5. >> Um, good evening everybody. It's 7:05, so we're going to begin. Um, we're going to start with the second item on the agenda, which is 19 Rocky Nook. Um, A. Can someone read that and open the
um, hearing? Sure. >> You have to open the meeting first. >> Oh, I'm sorry. Um, I'm going to make a motion to open the meeting. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I. >> Thank you. Thanks, Paul. And Paul is on
the phone. >> Um, all right. Can someone read >> number two? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Public hearing will be held at town hall 26 evergreen street room 200 on Wednesday March 4th but actually uh
16th at 2026 at 7:05 applicant Charles Bellinger 19 Rocky York a map 41 lot 108 seeks a special permit to raise and rebuild a single family pre-existing nonconforming
dwelling proposed plan does not meet 4.2A.4A and 10.7 compliance by Kingston bylaws. >> Just need a motion to open the hearing. >> I'd like to make a motion to open the
hearing on that. >> Get a second. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I. >> All right. Thank you. >> Just to correct that the applicant's actually Ed Tumulion. It's not I think you had the incorrect applicant on the or owner on that. >> Okay. notice. I'm Paul Seabberg from
Grady Consulting. Um we are here for the special permit request for 19 Rocky Nook Avenue. Um this site is located in the R20 zoning district assesses parcel 49-108. Um and consists of 5,000 square ft.
Um the site currently contains an existing single family dwelling with a detached garage and paved driveway. Um Kingston Bay is located opposite of Rocky Nook Avenue. Uh the lot is non-conforming with respect to lot area 5,000 square feet
existing 20,000 square feet required. Um the existing construction is non-conforming with respect to front side front and side setbacks and building coverage. Um the applicant seeking a special permit to raise the existing dwelling and construct the new single family
dwelling. Proposed home will improve the non-conforming front setback. um balance the non-conforming side setbacks by centering the house and the lot um and bringing the building coverage into compliance with the bylaw. Um the project has been approved by the
conservation commission already. I'm happy to answer any questions the board may have. >> Um I'm going to start with you Doug. >> Um I'll start with you have sewer for the bathroom
proposal. What's that? >> Do you have sewer? >> Yes, we have sewer. There's there's three bedrooms existing, three bedrooms proposed. So, no change. >> And parking. >> Parking. We have uh three parking spaces on the left side and two on the right side. So, there's plenty of parking in accordance with the bylaw.
>> That's all I have right now. >> Uh Kevin, >> is uh this the exact same footprint that was there before? >> Very close. almost um it's a little slightly different. You can see the existing footprints on the left side and the boss is on the right. So more
rectangular shape but same width and a little bit further back you said on the right side >> is the yellow the yellow is the the existing >> this is existing >> I'm sorry on the uh the left side is existing the right side
114 114 more than >> Yeah. And it's three bedrooms, correct? >> Correct. >> So, you have three pocket spaces. >> Yep. >> Well, there's three I see three cars on
the plant, >> right? There's uh required spaces. I believe there's two spaces, but we have three spaces on the right side. Then we have another parking spots on the left hand side. So be two more on the left hand side. So there's five total.
>> Okay, that's all I have. >> Uh Bob, >> uh questions. Marsha, >> I don't have any questions. >> David, >> I don't have any questions. >> Um, I don't have any questions either.
Is there um anybody from the public that has any comments? Anybody online? Oh, I'm sorry, Paul, you're on there. Paul, do you have any questions? >> I have no questions. >> Okay. Sorry about that.
Anybody from Zoom? >> You have a hand up. you did. >> Uh, no questions. So, I'm going to see if someone can make a motion to close the hearing. >> Make a motion to close
Rocky Nook. Uh, hearing uh 19 Rocky Nook. I make a motion to close it. >> Anybody second? >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I I >> I also make all
I also make a motion to accept the uh applicant for 19 rock. >> And do we have a second? >> Second. >> Um and there's I'm sorry. So So Paul, you're voting, right?
>> I don't need to I don't need to vote. Okay. You guys want to bring me in the fifth person? one of you. >> I was not planning on voting because Paul is present. >> Okay, David, >> I got >> Okay. Um, where were we? I'm sorry. So,
we have a motion to >> approve >> approve the petition for uh Did someone second that? >> Yes. >> All right. All in favor? I I >> All right. >> Thank you. Have a good night. >> Thank you. All right. The next item on our agenda
that we're going to go to is the uh for Drew A application. Someone read that. A public hearing will be held at the town hall, 26 Evergreen Street, room 200 on Wednesday, March
18th, 2026 at 710 p.m. Applicant Thomas Foley for due map 38 lot 129 seeks a special permit to extend or legally alter a pre-existing nonconforming
structure and add an addition a deck entry porch and alter the second story proposed plan does not meet 4.2A 2A 4A and 10.7
compliance with the Kingston bylaws. >> Make a motion. >> I make a motion to open the hearing >> with a second. >> Order. >> Sorry. >> Second. >> All right. All in favor? >> I. And who's voting on this one? >> Paul, are you going to be voting on
this? >> No, I don't. No, I don't need to. You guys can do it. Okay. Do you want to vote? Okay. Um, did we vote on that? I'm sorry. >> All in favor? >> I >> I >> I. >> And I'm not planning on voting.
>> All right. Thank you. All right. >> Uh, good evening. Uh, my name is Gavin Driscoll, Lighthouse Architecture and Design. Um, this is a a renovation of an existing single family home. Um, it's on Drew A. Um, the existing footprint of the building is not changing. Um we are
looking to uh get a variance for two violations for the rear and the right uh the rear and the right side. Um the uh both violations are about 2 foot short on the right side, the back right and the uh the rear. Um we are like I said
not larging the footprint. Uh it's about 111 square ft we are larging uh the building by. Um and really all we're looking to do is just square off the the rear of the property. Um, and if there's any questions, I can take them. >> You're You just said you're looking for a variance, but a special per
>> special permanent. Sorry. >> Um, and it's going from two-bedroom to three, >> correct? Yes. >> And two bath. You're you're doing a two bath, >> correct? Yes. >> So, you're adding a bedroom and a bath, >> correct?
>> And do you have sewer for that? >> Uh, we do. Yes. >> Okay. Um, I'm going to go reverse now. David, do you have any questions? >> Marsha, >> are you seeking a variance or a special >> special? That was my my mistake. Special
apartment. >> Yeah. >> Uh, Bob. >> Yeah. I just confirm we have a parking three. >> Uh, yes. There's a existing two on the left side and then one on the right. Yes. >> So what as far as parking I see an
existing onec car >> driveway. There's a driveway on the right of the building. There's a one spot and then there's uh two spots on the left side. >> The two car. Okay. >> Close to the corner. Correct. >> Um Kevin.
>> So is this a total renovation? >> Uh yes. >> Not a tear down. >> Not a tear down. Okay. Um, no, you have enough parking spaces and you're on town surv. Um, I like to just
hear from the public if if anybody got any comments on it. >> Um, Doug, do you have anything? >> Um, I do not. >> And Paul, do you have any questions? >> I have no comments. There's nothing to me.
>> Okay. Uh anybody from the public here to speak on this? >> Uh the the uh owner did get a list of um support letters from most of the neighbors are on the >> Okay. This is a part of the filing, right? >> Yes. >> Okay. Um
Oh, they Okay. And approve the plans presented. Uh so there's a list of these are butters. Yeah. a lot. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Okay. Um,
nobody from the public online. >> All right. Uh, can I get a motion to close the hearing? >> Second. >> Someone has to make it. >> Oh, I propose it. I propose a to close the uh hearing at for Drewv. >> You're making a motion to close the
>> to close the hearing for due. >> Thank you. Any second? >> Second. >> All in favor? I >> I >> I also uh propose to accept the proposal for four drew a uh in Kingston. >> So you're making a motion to um
>> accept it. >> Okay. Any second? >> All in favor? >> All right. >> Thank you so much. >> You're all set. >> All right. Right. So, we're going to circle back to the first item on the
agenda, which is Kushman Farms. Can someone read that? We don't need a motion to open the hearing because it's already been open. Public hearing will be held at town hall 27 Green Street, room 200 and Zoom on Wednesday, November 1st,
2023 at 7:05 to hear the petition from Kushman Farms LLC, 33 Kushman Drive, Kingston, Mass, to request a comprehensive permit under Massachusetts General Law, Chapter 408
to allow construction of three apartment buildings proposed to build 162 unit rental 162 units of rental housing. the project on approximately 11 acres of land located off of Marian
Drive and Kushman Drive, also known as the site in Kingston with an associated community building, access road parking, stream crossing, utilities, storm water features on assorted parcels along
Thomas Street, including off Pleasant Street and Pleasant Street map 66, lot 29, 9 32 33 34 I mean excuse me 35 37
38 40 41 42 and 47 and map 75 lots 5 and 7. Mass housing ID number 1159. Plot plan by Conco Engineers and
Scientists. Bridgewater, Mass. drawn by surveyor Thomas S. Boda. Excuse me if I pronounced that wrong. PLS dated September 28th, 2023. Conse comprehensive permit plans by KICO
Engineering and Scientists. Plans drawn by engineer Damian J. Dmitri. PE dated October 2nd, 2023. >> All right. Thank you. Um, so just to be clear, we have in front of us
a comprehensive permit plan dated, it's revised February 25th, 2026. >> Correct. >> We have a list of uh requested waiverss that's dated February 26th.
>> Correct. And then another um I I guess this is the landscaping plan. >> Two sheet landscaping plan. >> Okay. And that's dated February 23rd the revised. >> Correct.
>> Okay. Was there anything else that you guys provided? >> Um at this time I believe that was all we provided. Okay. >> Um there was in the previous submission a phototric plan that you had asked for. >> Yes. Okay. But that has not been revised. >> That has not been revised.
>> So these two plans have been revised since you came before us. >> Correct. >> Okay. >> All right. Go ahead. >> Hi, I'm Megan Der from Kico. Um plans Um so I'll just go over some of the
changes we've made since we met last time. >> Um the first we had discussions about um open space in particular. Um there was concern about a place for children to play and spend time outdoors. Um, with
that we added in a um, play park right near the amenity building. >> Can you just tell us what you're on? Page 10. >> Sorry. This is Yep. page 10 of the site plans. >> Okay. And this is Does this replace the the
dog park that you were planning? >> Nope. We still have the dog park on the far end here. >> I'm sorry, I can't hear you. >> Sorry. Uh, we still have the dog park at the end of the development as well. >> Okay.
Where is that? >> Um, let me just grab my laser pointer and I can point it out for you. >> Can you guys hear her in the back? >> No. Could you speak to the microphone, please? >> I don't know if the microphone isn't >> The microphone only goes to zero.
