Heat. Heat. Okay. Welcome to the zoning board of appeals. Um, please silence all cell phones and note that this meeting is being taped by FCTV. If there's any private party recording this hearing, step up to the
podium to request permission. I'll introduce the staff. On my far right is Mark Finan, and to his left is Scott Peterson. Next to me is Frank Duffy, the clerk. My name is Suzanne Murphy. I'm chair. To my left is Tony Patuchi, a voting member tonight, and Nick Haney, a
associate member. And then we have Noren Stockman, the zoning administrator, and Ashley Dlo, our office assistant. The zoning board of appeals is charged with applying the state zoning statutes as well as the tones town's zoning bylaws in reviewing and voting on applications.
All decisions are made through the public hearing process. Our goal is to hear testimony from the applicants and the public and to allow a full and fair discussion of the project prior to closing the hearing prior to closing the hearing process and reaching a decision.
Number one, to begin each hearing, the clerk will read the public announcement for the hearing and read pertinent information from the file. Two, the applicant or the applicant's representative will then have 15 minutes to make a presentation, but time may be extended by vote of the board. Three, the board will then question the
applicant. Four, the public will then be invited to comment. Comment should be limited to two minutes and be strictly related to the proposal. All members of the public wishing to speak should wait and to be recognized by the chair and should come up to the podium, state your name and
address for the record, speak into the mic. It will not amplify your voice and record audio for FCTV viewers. And before we take the first hearing, we have a time if anyone wants to make a public comment about anything that's not on our agenda. You're welcome to come on
up. Anybody? >> Last call. All right, we'll take our first hearing, which is a continuation for Habitat for Humanity of Cape Cod, 48 Benjamin Nane. Welcome.
>> Thank you. This is I'm Warren Brody, attorney for Habitat for Humanity of Cape Cod, Inc. This is a continuation of our prior hearing. There has been basically one significant development since the last hearing, and
that is our receipt of a very extensive review of the project by the town's peerreview engineer, Bills and Thomas. Unfortunately, that was only two days ago and we have not yet had an opportunity really to review it and
tonight would not be the appropriate time to get into it in depth. So, that being said, if there are other issues to to discuss, otherwise I feel the next hearing will be far more comprehensive. >> I didn't know if you wanted like I've
reviewed mine. I worked hard on it today and have a few questions. I didn't know if you wanted us to give you our trigger points or something that we may worry about or you know something like that just to so you can take that home to your engineer.
>> True when he's going over it. I don't know if anyone >> I I'm >> You didn't have time. >> I didn't have You're You're a woman of leisure. I think I am. Um I don't have that. >> I'm the bomb bomb queen. I am. >> We do have the peer engineer with us tonight. So, I would recommend that he
make a presentation to the board and then um the developer can work out whatever concerns there are. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Sure. We'd welcome that. >> All right. >> Do you want to start off first or have him start off? >> Why not have him start then? Sounds like a plan better grounded in. >> Great. Thank you.
>> Thank you. >> Good evening. I'm Dan Gagny, professional engineer with Bills and Thomas. >> David >> Dan Gagney. >> Um, as you have noticed, uh, we did a
comprehensive review of the plans and documents submitted with the application. >> Are you going to put it up on there? >> Um, I don't have anything to put up right now. >> Okay. Um the plan up just for
>> sure that go for it. >> Oh no squeeze. >> Do you have a copy of his Yes. Okay. I just >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Now, before we began our review, we went out,
made a site visit, took a look at the existing conditions out there. Um, paying particular attention to the uh existing developed area and the intersection with uh Benjamin N Road, the propo proposed area there. Um,
you'll see some minor comments in our report about that information. Um, as we kind of dig in, I don't know if you guys want me to go through all of the comments. Um, there's a substantial number of them. Um, I can jump through a
few of the points that, uh, I see is, uh, things we might want to talk about a little more. >> That's what I would do. I would kind of do the general like a storm water generalization comment and maybe erosion and do them kind of generalize. Does that seem okay to you guys? >> Mhm. to do it rather than it will take
all night. >> There was a lot of uh part of the review was he said they said they didn't have any concerns but then they had specific concerns about other things. So if you could focus on your areas of concern that would be >> all right. So we'll begin with uh the waiver requests and in our review of
those um you'll see on comment number nine um there was a request for the applicant to wave um the sidewalk requirements. In our opinion, we would uh request that the board consider requiring a sidewalk maybe only on one side of the the
subdivision road here um just for pedestrian safety in the area. >> Both directions. >> Uh one side of the road. >> No, both directions. >> Sidewalk. >> A sidewalk. >> Yeah. >> Oh, inside. Yeah. >> Yep.
>> There's none on the plans right now. >> Yeah, there's none on the uh >> um you'll see comment number 10. uh the applicant requesting a waiver from uh street lighting. Uh in our opinion uh we we do recommend that some type of street lighting be installed here and you know
it doesn't have to be you know lit up like a a baseball field out there but something that provides adequate lighting through the roadway um we feel is important. Um so with regards to parking in um for the individual units
uh each uh unit is provided with two parking spaces. However, uh a few of the parking spaces that second parking space extends into the right of way. Um we'd recommend that that uh all the parking for each of the units be provided on their respective parcels.
>> Did you have a square footage? Is it 18 feet? Did you use that? Uh we did stacking two cars one after the other. So that 18 ft. Yes. Um some minor things and then um >> could you speak to 13 items please?
>> So uh number 13 refers to the codes requirements that all private wells within 100 ft of the property be shown on the plan. Um the it's not indicated on the plan whether all of those are shown and none of them exist or if they just haven't been shown. Um that's
something that should be included in uh a re revised plan. Either a notation that they've been they've looked at them and that there aren't any within 100 ft. >> Yeah. I guess the concern would be from groundwater migration is going one way
and people having a well downgradient of where these uh shared septic systems are. >> That is a concern. Um again it depends how far away from the property that well actually is. >> Okay. >> Thank you.
>> But it's a it's advanced nitrogen removal system. So >> correct, >> it it >> makes it less of a a risk or whatever. >> That is correct. >> Prefer um
>> and you also have to consider they could build a hell of a lot more there here >> than they are. >> So I don't see it as a major concern myself. >> How does Go ahead. How how does the idea of just
having the homeowners test it once per year >> uh with the board of health >> that gets into an ownorous uh responsibility for the for the property or for the board of health? Um >> what about the property owner? >> It the same it becomes ownorous for that
requirement perpetuity. So we we do sorry to interject but we do have a comment from both uh board of health and town our town engineer that pointed out that board of health is familiar with locations of some
approximate wells and that those are further away than the 100 ft that are required by the D. So basically both the board of health and engineering were saying that it complies in that it
exceeds what the D requires >> and um if any of butter was concerned it would be I would think incumbent upon him to test his own well first to get a benchmark and then
as the project uh after the project is built I mean and I mean if he could show anything But still don't think there's anything you could do about it. It's more than >> the IA is going to be tested at least the first time what it does. They're they're concerned with
>> uh contribution to their uh wellwater and I mean if like I said I mean they would if if they're genuinely concerned I think they should you know test their own well first and get a benchmark and then you can see through further testing if there's is in fact any um
contribution. But I can't see where there would be. >> Well, the real two issues are I as I see it anyway is that I absolutely agree with Mark what I would do test it in advance and then from time to time tested but if there are no wells within
100 ft just say so on the plan that they've done their work. Yeah, >> they've investigated and sure that there are no wells. D says that's okay. Our board of health has said that's okay based on D. But if it were my well, I don't care if it were 150 feet away. I
would be pre-esting it now and then test it later because if it becomes polluted, I I want to know where to go. That's fair. >> Thank you. >> All right. >> All right. >> All right. So, I'm going to skip ahead a
few down to number 18. Um the code requires that there's a minimum setback between two intersections intersecting roads of 300 ft. Um now uh Cameron Road isn't shown explicitly on the plans but
scaling it through an aerial it appears to be less than 300 ft. Um that's something that should be uh looked at by the applicant and uh clarified in that. >> Is that a private road? >> Yeah, >> I am not aware. I'm not aware of the status of Cameron. put a private road
uh the same. >> Yeah, still counts. >> In your estimation, how far away is it? Do you know >> it? I'll say less than 300. I don't I don't
have a I think it was closer to 200 250, but >> yeah, because Yeah, I appreciate that. Um, let's see. 19. All right. Um, let's jump down to number
21. Um, >> code requires that street lines intersect uh with existing roads with a radius of 25 ft. Currently, the plan shows, as you can see here, that they intersect with the roadway at 90°.
