project uh for me. Um, it's involving a lot of analysis of the existing town properties that we currently have on the books to try and figure out are there places that we could dispose of property for affordable
housing just like the three sites the four sites that were um released by town meeting in November. Um, so that is ongoing and then um we met Melinda and I met with um the Cape Cut Commission this week. last week.
>> Last week >> uh to discuss the Mr. Cod district design guidelines. Uh so those are coming together um we're providing them input on uh some of the sites within the
district that are good examples in our opinions um that have uh good setbacks both side and front have good landscaping features. And so we'll shortly be be able to at least give you um an assessment of where we are with
that. I'd like to give you a presentation and sort of give you sort of a taste of where that is and then offer an opportunity for you to give us some locations that you think are real winners in the Mr. Cod district so we can highlight those within the the uh
design guidelines. Part of that Charlotte, you'll be happy to hear is is lighting. We're really focused on trying to define dark sky compliant lighting. Give examples of what that looks like. Some good examples that are um packs on
the wall of buildings. Um goose neck lighting that comes off the front. Pole lighting that's pedestrian level. Um things that we want to create within the uh within the Mr. District. So, >> and sign guidelines >> and sign
>> for commercial developments in the area. >> Right. So there's a lot that goes into it. Um and the KPI commission's been very patient with us because we're extremely busy. And then lastly is permit.ai. So our online permitting um platform. Uh it's been um a success
story for the building department and others. Um and so I'm working with other departments to get them online just like the planning board is currently. Um so uh a lot of work going on uh currently. But that's the report for the planning department. >> Okay. Great. Thank you very much.
>> You're welcome. >> Uh so, uh committee reports. Charlotte, you have a committee report other than last night? >> Yeah. The um the short-term rental group has met twice and we've had a
presentation. We had a presentation from uh Province Town that I think I already told you about. >> Yes. Um we're we're meeting again and we'll have a presentation um by the uh the set of by Plymouth because they have the bylaws that the we admire the most
so far. So that we've used them as a model to put together a sidebyside of what we currently propose did propose last year that failed town meeting and where we think we should move in light of what we've learned so far. It was kind of like a progress report and we're
really adding to what we had said before. Um the what we're adding is a lot of definitions because that whole area has turned up a lot of new uh kinds of things um about brokers and and ways of interacting and more specifications.
So it's been pretty active and we're hoping to get to this not to November um but to the spring town meeting with it. Are you finding a lot of other communities that are working on the same? >> No. Um, so far on the Cape, there are four that already have regulations and
then there's us. The two islands haven't quite settled on what they're going to do, but it's still a live issue there. But what is happening because I think I told you that Province Town find found that uh they did not have nearly the number of short-term rentals that they thought they had just because of the way
they're reported. M >> so it it kind of lowered the heat under the whole issue and we'll probably find the same thing. We don't have quite as many as we thought. What what they're thinking is maybe ADUs are going to uh
eat it up again, but maybe not, but no, we don't see activity in the other towns yet. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Any other committee reports? or just a question. Are aren't ADUs? Aren't short-term rentals prohibited from ADUs? >> Excuse me. >> Aren't
>> Yeah, >> there ADUs can't be used as short-term rentals. >> That's right. The way the law is written now, they may not. >> I Yeah. So, >> the lady in Province Town felt that it could be a problem. The people who find it creates the biggest problem for the
hotels, the ADUs. >> Yeah. It just lowers the number of people who need a hotel room >> if they were renting out ADUs. >> But they're not supposed to >> they're using the ADUs. It just thought about it. >> They're not supposed to be used for seasonal rentals, though. Right.