>> Oh, okay. >> All right. >> Oh, maybe just raise your voice. Thank you. >> Can you blow Is is there any way you can make that large that that bigger? I'm I'm struggling.
>> Is it page 10? >> The new plan. >> Now she's on 11. It's on. >> Sadly, there is no way to raise her volume. >> I'll just speak loud. Sure. >> Thank you very much. >> Um I believe what's being broadcasted
here is from your computer here. So I can't actually make it larger. It has to be made larger through this. Like I have a full screen on mine but it's not. I believe. >> Thank you. And and it is page 11 of your new plans. >> Correct. That's page 11. >> Thank you.
>> Right there. Play. >> Yes. >> Okay. Go ahead. >> Um so I'm pointing out here we have the play part. Again, miss, we can't hear you. You have to speak up, please. It's a big room. I know there's a lot of echo, but you think you have to speak up, >> right? >> No one can hear you.
>> So, like, use your voice. It's okay. >> Uh, so here we have the play park right in this area here. And the dog park is in this area here. >> I don't So, on page 10, >> correct? Can you show us where the dog park is on
page 10? >> The dog park isn't on page 10. It was always on page 11 and it's still there on page 11, >> but it's the same footprint. So where >> It's right there. That's the patio. >> I I don't know where the disconnect is.
Can Can you show us like on page 10 where that dog park would be? >> You can't see the dog park on page 10. They're connected right next to each other. >> It has to exist on page 10 somewhere. Because it's Isn't it the same?
>> Oh, so page 10, it doesn't extend out all the way. >> Correct. >> Okay. All right. Never mind. Thank you. >> Uh, in addition to those, we also increase the patio and garden area to the south of the first building.
>> And that's depicted on page 10. Correct. Page 10. >> Do you have a plan that shows all of this on one page? >> Um, not in this plan set. No. >> Do you have it in another plan set? I mean, I'm >> We've previously submitted materials
that show these things, >> but you've changed these. >> That's correct. It's not shown on one plan because if it was shown on one plan, you can't see any of the detail on that. All showed on one plan. Your previous plans are not what we're going to be approving. Am I correct in
stating that? >> That's correct. And these plans have all of the information correctly shown. >> Okay. It's a little hard to follow when you have bits and pieces on different pages. That's my point. Are am I wrong in >> I think Lane um as David pointed out you
have to like fold the page over to match it up because >> it's too the everything is too long to be depicted >> on one. >> Okay. So you've had to fold it. >> So right so if you had page 10 and page
11 you can't copy that. >> So now you have two different >> All right. Let me >> So we will hear from the public in a moment. I apologize. >> No, that's fine. I just I have to keep it to us first and then I'll open I'll definitely be opening up. Yeah.
>> Um >> Okay. Go ahead. >> Such a big project. >> Um another change we made was on this access road here. We straightened out the road slightly. There was previously a slight bump in it and we just straightened it out so it's easier for
fire access. the fire truck could get through before, but this was just to uh simplify it. Um, in addition to that, we eliminated in that same area a retaining wall um and just uh adjusted the gradin for that removed retaining wall.
>> Could you tell us what page you're on? >> This is still on page 10. >> Page 10. Thank you. uh to accommodate the new changes um we adjusted the shape of the amenity building. It will still um incorporate
the same uh same uh components inside it um such as the fitness area, the leasing office, the mail room uh and work rooms for remote work. May I ask
>> if you are going to put together a written summary of the changes that you're making to to facilitate our review and deliberations. Is that possible?
>> Uh I could do that. Um the peer reviewer actually did have a list of it as well. Um, but I could also provide you with a list. >> I mean, just to facil it would just there's so there it's a big project and there's so many piles of paper just to facilitate
our review, deliberations, and ultimate determination if you could. I I don't know if that's possible because tonight might be your last hearing. We can always review the record, I suppose, but that would be great if it's legally
possible. Yep, I will do that if it's possible. >> The last change we made was a change to the uh snow storage areas. Um we had a comment that the uh we didn't want
overlap in the snow storage and landscaping within the 5% that the planning board uh requests for um snow storage area. Um, with that in mind, we took out all the landscaping within 5% of the snow storage area. The landscaping area will likely still be
used for snow storage, but it has that minimum 5% without any of that area. Uh, those are all shown on the plan as the um dotted hatches such as the hatch in this area. >> That is on page 10.
>> Correct. >> What is the LS in the middle? LS stands for uh landscaping >> and the 5% requirement was >> correct. It's in the plan of a board regulations. >> Just for the people online, we're not
seeing this. We're just seeing a straight plan and nothing else. >> You're seeing what? >> Just the plan. Like I have no idea. I'm I'm just seeing one single plan and I I'm only I have to listen to it to try
to figure out some people that are online. >> Yeah, I mean the the only thing that's up is the plan. She's um the presenter is just using a um a pointer to just point out some things but that that's on
our screen. >> If it's helpful, I can also move the mouse to the areas if you can see that on the Zoom. >> Yeah. I mean one one of the problems I see in this set of drawings though is you do have on the right hand side there
is a revisions on revisions one through whatever you have the number six but you usually they have a little triangle where the revision is on the drawing one two three so you know where revision one is and what it is I don't see any
revision notifications on on the drawing ing itself. I see a little profile on the right hand side, but I don't see the actual revisions, which to me is the designer should should know better.
It's pretty >> uh if we showed all of the revision um markings for every single vision, you wouldn't be able to see anything on these plans, unfortunately. >> Well, then >> that's why we need >> that's why we need them. And we couldn't then how how are we supposed to understand them if you can't show them?
because I'm speaking to you and I'm illustrating what's been changed. I'm here to answer any questions you might have on what's changed. >> I get it. But once once this is filed, there's not going to be a person narrating what we're looking at in the drawing. You can see every revision and change at the very end. Whatever gets
approved should be the final drawing. >> That's correct. And it will have all the information. >> Well, I don't think it's there yet. Um I can >> just clarify I'm sorry. >> No, go ahead, Marcia. >> The your concluding comment uh in the
end at the end of it I guess that is that that would assume a final >> submission. >> No, this is their submission and you're here to explain. Can I
as I understand it this is your submission to this the board and as revised. Is that correct? >> Correct. >> And you are here to explain your revisions to us.
>> Correct. >> Okay. And should this board approve this project with conditions, you know, am I to un just so I understand and everybody here
understands that the final project with all the conditions attached to it will be depicted on a final set of plans that be you will be bound by
>> our town council is here and he can answer that. >> I'm asking them first and I just want to know what their understanding is going forward. >> Correct. Typically, we'll submit a final plan set. Um, conditions will be issued and then all of those conditions will go
into the plan set that turns into basically a construction document where we continually update it with the um any construction um modifications and need to be made and need to come back to the town. >> Okay. Thank you.
>> Did you have something to add to that? Yeah, I think for the board's benefit, typically what we do in our approvals, if if there's going to be an approval, is to have a requirement that at a certain point uh a period like 60
or 45 days prior to submission of building permit applications, they have to give a final plan set that reflects all of the conditions >> in it. And that's been our standard for a long time with this board and and with other boards. So they should be picking
up everything that would be in the condition. So this is this plan if this is the final plan that they're submitting to you would be identified. But the plan of record ultimately that the building uh commissioner as well as
the board's inspectional engineers will be that more advanced plan set that would be cons 100% level construction drawings that will incorporate all the conditions and that's pretty standard fair in our in our conditions that we've
been working on with you for a number of years. >> Thank you. All right. So was that all the revisions? >> Uh correct. That's all the revisions. >> Um, last time that we were here, we had discussed kind of at length. I mean, you see a lot of people here. Did you guys reach out
to the Butters at all to try and schedule a meeting like we had suggested? Did you meet with them? >> No. >> No. >> Okay. I mean, that's really bad faith on your part that you couldn't meet with them. At least hear them out. They're all here tonight
wondering what's going on. I we suggested it. It's been over a month that we were here and you couldn't even reach out to them. I I I I think that I don't know that speaks volumes. Um any other comments from the board
right now? >> I ju I just think that the the plans are so tiny and small that we need a magnifying glass to look at this massive project that's going on. And they're not even full sets. even though I know that they've had some but have they have been
changed back and forth. So with this here it's like dots on the paper. >> We provided the town with all the plans they asked for the fulls size ones and the smallsiz ones. Um if you needed more full size we definitely could have provided that.
>> Well it's a little late >> this full size. >> That's the full size. >> Yes. Okay. Um, any other Paul, did you have anything? >> Apparently, I don't apparently I don't have a comment. I'm just listening.
>> Okay. Marcia, did you have something? >> I just want to make sure I understand. This is the final hearing. So >> is that correct? >> Yes, they are. You are not asking for a waiver, >> an additional waiver.
>> We are asking for the same waiver as we were previously asking for. >> So today is the deadline >> to do another extension. >> If I may, um this is Tanya Trevson. I um with Marion Shaughnessy and Yudi um here with the the engineer. Um yes. So, we
had uh been asked if we would be willing to extend the the hearing um deadline again and because we've been uh before you for so many times and uh have provided many revisions um we are
declining to request an additional extension. Um we believe that this project um as proposed is um well within uh the developers u best rights and uh we would request that the uh the board
close the public hearing this evening. >> Okay. >> Thank you very much. And you don't want to submit as I understand the you're the engineer for the developer. You have nothing more to submit to us tonight. Okay. Thank you.
Anything else from the board before I open it up to the public? Uh, I'm going to open it up to the public. Anybody care to speak? I think we're going to try and limit it to new things and any issues with the new plans
if possible. Doug. >> Hey, uh, Doug Dondo, 14 Copper Beach Drive. just for everyone's uh attention. Uh if it gets closed this evening, what happens? >> So if it gets closed, my understanding
is that we have 40 days to then >> So you'd have 40 days to deliberate. That would usually be one or two sessions. >> Sorry, that 40 days to deliberate. That would usually be one or two sessions of deliberation. Um and then uh you know
get a a draft decision done. So that that's what would happen and we don't we could but we don't have to deliberate tonight. We could return outside of the public hearing format but in a public meeting and deliberate later. >> Um
public involved or is that strictly the zoning board of appeals? >> That's that's up to the board but normally it's strictly the zoning board of appeals at that point. Hi, Britt Opachinsky. Uh 15 Copper Beach
Drive. Um I've been up to the pod podium many times now and I I feel like there's still major aspects of the development that are not addressed and that we've been asking KCO repeatedly to address and they're not and now it sounds like this is the final meeting. Kushman
Drive, what is the plan for Kushman Drive? Because Kushman RI drive is a narrow I call it a cart road. It's not a it's not up to grade. And right now if you were to drive down Kushman Road, there's two
running streams that come down because there's water. It's the wet season. So what type of environmental studies have been done for that? And if you think that you're going to put sidewalks on Copper Beach and just stop them there, why would you stop them there? Because you just think that every person's just
going to the school. So you're going to put hundreds of people in apartments that then might actually want to go to 3A. So to me, if you you have to put sidewalks in, you have to put sidewalks in all the way up to 3A, which means
then you have to widen Kushman to make sidewalks. And I don't think that has been addressed at all. So is there a plan for that? Do you want me to stop and have them address it? Because I have a couple. Yeah, I would like them to as we get questions if if you guys can address it,
please. >> Yes. So, specifically on Kushman Drive, um what what is your plan, if anything? >> Um forward back. I actually uh missed it in my notes. We actually did get rid of the sidewalk there. So, the sidewalk ends right at the end of the street now.