Doesn't provide any. Can you just show that >> curve in the side? Um, >> approximately. >> Yeah, >> that's this side line here. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> And what's the issue there? >> And that should intersect with the existing roadway with a curve to it. Not
just the pavement, but the property line itself should have a curve. >> That would entail ripping out more of the >> historical wall rock. >> It may, but there's other issues with that walls. that wall with regards to sight distance.
>> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> So >> 22 I had a question on you wanted them to since it's only 18 ft wide, you were looking for a little >> So the the code allows the board to request a strip of land to improve the
width of roadways that are inadequate in existing conditions, the town public town roadways. Um, with Benjamin NY's road being uh less than 20 feet, I believe it's 18 feet when I scaled it off the plans. That is very tight for a two-way
traffic. It may be something that the board wants to con consider is requesting that additional strip of land to widen that roadway at some point in time. >> But it would only be along the frontage of the parcel, not the whole length of the road. >> Correct. >> Yeah. Just a little bit like to the left
of the driveway, I think. Just point that out again. >> Please. >> Yep. >> So this stretch of Benzer Mini Road here, >> it's eight about 18 ft in this location here. When I scaled it off, per the
plan, it looks to be less in this location. Um so if the board felt it appropriate a piece in this area could be uh taken from or not taken but could work with the
applicant to provide a piece of land in here to widen >> that that would be the end of that wall completely would not it not >> the wall may need to go one way or the other. >> That's very unfortunate. That's
unfortunate. >> Um, number 24, the code requires a firewall. >> Um, back back. >> Uh, I I for one like the wall. Um, >> yeah. >> Is there a sound a little outlandish,
but is there any way we can put that strip across the street? >> So, not yet. >> Achieve the same. >> They don't own it. We don't own it. >> No, they >> No, they don't. >> No, they don't own that piece around along there. >> It's got to be a problem because it dips
down there. >> Yeah. >> Yeah, you can fix that stuff. >> I thought it might have been wet. Sure back to the existing. >> So, you know, often times when there's a road, the paved road doesn't line up with the right of way. >> Yeah, >> there may be land available to widen
that road for all we know. Um, if you I brought the existing conditions plan up here. You can see that beginning at the edge of Benjamin NY's Lane, the grade drops off considerably towards uh this area they're using for storm water detention.
>> So there may be a need to provide just a um area for a grading for the roadway in the right of way. It seems that um and I can understand the neighborhood and the abutters don't
really have an appetite for any improvements cuz it's it's already used as a fast cut through on occasion as it is. Um even by trucks uh I do it myself all
the time but I'm privileged. Yeah. Anyway, >> that's understandable and that item is to the board's discretion. >> What >> notriv is there a significant safety issue with regard to that that needs to be we
really need to pay attention to it >> with the road that's 18 ft wide. When two cars pass each other, one of the vehicles typically has to take a tire off the pavement >> and that's a safety concern. Okay.
You think of a parking stall, when you park two cars next to each other, they're usually 9 ft wide. So you think of that with two cars passing at any speed. >> So there is a safety issue. >> That is a safety concern. >> Yes. But it will I mean it's kind of like a if you build it, they will come.
I mean, uh, improving it is probably going to double the amount of traffic there and may leave us in a worse position. All right. Yep. All right. So, as I was mentioning before, uh, comment number 24, the code requires a fire alarm box somewhere in the subdivision with, uh,
lots that have more than 12 lots. Sorry. So, something that should be considered for being provided up in the, uh, the main area of the, you know, the septic system. Um, in in place of the
fire alarm system, what safety issues are there without that? Is there a safety issue uh that someone just couldn't call from their house? Is there
>> There's a lot of places where there are not fire alarm boxes. I'm bringing it up because it's something that's required by code. No, it's just a there's 12 houses. >> Oh, >> okay. >> Like a regular rule. >> A lot of this stuff's just stuff that needs to be added to the plan, the bulk
of it. Anyway, >> some of it. Yep. >> Yeah. >> Yep. Um walls. Um yep. We jump down to number 31. um the intersection itself. Try to jump ahead here.
>> Did you do any site assessments on footage at all? I know I know you're saying here in item 31 that the applicant hadn't provided it, but did you do any type of >> I don't have I don't have the availability to go out and survey when
I'm looking at these things, but when I stood at the approximate intersection and look for site distance, I did observe that there is to the which direction was I referencing here? um to the east there is a tree that looks to be within the sight triangle.
>> And again further in the letter letter um from the traffic report they request that any if the wall itself exceeds 2 and 1/2 ft in height that it should be removed and from what I can tell that wall exceeds that 2 and 1/2 ft. >> It does. Do you know what the speed is
the registered speed for the road is? >> I don't know the published limit on that road. >> It's unposted. >> It's not posted. So I think it makes it 35 by town >> bylaws. Unposted roads are 35 I think.
>> Could be wrong, but >> can you go back to 27 for me? >> Certainly >> for a minute. >> Frank had a question. >> You have a you have what the the code requires. What what is the difference between what the code requires and what they're proposing?
>> Um let The details are endless. >> I think that is for subdivision. >> Yeah, but I remember what they proposed, but it is a subdivision. It's not doing subdivision. All right. So the uh asphalt that
they're proposing includes one and a half inches of top course which I believe meets it provides 2 in of binder course code requires 2 and 1/2 and then they provide 8 in of gravel where the code requires
10 in of gravel. >> So they proposed 10 in gravel, 2 in binder and one and a half. >> They proposed 8 in >> eight. Okay. But are these subdivision stats? >> 305. Yes, that is some sub.
