All right, it is uh 603 and I'd like to open the regular planning board meeting for Tuesday, May 30th. Uh under Mass General Law, chapter 30A, section 20F, this meeting is being
videotaped and perhaps going out live. So uh and recorded. So uh first up are administrative items and the first is uh 234 Old Harbor Road file number
25-008A approval not required. request for the planning board to endorse a two lot plane of land located at 234 Old Harbor Road described as assessor's map 86 lot 21.
Good evening Greg Nicholas South Coast Engineer on behalf of Bob Hawks property here at 234 Old Road. This is roughly a 13 acre of parcel of land structured on old house road and frontage on river road. And the proposal here in front of
the board is to divide this into two lots with lot one having frontage on river road and lot two having frontage on hab road. The uh lot one 4.41 acres. Uh lot two is roughly 8 and 1/2 acres.
the 200 feet of frontage on the Labour road and there's 180 ft of frontage on River Road. So the lots as far as frontage and area meet the requirements of zoning the town of Westport. Each lot has over 30,000 square ft of upland. So
that'd be another part that they have to um another item that they have to be in order to be considered a buildable lot. Those of you who are familiar with this area, I'll speak directly to the chairman because he lives down here. This is a very steep hill that comes up
on this proposed lot number one. Now, I believe that a driveway can be constructed coming up on a switchback and making up a hill to a buildable portion of that. Uh there are other lots in the area that have a similar type of access. But the one thing that I'd like
to mention to the board as far as the future of this of this land, if you look to the north at 171 River Road, it's owned by Lawrence Goff. 175 River Road is on by Lawrence Goff. And this has been a roughly three-year project to create this lot one because that's also
being purchased by Lawrence Goff. There are no per test done on either one of these lots. So, I don't think it's an immediate plan to develop anything down here as far as residential residential housing. And Mr. Hos is informing me
that there is a 5-year moratorum, I guess what we call it, that no development will take place on this, if any, for at least 5 years. Going back to the issue of the access drive for your dwelling unit is actually 171. An existing drive that
comes up here just north of this property line and turns and goes off in this direction. Um or as I stated earlier, this lot does have means of creating its own frontage. That would be something that if I were the engineer on this project, and I don't know that I would be, um I would
consider applying for a common drive because you'd have at least part of it built. One other thing I'd like to mention is that despite the um area here that Mr. Goff will own with the presumption that this will be approved be around 10 acres, he is only going to
have around 500 ft of frontage. So, you're not going to see me or anybody else in here with four main plan tomorrow showing four lots. Um, you don't have an affronted floor for it. You may want to move these property lines around for whatever reason, but this is what it is. So, one thing,
you know, entered in into the design, we had a nice stone wall over here. We able to use that as a property line for as far as it went. Just extended the line in the northern direction. So, that's how that line was determined. The rest of the lot lines that you see on lot one were in existence. So this line here is
in division line and that's pretty much what I have. I'll turn it back to the board. So is that uh western lot line is that sort of at at a at the plateau sort of where your yard is or is that still
pretty steep where the lot line is? I didn't hear the question from from the from that west line to my house. Yeah. Is it pretty steep where that line is or is it No. Um
it there's a on the west side of that uh between my house and that mine is a septic system uh that Lenny put in I don't know 15 20 years ago. Um and then
it it does sort of dip oh I don't know um I don't know elevations but it it it's there's a slight dip. Uh but it it's not yeah it's not steep.