>> Right. >> Right. >> They're not. >> So, it's only a problem if they're violating the law and no one catches them. >> Yeah. >> Exactly. >> Okay. >> And the the person who's coming to speak to us next, you might want to tune into it. will be on FCTV I think has found
that um monitoring it and enforcing it in Plymouth so far hasn't been a burden and she has the same size planning department um no health department that we do with much bigger population >> that's interesting >> it was so it's not the problem it's been
made out to be >> right >> here >> so far >> so far >> thank you Tom >> for anybody that wants to attend tomorrow at the recck department 6 p.m. M community forum uh on a noise bylaw update. The town manager and town
council will be there. Um and just looking for community input. Uh right after that will be the recreation department meeting and then the next day on Thursday will be our CPC meeting. We're going to go over the April 2026 CP
fund project applications. >> Hey Paul. >> Okay. Okay. Uh, I'll just give a short uh report uh for uh Cape Cod Commission. We're having um a hearing on Thursday at
3:00, a Zoom Zoom meeting. And then we're going to uh uh take a vote. The full commission will take a vote on the solar farm at the Cape Cod Country Club that's proposed. So, first we're going to have a hearing. If anybody wants to
testify or listen in and ask any questions, they're welcome to do that. And um I'll just give you a little update on it. The parcel is about 139 acres by country foot. And the solar
array is going to um entail about 59 acres of that. And the rest will be u open space and recreational space. and um uh they're going to have the applicant is proposing
43,056 solar panels on the site and they're going to be uh tilted combination I'm sure but 3 ft at the lower end 16 ft at the upper end and they're going to fence in the areas um
around it with uh 16,514 ft of chain link fencing, 7 ft high with 6 in underneath for uh rabbits and squirrels and small deer to get through. So,
so uh but we're going to we're going to uh have the hearing at 3:00 and then uh the full commission is going to vote on u recommendation >> and that's it. >> Butters turned out >> I'm sorry. >> Have a Butters come to speak to the
commission. Uh there were some letters from uh Butters that were in favor of it and I I don't think many people realize the size and the scope of this project. Really, not yet anyway. But if it gets
approved, then it comes to um this board for site plan approval. >> I I know some of the abutters and uh they would rather have the solar farm than u 139 houses. Well, that's that's uh one of the concerns. Yes. That
>> that it may be a housing development if it's not a solar development. >> Didn't haven't we reviewed this or talked about a few years ago? This seemed so we kind of had the same argument. I think somebody came up with the number of houses that could be built out there. >> They did. >> Right.
>> And that's why I brought up last night now, okay, if they're all duplexes and have uh ADUs, that would multip it by four, >> right? >> Yeah. So there I mean there's a there's >> incorporated >> and and what I remember when we talked about it it was different leadership and
whatnot but we actually thought it was a a good idea because in 20 years doesn't it all revert back to the town? >> Yes. >> So it adds conservation land right. >> Well that that has not been agreed to yet. >> Oh >> no that's what was proposed last time.
>> It's a concept. It's not been agreed to yet. Not nothing is >> they're not proposing that anymore. I didn't say that. It has not been agreed to. After that, presuming it gets approved by the Cape Cod Commission on Thursday, the decision will get written up. It'll come to this board for site
plan review. And this and then the selectman will make an agreement probably on ownership and terms and conditions and decommissioning. And I mean, there's a lot more to it than I mentioned here. is
>> this is going to be a a massive uh industrial site really is what it's going to turn out to be. So >> right >> it's a project beyond uh what you could comprehend. You have to see the plans and >> and have a little bit of vision but anyway it's going to come back to this
board and then the selectman will uh make some sort of an agreement with uh ownership of the land or not ownership leasing not leasing etc etc. >> Could I ask just one other question? >> Sure of course. They'll pay the town taxes, right? >> I'm sorry.
>> They'll pay the town taxes on it. >> If they own it, they'll pay taxes, >> right? And >> the town owns it, they'll pay rent. >> They al they usually pay uh an estimated a number instead of taxes. When we did the solar project, there was a tax payment that was built
into it u every month. I mean, just like real estate taxes. It's in lie of taxes, but it's a it's a scheduled payment to make up for that. And when we did the solar project, that was one of the income streams that got identified as a benefit from the town. It was pretty big
money. >> It was they they had rent and real estate taxes is what do they call it? A pilot program pay taxes >> and that's usually negotiated, at least it was in the contracts that we did with uh Citizens Energy when I was doing that stuff.