>> Okay. Okay. Can we go back to 31? >> Certainly. because the site just issue um that that wall is um really a part of that
whole neighborhood. But if it's truly a safety issue, it has to go. It sounds like because it's over 2 and 1/2 ft. >> There are other solutions, but >> if that I would love to hear them. >> Yeah. if that uh that location is
necessary for this intersection, the walls are going to be an issue for sight distance as they stand >> because I was hoping just to have them move the road a little bit so that we saved all of it. That doesn't sound like that's going to be the case other than moving it further into the into the
site. >> Something along those that line would be a solution. Yeah. Moving the wall. >> Yeah. All right. Thank you. >> Well, during construction, they were going to have to move some of it, right? It's just the fact that they weren't
going to move the complete length. >> That's the problem. >> Well, on site, we had talked about >> over here just repairing some of it. >> But now we're hearing that anything over 2 and 1/2 ft, I think it is, is a sight issue for safety purposes, which you
can't have. I mean, this was just a driveway one time with a few cars going in and out every few months someplace. Now it's going to have a lot of cars going in and out. A lot more cars going up. >> That road is I don't know what the DPW schedule is,
but that road is due for some improvement. Uh especially turning left or west. I guess it would be uh >> kind of nice. See if it's on the uh DPW's wish list. Maybe we could
potentially make some of these things melt. Probably not. >> Wishful thinking. >> Well, you know, because this is close to >> tell us about 32. >> All right. >> And Dan, oh, sorry. Before we leave, could could you just confirm what the speed is on the road for and get it back
to us on that? >> Yes, we can check into that. >> Sorry, chair. Don't worry. Now before we go on to the next one, >> I mean you you in relation to the wall, you said there are ways to dealing with
this and that would in fact be moving the road almost. >> It would likely be relocating the intersection itself. >> And just can you give it to us in feet? Um, if we're looking in here, so the
walls intersect. Can I zoom in on this? All right. So, this shows it a little better up here. So, your walls, what's to be left and very close to the edge of pavement here. We would have to move this entire
roadway out past the edge of the wall here, which looks to be say 40 feet. >> I was thinking of forward, you know, to get to the point where your line of sight would be better, but and that
would entail moving the whole road, which is too narrow as it is. >> Kind of unless the only solution is to pull it in, you know, to me. I don't So this the intersection now shows building >> a curved radius uh of the at the
intersection is that >> you just said there was none earlier. >> There's a radius on the pavement. >> Okay. >> There should be a radius on the lot lines also. >> Makes sense. >> Okay. But the lot lines further
>> doesn't line up. >> No, he wants it to curve further on the lot line itself. All right. >> Not the road. Okay. >> Am I right? Yeah. >> So, there should be a right here. There should be a curve that runs from here to here. Typical on a subdivision roadway.
>> All right. >> To maintain your uh setbacks from the edge of pavement to the limit of right ofway. >> Okay. Thank you. >> That's subdivision though. >> Yeah. Well, this is >> right. >> No, that's supposed to be going by
>> now. Moving along, I'm going to move to number 34. Um, from the traffic report that they recommend uh pro prohibition of on street parking in this subdivision because of the narrow uh roadway. So, we're noting that signage or some
other method should be provided to enforce that and we'll probably end up looking at like something like guest parking. Um there may be may need a provision for guest parking separately to make that
happen. >> So may go ahead. What what is it you want to do? You want signage to do what? To keep people from parking on the street. >> Simple. No parking signs on the off the edge of the the pavement there.
>> Yeah. >> Traffic engineer is recommending that no parking be allowed on the roadway itself. Um, okay. I'm going to move along to 37 here. Can Can I'm I'm sorry, but
obviously I I have an affinity for this wall. Um, >> it's coming right up in 37. He's about to get there. That's a different wall. >> Okay, I'll wait. >> Well, no, go ahead. 37's actually about different retaining walls. If you have
>> Yeah. No, that's retaining walls. Very >> um >> I'm trying to help you out. >> And I'm not trying to reinvent the wheel here, but I guess I am. Is there any way um as you said, I mean, it could be corrected by moving
uh the entrance to the left or whatever. Is there any way you could split this road going in and have it uh just an entrance where the wall is and an exit elsewhere? I don't know if yes, you may be able to
save the wall in doing that. Um because you can kind of center the roadway, but you're going to have a much larger impact over on this area here and where the grades drop off considerably over here that require fill and structure to make that happen.
>> Yeah. Talking a lot of money, >> huge money. Yeah. >> There's not that much fill coming out of anywhere here. I'm not certain on the cut fill on this. >> All right. I tried. >> Where were the other retaining >> 14 homes with base?
>> Okay. So, >> for Yeah. >> So, 37 I note that there's proposed retaining walls of varying heights throughout the site. >> Excuse me. I mean, just just to keep it open or whatever. I mean, Scott's point is very good. 14 homes with 14
basements. That's that's a fair amount of fill in and of itself. I mean, is it not possible that there's going to be enough fill there and it wouldn't have to be removed from the site? >> Potentially. You would need the engineer to run that an analysis on the new
design. >> I mean, that would mess with all the drainage, too, >> you know. >> Not particularly. >> Yeah, cuz that goes right down there at the end of the driveway. >> Goes down. But if the purpose if the purpose the first primary purp issue here is safety
sight visional >> right >> after that if we really and I do feel that wall is important >> um is how do we get that wall to remain someplace without overburdening
>> this group the project financially because it's stone wall I mean it's not >> strictly as an entrance would would eliminate that problem >> is Is it 2 and 1/2 ft relative to the the height the the grade of the road or the at wall height itself? >> It's
>> it's relative the grade of the road. >> Yeah. >> At 2 and 12. >> So if the road was higher >> well the wall >> above the two and a half >> could be done but then tying back into Benjamin NY that ends up >> okay >> kind of being a circle in that. Um uh
applicants engineer just mentioned a an option to maybe deconstruct a portion of the wall. So that and then re reface it at that two and a half ft height might be another option. >> You mean take it down? >> Decrease the height. Yes. >> Yeah. >> Leave the bottom half.
>> We talked about that. >> Clean up the top. >> Kind of lose >> the aesthetics. >> Yeah. The aesthetics of it. >> I can see the engineers taking copious notes over there. So we'll await your thought process. >> Yeah. I mean the potential the only
potential or is making it entrance only because then none of this stuff would really be >> one >> applicable. One last and I get and I'll leave this but one last thing these folks know what's necessary. We talked about it on site during the sidewalk a
little bit. Uh there is a way of doing it. uh it won't look like it looks today but depending on where the end I'll call them finials and not finials but uh that how far they have to be away so I
there's there may be a way I I I think they just need to come back and say we can do this or we can't do this or this is how we can do it. I'd rather see them say this is how we can do what we can do for you so we achieve the safety and sight view. I think that's what they should come back and do.
>> Yeah. All right, onto the retaining walls around the houses. Um, you can see a few of these houses. Um, this one here, this one here, they have considerable height
retaining walls. I believe when I scaled them, uh, measured them out, they were about six feet in height. Um, those may require a building permit, but I'd recommend, you know, anything over three feet has some type of a fence or a railing along it just so that it
dissuades someone from getting onto the other side of it. >> You have lot numbers for the >> Those are one and two, I think. >> One and two. >> Um, aren't those one and two up the top there? So, we've got I forget that I got it right in front of me. Sorry.
>> They changed the number. So, we got lot one and two and then again over here on lot 12. >> 12 >> has one. >> Okay. Thank you. Sewer construction. Some more very technical pieces. Um,
I'm going to jump down to 46 unless you guys have any uh questions on water and sewer. Those are pretty heavy items. Um, what' you say? 46. >> I'm going to jump down to 46. Yeah. Parking and access comments. Um, so they
provided a a sweep path analysis. From what I can tell, the path the sweep path analysis does show that they have adequate space to move around the subdivision itself. My concern is that the truck entering from Benjamin Nane,
the pavement itself isn't shown to confirm that it's actually going to be able to make that swing off of Benjamin N into the neighborhood here. So >> that's something we can just send off to the fire department request. Yeah. >> Right, Nory?
>> We can just request them to comment on it at least. >> Don't they do that? Of course. Anyway, >> I think they only do internal normally when they comment. >> I' I'd really like the zoning administrator thinks about that question. >> Yeah. So I I guess I can certainly check
with the fire department, but I see what you mean and that you know that is going to be likely part of the calculus with how you dealing with that wall, etc. Because I mean obviously for a private residence, a single house being there if
there's a fire, the fire department still has to access the property. But where you're adding homes, it clearly makes sense to have effectively a wide enough entrance that a fire truck can make that turn easily without issue.
Right. So >> 47, you have the mailbox. Where was that on the plan? I don't remember. >> Um, >> is it right there? >> I'm not sure what sheet it's shown on. Actually, this little box right here, I believe, is the uh the um mail kiosk.
And my comment is uh simply the vehicles stopping here, whether they're um mail delivery folks or residents, they're going to be blocking that lane of the road, which gives >> Do you think there should be a little pullover area maybe or something like that?