Um it is shown on your plans. >> What page? >> Uh page 10. And you can see on page 11 as well that there is no sidewalk along the top. >> Um, does everybody see that sidewalk >> there? It's not on Copper Beach. It's just coming out.
>> It stops. Yeah, there's no sidewalk on Copper Beach. So, >> where would they where would they walk to? So, you're putting, can you repeat that? You're putting a sidewalk on, you're not putting a sidewalk on anything.
>> So, we are no longer doing a sidewalk along Carp Beach Drive. It ends at the end of the access drive. Uh, just as basically if >> Wait, what ends? You're saying it? What ends? The proposed sidewalk ends on the access drive. Uh it does not go onto Copper Beach Drive.
>> Is that because the residents to elected not? I thought I heard. >> So the residents have been saying at the meetings that they don't want a sidewalk along Copper Beach Drive. We left the sidewalk just go and stop it at Copper Beach Drive as just emergency access in
case the residents of the development ever need to >> emergency access if a fire or something. and and Kushman the the the um the uh concerns about Kushman Drive sidewalks
were they ever part of the project? >> Uh I think in the first re not the first set of plans uh so before any revisions we had a sidewalk on Kushman Drive on a portion of it. Um and then uh when we
changed the access that went away and we had a proposed sidewalk along Copper Beach Drive and now that sidewalk is no longer proposed. >> Thank you very much. >> So the so Kushman Drive is is much narrower than Copper Beach. Are you is
there a way to expand that? Is that is that your question that you're asking or >> you you could never safely put 200 cars or however many you think it's going to be against that on that road. It you can't even take a corner when another person's coming this way. >> Yeah.
>> It is very tight. >> So is >> so it's not I don't know your standards for a road, but you should measure it. And this there's no curve. It's just kind of rolls off. It's
>> is there any plan from the developer to do anything with Kushman Drive? >> So, currently uh Kushman Drive and Copper Beach are 18 ft wide based on what the traffic engineer um has stated, which is wide enough for a small local
road. Um there's no plans right now to increase the size of that road. Um as I understand, there's wetlands on both sides. Um uh based on what the uh traffic engineer as well as the town's traffic peer
review uh engineer said, they don't seem to find a problem with it. >> That reminds me, the traffic study that you guys did, you're not doing another one. >> Correct. >> Just had to ask again. >> Okay. So, the summer, the one in the summer where no one was driving, that was sufficient for you guys. We had that
one as well as the one that we submitted to uh Mass Housing which was done in the middle of April. >> Okay. >> Do we have a copy of the one you submitted to Mass Housing? >> Yes. >> Because I only have the
>> Yeah, I only have >> November 4, 2025 um and the November 14, 2025 studies. So, is there is there a third one? >> There was two. There was one in 2022 and
then one in 2025. >> Okay. Oh, so you're talking about with your application the back in when you first started this project? >> Uh, we submitted it first to the town when we did the mass housing application as we're required to and then when we submitted the project to the ZBA, we uh
submitted it again as just part of the application. You know, if you say you submitted it as part of the original 2023 application, is that what you're saying? That original study, cuz we've never seen a
third study. >> I've only seen one and it was done, I think, in August of last year. >> That one was the second one. >> Okay. What day was the April one done on? >> April 17th. >> Isn't that like Patriots Day? I mean,
>> no, it's a Thursday. >> Okay. >> Was it once? >> Uh, it was along >> uh Copper Beast Drive, Marian Drive, and then at the large intersection um where the highway is.
>> Okay. It was a Thursday >> of what year? >> Of 2022. >> Okay. >> School buses is still Any other questions? I'm gonna have her step up.
>> Okay. So, are we just taking their word for it that Kushman Drive is wide enough? Cuz I drive it every day. >> Their their plan is not to do anything with Kushman Drive. >> Okay. >> Okay. Last meeting, I felt like there
was a lot of momentum and a lot of talk about how unnecessary the road onto a Copper Beach was to start with. I felt like we've established that most major developments have one road in and one one in one out. And Mr. Lincoln said he
just wants it. Okay. I would like a key card to go to the mall or to go to the dump and make it a lot easier for me as well at the end of my street that's blocked off, but I don't. We all get on the highway and we go five minutes around. I just don't
understand when you are talking about putting all these cars onto the school roads how you cannot how you can think that is not a safety concern. We live on the street. We see how many kids come running riding their bikes from Indian Pond from our street. They come from Riverview
that traffic the buses go all the way the whole length of the street. I I just don't understand this exit and why the push for this because it is creating a million problems and I I I just don't understand why we're still entertaining
it. Can we just take that off the table? I mean, you're still going to have all your apartment buildings. You're going to have your I don't know. I just to me it just makes no sense. And then I never really saw um the light pollution study. We have no street lights.
Are we going to be living in a parking lot? >> Uh, I think that they submitted the photometric. >> Is it like this traffic study? >> The gate I I believe that was addressed and they are not willing to not allow that. That was something that
>> can the board can the zoning board not allow that? >> Uh, can you I mean we can condition it on whatever we want. We can not allow the whole thing. >> Okay. I would formally request that we can remove that road. Um don't understand why that is so necessary.
>> Let me just get clarification. You are not willing to get rid of that egret or that road. Correct. >> Okay. So they're not willing to get rid of that. >> Why? >> Cuz >> I just don't understand. >> Massive retaining walls for no reason.
>> Can you give a reason why it's please? And then also while you're up there, can you clarify the date of the of the April >> Can you see that 22nd school vacation. >> That's what I just looked up. So, >> with no school buses, no school
down the road, you don't know what it's like to get out during school hours. You have 300 cars to it. >> All right. We can't we have to keep it to people at the mic, >> but you can get in line and speak. >> So, was there anything else that you had?
>> Um, okay. So the light pollution were just it was done and it's okay. That's what we're saying. I don't how do we see >> our engineer reviewed there? >> Excuse me. >> No offense. I don't trust it.
>> The town engineer reviewed their study and concluded >> in his professional opinion that based upon their study that your neighborhood would not be bothered by light pollution. >> I I'm just repeating.
>> Yeah, I we will add it to the list. the information that our engineer provided to us he reviewed on our behalf >> and your behalf >> you know you're doing >> okay study >> thank you um and then the only other
thing is I think briefly we touched upon the fact that now it's a four-story two four-story complexes um are we worried about the fire engines not being able to get their ladders to the top that was discussed because it's a narrow um parking parking lot.
>> That's a good question. Do we have any information? >> Never went back to the fact that the people on the top floor maybe couldn't get out on a fire. Are we worried about that? >> I would be >> I the fire department has
>> Yeah, they've changes. Is that correct? They're circulating. >> Is that still the case? Can I ask can I are we still dealing with that problem? >> Can you just address the three I think questions? Thank you.
>> First traffic study was uh April Thursday uh 14th. Um >> okay, >> it seems typically based on what I looked at the April vacation is typically the first or second week of April. So it shouldn't have interfered. Based on what I looked at on the traffic study as well, I could see that there
was a surplus of cars going into the school likely from the teachers and school workers. uh which makes sense versus the one we did in August for the morning. Um for the height of the building um uh I believe we looked at
their the uh development at the mall is also a four-story building. Um it's if the fire trucks can reach that they should be able to reach us as well. We did the fire truck uh the fire department in um addition to getting it from the town, we also brought plans
directly to them with this submission so that they can see it. They haven't indicated that they have any issue with the turn analyses that we provided showing that they can reach all the sides of the building. >> Uh and then uh the public wanted to know
why you will not get rid of that. Um, >> one is based on um, ideally when we're developing um, any development, especially with a development that is meant to have a quite a bit of people on it, we it's better to have two access points to act as an emergency access for
people to leave the area. Um, in addition to that, having the second access point into Kingston, um, allows residents to be able to actually get to all the different amenities and businesses in Kingston that they will be able to benefit versus going the other
way and just hopping on the highway and going elsewhere. >> Will this make it more um, Never mind. I'm not even going to ask. >> Anything else? Okay.
Uh, I'm going to skip to Lauren Wall on on uh Zoom. >> Lauren, if you could unmute unmute. Lauren, are you there? >> I am here.
>> Did you have a question? Your hand was up. >> Yes, I have a number of questions. I feel like the elephant in the room currently is um the size of this development number of people or I've heard two comments saying it's a very
large size worried about I'm currently worried about education the schools the classrooms already full tax dollars to pay for additional fire trucks police different resources our roads Can
you clarify what year you said that you did the traffic report? I don't know if you go even drive down the street. I drive down these streets every day to get to work and they're already cracked. They're already packed. Summertime is doubled.
I I'm I just don't see a need for this. The only people that probably see a need for this building are the people making money off of this. So, I mean, there's so many different so many different questions. I can go on and on. I just don't find a need for a
size apartment in everyone's backyard, post schools, the roads are packed, the roads are already shitty, and I just don't I I disagree with this whole project. >> Okay. So I I think um we've talked about density a lot and the developer is not
willing to uh reduce the size of this project and that's their final answer. Uh yes please. >> Uh Nicholas Citzki to Pine Julian. Um first off I'd just like to state that I think whatever you guys are doing has
not been done in good faith. Um truthfully it's not. um if you had even decent records, we could keep um page 10, page 11, we have to merge them together. We have to mesh stuff. I mean, this that is ridiculous. Um with that
being said, we got to look at the fact that you can't get down Route 3A without traffic. The traffic is overpop populated to begin with in this town. I was here in 78. I'm here right now in 2026.