Well, again, I think some of it is going to be determined on who owns the site, >> and that has not been determined yet. So, and there's a lot to it. It's, as I said, 20 years from now, 35, 40 years from now, it's got to be dis
decommissioned. You have to have agreements to to that and guarantees, bonds, etc., etc. is there's a long way to go on this really. >> Yeah. >> And and uh but anyway, I don't want to get too deep into it. Just wanted to let you know that we're having a meeting
Thursday at 3:00. Anyone's welcome to attend the meeting. >> And uh >> fully virtual, right? >> Fully virtual. >> Yep. >> Included in your packet is the announcement. Um and so if anyone's watching from home and wants to tune in
um you can just Google the Cape Commission, click on their um upcoming meetings uh on the top panel and you can scroll down and and find that uh Zoom link. So >> right, everyone is welcome. Yep.
>> Uh so uh next we have uh future agenda items and uh Pat >> I thought we had a very successful joint meeting between the two boards last night, the planning board and the select board. And I would like to see
our board, I hate to say rehash it, but in a way, yes. So that we can come up with where we think we should put our initiatives to come in line with what was discussed
as much as we can. And I definitely you guys were sitting listening while we were doing and I really would look forward to your input as to what you think would be the next most valuable first step or first steps and even
put your ideas before the town manager or the select board. But I don't know whether you want to do it at our next meeting while it's still fresh. >> We do. >> Okay. Yes. Good. So uh we'll have the same agenda items topics that we we are going to discuss
>> I would assume so false. >> Yes. And as you recall the the first one kind of was a touchstone for the other items too because some could happen and some couldn't happen the way we are now. >> Would that be open to public discussion as well? >> I don't I don't even have any thought
about that. >> Planning board discussion board. >> Yeah, we think it would be you'd want to start with a planning board discussion. >> Yeah. Um and then you know you can move into something that would involve the public. Um don't forget too is a large
conversation that you want to be able to have probably in conjunction with this is the whole idea of ADUs and going beyond the first one. >> Yeah. >> So what sort of guardrails do we want to establish or would you like to establish for the second, third, etc. whatever cap
you'd like to put on it. Um, and then how that interplays with Jim's to your to your point earlier, how that interplays with potentially allowing duplexes in certain areas, right? So, >> I think it's a it's a larger conversation. Um, >> so basically a debriefing and a
brainstorming session. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Could you get some I know I raised a lot of questions, but really didn't get you were in in a position we can answer them, but I'd like to know what the state's thinking about those questions. Does one become four?
I mean, I if if they if they're not preventing it, that leaves the possibility for it to happen, >> right? >> And that's really what I was bringing out. And then what the heck does that do to our uh water protection plants, >> right? >> I just I'm not against these things. I
just I don't know if they've thought it through. It just seems to be a really massive change. And when you when you ask a question and you don't get an answer, you don't really know what to think. >> It's tough. Yeah. Not to pin you down, but you you don't know the answers to that either. They're all like
>> No. And they what comes out of this may be that we have to get our state reps active on the state level to change certain things because individual communities are individual. You can't put us all in the same box and shake us out to look the same. >> They're also from Beacon Hill. They're
also thinking greater Boston, which is all on the sewer. >> Right. I know. >> That's right. >> And down here, they're saying, "Oh, no, you can't add anything into the sewer." But oh, you've got to develop and >> well then how it interacts with the flow neutral bylaw too, >> right? >> Uh I had the privilege of getting the
first three flow neutral bylaw permits that the town ever issued. >> They actually forgot about doing it for a while and then all of a sudden they woke up and said, "Oh my god, we're supposed to do it." So I mean I don't think it's been thought through. Uh I I don't want to I didn't want to come across as negative as them. I just
really just asking a lot of questions and we really you weren't in a position where you could answer. >> Yeah. So I think you know with the board's permission I think what we would we would like to do is just have it as a discussion item on each one of your agendas moving forward if there's time at the end of the meeting depending on
so it would just be a standing item >> and we can just start to chip away at some of these conversations because I think it's a long conversation about >> you know as I mentioned last night the local comprehensive plan we're just about to find out whether or not we've got funding to do that. So that really
in my opinion is going to set the stage for these types of conversations because that's an opportunity to go out to the public and say what do you guys think about this XYZ. Sorry. >> Well, there's another reason that I want to keep this alive too is that Melinda
remembers um how I tried to push for these meetings and the select board would always find a reason not to. And so Bob Mscali is the first chairman of the select board who is making it happen even though it's required twice a year by our charter.