The steepest part if I may chairman is in this area then it's more gradual. There's a lower point here and go back up the hill and the the lot that's on River Road to the right where your hand is. That's the previous Bruce Haw lot is
what? The previous Bruce Haw lot the yellow house. Yes. Yeah. Yes. Now Mullen. Yeah, that was my uh cousin, my dad's cousin. I was born one and a half. So,
uh and I that's how I still live. So, um you haven't gone far. So, is there a plaque on the house, Bobby? Cuz you were born there. Is there a plaque on the house cuz you were born? Yeah, there should be a
statue. I'm working on the statue. Okay. Is that planners? Do you have any comments? Yes. Um, so I did a staff review for this ANR. Um, it's probably just going to repeat a lot of what Greg already said. So, um, if the applicant is
proposing a boundary line down the middle of the property to divide the parcel into two buildable lots known as lot one and lot two. So, the lots shown on the plan must front on one of three types of ways. And this plan fronts um on a public way or a way which the clerk
of the city or town certifies as maintained and used as a public way. Lot one being or shall front on river road and lot two fronting on Old Harbor Road. Um, item number two, the lots shown on the plan must meet the minimum
frontage requirements. Both proposed lots meet the frontage requirements with proposed lot one having frontage of approximately 180 ft on river road and proposed lot 2 retaining the original parcels frontage of approximately 200 ft on Old Harbor Road. Um, the existing
ways are maintained by the town. Sufficient access is provided and both proposed lots one and two do not cross any wetlands. proposed lot one has approximately uh 192,000 square ft of upland while lot 2 has approximately 372,000 square feet of upland. Um so
staff finds that the proposed ANR meets the criteria for an ANR endorsement and staff recommends that the planning board endors endorse this proposed ANR plan. Okay. Are there any questions or comments from the board?
Yes, please. Uh based on staff review, I move that we endorse the two lot plan located at 234 Old Harbor Road described as assessors map 86 lot 21. Second.
Any further comments? All those in favor? I opposed. There are none. And you're looking should sell more. Thank you. Okay. Well, you're still up, so I wouldn't leave. So, uh, the next
item on our agenda is, uh, 234 Old Harbor Road, Chapter 61, release request for comments from the select board. So, planners, do you have any comments with regard to that? We don't have any
additional comments, but um if the board would like to send the select board any particular issues they'd like to raise, uh now would be the time to do that. I don't have any problem. I can't see the town spending that kind of money for a
small piece of property. I agree. Um, and so I would uh entertain a motion. Uh, Mr. Chair, I move that we uh recommend to the select board uh release
of chapter 61A on 234 Old Road, lot one. Is it just on lot one? On the on the portion of the lot that is that is uh encumbered by 61. It's not 61A. It's forestry, I believe, which is
61 C. 61. Just 61. Okay. Second. All those in favor. I I Okay. Next is 350. Let us know when you're unveiling the statue of Bob. Next up is uh 359 Division Road
Solar. We have a review by SW Cole received on May 2nd and review and we're going to have a review of the screening plan received on May 2nd. Sure. So, yep. So, S SW Cool's report is
based off a site visit conducted um with S SW Cole, Derek Melo, um Molly Morgan from Waterstone Engineering, and myself. Um let's see. So, I'll first go over kind of what's good in the report. The gravel access roadway is in adequate
condition with no rutting or washouts noted, though the roadway shoulders at the entrance do need grading and shaping. Both culver crossings have been constructed and appear to be functioning as intended and wet wetland replication work has been completed. Moving on to
items to be addressed. Uh the connection to the power grid is still incomplete. Silt fencing remains which is holding back drainage through the cul culvers. Construction debris needs to be removed and they need to reassess the grass growth in warmer months. um some
construction signage read needs to be removed and then in addition the gated entrance to the solar array must have the required signage installed. It's still missing some important contact information. Um the fencing around that solar array must also allow for a wildlife a wildlife gap. The gap is not
consistent and needs to be um maintained consistently. Um lastly, a landscape screening plan for the interconnection pad and equipment was submitted. Um we actually there were two versions of this submitted um and the latest version which is included in the packet yielded
no comment from conservation. Um he's okay with the species chosen and also the location. Um S SW Cole and planning staff do want to see this landscape screening plan in August when we can see more of the bloom. Um just because we feel that it provides adequate
screening, but it's a little hard to tell on paper. So, we we'd prefer to see it in August. Um, let's see. And then, oh yeah, going on to the landscape screening plan. If you want to look at it with me, I we can look at it later.
It's 6:15. Sorry. Oh, okay. We can we can take a look at the we'll show you the landscaping plan um a little bit later in the meeting. It's 6:15, so I I think we should move to the public hearing. Okay. So we'll continue that discussion uh
after uh some of these items that have time schedules. So the next one is the 615 public hearing for Francis Estates file number 24-037C- SPA-LI.