You cannot get down 3A. To put that in would be an injustice to the people in this town 100%. It would be a corporate greed push. And I will tell you, I've never been so disgusted with this town to even think that we're even talking about it and even think that we even
allow it. Okay, money is money. But this is ridiculous. We pay enough taxes in this town. We have a beautiful town. And I will tell you, the police department is the size of a postage stamp. We're going to put another how many thousand people in here and expect them to go up
and down Copper Beach and take a right on Route 3A and expect that to work. You can have accident after accident after accident. And on top of that, you're going to have god knows how what people are living in there with kids running around that elementary school. I I I
really am embarrassed to even have to come here tonight that this is even an issue. Completely honest with the board. Very upset. Very upset. I'm a voter and I'm friends with a lot of people in this town and we all vote and we're going to sit there and we're going to really think about what happens here tonight
and what you guys do and how we're going to handle this. Okay, so that that's really all I have to say. Just I just want to agree with you, let you know I'm not ups I'm upset about it and and I think it's a joke and I really think this is all done with absolutely no thought at all about the town. This
company, whoever they are, could care two craps about who lives in this town. All they care about and this gentleman here with his beautiful shirt just really wants to load his pockets with money and that's all they want to do. >> Let's keep it. >> They don't Well, it's the truth. It's the truth and we have to speak the
truth. You know, this is a beautiful town. 1976 I moved in here with my family. 1976, I've never been so upset in my life to see what's going on. You can't even drive down the street. It's an absolute disaster. So, they keep on
putting more and more and more and flooded with tax, you know. Oh, you know, whatever you want to do, what do you think you're going to get from it, you're not going to get, you're going to get people leaving by droves. Absolute droves. I have some very good friends that live down there in Copper Beach and know for a fact they're going to they're
going to have to sell and get out of there as quick as they can because who would want to live in that neighborhood now? It was a beautiful neighborhood that they're going to absolutely destroy. They're going to destroy it. And all I can say is thank God that my kids are getting older now and I can and I can I'm going to retire and get the hell out of here because this is this is
one of the worst things I've seen you guys do. So that's all I have to say. >> Speak my word, but you guys you got to think of what you're doing. >> Okay. I just to be clear, we're not presenting this. We're the >> I know, but you have to vote it on. You have you have to step up and do the
right thing is what you have to do. I I understand that. >> Yeah, we're we're a board >> these two people here. >> We're also not elected. >> We're a volunteer board. So, >> you're a voted in, but >> No, we're not. We're not voted in. No,
>> if you want to join the board, feel free. >> No, listen. I'm not putting you guys down. I appreciate what you guys do. We all I really appreciate you guys. He has to consider everything and do this. >> All right. I'm going to have to I'm going to have to move this along because we are volunteer and we all want to go home. they could care less about this
town. If you guys care about the town, then >> I'm going to ask Pine. >> Pine is the next person to speak. >> Hi, thanks very much, Chair. Um, uh, I'd like to change the orientation of the comments a little bit. The question I
have has to do with um map five uh where um uh Kanico lays out a FEMA flood plane and and refers to a note and their note says that they will be requesting a
letter of map revision from FEMA which is a federal agency relative to the um FEMA flood zone that is marked out on all of the the U reference maps. So,
USGS, uh, FEMA, everybody has a flood plane there. And I did research this um early on in the in in this process. And I believe um if my memory serves me correct, that it that it referenced
Second Brook. and Second Brook um emerges on the on the um west side of the uh Kingston Elementary School. So my understanding of that is that in the
past before the highway even there was second brook there just like there was first brook that ran from um uh prospect street across and and emerges where it does now um on on Kushman Drive. So, the
state altered uh the landscape here. The town altered the landscape with the school. Um there there was a flood plane that is still on FEMA's maps. Um and and the the applicant wants to pro
uh still uh submit a letter of map revision to FEMA. So, I'm wondering how that would play into the board's decision if you're waiting on something that has not even yet been requested and
and what um what that might affect in the and because I can't really tell. So, um on map five, um it has the the the area outlined. On map 8, it has test
pits, but there was no test pit actually in the flood plane area. So, to me, that says, well, you didn't really look for the groundwater elevation because that's where the elevation is lowest on the plan. I think it I I believe it's um
elevation 70. I don't have it in front of me right at this moment. Um but but what is being proposed there? Uh since there are so many plans, I couldn't quite figure it out. Um, but if you could address that, uh, chair, um, or the the applicant could address when are
they proposing to write the letter? Can we at the Jones River Wershed Association get a copy of that letter when it's proposed and have a chance to review it? Because I don't really believe that um,
uh, things change the way they're proposing that it does. >> All right. Thank you. So, um I just to clarify on you were on page five. Is that the new plan that we're >> on map? Yes. On the new on the new map set plan map five outlines the FEMA
flood zone and says C note and the note below on map five says that they will be requesting a letter of map revision from FEMA. Um, and then I went to um, map 8 and I and I saw that they had done a lot
of test pits in the area, but not precisely in the the low area. Um, so I don't know what their test pits are are trying to tell them. >> So I see the C note, but where is the uh, where's the specific requ the Oh, a
request for a letter. Okay. Very bottom. >> Right. Right. All right. So that's a process we even had to go through when we when we uh took out the dams and stuff like that. That's it's a long it's a process through the federal government. >> Uh great question. So can you address that please?
>> Yep. Uh so the flood plane shown on there was recently added to the uh FEMA flood hazard maps in the last revision. Uh it didn't exist in their maps until a few years ago. Uh they say that there is a brook running through there. Second Brook actually starts west of the school
and then flows northward. Uh we were out there with CODCOM walking the area um to verify what we had from our survey um of which there is no stream running through that area. It would also be a stream would be hardressed to flow up and down
10 to 20 feet uh in that area um because streams you know don't flow uphill. Um we did review the FEMA's model in for it. Um and they also uh make notes in their own model in that the area does
not make sense for a stream to be there despite the fact that they show it there anyways. >> But you so you requested a letter. Did you get >> We haven't requested the the letter yet. We uh have to direct the letter. We have to submit it to the town. The FEMA flood
official is in your conservation commission. Um, so it has to go through him first. He has to sign off on it and then we submit it to FEMA. >> When did you identify this? >> When? Sorry, I didn't hear. >> Why haven't you requested the letter yet? >> Uh, we haven't requested the letter. We
were going through the submission yet. We haven't requested the letter based on that. >> Did you raise it with Matt Panella of the >> uh We've >> So, he's a Is he aware of this the issue that Pine just raised? We uh we did uh
walk the um site with the conservation commission including Matt. So yes. >> And what would did he did he weigh in on it uh like in writing? Did he submit it? >> He hasn't weighed on it in writing. No. >> No. Okay. But that's on that he is aware
of it. >> Correct. >> Okay. Thanks. >> I think answer Oh, I'm sorry. Go ahead. >> What's the consequence to the project if you don't get the map change? If we don't get the map change, we would have to work with FEMA otherwise to provide a compensation area basically or to revise
the area to not go within that area. >> Would impact your wetland permitting too, right? >> It would impact the wetland permanent within the town. The state does not have wetland permits for a 100red-year flood plane, but the town has um wetland restrictions on a 100red-year flood
plane. Can can I ask a question chair because I could not understand from all the maps because there's quite a few of them here. What was being proposed at that location? >> Uh yes, that's a good question. Uh, so
that location runs through the um it runs partially over the um building too um and part of the parking lot to the east of that parking lot in access road to the east of that.
>> So you want to put a a a uh building in a flood zone? >> No, because it's not a flood zone. It's just mapped as a flood zone. >> But you don't know that yet. based on what FEMA has for the model in there. We're quite sure that it is not
>> Can I wrap up, Mr. Chair? >> Yes. I just think I think that they should be required to do um some some test pits in that area in order to determine what the level of groundwater is. As I said, um, you know, historically there was no highway there
and there were streams running from from the east to to the west and and there it could be residual. We don't know what the highway did really. You know, it's it's been there since what the 50s. Um, not actually there. I I don't even think
that area was done was built until the the late 70sish. Um, so it hasn't been that long and I and I and it takes time for the earth to adapt. Um, just like it takes time for us to adapt. And I I just think that
they should be required to really investigate. I'm not confident that, you know, whatever um whatever uh uh personnel are at FEMA right now can can talk off the top of their head and say, "Oh, no, that was a mistake." Because it has been historically on the map. Thanks
very much. I appreciate your time. Uh, thank you. I I to answer your question, I don't think that we can make them do test pits. We can request it, but they're not uh probably going to because they want to close the hearing. They want us to close the hearing today. Uh, as far as voting on this, we can
condition it on >> I'm going to defer to town council. >> I think with our options, >> I mean, it's a pretty big issue. It's a go no-go issue, right? So, it would either be conditioned on them resolving this as not being able to do anything. I
mean, I think they know that they can't do anything until this is resolved, at least not in this current form. >> And then if they don't get it resolved and they seem confident that they can, fine. There the other option would be to deny it because currently they can't
build it the way they're showing it if that flood plane currently exists. And I think those are the kinds of things that we'll have to discuss. >> Yes. during uh deliberation. I haven't reviewed any engineering peer review that might discuss that. I haven't had a conversation with Matt Panella or Val
Massard about that yet either. So, I think I I would want to get a little smarter on it before >> advising you, but that's the kind of thing that we we can pick up um in uh in the deliberation for sure. It's a big issue. >> Yes. Thank you for pointing that out, Pine.
>> Can I just clarify something that town council just said? If we were to condition a permit as presented, their application is presented on doing additional test fits,
getting your approval from the EPA. Isn't that a risk that the applicant bears if they don't get it? >> Yeah, of course. >> Okay. I just want to be clear on that. >> Yeah. >> So that's their risk. >> We're not doing it. But
>> but so I don't understand why you would say that that's a reason to deny it if it's their >> clarify. That's for you all to to decide. >> I asked him what options and he's giving us all options. >> Thank you. Uh
next person up, >> uh Keith Anson, number one, Copper Beach Drive. I just want to bring up uh some issues that was presented by Mr. Lincoln at the last meeting which I think is a little disturbing. Uh he he claimed that his main reason for wanting that access
road going down to Copper Beach Drive was so that the residents of Kushman Farms could enjoy the many amenities of downtown Kingston. Well, for the life of me, I don't know what he's talking about because there are none. The only thing they got down there is a massage parlor.
If that's what he's referring to, I think it's kind of a weak argument on his part. Every single amenity that you could think of is located at Colony Place or at the Kingston Mall. Colony Place has three supermarkets, Aldi's Market, Basket, and Walmart, which also
has a pharmacy. You got Lowe's uh hardware store, which is a two-minute drive away. You got Portide Liquors. You got the Kingston Mall for Target, plus numerous uh restaurants and best of every fac every uh amenity you could
think of is a Colony Place. You can literally drive out Marian Drive, take a right on Gallon Boulevard and get down to William Gould Highway, which was built for the for the traffic. Uh they they widened that when the Colony Place
went in and when the train came in, it could absorb that type of traffic. That's where the traffic should be going. Not down Copper Beach Drive. There's absolutely no reason for him to put that road down there. It does not serve the town well. It does not serve anybody well. Uh he should take that
off. And the kids aren't going to be walking to school. They're going to be bus to school. That easement, which is next to my house, is is an emergency egress only. Okay? And uh there's just no reason to have that road coming down.