>> Yes. Yes, that would be my, >> you know, I was going to say and piggybacking on that, we've had other developments where sometimes the parents will drive their kids up to the end of the street to wait for a bus. >> And so maybe that type of mechanism
could be used for both the male and, you know, possibly a parent who's waiting to drop their kid off at the bus or something. >> And that other side of the road's okay. Well, I just think it certainly is a
good area to have extra space for vehicles because you also don't want to have cars coming in and off of Benjamin Nye and somebody stopped to get their mail and you're what holding up traffic or you know so >> yeah a little pulloff. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah. Something along those lines I think would be fair. >> So I just these folks built something almost identical in in layout. Will it weigh? And on the right, their mail box. I was just there today in my box on the
right. They don't if I'm just looking at my video here. They don't have a pull out, do you? >> I don't believe so. >> All right. But the recommendation would be I was driving very slowly, so this videos takes a long time.
You know, safety first. Um, anyway, you are recommending a pull-up. I would recommend some other >> some type of Okay. >> pull out there. Yes. >> Okay. And then we have a bunch of uh comments
on storm water. Nothing that I don't think that the applicant applicant can't resolve. Um >> any simple overview that you'd like to just put into testimony other than >> um simple overview they have a uh they
are using the natural depression area shown here for their primary storm water detention and infiltration area. So they have very limited uh uh stormwater structures in their roadway network running through here
goes through uh treatment devices before being uh discharged out to this large basin area over here. >> Just like an oily water separator. Is that what you >> uh they've got a propar proprietary unit. I don't recall which is it
>> CDS or storm sectors. So, it's a CDS type uh proprietary unit that's going to be installed here. >> Okay. >> Um they also have for each of the uh residences, they have subsurface infiltration units with overflows that
either um drain into the roadway or uh as they overflow drain towards these basins here. There's another small uh detention area here that handles only uh roof runoff in this here and another small one over here for lawn area and
roof runoff. >> So in the end it's going to be very similar to how it works now. >> Yes. Yep. >> Where will snow removal? >> Did you see any spot for snow removal? Typically in subdivisions, we don't call
for individual snow removal areas because it becomes wind rows on the side of the road as opposed to a commercial development. >> You know, >> it does. Yes. >> But they do have plenty of room in the center if it >> Yeah. >> became an issue. >> Thank you.
>> Well, I think the question is too, is there anything they shouldn't do with snow other than do what every road does? You just the plow goes down and go side of the road. My concern would be I would recommend not piling snow over this uh infiltration area here.
>> That's right. >> So just pile the road. >> Yeah. I'm not worried about uh the snow, you know, what leeches out or drains out of it, the the uh sand and that type of stuff. That'll all be treated by the treatment units. I'd be worried about having heavy loads on top of the septic.
>> This is a homeowners association. You mean you what you're going to have every plow contractor is going to do is going to come out of he or she's going to come out of the driveway and just pile everything on that center island >> potentially. Yes. >> That's what they do.
>> If that's part of the homeowners association requirements I sometimes that the residents are responsible for plowing their own units. >> They're dealing with this at that will it way now. I don't know what they're doing with snow because I've never been there, but they they're already familiar with this whole setup almost exactly
like this. And I imag I can bet they're going to come up with something and tell us how they're going to take care of that. >> No. Anyway, >> it's not going to snow anymore anyway. >> That's right. >> Any other concerns with storm storm
water? As I mentioned, I've got quite a few comments here on my letter. Again, it's nothing I don't think is insurmountable uh as they move forward. Okay. They will also need a construction general permit with the EPA, right, for
the amount of disturbance. Yes, that is a note in here that they will need a a SWIP and that's recommended that it's included as a uh condition of approval for it. >> If you don't mind, I guess next time hopefully we'll be you'll be in front of us again. If you could bring a thumb
drive to it's easier for the folks here that are sitting here. We're going through 73 items. uh for those people at home, it' be nice for them to be able to read the words that we're reading. Appreciate that. Thank you. >> So, just for the board, we typically
after this presentation would have the two engineers working with each other to resolve the matter. So, we don't typically like require request the peer to come back unless there's some need by the board. So >> yeah, >> that's why I I I know it was tight, but
I certainly would have appreciated a window to be able to absorb this. It kind of, >> you know, put it under your pillow. >> So may I? >> Yep. Go for it. So the so the plan is that
our peer engineer and the applicants engineer will now sit down or by phone discuss these things and come up with some solution. >> Yeah. >> Hi, good evening. Joe Henderson, Horsesley Whitten. Um, yes, we would
typically provide a a response letter and we'll respond item by item to all these comments and then we can discuss, you know, anything further we need to discuss before the next hearing and hopefully come back with be able to say we've resolved, you know, the questions.
>> Just while we we have done this many, many times and unfortunately had to preview a lot of these things in the past two years. Um my belief has to be that the two of you will come to some agreement as to what
needs to be done. If there is no agreement to that, that has to be noted someplace so the board can consider it. In other words, if you continue to disagree with deals and Thomas' findings, which you'll likely to do some of >> it'll come out in the our peer review.
We'll say, you know, if we if there's something we don't agree with >> comment is so that you we this board wants to make sure they know you agree or disagree with whatever you folks come up with. >> Exactly. >> Okay. Good. >> And I think we would that's what we would discuss at the next meeting if
needed those particular items that are we're not seeing uh the same way. >> Okay. >> Go ahead. >> Hey, good to see you again. >> Hey Joe. Um just curious uh what's the potential um
for saving that wall by making that entrance only and then the exit somewhere else. >> I I think um >> am I dreaming? >> I think changing where the entrance is is is pretty difficult to do actually moving it to a different location.
>> Um >> it would be an ex an exit elsewhere. I think you would still have the sight distance issue with the wall >> coming in though. It wouldn't have eliminated >> the sight distance is is merging onto the road. You'd be coming off the road into there. So the wall of I could be
completely wrong but in my mind it would >> best yeah I think the best way to do it would be to look at just reducing the wall height and we'll go through and we'll we'll look at the site triangles like and Thomas recommended looking at that closer and seeing what needs to be
done to um you know to make it work properly. But maybe there's a possibility of taking that wall part partially down but leaving a good portion of it. We know we already have to take down the large pillars that are there. We know that. But now we'll just
have >> if it was only a single lane entrance. >> I I think you >> I don't I like I said >> Sure. Yeah. I mean, we'll look at it closer, but we'll do everything. We'll come up with every solution possible to to keep as much of the wall as we can as
we understand the board wants us to look at that. So, >> well, probably the butters more importantly, right? So, yep. And I think just to talk about the road in general, it's a 40 foot right of way there, the road width. So, there is town-owned um
land there to make the road wider if it had to be, but we could pull pull our entrance if we had to. I mean, that it would have to come back towards the property, >> make some land across the street or >> Well, I think there is land there that's
town right ofway. If it's a 40 foot >> Yeah. >> layout, >> there's a 40 foot layout there. I think it's just the road within that layout is not >> and as I say, um that the left or west, I suppose that road is completely torn
apart and and um filled with potholes. And I mean it it needs to be fixed at some point in time. And it'd be, you know, maybe I'm just dreaming, but it would be nice to make it happen so that wall could stay. >> I'm fairly confident that they're going
to come back with something. >> Yeah. >> And we'll be able to see and deliberate over. >> I think so. Yeah. That we'll we'll look at that for sure. And we'll provide I don't know if there's any specific items you want me to address from the letter or we can, you know, we're like I said, we'll >> I'm going to really want lighting,
street lighting definitely. I I even googled Home Depot solar ones. It's not that expensive to do them if you're not going to do street lights or but I I >> I think Habitat could potentially they've done on other projects where
they've had um each individual home has a light at the street that provides lighting. I know they've done that and that could be um an option that would provide the lighting you want. >> The kid gets dropped off at Benjamin on the school bus at 4:00. It's dark.