This is continued from January 28th, March 11th, April 22nd, 2025. The applicant is proposing to construct a lot nine lot definitive residential subdivision requiring site
plan and low impact development approval on the parcel described as map 68, lot 7 between 50 and 58 Charlotte White Road. Uh sir, good afternoon members of the
planning board. My name is Nicholas Gomes. I'm an attorney with an office in New Bedford. I represent the owner of the property, the applicant before you, Vasel Realy Trust. Uh this matter has come before you in uh the Zenith
Engineering Firm provided some updates to the plan. Uh essentially this project has been reduced from a 15 lot subdivision down to a nine lot subdivision. Uh my understanding is that the engineering is satisfactory
generally. Um and the issue before us is we have on record at the Bristol County Register of Deeds the existing open space covenant as well as the plans for the 15 lots. So, we're seeking to rescend the 15, the largest subdivision
uh in the open space covenant and go forward with just the definitive plan that Zenith has filed with your office. Right. We have that next on the schedule at 6:30. So, we will address that at 6:30.
If there's any questions regarding the uh plan itself for this segment, I'm happy to answer any questions in that regard. But I don't have any other information other than what I imagine has already been put forward. Nine uh lot subdivision. We're not doing the
large scale septic system. That was the concern. This drainage easement, the cemetery easement as well. And I think all matters have been addressed. Okay. Uh, planners, you want to fill us in on where we are? Sure.
Thank you for that introduction, Attorney Gomez. So, yes, we've looked at Francis E's states um a couple different times. Um, this in the interest of time, I'm going to highlight comments that are different than the past staff review and
then move on to um consulting engineer findings and staff findings along with sample conditions of approval. So, as a reminder, the applicant has requested a waiver from the town of Westport subdivision bylaw section um 4A1 that a rounded curve with 25 foot radi is required of the road on the road layer
at all intersections. This was approved at the March 11th, 2025 planning board meeting. Um for to rules governing the sub sorry uh subdivision of land design standards. Um section A streets one location in
alignment J. Proposed subdivision streets shall not be located along the perimeter boundaries of the subdivision except as necessary to provide access to the existing road system and if other physical conditions so require. Um, so the proposed road is located at the perimeter boundary of the subject parcel
due to the arrangement of the pre-existing lot layout. Um, and then item K in the same section, streets in the subdivision shall connect to and be accessible from a public way or an existing private way, both of which must be deemed adequate in the opinion of the planning board to provide access. If the
streets in the subdivision require access over a private way, all land within the subdivision shall have uh appropriate easement rights to the private way. So the proposed road is provided access from Charlotte White Road which conveys access nearby to similar types of development. In
addition, a proposed section of path has been added with a revised contour to connect the proposed road to the existing path to access the cemetery. Moving on a couple pages to section D, protection of natural and cultural features under B easements. Due
regard shall be shown for all natural and cultural features such as large trees, scenic points, historic locations, stone walls, cemeteries, and other similar community assets which if preserved will add attractiveness and value to the subdivision or to the town. So the cemetery will be proposed in the
proposal sorry prop preserved in the proposal. A proposed section of path has been added with a revised contour to connect the proposed road to the existing path to access the cemetery. The plan delineates a section of the stone wall that is to be removed for the
proposed symmetry easement because the site is significantly vegetated. Building envelopes have been incorporated into the revised plans. Right under section E, protection of wetlands, when the subdivision contains land areas which are protected or fall under the jurisdiction of fresher
saltwater wetlands protection acts or wetlands designated by the town of Westport, those land areas will be designated on the plan. No plan which involves obstructing, filling, dredging, excavating, dyking, bulk cutting, rip wrapping or changing the course of any stream, pond, bay, harbor, or tidal
river, or separates any sector of said swamp, marsh, or body of water from the main part will be approved until the planning board has ensured that all of the requirements of the current town and state wetlands regulations have been complied with. So, I think this is a reminder for everybody. No disturbance is proposed to the wetland or pond on
site. work is proposed within the wetlands buffer zone and will require new order of conditions. The plan utilizes an order of resource area delineation and an order of conditions issued by the Westport Conservation Commission in 2007 which are both now expired expired. This has been noted on