>> Charter. Yeah. >> And so they haven't been happening. And I would like to I guess applaud his effort would be the way I'd say it by continuing the discussion and keeping it alive. >> Yeah. And you know, I think one of the things, dare I say it, and you know, I'm
going to turn this way because I have a feeling that I I might I might get uh blocked, >> but I think a Saturday session might be might be in order. >> That's the way we used to do it. >> We used to do it that way. >> We have an opportunity to not have
applicants um before us and you have, you know, two or three hours to really dive into some of these topics. Besides the donuts and coffee. >> Let's have let's have a first round of this first though. Absolutely. Before we get into that part, >> let's not go crazy. >> Correct. >> Yeah. We had giant Saturday meetings
with three or four boards. We used to be at Felmouth Academy. >> Yeah. >> So, there was one I think at Felmouth one. Were there two or three that I could maybe I could only attend three and it was Miss Brager I think who initiated them and led them. I think
>> it's a big undertaking, >> but they they were a lot of boards and you're not as effective, I think, with pulling that many in. >> We'll work on this first though. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Paul, >> yeah, they were the last two meetings were what, three years ago and two years
ago. So, it's been a while. >> Has been a while. >> I had two items and one was a followup for the uh joint meeting last night and Pat explained that someone mentioned it, but I think that's very important. Uh the other thing I'd like to see if it's appropriate is with the new
uh community development organization. I understand it's going to be reorganization within town hall. So when appropriate, it'd be nice to know when we come to town hall where to find the planning department. >> Wherever that's going to be
>> one day it'll just not be there. All all I know is house down was born to hell. >> Breadcrumbs >> and Scott referred to Jed as his boss. >> Okay, >> that's that was a different There you go. >> Well, >> there's a lot of change. >> Yeah,
>> lot of change. >> I would think that the department head needs a private office. There's no question about that. The only private office upstairs is EBA. Whether they'd be willing to give that up or not, I don't know. that's beyond my pay grade and it may not be appropriate to do it in the next meeting, but at some point
in time, but nice to know >> what's going on and how we find the planning department in the future. >> Jed's going to be taken care of. Don't worry. >> We're all looking forward to it. >> We are working on a relocation plan.
>> We are um the And I'll say this because, you know, we're slowly working on it in our spare time. Um me, myself and I uh no I'm kidding. Um we are looking to move over next to ZBA
uh because uh the vision is to create a regulatory environment in that area where planning board and ZBA are right next to each other. So we're trying to find spaces within town hall to distribute the staff that's currently up there. I think we're in a place where we
can make that happen. who um in a few months we might be >> I I just want to put a little two cents in here. A private office. I think Jed, you've done a really good job of surrounding yourself with people that can answer questions and to pack you away in a corner and then not have the
staff that is in that's integrated to helping everybody from a customer point of view from because I have to go up there and deal with them. I really appreciate your that that that there's two or three other people that actually can try to answer the question because you can't handle it all and I just I I
think you're doing a good job spreading it out amongst your staff and I'd like to you to be continue to do that. That's a customer service question because I have to deal with them per from my side. Tom, >> I'm sorry. >> It's not top priority, but it's something I'd like to see down the road.
>> Not next meeting, but at some future meeting. >> Tom Okay. >> I have you like everything two announcements if I may. >> Let me finish first. >> Okay. >> Uh I I had uh a meeting with staff earlier today
>> and I asked them if they would please uh start uh making a list or give us an idea of amount of buildable vacant lots there are in town. If we're going to talk about duplexes, triplexes, how much land
is actually available and where where could we uh as as a board designed for them to go or not go? So, it'll be a while before they can get that to us, but cake. >> Okay. So, two weeks. Great. >> Two weeks. Piece of cake. >> Got it.
>> Okay. You want to say something, Jim? Well, I I believe that question, believe it or not, can be you can ask a question to the computer system and have it do the assessor's records and it'll give you the answer. >> Yeah, that's why I say piece of cake. >> I I believe it's available. >> So, I'll stop by Jim's office tomorrow.