They're going to come in and it's going to be dark all the way in. I mean, I don't want my kid walking in the dock like that. No. >> Yep. And I believe Habitat heard back from the they reached out to the town and the bus stop is all the way at the intersection of Ben Nye and Old Maine.
That's where the bus stop is. >> Yeah. >> So, unless otherwise needed, I don't know that we would even need a bus stop in our >> uh property, but that's something the board I guess we have to consider. >> Light through it. >> Yeah. Go ahead. >> And I have to agree with the chair that
you need some light. So, it's a pretty dark area. One of the things that I'm going to want to talk about at some point in time when appropriate is um dark sky friendly, not dark sky compliant, but dark sky friendly lighting at the houses, exterior
lighting and on the street, which basically means that all the lighting has to be 3,000 Kelvin or less basically, which is easily done. You got you folks already have down lighting on Willlet Way on many of the houses, but
you have pole lights which I don't know obviously I wasn't I couldn't get out and take a look, but dark sky friendly lighting I think is going to be very important to uh reduce u uh light trespass to the neighborhood. These are things that no one really
talked about even 20 30 years ago in these little subdivisions. Um, but it's going to be important, I think. And, uh, that type of lighting, many retailers that I checked are anywhere from 50 to $275
per unit sort of thing. It's cheap, cheap, cheap. >> I think they could accommodate that. I >> But it it's something that when I'm going to ask the board to consider conditioning that be dark sky friendly with 3,000 Kelvin or less flooding. So, you avoid light trespass
as much as possible. And I'll give a bunch of reasons some point in time as to why that's important. >> And you have difficulty with compliance, right? If you're going to have everybody with a post light out by the road and that that's kind of your solution and
the people don't turn on the post lights and so that kind of gets to be difficult. Going back to the chair's point, >> I think it would have to be hardwired and on a timer. >> Okay. And you might want to consider one at
the mailbox even people get home from work at 5, pull up to the mailbox, you know, just something small around the mailbox so that they can at least see their number. Okay. Anything else anybody has? >> No, they just received it. So I think
you know 73 items. >> But is there anything that stuck out when you read bills that you want Not not conven >> I think that's all I had too. >> It was a well done report. >> Yeah. Very good. >> Like I said, we'll itemize, you know,
line by line, answer them and coordinate with Bees and Thomas, you know, ahead of whenever the next meeting is. >> We have faith in you. You do. >> Okay. From the public. >> Anybody from the public want to comment? Come on up. Name and address, please.
Hi, my name is Katherine Truman. Um, I own uh 78 Benjamin Nlane. Um, and I had submitted some written uh comments at the previous meeting, I believe. >> Uh, and I brought a few more here, many of which have been touched on. Um, I
will read them, but I will probably also go off a bit to address a couple things that came up in today's presentation. Um, I own this three and a halfacre property at 78 Benjamin Nys Lane and have concerns over the proposed development at 48 Benjamin Nys Lane. I've owned my property for 5 years and
split my time between Somerville and Felmouth. While not a permanent resident, I am here for about 25% of the time in any given month. I should note that I come before this um become come here um both as a resident but also as an architect. Um, I have 25 to 30 years
experience in the field and um, I own a medium-sized residential architectural design firm in Boston. So, I come looking at these plans um, not only as a resident and as an abuter with those concerns, but also from the point of view as a critical eye of an architect.
Um, I also do a lot of work in historic preservation and that stone wall thing, we can solve it. We do not need to. We do not need to remove it entirely and we definitely do not need a second entrance. The disruption of this
property already is enormous and I I shudder at the idea of having another entrance blasted through that woodlands. Um I was also very happy to hear the discussion about the condition of the Benjamin roadway. I have suggested solutions for that in my
previous um written testimony about that. Um, and I'll get to that momentarily. Um, I am conceptually in favor of providing affordable housing for permanent residents here on Cape Cod. And I am very happy that the majority of this site has been left to conservation. And I am also very happy
it has not become one of those giant subdivisions like down near Blue Shutters Lane. Um, I do however have a number of concerns about the design of the plans as they are now. in brief, um, the size of the project, the site planning, architectural, and site
design, the possibility of ADUs being added to this property in the future, which I would like to I'm glad to see shaking of heads. I would like to make sure that that is like written into law that we cannot have another 14 units on this property in the future, and I know Massachusetts is very interested in
that. Um and of course the related impacts to the area including water quality which has been a big point of discussion amongst my myself, my neighbors and I know here. Um the impact on natural wildlife of which there is quite a bit. I recently installed some little cameras to monitor some things on
my property and the number of deer on my driveway alone is amazing. Um the traffic impact on this road, the road quality and safety are huge and I'm incredibly happy to hear you talking about this. Although I think you guys are all headed in slightly the wrong
direction with the way you want to fix it. Um and then light pollution and noise pollution. Um first point, the total number of units on this property seems to be too many. We have 14 houses, but that's actually 39 bedrooms, which could easily be 56
people. That's a huge heavy septic load, heavy light pollution load, heavy traffic load, possible noise load, amongst other things. Um, I have made longer comments in the past. The site plan, um, I think this the small portion, okay, this portion of North
Falmouth is incredibly special. We have such we have 22 acres owned by one of my neighbors. Another neighbor does something like eight. I own three and a half. We have 40 something or whatever it is now in conservation. This little area of North Felmouth is an absolutely
precious resource for our environment and just for the fact that we don't have a million street lights out there. We have a small narrow road which people go flying up. The solution here is not to widen the road. The solution here is to make it one way. This entire problem
would be solved with a one-way road. Come in one way from Old Maine, drive down and go out at Wild Harbor. And because all of the speedy traffic comes from Wild Harbor, blasting up Wild Harbor, screeching along on what's not even a 90 degree, flying up past my
property, and then round that crazy little tight little area where I am sure someone is going to die crashing into a tree, or two cars crashing into each other. And the only way to stop that is either speed bumps, a stop sign at the end of Wild Harbor, or just make the
road one way. Easy peasy. Solution solved. We don't need to widen anything. We don't need to take property back. We don't need to change the character of the road. It's easiest solution. Um anyways, that's but my biggest problem also with this is I find the site plan
to be incredibly uncreative. Um, this is basically a culde-sac slapped on a property with no regard for its planting, its topography. Just the the discussion that we are having right
now about six-foot retaining walls. There are so many models of development, architectural site plan development that could look creatively at how to use the topography and the landscape and the clearing and create something that was far less disruptive to our planted
environment, far less disruptive to the need for grading and clearing. Um there is I meant to bring a pro um a print out which I left at home. There is a model that I know Habitat did. I believe it's in Hamilton, Mass. that's up on the Northshore that are duplexes and
triplexes. They look like little houses. Um I have it a screenshot on my phone. It would be significantly less disruptive to have three buildings here that had two or three multif family houses. I mean town houses, townhouse in
Boston is a $10 million proposition. So I don't see why a combined townhouse here would not be just as as desirable as a small little Lego box house. Um, and they are far less disruptive to the environment. They require far less clearing. Um, and they are also far more
economical to build. You don't need to build two separate foundations, you build one. You don't need to build, you know, you build one wall instead of building two. You need less building material. They're cheaper to build. Um, I was Yeah. Anyways, I was I was shocked
at the amount of land um regrading. Lots 1, two, and three are graded to drive all the runoff into the depression and the wetlands. Lots 11 and 12 are massively regraded and I know there are ways that we can do this more successfully. Um, >> one second. Okay, if she keeps going, everybody up here.