the plan. The applicant spoke with the conservation commission agent who is comfortable with using the wetland delineations as is for site. A notice of intent shall be filed with the Westport Conservation Commission by the applicant. Moving on to required improvements under
B, streets and roadways. Item four, all areas between the exterior street lines and the curb lines of the roadways thereon, which are not occupied by sidewalks, shall be graded, loomed, and seated in accordance with the then current standard specifications of the planning board. where the final grade of
the exterior street is above or below the grade of the adjacent land. Walls or slopes shall be constructed sufficient in the opinion opinion of the planning board to support the street or the adjacent land as the case may be. So areas between the exterior street lines and the curb lines of the roadways not
occupied by sidewalks are shown to be graded lommed and seated. Walls and slopes are shown to be constructed to support the street or adjacent land as need be with regards to grade. The sidewalk and buffer area have been included accordingly upon plan revision and the buffer area was widened
approximately two feet to four feet down to item seven in the same section. Um where there are five or more lots in any one subdivision sidewalk shall be constructed on one side of the street. The sidewalk shall be constructed in accordance with the then current standard specs of the planning
board. Um nine lots are proposed. Therefore, sidewalks are required. Sidewalk shall be installed in accordance with the current standard specs of the planning board meeting with the slope no greater than 3% and with an 8 in gravel base topped with 1 and 12 inches of base and 1 and 12 inches of top coat. So these materials that are
used for the basin top coat are now detailed on plan sheet D1. When looking at storm water requirements um item F where storm water basins are designed with a permanent pool depth. A suitable fence shall be used uh when the basin is in close
proximity to residential units. So the infiltration basins have temporary pools which will be drawn down within 72 hours at the end of the 100red-year storm. Um there are no permanent pools in these basements. So this was confirmed by MBL in their third staff review dated March
13th, 2025 that fencing will not be required. Okay. So I think I've called everything in the review. So moving on to the technical review committee. Um the fire department expressed no concerns with the proposed development. The board of health stated that perk
tests have been completed but the applicant has not yet submitted septic plans. And then as we know with conservation commission the applicant will be required to file an order of conditions for the proposed activity in the buffer zone. Um requested waiverss
subdivision bylaw section 4 A1 I that street lines at all intersections be rounded with a curve at each corner having a radius of not less than 25 ft approved at March 11th. Um the consulting engineer findings she's got a few so she's got the same thing about
the um Orad and order of conditions which have both expired. Um, a notice of intent must be filed with the conservation commission and MBL also recommends a condition approval of approval that if there are any changes to the wetland lines or proposed work that results from the conservation
commission permitting, the revised information shall be provided to the planning board for approval. Approval, pardon me. Um, manhole DMH2 has been updated from showing a 12in pipe from DMH to a 15inch pipe for
sizing calculations. In addition, attached details from the March 10th, 2025 response from Zenith Consulting Engineers to MBL's March 7th, 2025 comments show that DMH2 has been revised to constructable as a 4ft diameter structure. Uh the basin elevation for
basin 2 on the basin crosssection cross-section detail have been updated to reflect the accurate elevations for the spillway. Um, while the detention basin has been converted into a pocket wetland system for storm water treatment, a process that does not typically include conducting test bits,
the storm water handbook does identify that the in infiltration rates may be rapid if the soil is more impermeable. MBL recommends a condition of approval that the engineer perform an inspection of the basin excavation during construction to determine if a basin
liner should be installed as well. Um, we talked about the test pits that on March 11th, 2025, the planning board um, determined that additional test pits in the basins not be required. Um, and then while searchcharging pipes is not a recommended design practice due to contaminate suspension in the water, the
water quality volume has been contained in the basins before backing up into the foray per MBL comments for March 7th. When it comes to staff findings um for the rules and regulations regarding the subdivision of land section 4E, the proposal requires approval from the
conservation commissionation approval. Um I'm going to skip over the waiver because I've said that a couple times already. And then on to the sample conditions of approval. Number one, the applicant shall provide to the planning board any changes to the wetlands line