There's no amenities in downtown Kingston. I, you know, to me it's ridiculous. That was a ridiculous thing for him to say. He's not willing to work with us. He doesn't want to budge an inch for anything for our neighborhood. Okay. Also, I got the accident reports here for uh
from the Kingston Police Department. He says he did an he's some sort of a traffic study. He counted cars. He didn't do a traffic study. There's been numerous accidents at the out in front of Cancun restaurant. Okay, there's like
37 last year, 14 the year before and there's seven the year before that. It's increasingly gotten worse. And this isn't my talk for me. This is from the Kingston Police Department. That access road is just going to make traffic worse.
>> It's a safety issue. It's going to be addressed and there's no reason for that access road. He should take it off and he should be ashamed of himself. >> He should be. And I'm gonna leave it at that right now. >> Thank you very much. >> Jennifer Kushman. Um 273 Main Street. So
I'm not actually right there, but I can tell you there is a stream that goes underneath the road that goes down to the elementary school. It's been there since I was a kid. Um my concern, and I thought this I didn't even know this was still going on. I thought this was killed years ago because then we talked
about it at a meeting number of years ago and we figured out there's no way you can fit buses. The buses are just about wide enough to get up this hill. >> Well, they have to go down the middle. >> Yeah, I'm talking about the hill going
up to Cancun. >> Yeah, but in drive. >> They were saying that that was too small for even the car the buses and then put put kids walking and they do walk because I've seen them. I mean, it's it's crazy to even consider building anything near that school. And
then in 20 in 10 years, are we going to have to build new schools, too? >> That's getting ridiculous. As is, we're we're stretched is this year for the schools. >> I think the developer has addressed that question in a prior meeting in
saying that the kids won't be not many kids will be living in this is their answer. So, >> you can't guarantee that. >> I I'm just telling you what the developer has told us before. >> Tell you that, but you can't guarantee it. >> No.
>> Uh, I'm not saying it's not my words. It's >> No, I'm not saying you can't. >> So, >> yes. >> Kushman, 273 Main Street, Kingston, Mass. And my questions are, will this building be ADA accessible
with the with wheelchair and elevators access? >> Uh, yes, it it is. >> Okay. Also, the Kushman Drive, we have not I used to be on the bus that was
going down that street. So I know Kushman Drive is not big enough for buses to get down it. They have to drive down the middle
street to just get down there. Thank you. And please take this into consideration of public safety size increases in the next couple years. >> Thank you very much.
How we doing? My name is Derek Herby. I'm at 17 Copper Beach Drive. I've been there for 17 years. Oh, 17. 27 years. This was a little before my time, but I remember the gates at the end of Copper Beach Drive were closed because Copper
Beach Drive became a cutaway from the mall, from the train station to skirt out and get up to hill uh Kushman Drive and get to Cancun. So my question is after this winter
putting in that access road, building two massive retaining walls to get onto Copper Beach Drive. As many of my as many as my neighbors know, and this is no knock on the town of Kingston all winter long, it was one car wide. And
it's no knock to our highway department. We had a bad winter, but what what's what's the answer? I'm sure the development is going to be privately plowed, which is fine, but does that give a cutaway to anybody that wants to get through, just like the firegate at
the culde-sac? Am I allowed to go through there to shoot up to the mall? Who's to stop all the traffic? You may have done a traffic study on the amount of cars that could possibly be at this new development, but what stops it becoming a public
road? Kingston's not going to take care of it. So, who's not to use it as a cut through? So, then your traffic study goes right out the window. There's no stop lightss. It took me eight minutes to get from Kushman Drive
to the top of Hilltop A this morning during school hours. What's Copper Beach going to turn into? >> Um, I did review some paperwork about the gates at the end of Copper Beach
Drive to the MBTA station. Was that if someone can speak to that, was that an agreement with the MBTA? >> That I don't know. >> I believe it was. >> Okay. >> I believe quite sure I read something. >> I I believe I believe it was. >> So, the town didn't have anything to do
with that. I'm purely genuine. >> I don't have any information on that. That's why I'm asking if if it was just between the MBTA. >> You want me to answer? >> Yeah, absolutely. >> Tennis uh six copper beach drive. The agreement originally was to have
electronic gates at the end of the road there, but the fire department didn't feel comfortable with them. So, we ended up with lock gates. The agreement was between the town, Copper Beach, and the MBTA to put the gates there with an emergency access rather than just close
the road completely. But the issue was the T had stated incompatible land uses. We had uh tra they did a traffic study through Southshore Planning Council. There was over 1,300 cars a day going down to Copper Beach. So this is why they didn't
want Copper Beach being used as a main access to the train station. Obviously it would have been a disaster. So that's how the road ended up getting closed. >> Okay. Thank you. >> So now is it a possible cut through this new development?
>> No. I mean it's a cut through took off. >> Exactly. That's my point. So now you can come up Copper Beach, take a quick left, >> go up there. >> It's only out. >> So the the complex, my understanding is the complex has access just to go out
and not to come in. >> Okay, that's fair. So it's going to be a one lane road down one lane. >> I don't know. >> Emergency vehicles. >> It would be going up, right? >> So if it's out, it' be coming >> going out.
>> The grade of it would be coming down. I Copper Beach either. No, no, I get I get what you're saying. So, it's just a one lane >> going down Copper Beach. >> Yes. So, they would be turning right out of their complex to go down Copper Beach and then up >> um >> to 3A.
>> Yeah. >> Now, is the town prepared to take care of Copper Beach, snow removal, ice removal >> for another bad winter to fix one year? I think the last storm was what, 700K and it was one lane. And I'm not knocking the highway department. They've
done a great job, but so we're paying for it for another 400 cars. >> Uh, I don't have an answer to what the town's will. >> Not a problem. And I'm I'm not coming at the board. The highway department does an excellent job. I just figured I'd bring that point up. I appreciate your guys' time.
>> Yep. Thank you. >> Hi, Jennifer Ering, 51 Winthrop Street. I'm I'm disgusted as I stand up here listening to all this happening. I was part of the uh fight for us to save Winthrop Street about four or five years
ago and thankfully that went through at that town meeting. It was unanimous unanimous. Nobody wanted more building in Kingston. Last year, this time we had a town meeting over building or not building
another leeching field. It didn't pass because people did not want more building in this in this town. It came back as an environmental issue and for that reason only, people passed it so it would clean it the so the Jones
River would stay clean. The sewer committee at the time swore to us that it would not do any more building or allow access to that leeching field. Our town is at 98% for water already. We
are down to one principal for over,00 students for two schools. One vice principal, one principal. I don't know if anybody I mean you must all have young kids here. mine are almost out of the system here, but I
can't imagine one person running two huge schools. You you have no say in how many people are going to have kids in this slot. This turned out I mean this was before I it last year it was only a slot that was
like some apartment buildings. Now there's a dog park. Why do you need a dog park? There's a dog park right around the corner. And why bother all the people on Kushman it or on Copper Beach? It it is beyond ridiculous to me how many times this town has voted as a
whole to not have any more building and yet this keeps coming up again and again and again. When is it going to stop? I I for one am sick and tired of it and I'm sure all these folks are here sick and tired of it.
>> Um I don't know what else. That's all I have to say. Um, Sitzky again, TwoPane. Um, I just wanted to ask real quickly, um, when United Apostle Service came into Kingston and they went down to, uh, Independence Drive, I know for a fact they put
millions of dollars into a traffic study at that light. Um, and I know they gave the town a lot of money for that light as well, right? You guys can look back and you know your records. You know they gave you a lot of money. I don't think they've done anything in good faith at
all to even look at that intersection and what's going to happen and what what the the nightmare they're going to create. Um at least with United Postal Service, you knew well we have a big company. We know we can get a check out of them right and you guys got that.
Right now they're gone. Thank goodness. But now we still have their money and we still have those lights. They're actually working pretty well. nothing that these people are going to do unless they start pucking out some cash, which I know they won't, we're going to have major issues with that intersection. And
as we as this gentleman be said before, there was 37 incidents there last year. You're going to at least double that number, if not triple it, okay? And there's there's crosswalks there. I know there are people that work at that restaurant that walk up and they go across that crosswalk. You're going to
have people getting really hurt. Okay? So, I think we need to step back, take a good look at what we're doing, what we're thinking about before we start allowing all this to move into Wattown. >> Okay. So, I just wanted to reiterate with that and I I think that, you know, unless they want to start coughing him
up some money, >> which I highly, Sir, would you be willing to do that? >> You have to address the board. You have to address the board. >> Probably not. I I assure he wouldn't. Okay. >> I'm pretty sure he wouldn't be willing to do that. >> So, I don't think he cares about this town. Um, and I think that we should
really sit s step back and think what's going to happen when you start doing that. That's a lot of cars. It's a lot of traffic coming up there and it's already a nightmare. So, all right. Appreciate your time. Thank you. >> That's understood. But we're the zoning board. We're not the planning board. >> We don't by the time things come to us,
things have already been approved through the fire department, police department, planning board. We're >> I can't believe the police department if I get you have to bring that up to them. I do have a question for the board >> with the zoning board >> and and just so the >> well who makes the final decision if I may ask.
>> Could I just interrupt you for a just so everybody present understands that these kinds of developments this particular development um is we are susceptible to them in our
town. Why? >> Well, we've Sorry to interrupt you, but we've had that already at at the at the >> You've got to let her You've got to let her finish, please. >> Well, we got >> Again, I'm just trying to share with you. We are susceptible to developers
coming into Kingston, our town, >> right? and asking the zoning board of adjustment to give them waiverss that would not otherwise be granted to
any other developer. And the reason for that is because, and this has nothing to do with everybody who sits here and works hard in this town, it's because years ago the
state decided that Kingston did not have enough affordable housing units. And because of that, >> we don't we're not at our limit. We are we don't have a safe harbor from these
requirements that permit developers to come into our town, your beloved town that's my adopted town, and ask for these kinds of developments because they serve a specific purpose that is fund
that is authorized by state law. and our town has to hear them out. Okay, that's why they're here. Yes, ma'am. But we're not going to make you that quota. >> If you keep turning them down, >> you have to speak at the microphone if you're going to speak. We have to stay
in order. And ma'am, I appreciate what you said and I and I do appreciate that. But at what point in time do we say enough is enough? >> At what time at what point in time does the town start >> and who's okay >> approving some of these projects? All right. >> At some point, at some point, ma'am,
>> there's a certain percentage that the town needs to get to. So, I feel like we let me just ask, >> does anybody from the board remember we had peer review on the traffic study? >> At what point are we? >> But it was the traffic study from August of >> You can't do a traffic study in July.