>> I don't do it. I don't get paid to do that, but I I have done it before. I I wrote a a simple question saying, "How many general residential properties are there that were 12,000 square feet or bigger?" And I got an I got a answer right away. Yeah. And I'll just point
out that a three-bedroom septic system in three units fits on 12,000 ft in general residential. So it's the density you got to when you're anyways it could be asked and answered by a >> especially with AI could probably do it. >> I could
>> I think we could do it right now. >> I think we could do it right now. I just realized we could do it >> which is scary. You know >> it is pretty scary. >> But then the human eye has to check the AI. Sometimes any just answers because they want an answer and it's not real.
>> Okay. General correspondence. >> Yeah. >> So, we have one. >> Okay. >> Um it it really falls into an announcement/general correspondence for those of you who are interested. The Cape Cat Bridges project. So, the Sagamore Bridge Replacement Project will
they'll have an open house um in Bourne um on September 25th at the Bourne Veterans Memorial Community Center um from 3:00 to 7:00 p.m. So, u for those of you who follow the project, they just
filed their draft environmental impact report. So, that has a whole host of analyses as well as visuals. So, there'll be an opportunity to learn more about um what the Sagamore Bridge is going to look like whenever it's finished. Um so, near and dear to my
heart. Um and more importantly, um I forgot the drum roll. Uh but you all have hopefully in your seats um new copies of the zoning bylaw that is inclusive of all of the changes that
have been made up to and including the November 2024 town meeting. So, we're very excited to hand that out. Please keep that um uh at your bedside table. Uh read it every evening. Um but it's yours to keep and take home.
>> There going to be a quiz? >> There will be. >> Okay. Has this been added to the computer version that we can look up. So, it's now all up to date. >> All up to date. >> Paul. >> Yeah. I just have a question. I attended the last meeting of the bridges.
>> Yeah. It was basically a presentation of with a lot of cards with no visually, no discussion at all. There were everyone there, the consultants and everything. Is that the same kind of thing? Are they going to present the the um environmental impact statement or are they just going to walk around look at
posters again? >> I really don't know. I I don't know the design of of the event. Uh, I suspect it'll probably be very similar to what you saw because they would anticipate a large crowd, but I I can't I I don't know until I go. >> That's very interesting, but I was
expecting a little bit more of a presentation rather than just posters. >> Yeah. >> Right. >> Um, one more announcement is that next week on Tuesday and Wednesday is the one peep um conference with the peep code
commission. and they put it on every year and Caritch. Um Jed and I will be attending one of the days. Um not both this year. Um anything else about that? >> No. No. Um registration I think is still open. >> It is.
>> Uh so you can if you're interested register uh for the event. It's great. It's an opportunity to network with other folks on the Cape and learn about some of the really innovative things that people >> What's the date of that? Tuesday and Wednesday next week. So the 16th and
17th >> of >> this month, next week. >> Yep. There's a fee for it, >> but you're welcome to attend. >> One item I just did want to bring to the board's attention is we do have two petitioners articles, two zoning
changes. Um so we'll be hearing those on October 14th, I believe. >> Um so just keep that in mind. uh that we'll have presentations by the petitioners. So, >> excellent. >> Okay. Move to adjourn. >> I just have one more question. When I
searched the e-code for the word duplex in preparation for last night's meeting, I couldn't find it in in the in the book. >> Yeah, >> it's it's family. >> They they don't call it a duplex. They call it two family.
>> Oh, okay. But that but that meeting I thought didn't the state call it duplex or I I was confused about that >> because in in my definition a duplex is two sidebyside units that are almost identical and that's not what we're
talking about. I I didn't actually know what we're talking about on that state law last night. I'm done. But so it's still not in here. >> And definitions is still part of the recontification effort. We still need to go through our definitions and make sure that whatever's missing, we start adding and improving our definitions. We still
have a lot of work to do with the zoning bylaw. >> Okay. So, it's on to adjurnn. >> Motion to adjurnn. >> Second. >> You going to pick up the gavl. >> Okay. All in favor? >> I [Music]