>> Yes. >> Okay. >> Um, I think I probably covered most of it. My concern about ADUs was my.3. Um, I am also concerned and I noted in here about light pollution. I understand the concern about people walking down that street at night. I do it all the time. I
got myself a white reflective coat uh to walk my dog. I would strong I I do feel very strongly about light pollution. Um I understand we need to have people not like trip over the potholes, but I do think if we do have any kind of sight lighting. If it can be the kind that is kept low at 3 feet and is designed for
pedestrians for kids walking and not try and have giant street lighting everywhere, it would be fantastic. Um water and septic. I know that is a big point of concern. I know that Jeff Lintner, my neighbor, has been doing a lot of work on that and we'll speak to that separately. Um
uh yes, traffic. I did address that. We could have up to 53 cars in this place. Um that's an enormous amount of additional traffic. I mentioned um how to solve it, which I will um put in my notes when I um put them
in. I think I managed to get through all of my concerns. Thank you very much. >> May I ask a question? >> Can we Can you answer a question? >> Oh, absolutely. Of course. Yes. I >> mean, thank you. >> You are an accomplished architect. I know the name quite well.
>> And um what you talk about with regard to design is what I would like to see. That does not fit their model of how they find a buyer uh who then contributes the time to build them. >> I understand. I've worked for I've done
volunteer work for Habitat for Humanity. So, you know that. No, I get how the model works, but I don't understand like it is just as easy to build a two family. Like if you're want to put in sweat equity on something like it doesn't matter where you're hammering the nail and it doesn't matter where you put like if that if there's a party wall, you can hammer the nail on one side of a party wall versus hammer the
nail on the other side of a party wall. And I mean property in Boston and in New York City and in a million other places, we have you have an individually owned um townhouse or individually owned multi-unit. like it doesn't it doesn't have to be a condo in order to do that
depending on where you draw your property lines. I mean that may be a zoning thing about where we draw property lines and having to have setbacks. There are solutions to all of those problems. Um and I don't think that the idea that you can't purchase a townhouse or purchase a multi a piece of a multif family makes it any less your
own. I mean I own condos. I I've owned a condo in Boston. It doesn't make it any less mine. Um, so I don't I mean I I would disagree with the fact that that that that idea should be abandoned because because it's not a small single family home. I I just don't see how that
>> I don't disagree with you. I'm I'm trying to I want them to hear this because I have concerns as a board member and I just want to hear from an architect like yourself. >> I mean, I had hoped in all honesty after the last conversation, Jeff and I had had a conversation. He said, "Could you
redesign this and bring it to the next meeting? If I had if I could keep up with my paying work, I would love to have redesigned this and brought it to this meeting. Unfortunately, that's just like not there's only 24 hours in a day. Um,
but I know that there is a better solution for this plan architecturally, urbanistically to the extent that but planning is you know urban design. We are creating a small urban space here. there is a better plan here that would I
think ultimately be cheaper e budget-wise cheaper to build and that would be better for the environment because this is a really precious site. Um and then you know if it still has to be
14 houses then we just need to come up with creative solutions for the other problems which can be just make the road one way call it a day and you can rebuild those with those stone things the right ma you need
the right mason that's the problem you can't just hire Joemo mason and expect it to come out right you need to have the right mason who can take it apart and put it back together in such a way that you get your two extra feet and it still looks the same. >> But that's about means and methods and
finding the right subcontractors and doing it the right way. And I would love I mean I am really really happy to have affordable housing available. We don't have enough of it and I see so many houses sitting empty and I know people probably say that about mine. I'd like to spend more time here. I would also
love to see that there is the possibility for a design project to be done really well and really creatively and like they do this all the time in Europe and this is like this is this is a site plan from like 1965
right we've evolved from this and like we did it town let's not do it here let's come up with a better plan for it um this is an opportunity and it's one of the few amazing sites like this that we So,
sorry. I can have opinions occasionally, but >> you're doing fine. >> I'm doing fine. Good. >> I try not to, but I think they come out. So, all right. >> Thank you very much. >> You want to Barbara? Sorry, not Barbara. Um,
you're sitting next to Jeff. >> For the record, Jeff Lintner. Uh 72, Benjamin Ny Lane. Again, um we need your help. Actually, before I start, I'm going to just point out something that I'm not going to address, but you look
up there at that depression and where all the waste water is going to go, not storm water. That's really close to my well. And I haven't addressed that in my comments, but I'm going to have to think about that because the uptake for my
well is probably within 100 feet of that. And that water is not going to be well treated. >> Anyway, we need your help. I'm not here again. >> It is groundwater, not waste water. >> It is ground water. It is storm water, sir. >> Yeah, storm water off the street and it's
>> got waste water. You called it waste water. I'm just pointing that out. >> I I stand corrected. Um, so I'm not here to question whether habitat will be built in some form and I acknowledge the extensive planning, thinking and experience. They're evident. I respect
the effort to date, but there are aspects that need to be resolved. Last month, well actually in October, I shared several areas of concern with you. The most important relating to the impact of septic disposal. So I thank you for agreeing to request a peer
review. On that note, uh it is not in yet. Um and I think it relates both to me and to other abutters uh because there are as I'll say again there are total of two other wells besides mine
plus two other lots. So I had not been made aware of the parameters and scope of the peer review process. So I don't know what's involved in that or who you've asked to do it. But I am sharing an additional perspective this evening about the
extent of that review. So we strongly believe that onsite flow testing should be a part of the review process. Test what the flow is the groundwater. To recap, our home uh does
not have access to town water. Nor is there town water available to three additional lots. One of which is Katherine's right there. And she has two wells on her site. So, we're orphans, so to speak. Habitat will generate 4,000 gallons a day, and we are legitimately
concerned about the impact it may have on the only source of portable water for our home. I have learned that the septic plume's position and spread is based on projected elevation of groundwater. However, this is a marine area with
highly variable soil types. So, in October when I shared our concerns, you asked the applicant's engineer uh to respond to our observations. He answered by saying, quote, "It seems like unquote, the effluent will bypass our
property." And he was quote pretty comfortable with unquote the data from Cape Cod Commission. By all accounts, this is an excellent engineering firm. And in his position, I would have said exactly the same thing. But the data he
relies on is best is based on the best estimates. So I'm asking for your help in reducing the risk and uncertainty factors. This is not an unreasonable request, nor should it be perceived as an effort to challenge the feasibility
of the habitat project. Since the last meeting, I have reviewed or tried to become more familiar with the Cape Cod Commission resources and database. I've also talked to several individuals whom I consider to be knowledgeable experts.
Their consensus is that the only way to eliminate ambiguity about the direction of the groundwater is to do actual flow testing. This type of test would involve installing three wells and taking resultant readings from them. Having
that kind of data will give us a factbased answer as to whether or not the water supply is threatened or not. So without that answer, I worry about an uncomfortable scenario. The project goes ahead. Then several
years hence it turns out that our well and the additional downstream wells are compromised. What's my remedy? I can't come back to this board. Do I have to undertake a multi-year litigation? Who are my adversaries? Is
it the homeowners association? Is it Habitat? Is it the town? I I don't want to be in that position. My hope is that by doing the flow testing, we reduce this uncertainty. With respect to other aspects of the
septic issue, I'm aware that the town's health department didn't see a concern with nitrogen. You pointed that out at the last meeting. Um they do point out there are no current regulations for phosphorus removal but there are other issues that the town
doesn't currently currently address. CEC's contaminants of emerging concern which include perr and polyfllorocal I can't I can never pronounce that word poly fluuro alcohol substances which we call >> it's easier
>> pharmaceuticals personal care products microlastics and endocrine disruptors to our knowledges these substances are not addressed in the current septic treatment operation as a consequence we continue to have concerns about the viab
ability of our well flow testing will go a long way to giving us the assurance that it will not be impacted and that habitat will be uh operational and that the septic will work. >> Thanks.