or proposed work that results from the conservation commission permitting. Revision to the plan may be subject to planning board approval. Number two, the applicant shall have the town's consulting engineer witness the basin excavation during construction to determine if a basin liner should be installed as well. Number three, the
applicant shall include a sign at the entrance of the cemetery access easement identifying the historic cemetery. This must be added to the site plan. Contents of the sign must be approved by the planning office. Number four, the applicant shall establish a performance guarantee either as a bond or a covenant
to ensure the completion of work. Number five, homeowners association. As a condition of approval of the subdivision prior to the endorsement of the definitive plan, the applicant shall create and properly fund a homeowners association. All purchas purchasers of land within the subdivision shall be
required to belong to the homeowners association. There are four sub points here. The HOA shall be responsible for the maintenance, repairs, and plowing of the subdivision roadways unless accepted by the town. The HOA shall maintain permanent ownership of any drainage basins or ponds in the subdivision,
including all pipes and other appertenant devices. Sorry, I don't know how to say that. And shall have the permanent responsibility of maintaining, repairing, and replacing said drainage systems as necessary unless accepted by the town. The HOA documents shall be
reviewed and approved by the planning board in consultation with the town council at the expense of the applicant and the HOA shall have an initial fund that is deemed satisfactory to the planning board in consultation with the planning board's technical consultant. And item D for the HOA, they shall be
responsible for the permanent maintenance of the center island of the culde-sac. Moving on, number five, road maintenance and snow removal. The applicant shall be responsible for periodic maintenance and snow removal until such a time if properly funded HOA is created and functioning. Number six,
fire protection or seven, access to and from the fire protection tank must be maintained at all times for the fire department to use in the event of an emergency. Number eight, roof runoff recharge systems are required for each dwelling. Number nine, construction work on the subdivision road and utilities
shall only be done between the hours of 7 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday. Number 10, the applicant shall provide the town legal access to the proposed storm water and fire protection system systems. And number 11, the plan shall include a note on the recordable
plan stating, "No dwelling shall be built on any law without first securing from the board of health a permit for an approved Title 5 compliant soil absorption septic disposal system. And then I know that this is already noted, but as a matter of process, it's best to
resend the previous approval before approving this next subdivision plan. Uh, as it's pretty much almost 6:30, I rem I recommend that at 6:30 we move to the public hearing for the recision and then come back to approve the definitive residential subdivision for Francis
Estates. Okay. So, we're going to um put a hold on this public hearing for a few minutes while we consider the recision of the previous subdivision. So, uh it is 6:30 according
to my watch. Um, I'd like to open the public hearing for the recision of uh the Francis Estate Open Space Residential uh subdivision that was approved several years ago. Uh, file number
25-7 C-MOD. The applicant is requesting to resend the previously approved 15 lot definitive residential subdivision case number 17-016 C-SPH-
OSRD located at the parcel described as map 68 lot 7. Good evening again. My name is Nicholas Gomes, attorney in New Bedford, representing the owner and applicant, Vasro Realy Trust. I am here today asking for a vote from the board to
resin the prior subdivision. It was 15 lots. It had a open space covenant recorded at the Bristol County Registry of Deeds book 13752, page one. Uh that project is not feasible. We were unable to do it over the uh term and we've
provided a updated smaller version which I believe is more suitable uh and it has after a couple meetings with planning board I think been rendered into a final version that the town can be proud of uh maintaining the cemetery the wetland
protections are there and offering uh nine new inhabitants to your welcome community. Um, so on that basis, if there's no questions uh for me, I would just ask for a vote to resend that prior subdivision so we could potentially
proceed with a smaller version. Thank you. Uh, planners. Um, yes. So, planning staff also recommends um rescending this plan.
The so at the at this time as as as attorney gums has said that they basically have a clean letter from planning staff and MBL the consulting engineer um for the the proposal that's on the table right now. Um, so in order
for that proposal to be voted on and approved by the planning board, this previous plan either needs to be rescended or amended, they chose to go the route of the the recision. Um and so that would be the process for the
planning board to approve well the process is to resend this one um the open space residential development and then to uh vote for the um Francis Estates nine lot subdivision.