>> Let me please let me talk. >> The two traffic studies. >> Did we have peer review on the 2022? >> Again, I never knew about a >> Paul, if you're on there, can can you speak to that? the state. >> That was the state. >> That was to the state. >> That was for their application.
>> Mr. I know Mr. Brennan only reviewed the newest one. I don't know if he was actually aware of the 2022. >> Okay. >> Study. >> Um >> that's why we were going to request to have another traffic study done
properly. Um even though I think Mr. Brendan at the time had said that it was between him and the other traffic study. They said it was adequate, but I think us in the board and the public felt that that was untrue. >> Okay. >> So, we were requesting a more robust uh
traffic study. >> All right. Thank you. >> I'd like to say Mr. Dan's probably correct in that that we need that done. I know the United Apostle Service did that and they actually stopped that influx because I don't know if you recall when they first went in there the traffic was backed up to that rotary in
Dubberry. You couldn't get down Winter Street. You couldn't even get anywhere near that intersection when they released those trucks. Now when you start pulling this going on down at Copper Beach is going to be just as much of a nightmare if not worse. >> So I So just for the record we have asked to do a different one
comprehensive study on that. Did they not? Well, I don't I didn't know about the 2022 study. Did anybody else pocket out? >> Did you? >> I think they did the 2022 study >> in connection with their original
application or the state >> to the state housing authority when they were >> Yes. >> approved the project. It was there a time limit on that >> of this proposal >> because that's that was four years ago.
I'm just trying to explain to you. >> I'm just I'm asking if there's a time study on that where you can go any other question for the new time on that. No, >> new study. >> There's no time limit on a study. So in a town, >> we've asked them for So again, we've
asked them for another traffic study. They have refused to get one and that's what we're stuck with when we >> vote on this. >> Oh, great. So he doesn't want to open his wallet up and do a time site. I you have to um not have personal attacks in these meetings, please.
>> I do. >> Okay. >> All right. Next. >> Hi, Tracy Oberus, 8 Copper Beach Drive. Um in regards to the exit going on to Copper Beach Drive, right now it's sized for exit only plus emergency access fire for the fire department. The closest
fire department is by the mall. Why would the fire department access be on Copper Beach Drive in lie of Marian Drive? Um, >> as we all know, the gates will most likely be left open and two-way traffic will go through the fire exit access
entry. >> I think it's a one-way road. Is that correct? It's one way. >> They say it's one way, but we all know it's sized for >> Yeah. >> double that. And with the gates, they usually end up being left open. And so if the fire access were to be moved
closer to the fire department, it might alleviate some of our concerns. >> Perhaps it would require more than one truck to respond and maybe they would want another access point. It seems to be in the best interest of safety to
have another emergency access for use by only emergency vehicles. >> Isn't it there only one access currently? >> It's a second access. >> A second axis. So, it's two two access points
only for emergency vehicles. >> Okay. And also in regards to developments coming in, um, in the town meeting last year, the MBTA required housing developments be approved at the
mall and that did go through. So, wouldn't that be a better location as opposed to this since it was already approved for affordable housing? I just want to stay >> the mall is currently um cited for future residential
development but not for not in this category. This is a special kind. The apartments at the mall so you all understand they were not a 40B project. That was a developer that came in and in
conjunction with the town's efforts to redevelop the mall built I I guess what three fourstory I don't know how many >> a 10% thing piece that they have affordable housing >> but it's not mandated. >> It wasn't a 40B. It was not like this
project. This project is specifically a 40B project. >> All right. >> The whole thing. The whole thing. Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> No, it's not all >> 40b means that it's >> it's not all affordable housing. It's a
certain percentage of >> uh I'd have to look at the plan of how many of how many units are affordable? >> 25%. Thank you. >> Which makes >> 25% 25% >> 25%. >> How many units are there? >> Six units.
>> Six units. 40 something. >> 40 something. >> 30 units. >> There's the parking is is on on the map. >> But just you understand the mall didn't have the apartments at the mall were not
required to have >> and also this is a developer that owns this parcel of land. We can't make he doesn't own where the land is. So he can't I mean that's not an application that's before us. you not request less of >> uh we have they
>> make it smaller you know cut cut it down >> so we have addressed that the board feels I don't want to speak for everybody but I think that the board as a whole feels like the density of this project is u >> we've addressed that in past meetings maybe >> yes
>> um they did reduce the amount of originally they had planned and more units. I don't remember the amount but they have reduced that. >> There was three buildings. >> There were three buildings and on the original plans and this was stalled
because it >> because they didn't have the parking. >> Okay. And to address a question before I this was stalled for a while because the sewer department >> had a um I'm sorry the water department >> water department
>> had a um >> a moratorum but since has been lifted >> yeah they lifted them >> reversed. >> Uh were there any other questions from the public? Go ahead, >> Susan Sherman, 215 Main Street. First,
let me say that I appreciate all of your hard work. You people are volunteers, and that is something in Kingston we we definitely need. >> Thank you. >> I live on Main Street. I've lived in
Kingston my entire life. And I guess I want to ask when do we start taking care of our residents? Where do they come into this? Is it the planning board? Is it the zoning board?
You know, we are changing the character of Kingston. And it breaks my heart. It breaks my heart. How can we I saw one of the selectmen
say we didn't outlaw 40 BS. I don't think you can outlaw 40 BS, can you? Were we're Were we as a town able to do that? No. >> It's a state mandate. >> Only when we hit safe harbor, then we're not susceptible. >> So, we're not able to do that
>> until we get increase our stock of affordable housing. We're >> And I believe we need to do that, Miss Me. I definitely do. I don't know that we need to destroy neighborhoods in
order to achieve that. And that's all I want to say. Again, I want to say thank you for all your help because I know that it's a long days and long nights of looking at these things. But I I hope you do take into consideration
the character of the town that you all moved to. I came from and I I hope it continues. I really do. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> I just have some follow-up questions. I'm wondering, >> you have to state your name again.
>> Jennifer Ering, 51 Winthre Street. I'm wondering how we ever are to achieve reaching our goal of having enough affordable housing when every time we say we're building affordable housing,
it's it's just a little bit of affordable housing with along with luxury apartments or McMansions. And so where we still then are not meeting our quota. So it seems to me it's an unattainable goal.
Correct. >> It's it's ridiculous. >> And again, I agree with her. Would like I didn't I didn't grow up here. I moved here in 2010 and raised my boys here and I have loved
every minute of it. What is happening now, it it takes me 30 minutes to get from Winthrop Street down towards the highway to go to the dump on Saturday morning. I I just it's it's gotten out of control
and I feel like we keep asking and asking no more building and nobody's listening. I don't know who is supposed to listen but it's not happening and that the fact that this is this was voted down ages before this all like ages ago. We all voted this plan down
and it's still coming. Like I was shocked to hear this was coming again tonight before the ZBA. Thanks. >> Can >> Oh, and and can this go before the next town meeting to be a vote? >> Can you do you mind just addressing the
40B aspect of this project so that everybody is clear here on what the town of Kingston needs to meet? And >> so if we don't there's a number of safe harbors to get out from under the heavy weight that is 40B. One of the primary
one is that you have to have 10% affordable housing. For a rental project, you get credit for 100% of the units on your subsidized housing inventory, even though only 25%
of them are affordable. So 100% of the units in this project will count towards that 10% goal, which helps us get closer. So both the so that that helps the numerator essentially in that equation
right now we're not at 10% so we can't >> deny this >> if we if you could ask where are we are we at 9.5 are we at 75 we're only at 5% >> right >> oh my gosh >> so we'll make a significant dent in that with this project but that doesn't help
us with this project it might help us with the next project so we've made some progress over the last several years with some other 40b projects. The denominator is small solace I know the denominator in the equation doesn't
change in between the dennial censuses. So, as long as we keep making progress on the numerator, the number of total affordable units with the denominator being the total number of housing units in town, we can get to that 10% within
every 10 years. Then they every 10 years they reset the denominator. So, you might fall back a little. Here it's complicated. I understand. Here we do get substantial progress. rental
projects give you a big step forward doesn't help us in terms of deciding this. So we can't avail ourselves of a safe harbor. >> Well, so again, sir really it's unattainable. >> It's not unattainable. It's fully attainable and towns do it
all the time. And ironically, despite whether this is a good project or a bad project, this will help us get into safe harbor for the next project because not only will we get much closer to 10% with just this one
project, we will also make significant progress. So, we have another safe harbor. If you make a certain amount of progress in a given um year, then you might be able to say no. That's again doesn't help you here with respect to
how the board has to act on this one because we're not in any of the various safe harbors. But we it is not unattainable because towns hit that 10% number frequently and they do it more frequently with the benefit of these big
rental projects than with home ownership projects. But every time we have these big rental projects or we have these big projects, there are a number of homes that go up where there are multiple bedrooms which bring in multiple
children and more more for our infrastructure, more for our police. Our police station is literally this big and has a rotted roof and we still have not been able to replace that. >> Th those particular concerns and I I don't want to get too deep in the the weeds here. school impacts
and police officer impacts are not the kind of things that we're allowed to consider >> in the denial. We there are a number of things and we've talked about a number of them that the traffic issue, the
flood plane issue, general engineering, other issues are very much part of what the board will be deliberating on and the board has already noted their preference for making some conditions or discussing the
access onto Copper Beach to discussing the impact of that flood plane. they've referenced the general size of the project. So, those are all live issues. When the board is talking about taking this information in, the
board hasn't made a decision. The board could approve this as is. They could deny it as is, or they could approve it with conditions, including conditions that substantially change this project. None of that has been decided yet. So that that'll happen when the hearing
closes and the board gets together in a couple weeks to to chew on this on all the evidence that we've been collecting here, including all of your comments, which are important. So that's part of the process that we have to go through. There's no I've been working with this
board with Lane and Paul and Doug for years and they we've approved some, we've denied some, we've conditioned some. This board has always been a pretty honest arbiter about these things and they take the the town's considerations and interests to heart.