>> Thank you. Anybody else? >> You want to ask a question? >> Yeah, I could too. >> Sorry. Sorry. Go ahead, Mark. those um we can't force these people to do
anything beyond what the state requires. And I mean there there is no well within 100 ft of uh this project. So um you know there's
you're asking for us to to do more than we would do anywhere else. I mean the the state sets the regulations and that those regulations are for title 5. I mean this is going to be treated to a much lower level. Um and I mean which
would make you safer. I mean, as I suggested earlier, um I think it would be incumbent upon you to test your well beforehand and then, you know, I don't know where you're going to go, but for you to ask us to require them to do more
than the state requires um doesn't seem uh fair. >> Thank you, sir. Well, can I respond? >> Of course. Absolutely. You're here for we're here to listen to you. I I don't think it's an unreasonable request because I think it solves potentially a
lot of issues that can easily come up and I've that's why I've consulted with experts in water flow. I think it's not unreasonable to be concerned about the the the future of my well. I don't have town water. Does Habitat want to provide
town water to me and and the downstream people? that might change the equation. But because it's a marine area, I am told that that the flows can really be calculated only by a flow test and it's
not hugely expensive and I don't think it's an unreasonable burden. >> Before you leave, you bring up a good point. I mean, one solution would be to get you town water. Do you have any idea where that data point would be for them to get you town water? Is it 300 feet
away, 500 feet away? >> It's not just me. It's >> I understand. I'm just trying to get an idea of Do you have any data point on where that would be? >> Yeah, I I approached the town years ago and asked them about the fact that I didn't have town water and frankly uh
there was another resident here, uh Ruth is who who has water that comes all the way over from Wild Harbor even though she's on Benjamin Nye. There is a main I think it's an 8 inch main that comes down um Ben Nye and it stops at Cameron
and the idea was that the water would would flow through from there. The water department has said consistently that they feel that if you were to extend it, it needs to be extended all the way and then hook up to the Wild Harbor main so
you can flush the area back and forth. That would make a substantial difference. That's a That's a good life though, right? >> Thank Thank you. >> Thanks. >> That was good information. >> I didn't know that.
>> Anybody else? Come on up. >> Dan Arley from 130 Old Maine. I'm at the corner of Benjamin I in Old Maine. And I'll just preface as saying I've always supported Habitat. I've been to their annual event and you know I support the affordable housing all that
stuff. But of course it gets very real when it gets close to you and you say see this a little different for me now. I'm not uh supporting whatever it's doing out there and um I still support it including the development here but I
do agree that there's an issue with the density of it. Um I think that the best thing that could happen or or the most successful thing would uh that the level of de uh uh development of any you know complex
actually uh shouldn't you know overpower the neighborhood. Um this is a small neighborhood. There's 45 houses on it and this would increase the housing by over 30%. And I think uh somebody mentioned a bus
stop at uh you know Benjamin Nye in Old Maine. I can't imagine because these units are supposed to be for four people I think on average probably two children 28 children or whatever um of them all coming uh to that corner in this small
street and and people don't you know let their children you know go to the bus stop or walk to school like we used to you know whatever how many miles when we were kids and you know and of course they can't sit in the rain >> uphill both ways >> it's >> the whole neighborhood would be
disrupted it's it would change the nature of actually a historic neighborhood that it's actually a historic area there. Um, and I don't think that's good for them or the people there or individual owners or anything else. And so, you know, it's great
talking about the fact that this isn't a great design and there's also to all these other issues. But, you know, my point is is that I think it's, you know, when you're you're you know, adding something like that, uh, and the nature of it to this small street, small
neighborhood is, um, not not going to be good. Um, not that affordable housing shouldn't go on this property on my street. No problem. That's >> I just point something out. Go ahead. of all the 40bs that we've had coming
before us. I first of all I I agree with you in regard to density. This is probably the least intensive at 1.87 units per acre compared to in some cases five, six, seven times that if you go to some of the others in town. So this is
probably the smallest number of units per acre. I don't disagree with what you're saying. It's a 40B. very very hard to for this board and to deal with this stuff. But I just want you to know this is probably the least dense of all of them that we've had to look at in the
last two years. >> It's just an individual situation on this small neighborhood, small street. I don't know. I mean, I see these other complexes are off of major streets or whatever. I'm not that experienced on every individual development, but um it
will be difficult on this this neighborhood >> and I don't think you're going to have a bus stop at the corner of uh uh Old Maine and um Benjamin Nye with the amount of kids and so forth. It's just not logistically possible. And you're not going to widen the street and put a
you know sidewalk. It's it's, you know, it's a historic area and it's it's tight. I I just don't see that either. >> It's a very special area. It's a very special area, believe me. >> Yeah. And it has its own ge, you know, kind of, you know, confinements the way it is.
>> He wouldn't have moved there if it wasn't. >> That's right. >> Look at that. >> Yes. That's right. >> All right. Well, thank you. >> Thank you. >> Anybody else? Mr. Foreman, >> come on. >> I I don't I mean,
>> you have to come up if you're going to You got to come up to them. You want to be on the other side. I know you do. >> Well, you know, I think the point was well taken that compared to most 40bs, this is a really good development.
You've got state-of-the-art septic, you've got uh solar minimizing energy impacts, making it affordable for everyone who lives there. Um my hope is that you know the board and
the abutters will understand that in order for this to be affordable certain compromises have to occur but uh I think we're meeting the overall goals of providing some affordable housing and at
the same time you have to remember most of this acreage I think 48 acres will be preserved in conservation. So, it's part of a comprehensive approach to what uh to do with this property that makes it
affordable to conserve it and affordable for some folks to live there uh and to have the kind of single family homes that families really value. So, you know, that's why I think this is a great project.