Okay. Uh comments from the board. I think the resision makes sense. Motion, Mr. Chair. Yes, please. Hi, Attorney Gomes. This has been before us many, many times. I feel like I already live
there. And appreciate uh you and the engineer and the owner in the back and forth making this an improved uh and approvable uh project. So, thank you. Thanks for uh
working with the planning board and the planning board staff the way you have. Um, I move uh based on recommendation of this planning board staff to resend the 15 lots definitive subdivision plan case
number 17016C pi hos d. I hope I didn't just buy something on Amazon for that. Located at the parcel described as map 68 lot 7.
Second. Any more discussion? All those in favor? I opposed. There are none. So, back to the uh public hearing for Francis Estates
file number 24-037C- SPA-L. Um there's one last condition of approval that needs to be added to this. Um we need for the developer to indicate whether or not um for the purposes of
shity if they're going to um have a bond or a covenant on the on the lots. So the option of either the shy bond or covenant or covenant. Mhm. Uh here it's the shity bond would be the preference.
Okay. Do we have a figure for that? We can get it out afterward. Yeah. Okay. If I may, Mr. Chair. Yep. Um, could I ask that that condition be drafted so that the option of the
developer making that decision after looking into both that decision can be ultimately made? But from experience, I'm thinking surely where it's going to go. But that would be my only request is uh that condition be drafted that the developer either obtain a shy bond
satisfactory to the town or Okay. You want a motion? Well, I think we need to to go over the uh uh conditions and waiverss. Um before we can vote on that,
the waiver has already been voted on. That was approved at a at a previous meeting. Okay, Mr. Sure. And and uh and the assistant planner went through the uh sample conditions.
I think we need to approve them. Oh, all right. separately than approved the program. All right. I have a I have a question, Mr. Chair. Um it's unfortunate that the uh engineers not here this evening. I I I
just had a question that they our engineering consultants have reviewed the storm water stuff. I believe that's true. This has been continued many times. Um but I I want to make sure that
that's true. Um because uh while this the the drainage solution here was complicated and um and
um you know I my my only advice is I hope the developer engages the engineer to do some engineering here because um if If one one looks at the the the
building envelopes and the subdivision. So we have we have the the whole area but virtually the entire parcel is drainage easements in which pipes run back and
forth in basins out of basins. This is this is not a this is this is neither a simple solution nor a simple solution to build. It's it's easy to get this wrong.
Um, so, uh, if it's it's been through a peer review, the hydraulics all work, building it. Building it is another thing.
So there's no uh I think that's a piece of advice, not not a condemnation of the plan. If I may, Mr. Chair. Yep. Um I have taken down diligent notes. I will pass
this on to the developer and the engineer. And the engineer did speak to my pocket phone saying that the storm water was reviewed by the consultant. So I can at least confirm Okay. So, I I also have a few a few concerns before we vote on it. One is
this property is uh infamous in Westport for the destruction of the cemetery. And I want to be sure that the cemetery, whatever is left, is really well protected. It's
designated on the plan, but there are trees. You can see on the plan, it shows that there are overhanging trees along the edge of the cemetery. Along the edge of the cemetery also is a storm water
basin and a lot that's going to be developed for housing. And I am a little concerned that the housing lot is a little higher elevation than the cemetery. And I want to make sure that the
drainage from that lot does not go through the cemetery. And secondly, um, that every effort be made to preserve the trees that are on the
cemetery or around the cemetery that provide some shade to it are not disturbed as much as possible. Now it may not be possible next to the storm water
basin but uh that's a concern of mine and I would like some effort to be made to preserve this as much as possible and I don't know how to put
that into the into the decision. And secondly, I I agree with Mr. Daylor that uh this is a pretty complex storm water system and uh I would hope that we could
write into the approval that the storm water system has to be complete and functioning before you start construction on anything else. Mr. Chair. Um, also and that would help him with the shity like normally
typically get as much done, get it the binder and then and then if everything's working, it would be pretty inexpensive for them. I had a question just um and this my apologies if maybe our assistant planner
included this in the conditions but with regard to these drainage easements um and I'm particularly thinking about the easement that runs behind the houses on lots four and three and four
And so if you put up please the plan that's designated uh grading and drainage plan. Yeah, there it is. So which lots did you want to uh number well in particular number four lot four.