That's been my experience with this board. I work across the state. >> I we appreciate that. >> So I I'm not saying don't make your comments. All these comments are super valuable, >> but this board is going to do everything they can to do the right thing here. >> Is is it possible that this goes before
the town for a vote? >> No, that's not that's it's not going to happen. So it's possible. >> It's not possible. >> Not possible. >> It's not that that vote would not be binding. >> The the next step is we vote on this and then if we depending on our vote, there
could be an appeal an appeal in the court system. >> Okay. >> So that would be the next step and we have to keep that in mind as we're voting as well. >> I just want to add >> safe harbor last for how long? Two years. >> No, that's a different safe harbor. So
there are safe harbors that are of limited duration like when you make progress. So if you make like a a half a percent or a full percent in a given year then you get some temporary safe harbors. This project will certainly
provide at least a temporary kind of progress safe harbor in case another 40b gets applied for when we're done with this one. But it the the 10% issue is fixed once you
hit 10%. You can say no to any 40b project until such time as you fall below 10%. And we fall below 10% either due to the passage of time sometimes or because some of the restrictions on
older affordable housing projects which where the affordability was not perpetual where that expires >> and if we had decided to keep the water moratorum in place >> Yep. >> we could have said 100% >> we can't do anything for infinity.
>> Yep. >> And the same with the same with the leeching field. >> Talk to your water commissioners. >> That's a big issue. Look at what's happening in Bridgewwater. >> I'm talking about here in Kingston. >> So, >> all right. Let's basic I just want to also remind everyone that the that
Indian pond was supposed to have private snow removal, too, and that's not happening. So, we're adding also to if we have another huge storm and are way over budget, more snow removal for this whole area. And I just hope at least since since it can't go before a vote
that you at least really think about not having any access to Copper Beach because it would be a shame to ruin that little neighborhood. >> Okay. >> Um there's a a comment about the the two
mobile home parks that the state is not considering as affordable. So I'll leave that up for the people in the room to to read. >> Yes. >> Um so Brian Gagnen 19 Copper Beach Drive just wanted to revisit the access road. So how can we ensure that that piece of
it is taken into consideration during the deliberations and added as a condition? >> Uh we are taking that into consideration. U we haven't decided whether there's a condition on it. We have to deliberate after we close the hearing tonight >> because that piece of it is completely
outside of the 40B. Has nothing to do with the affordable number of affordable units the town has? That's strictly access to this development through Copper Beach. So, can that be under totally separate
consideration? >> And can we be confident that the zoning board will add that as a condition? uh you can't be confident because we haven't deliberated on that yet, but you can be confident that that we hear the concerns about that and we've asked the
reasons from the developer as to why they need that and we have to look at whether their reasons are adequate or not. So there's a piece of this where it has to be um financially
uh okay for the developer to go forward on this. Yeah, I >> what is the correct term here that I'm looking for? >> Yeah. So, the if if the developer is unhappy
with the decision, let's say it's an approval with conditions. Let's say conditions to reduce the size of it, take away the access on to Copper Beach, whatever. And the developer appeals that.
And they would appeal it. There's a specific body at the state that they appeal to. It's called the housing appeals committee. Not particularly municipal friendly entity, by the way. But the developers first burden of proof. So they have a the initial burden
of proof to show that the conditions of approval would render the project economically unfeasible. And then there's additional standards there. I won't I won't bore you with it. It can get complicated, but it's their
burden to show. So, if we made a change to the project, and usually this comes in and around the density issue because that's kind of where the rubber hits the road on a lot of these 40B projects because they are asking for more density than we would otherwise allow under our zoning
bylaws. Now, density is their key to unlocking revenue. So they are saying like we with that reduced revenue and all of the other costs that we have to bear to develop this project we can't make a buck that buck that formula being
kind of subject to appraisals and other evidence that we would present in what amounts to a trial. That's their burden. We would try and contest that. If they are able to prove that it does make the project une
uneconomic, it doesn't end there. Then we get to prove the burden shifts to us and we get to prove that there's a valid local issue that outweighs the benefits of the affordable housing that are being created. Those benefits, there's a
presumption of benefit when you're doing affordable housing. That's what this particular law says. With regular zoning, when we say no or when we condition things, we almost always win. With 40B, it kind of flips it over
because the the the state said in 1969 when they created chapter 40B that we have to flip that burden on its head. And now it's up to us to prove that there's something so important locally to justify those conditions or justify a
denial that um it outweighs the presumptive benefits of affordable housing. That's a difficult task. It's not impossible, but it's a difficult task. And again, this is a a developer friendly form of development.
So, we've done it. We've prevailed. Sometimes the the fight leads to changes to projects. We we do that all the time. Sometimes we win, sometimes we lose, and sometimes the the fight is just worth having. >> Yeah. I guess that's that's what I'd
like to request to have the fight remove the access road to Copper Beach. >> Yeah. So, we have asked the reasons why they will not remove it, and I don't hear from them that it's a financial reason. So, I I don't know. >> Um >> Yeah. the the the the removal and I'm
not trying to pre-bake any kind of any kind of deliberation from on that fiscal nexus. I'm less concerned about that than I am about other things that I would have to defend.
>> You have to please stop. >> I'm just saying concerns on his back >> this is our town council that's that's helping assist us. Okay. So, >> thank you very much. >> Y
>> David Kennedy, 13 Copper Beach Drive. Just making a statement. I don't have any questions. Our neighborhood's going to be ruined on Copper Beach Drive if this goes through. I'm not for this at all. I understand that, you know, a modification might be made to accommodate the person that wants to put
the development in, but I think the big thing here is is that it needs to be half the size. one access out by the train in by the train. Thank you. >> Thank you. Just for the record, is there anybody in this room that's for this? >> Absolutely not.
>> Anybody? Okay. >> Go ahead. >> All Tana 6 Copper Beach. I have a couple questions while town council's here. Um the incompatible zones, I know they address that they want a waiver to build residential units in uh an industrial
commercial zone or whatever. The question I have is where the access road is coming through, that's an R40 district, by putting the access road in there, doesn't that reduce the 40,000 square ft that the R40 district supposed to have? And aren't we kind of setting
up a precedence on what could happen throughout the town if we allow this to happen? >> So, no, it's so I'll work on those backwards. No, it's not a precedent setting because it's it's unique to this particular application. I I will say
that chapter 40B on its face and this is the big slight on it. If you're a fan of municipal governance and home rule deciding things locally, which I am as a as a municipal attorney and a official in my own town,
the it always hurts to to wave local bylaws, but that's what 40B allows. That's not the end of the story, however. So if a particular development is totally incompatible with the development pattern in that neighborhood, that's a important factor
for us to consider, >> right? But that's >> and and that could be that incompatibility could take on any number of forms. Again, I I just want to make sure that that folks understand though that when towns battle against 40bs or
impose conditions that a developer may not like, it's a battle, >> right? So these so all of this requires the evidence. That's why everyone here has given us a lot of great information that will help us. That's why we hire
engineers. That's why staff writes reports. The town planner has written reports. That's why we go through this multimonth exercise of collecting information. So when we make a decision again, let's call it getting rid of the access or
gating off the access to Copper Beach or whatever that we have a reason to do it. >> Okay? >> Or if we cut it down because we think it's too tall, we have to give a reason for that. Or if we change it because this flood plane issue, we have to give a reason for that. You know, we have to
it's all evidence. These are like little trials every single time. So the facts are really important. So, it really doesn't matter if we have an R40 district or an R20 district. >> It matters, but it doesn't matter as much as we'd like it to. I think that
that's the answer. I wish I could give you a more satisfying answer. >> It it just seems like we're setting up a precedent throughout town by doing this. >> Well, it's a precedent throughout the Commonwealth. We are not alone there. You won't find a town jumping up and down for joy because 40B developments
are coming in. That that doesn't exist. >> Okay. And the other thing I want to address is the shooting range that >> I think >> we addressed that last year. >> Well, I I think I know we talked about it, but I didn't really get a clear definitive answer here on on state law
says 500 ft or residents can't be there, but the the reason I got is cuz they submitted their application before. But has somebody told the police department that they're going to have to they can't coexist with this development and they have to move their range? I don't have any reason to believe that
they won't follow the our police department won't follow the law when it comes to >> No, no, no. I'm I I I understand that. All I'm saying is that when they did the study through town property to put in the shooting range, this was the only
viable spot to put it because it was within the 500 ft and the 125 ft within a highway. So basically, you're saying because of this development, they can't coexist. >> I I'm not I haven't drawn any
conclusions on that. I haven't attended any of the the meetings until now, so I'm catching up. The the chair person asked me to to come tonight in that we're kind of coming down the stretch. So, I'm still catching up on those facts. It's an important thing that we'll look at.