>> I think that may >> Yeah. I I think that everybody has to keep something in mind. When you solve a problem for one group of people, you create a problem for the other group of people. 40Bs do not allow for a balance
because it's a state statute, unfortunately, the way they've written it. But it creates a problem. The gentleman just pointed that out. And even though I point out it was 1.87 87 in its break which is better than some of the other things we are dealing with
is 40B and unfortunately we have to deal with within those within that box um and it gives us very little room. So the problem you're solving for affordable housing creates a problem for other people there and that is something that
is so often forgotten for developers of 40B and that's unfortunate but this is a pretty small one. Anybody else want to come up to the podium? All set. I know you want to. She's got it. You
can do this. >> I'm Ruth Brazier. I live at 67 Benjamin Lane, which is right across the street. And I um have town water, but I get my town water from Wild Harbor Road, which
means I have this huge long water line. So I would love to see the water come down Benjamin N's lane to accommodate, you know, that would solve the problem of um possible contamination of those wells. But the
other thing I would also like to uh support the idea of having perhaps some two family or three family houses among you know the that to be able to consolidate
the the development there. Um, as far as the traffic goes, the um I I have a I walk a loop or run um in the
neighborhood and um we have to start on Wild Harbor Road, which has a nice sidewalk. You do not feel safe on that sidewalk because the sidewalk invites the traffic to go just a little faster because
you're supposed to be on the sidewalk. Benjamin Eyes Lane is a resource not uh and potentially for this development where um we have people who who like to walk on Benjamin
I lane and they like to walk they walk in the street but they can walk several a breast. um bicyclists. We have bicyclists. We have we have um uh people with children on bicycles on
Benchman Lane because again the narrowness of the road and the lack of a sidewalk um makes at least res local people are mindful of the potential, you
know, of people being in the road. Um, and so I would be very sorry to see the road improved. >> Um, with more lighting because I think what people value is the
shade, the feeling of the of rural. It's it feels quiet. Um, and the the problem traffic is really the through traffic. uh particularly the traffic coming from Wild Harbor Road. We don't get that much, you know, people don't take a
shortcut so much from uh Main Street and most of the traffic from this development will be going towards um Main Street because that's where the um all the, you know, the school, the
churches, the church, the thrift shop, these there's a a couple of restaurants and that's the logical way to go and it's a pleasant walk. Um so I in my opinion the uh solution to
traffic would be to discourage the through traffic or put speed bumps one way is another possibility but um it is the people who the people who come from Wild Harbor Road who are going at excessive speed to
start with who turn in there and don't slow down. So, I I would like to see the road itself um uh as little changed as possible because I think there are an awful lot of people
who appreciate it the way it is and not just the people on Benjamin's lane itself. I talked to people who come from a mile away who say they love to walk on this road. >> It's cozy. >> And there's one man who may who goes six
miles. I don't know where he lives, but it may be as much as three miles away. And he comes every day and I see him going making it part of his um daily route. >> May I ask a question? >> Thank you. Go ahead. >> I ask a question. Have you ever question one question
>> with regard to your speed bumps or speed calming bumps they called it or whatever. Have you folks ever gone to the traffic committee and requested them? >> Um I have never done that. I don't know if I'm >> because they make it very very difficult to do that. They It's It's quite an
ordeal to get a speed bump. >> Almost impossible. >> Anything that Yeah. So, I'm just That's okay. I just want to know if you'd ever done it. >> They have the next best thing, speed bottles. >> And it's also that obviously the GPS
sends uh you know, trucks from goodness knows where and it sends them down this road and then they end up turning around and coming back again, some of them. But um if it was um if it if it was on the
maps as not allowing through traffic, then we wouldn't get those people. But you can uh as a neighborhood, you can do that. I did that in a neighborhood that I lived in and this town has signs on either end of the road and there's no more trucks.
I mean, that's that the DVW did it. It was I think we had to come twice and ask for it and we got it. be wonderful on this road. >> Any other questions? >> No. >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you. Um I just like to go ahead
>> expand on something Mr. Foreman said and and um I mean you have to realize that this this property could have been bought by a developer and um I mean there's 56 acres in total. I mean this project at 1.8
units per acre or 1.86 86, if you want to get technical, is is is one of the least dense I've ever seen. And the reality is if if you if you uh divide it by the 56, you're putting one house per
4 acres. So, I mean, this really um isn't uh overburdening the area in any fashion compared to what likely would have happened. Um
you know, um it's just the reality of it. >> And the thing the other part to elaborate on that is Habitat builds beautifulooking projects. They're not shoe boxes with, you know, with crap.
They're really good projects. They're beautiful looking buildings. They're not skyscrapers. They're not other stuff that we've dealt with. These are like really good-look buildings. >> Just needs a higher pitch roof. >> He's still hopping on that. >> And I will later on come back to that.
>> All right. Did anybody have any other questions up here or >> No, >> I would just say for everybody's edification that that actually this type of design is something that has been promoted throughout the state and that
you're preserving land for conservation and you're sort of effectively clustering housing so that you're saving most of the land but you're also getting the needed housing. And while it is always going to create a
problem whether you build one house or many houses, the truth is there's a desperate need, right? We recently had a um lottery for some uh houses that the board recently
approved and I believe there were some like 56 people that applied for like four homes. So, four or five people got very lucky and then 50 some odd people are now still looking, right? And these
were people all that qualified that were eligible to be included in a lottery. >> And while we're at it, >> it's crazy. I've said this numerous times over the last 20 years,
but um this dir of affordable housing, I mean, is is in part caused by our zeal for open space, our excessive zeal for open space. How many times in the last 15 years have large parcels of land come
available and the towns purchased them? I mean, the number one ingredient you need for affordable housing is affordable land. And um I mean, this town's over 56% open space. Um at some point, you got to say that's enough. And
you got to take care of everybody else. I know nobody wants to hear that, but that's why I'm here to say all the things that nobody wants to hear. >> I think the other thing that's important too with 40B is that the the town can ask for I believe it's up to 70%
local preference. So, it's not like people are moving in from elsewhere. I mean, obviously the state does not want to preclude you from having people from other communities apply for a house in Falmouth, but that indeed you can select
a percentage to help local folks. And you guys, Habitat does a great job with that selection. >> We asked for 70%. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> State has a boarded it. So, >> yeah. >> We appreciate that. >> I guess the only other thing I'd like
for the board to maybe address is we did have um a butter who spoke to a uh groundwater flow testing and I think there was maybe a perception that that was >> being reviewed or peer reviewed and we
haven't asked for that. So, I just want to make sure everybody's clear. Can we ask for it? >> Well, >> I don't see how we can. >> I think the particular problem is that while we have people who are interested in protecting their wells,
their wells exceed the limit that the board of health and engineering has shown under title 5 to be what's allowed. >> So, this is essentially an extraordinary request. And
I mean, obviously, it's up to the board, but I think the state with the parameters is going to say that you can't have a higher bench for an affordable development than you would for a regular subdivision, >> right?
And um nobody's come up with any distances either, so one has to assume they're much further than >> 100 ft. I didn't know there was three dwellings without town water. >> Mhm. >> I did not know that.
>> There were what? >> There were three dwellings without town water. >> Oh, they're all over the place. >> No, I didn't know if this project is, >> you know. >> So, anyway, we're going to continue this. So, you guys can do your thing. Do
you have a date for us? Uh so we could either continue to January 15th or 29th at the applicant's choice. >> 15. Okay. >> So January 15 >> 15. Okay. >> Thank you.
>> Motion to continue to January 15th. >> Second. >> We have a motion and a second. Everybody's all set up here. >> Y. >> You're all set. Okay. All All those in favor? I oppose? None. >> Great. Thank you everyone for all your
input and nice to meet you. >> Thank you. >> 15, 2026. >> All right. January 15. Martin Luther King. Easy to remember for me. >> Oh, that's right. >> Right.
>> Is that a holiday? >> Is that a holiday? >> I think they usually they do it on a Monday now. >> You know, I look up my time instead. >> Yeah, it's a Monday holiday. It is a Monday holiday.
>> It's a holiday. He used to go skiing. young >> cuz it's in the middle of the winter. >> Yeah, >> we do too. >> Yeah, it's on the 19th this year. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> Any minutes? >> Uh October 9. >> Anybody? >> Do you want to ask them to clear so we
can continue? >> Can you people go out? Can you guys go outside so we can finish? >> Thank you. Sorry. No, >> almost. It's not that easy. and more.
>> Thank you. >> Okay. Did you guys all get a chance to read October 9th? >> I did. >> I did. >> These people get out of here. >> Everybody's all set. I'll make a motion to accept October 9th, 2025. >> I'll need a second. >> Second. >> Motion in a second.
>> All those in favor? Hi. >> Hi. >> Hi. >> There I mark >> and we'll table the other ones. >> Yours is absolutely. >> We'll give it one second. >> Oh, Jesus. I can't hear a thing. I mean, I'm sorry. I'm deaf. >> You just approved the minutes for October. >> We got We got a job.
>> I voted for it. >> All right. Board discussion. Anybody have anything? >> No. >> Whoa. Board updates. We have our associate back. Yay.
>> Dad, >> Dad. >> Dad times three. >> Times three. >> Only three so far. >> No, I don't even say it right. All right, Norine, do you have a uh update?
>> Uh, I don't have anything else to share. >> Any future agenda items? Anybody? All right. Well, >> our next meeting is on December 11th, 2025. >> And now we just need Mark.
>> Motion to adjurnn. >> There it is. >> Second to adjourn and a second. All those in favor? Hey,