So were the So in this case the rectangle that represents the the proposed house is very close to that drainage easement because I imagine
uh the perk tests have been done in between the house and the road. So it can't the road the house can't get closer to the road. It'd be very easy for that when the uh when they go to dig
the foundation that they you know they may push the house back even closer to the drainage easement. Is it was it part of the all the in the conditions of the uh I guess homeowners association that there are strict restrictions on putting
on plantings or obviously building on that on those easements that the homeowners are prohibited from doing so because it's so easy that these maps get done these plans get done and then you know five years from now uh plantings
start creeping in uh people put a a shed out the back and uh and I imagine that you want to be able to get any part of that drainage easement. There might be a break in the line or something and you have to get uh equipment in to repair it
and uh everyone gets riled up if they start digging up their uh their costly landscaping. So my qu I'm just verifying that there are strict restrictions in the homeowners association is no
planting, no no structures. I I mean I would think that if there isn't that would be a sensible addition could be a restriction on the Say it again. It could be a restriction that's called out on the plan set. Yeah,
could be. I'm just trying to verify that that's all because there were so there was a lot of information that was uh passed along there. But we don't have the homeowners the draft homeowners association document yet. So well then I guess I'm requesting that there there be
some so something to that effect. If I may, Mr. Chair. Uh so what I would say Mr. is that uh your concern I think would fall under the homeowners associ association's duty of maintenance generally um and maintaining ownership
of the utilities and drainage. Um but I will specifically ensure that the homeowners association uh that I draft uh and is applied to this project does have an indication that there's no structures or plantings by the homeowners in these areas of the drain.
Yeah. Thank you. So, it it shows on lot three, four, and lot all the rest. Um the building envelope shows some of the existing walls there, I guess, and the drainage
easement. Does that mean that the homeowner can't do anything beyond that? I would say they would not be able to um so I think the answer question is no.
They would be able to put a shed for example in the rear of their property as long as it's not next to the wetlands that's touching the very southerntherly part of that. Um but there's a space between the drainage
easement here and the rest of the property line. So this could be a shed area, but this would not be a shed area. Similar with plantings, if they for whatever reason want to put a big chestnut tree back here, that would generally be okay, but not in the drain.
And is there septic um restricted to where it says on this plan or can they put it in the back? My understanding of the plan as detailed
is they're trying to put the sepic systems in front of the houses uh in particular walk number four that we're discussing. It's in between the house and the roadway, not towards the rear of the property going through the drainage. Mhm.
And as you know in Massachusetts and in the town of Westport now, ADUs are allowed by right. Can they put a ADU back there? Uh, so to be honest with you, I
um I do not have the exact answer where I can tell you with 100% confidence, but my understanding with the ADUs is that it's a format of an addition off the house, not a whole secondary freestanding building. No, no, it can be freestanding. Then in theory, that could
potentially work. Such a unit would need to have a septic system or or connected to the one. Yeah. So, Mr. Chair. Yes sir. Uh looking at lot four but it occurs in
other places. There are existing stone walls. I I don't Do we have a condition about preservation of stone walls? No. We should we have we could we could require it of the of uh because I was going to move that we
approve the uh conditions and then uh also move an amendment to those conditions. I think for example, one additional condition could require um the maintenance of existing stone
walls. Um and that might present a problem on lot four if you build a uh you know because that's it looks from the plan like the stone wall cuts across all of lot four.