>> Okay, >> that's all I can say right now. And one of the other things I wanted to bring up, if you bear with me two seconds here on the traffic study, um this is from Mass Housing. Um the applicant should be prep prepared to provide sufficient data
to assess the proposed projects potential traffic impacts at Hilltop and Maine and on other neighborhood routes and traffic patterns and respond to re reasonable requests for mitigation. Now, it seems to me by him refusing, the
developer to do a a better traffic study, like not with a kid in a clicker in a car that everybody on Copper Beach witnessed, which was the first traffic study. And then the second traffic study was done at the beginning of August with
no school traffic, no cape traffic, no train traffic. It would seem to me that it's a re reasonable request according to Mass Housing for him to do another traffic study. I mean, it's in their own paperwork. I
>> I I think that the any inconsistencies in the traffic study or any concerns in around gaps in the traffic study are likely to form the basis of some of the conditions that are likely to be imposed. >> All right. >> For sure. And and I don't mean that as a
dodgy answer. >> No, no. I understand. I think I think it's I think it's valuable information. I think you've heard several board members express a concern about gaps in the traffic studies. >> So, I think when we sit down with the mountain of evidence at our
deliberation, I'm sure that any inconsistencies or gaps in in traffic issues will help form the basis of whatever the board decides. >> I'm just reminding the developer that he agreed to mass housing doing proper mitigation. the
>> instead of refusing to do another traffic. >> There is a something about those letters that I I won't bother you with here today in terms of how the the housing appeals committee considers those letters to be >> important evidence. I think the important thing is is the board using
whatever information is available for them to make assessments. One of those assessments could potentially be lack of sufficient information supplied by the applicant. Okay. >> The applicant is within their rights to say, "I'm not giving you you all an extension to fill in the gaps that we
have mentioned throughout the hearing. We're at the end of the road here with them. They could choose if they wanted to to keep the hearing open so we could address some of these issues that keep coming up. They've chosen not to. They make their bed with that. That might be
good for them. That might be bad for them." >> Okay. and most of the other stuff I think we've already rehashed at prior meetings. So, thank you. >> Anything new? >> Keith and one carpet beach drive. First of all, I want to thank all of you for your uh for your efforts. I know you put
in some lot of lot of work and so forth, but I'd like to remind you of one thing. It was promised us the residents of Copper Beach Drive in layman's terms. I I respect the attorney, but sometimes he's hard to follow. But we were promised 35 years ago that Copper Beach
Drive would never be open again by the selectman. There's no credibility. Copper Beach Drive should not be open. And now it's going to be open again. Now you can you you have the authority to decline it. And and I hope you do that
because we were promised that by the selectman back 35 years ago before the train even came in. And I I hope that you uh honor honor the word of the selectman at that time. Thank you very much. >> Rachinsky, 15 Copper Beach Drive. Just
two quick like to recap. So just be um the fight against the road from the attorney. That was clar that was good clarification. If it's not, I just hope that like we can say because it's not financially, it doesn't financially impact the development. And there's
really we can't get a good reason as to why except that he wants it. Um, you know, the everything that was mentioned about the the the um fire department being closer at the other axis, all that stuff. So, I um hope that all goes into consideration. Um, and then the traffic
study from 2022 when Keith um had all the traffic reports, it was it was just the the amount of accidents that have increased. I just feel like that's completely irrelevant. Like if we could just add that in. I feel like that's good information about the increase in the amount of traffic accidents. So that
traffic study just seems kind of irrelevant now. So, okay, that's it. >> Thank you. Um, >> are you speaking? Okay. Ken Desiana, Second Brook Street. So, nobody's mentioned Second Brook Street
here. So, I gota um the traffic impact on Second Brook Street will be unbelievable. Uh if this goes through now, I I understand you're going to do another traffic study. >> No. >> No, you're not. Okay. The impact
the impact is going to be enormous. Um, I'm assuming that mo most of the residents of this proposed project would be working people, quite a few of them. Um, the avenues west of us
at the end of the day, the eastbound traffic will be quite a bit like a big funnel. It'll all come in from uh 58 to Brook Street, uh 106, 27, 3A, all those all those
roads. Eastbound traffic. Eventually, a lot of people will take Second Brook Street, which they do now. I I do it myself. I live there, but that's a shortcut. Um it's just going to be uh not a safe
thing. There's no there's no sidewalks there. As uh a lot of people have mentioned the bus traffic, they just barely are able to pass and uh it's my concern. It's a safety concern. Thank you. >> All right. Is there anybody else from
the public? Um All right. Seeing there are no other comments from the public, does the board have anything? I'll start with David >> before we close or make a motion to close. Marsha,
>> I don't have anything else. >> Bob, >> no. I think we've heard it all. >> Okay. Uh Paul, anything? >> Yes, I do have something. I would I would like to ask um Kushman Farms if they would like to do a waiver again
since I I feel one of the main problems here is that flood plane issue. um that is uh a very big deal for their project as it goes right through the middle of one of their buildings. And being that we could probably give a
denial just on the fact that they don't have a a proper piece of paperwork from the from FEMA stating that this project is even viable. Um I don't know if that's something that they want to entertain or leave it in
our report to use. Um if not then I understand that they would want to close the hearing and we can go that route also. >> Okay. Um I can ask them to respond. >> Or can I I'm just a little confused on
this issue. I thought our own town conservation officer uh weighed in on this right when this project was first conceived. we have
>> and as it's gone and as that it's gone on, I haven't heard him raise this issue. So, as as as you say might be just a reason to deny it. So, I'm just a little confused.
>> I don't have the prior plans in in front of me. Was this on the prior plan? Uh so this has been on all the plans since the first submission. Um additionally the FEMA flood plane if we could not remove it with a letter of map provision then it would be under the
jurisdiction of your concom and it would be basically we would not be able to build without their approval on that. >> So is there I think I asked this to you but I don't know I don't remember the answer. Is there a reason why you haven't requested that?
>> We were just going through all of the um uh deliberations with the town. We just haven't requested yet. C >> can I ask you a question on that? Cuz I'm a little confused. So, this is a hundred-year flood plane that's mapped. >> So, there's no new construction in 100-year flood planes. >> Correct.
>> So, that's not a local wetland bylaw issue. >> It is in Kingston. They >> It is, but it's also under federal flood plane guidance. There's no new construction in flood planes. >> Technically construct in a 100redyear flood plane. You just have to pretend uh
provide compensatory storage for it. >> So you'd have to change the project. >> Wait a minute. I thought the >> It depends what the >> Sorry, I don't want to interrupt. >> No. No. Please answer. Please answer. >> Okay. >> Wait, Marca.
>> Theoretically, we do pro uh provide compensatory storage. The 100year flood plane is stored within our infiltration systems for that area. Um, regardless, we're still going to have the um, flight plane removed because that's typically not where you put a 100year flood plane.
>> No, no, I I'm not debating with you whether or not FEMA's going to change it or it's a good argument or a bad argument. Right now, your design right now is as if this flood plane doesn't exist
or will be changed. >> Right? So the plans right now where is asis can't be constructed as is right now.
>> It would depend on the conservation commission. >> We technically do you need paperwork in order for this to move forward. So, if I may interject, um Tanya Traverson here, um I just want to be
clear that we're not required to apply to the conservation commission in tandem with the zoning board of appeals under this 40V project. We can proceed to request the comprehensive permit from the zoning board and then go to the conservation commission. We're not
looking for a waiver. This isn't a local waiver. >> Yeah, but Tanya, that's not the question. um that that's not the issue. Plus, if there's more local protection of the flood plane, then it does happen here. The question is, and I'm not I'm not saying how the board's going to
react to it. It's just right now the plan that you have would have to be changed if you don't get that map change. Whether it's approvable or not, I'm not saying that. I'm not giving a value judgment to it. But right now,
your plans are presuming that that flood plane will change. That map will be changed. And maybe it will, but right now it's not. >> Right now it's not correct. >> Right. Okay. That that's it.
>> So we're working under the your assumption and your presentation that your your confidence that the map is going to change. >> Correct. I I just if you were so confident this has been before us for years, why didn't you get the letter?
>> I don't think is because you're not required to get the letter. >> We're not required to >> Well, yeah, you are required. Yeah, you absolutely have to get the letter >> dispute here. The developers of lawyer says they are not that 40. >> We're not required to get the letter in
tandem with the review of the zoning board of appeal. It's a separate review. No, I know it's a separate review, Tanya, but you're presenting a project that's right now not technically possible. >> Well, I I disagree, but >> Well, you can disagree all you want
right now. And maybe you could modify the project right now to be able to design 100% of what you're doing through accommodating this flood plane as it exists right now. And the
board would act on it accordingly. But the board is being asked to make a decision based upon an event that hasn't happened yet. And that's fine. You're that's your prerogative to propose that, but that's what you're asking us to do.
And so that's asking the board to take that leap of faith. And maybe the board does, but at the very least, the board is the very first condition is going to be nothing happens here until that map change. At
the worst, it's going to be you're presenting a plan that's not possible and here's the ramifications of it. Whether that's a denial or removal of everything that's within the flood plane, I don't know. I haven't chewed on any of this. But that's why Paul Dalan
is saying like maybe you want to take care of this or think of think it through a little bit more before we close. >> Your call. I'm not I mean you and I have known each other for a while. That's your your your call. >> Yeah. Maybe also uh and this might be a
question that you don't want to answer or cannot answer at this stage, but how would the uh the um housing court deal with something like this? If if it's appealed if we deny it
and it's appealed, h they can't >> I think it's a pretty big issue. >> Okay. All right. Thank you. I think we >> did you want to address that >> just real quick? >> I think Paul's question was a pretty good one that I was going to actually ask if if you wanted to extend the
waiver. >> So again, I think we all Rick Lincoln, you know, applicant. Um we all know that or we're hoping the board can just condition it. Um we can change the project.
they you wouldn't like the the four-story building would go where the three-story building went that I removed to try and create more buffer. So, we have the land and the area to move the building, but we kind of wanted to get
through this process first before the the FEMA application is fairly comprehensive and we've just held off because we kind of wanted to get this thing approved with a condition. Um, so
just some context. >> So we you you're saying that we will not like your alternative to this, >> correct? >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> So I guess the that question is still there. Do they want to give us another
waiver and continue or do they still just want to keep it as a condition? Because this is putting the cart before the horse. I think the intention here is to go forward with what we have offered at this point. >> All right, Paul. Anything else?
>> No, no. Um I think the public did basically is is feeling the same way I think the board is feeling. Um we have a lot of issues that are with this 40B, not only density, traffic, um the effects on our schools, which I know
they feel we don't have to take in account, but it's definitely something we need to take in account. Um the height of the buildings, I know they said that we did the same height of the buildings up at the mall, but that's up at the mall. That's in a highly dense
commercial zone. This is the residential area. this is this is this is not apples to apples by any means. Um, so I think the public did a good job of, you know, putting out their their their feelings about this 40B and I think we have to,
you know, use what they have, but also try to wrangle what we know the courts can do with these 40Bs if we just say no and then we can we still dealing with other 40bs at 5 years now and uh they've been remanded back to us a couple times as uh
Mr. Talman knows. So, um, I'm with the board. I'm watching you guys right now on Zoom. So, if if they feel like they want us to close the hearing, so be it. >> All right. Anybody else? Uh, can I get a motion to close the
hearing? What that means is we we are not able to take any more um evidence or anything. >> I get a motion to close the hearing. It's not a vote that we're we're accepting or denying it. It's just the
closing of the hearing. >> We're not voting on this tonight. >> Uh uh Bob, I think did a motion to close the hearing. Any second? >> I second it. >> All right. Um all in favor? >> I >> I >> All right. So, the hearing is closed.
>> Thank you. The hearing is closed. >> Can we get a date on the calendar? >> Yeah. So >> for to come back and start chewing on this a little bit in a maybe two, three weeks, >> it's going to be
>> very hard for my schedule, but yes. Um >> Okay. >> I'd like to do >> I mean we we don't have to decide it tonight. I just that we have to talk about that about that. >> That's fine. >> We don't have to we don't have to schedule it tonight. I'm just saying
let's not lose track. It's likely it's going to take given the the issues here two nights. So in 40 within 40 days we're going to need a couple >> and there's no extension >> unless we ask and Rick gives us an extension of the 40.
>> Okay. >> So >> but we're not going to do anything more this evening. >> It does not appear so. >> Okay. I just I just >> No, we're not. >> Okay. >> Just a quick question. from this meeting like >> so the the next meeting won't be a
public hearing but the public will be allowed to attend. >> Okay. >> And then after on the 40th day or sometime before then there'll be a written decision out. >> So I think that we should stay back and
get some dates from everybody. Paul, if you want to call in with your availability. >> Thank you. >> Um, I guess can I get a motion to >> adjourn? Yes.
>> I get a motion date. >> No, I mean, you've already closed the hearing, so you haven't adjourned the meeting yet. >> Yeah. Do we need to talk about our meeting date on >> You don't have to because scheduling can happen outside of a meeting.
>> Proposed to close the meeting today. >> Uh adjourn. >> Ajourn. I >> a motion to adjurnn was from Bob. Can I get a second, please? >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I >> I thank you.