Uh I I'm not sure that stone wall I think those are that's an an illustration of the tree line. The the stone walls are really around the cemetery. That little that little curlic line is really Oh, I thought it was a bunch of
circles that like this and that's that's just all right. I'm misreading it then. It looks like it's the stone wall. So I missed but still I think that um uh an amendment to approving all the
conditions one would be to preserve stone walls the another would be on the condition that um number three where we're talking about a sign at the entrance of the
cemetery. I think we could add language there that would uh protect uh both uh the stone walls around the cemetery and that's important and the shading from existing mature trees uh to that
condition. Uh, so I guess I was thinking that the first motion would be just to approve the findings and conditions as is and then we would do some amendments to that
motion to deal with the cemetery uh with preservation of stone walls and uh I don't know if there's a way to we can just proven a condition that uh Bob Daylor talked about of this
is complex. Think it through measure twice. We can just add all of them and you can vote on all of them at the same time just just for the sake of simplicity. So right now the here the one the the five additional conditions
that have been talked about. The consulting engineer must verify that storm water will not create an adverse impact upon the cemetery. Storm water construction must be complete before requesting building
permits. Um existing foliage around the cemetery must not be removed. Um in the homeowners association document, there shall be a statement um indicating that no construction or plantings shall occur within the drainage easements and stone
walls on the site shall not be disturbed by either the developer or homeowners. Yeah. Okay. I just have a question. So, is it clear what the boundary of the cemetery is? Yeah, it's on the plan. Mhm. Well, I
see I see a couple of walls. It's on It's on this plan. Look at that. There is an easement around it. Yeah. So, it's all of that area there. The cement. This is I see
it's a big area. Yeah. Yeah. So, you know, again, I don't want to beat a dead horse, but on lot three, the proposed driveway goes right along the edge of the cemetery.
Uh, and it looks like it downs slopes towards the cemetery. So some care must be taken there to make sure it doesn't So all these houses will have roof infiltration.
Yes. So I would also suggest and uh with the condition for the consulting engineer to verify that the storm water will not create an adverse impact upon the cemetery that the design if it is found to create an adverse impact it
would be approved by the planning office in consultation with the consulting engineer. Right. Um, is the is the developer going to build all these houses or is he going to sell the lots? I don't have that full. My understanding is generally it's some
built and then others are sold off. But I don't have exact plan because it it makes it more difficult to comply with all these all these issues if you have outside builders coming in
who just want to get it done and get out. Um like my only uh response is that the the homeowners association is kind of a safety valve almost where
they have enforcement power to the unfortunately the property owner um if something was done the contract generally the homeowners association doesn't take effect until 50% of the lots are sold.
So that leaves a lot of leeway for a while. Uh so uh the practice has been to start the homeowner association right away and as soon as people are getting sold, they're signing up and understanding at the closing table before uh all the
easements. No, but what I'm saying is that the the developer owns the homeowners association until he's not a majority owner, right? So he's like policing himself for the
first five lots. Yes. And then if there's any other third party developer to purchase the lot, for example, uh they'd be subject to the same and they would be aware of uh everything at closing including the homeowner restrictions.
So I don't think it any develop could ski what we're discussing here today. Okay. Anything more? I have one last question. Um do you have any specifics regarding the sign for the cemetery that you want there or should I discuss with
the local historical? I would consult with uh the folks in Westport that are dealing with ancient cemeteries. Uh, and I would suggest getting in contact with Betty Slade.
Betty Slade, right? Slade. Slade. Yeah. Slade. Um, and I don't know if she could help you with that. Thank you. You want a motion, Mr. Chair? Please.
Um, so I uh move to approve the nine lot definitive residential subdivision requiring site plan and low impact development approval on the parcel described as map 68 lot 7 between 50 and
58 Charlotte White Road. uh with uh the findings and conditions by both the engineer and the staff as uh stated by and uh modified by uh the assistant town
planner and town planner and the waiverss listed on the plan. I second that motion. Any more discussion? All those in favor? I I I Any opposed? That carries.
Vote passes and no opposition. No opposite. Thank you very much, members of the planning board and staff. I appreciate your help and time today. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, we we do need a motion to close both public hearings as well. Move
to close both public hearings. Second. All those in favor? I I need a second. That's the decision for the I just
This is a blank check. It goes direct. Is this for an increase in my salary? I need to put the This is doubling my my Yeah, double.
Who seconded the motion to close? Mark. So, next up, uh we're going to go back to administrative items. Uh we were in the middle of uh 359 Division Road Solar I believe. Yes.
And I have a a question and we received a lot of pictures on a lot of pictures. On page 68 there's a picture of uh a flooded
area uh in the middle of the solar panels. What's the deal with that? Why isn't it draining? That is basin, too. Um, the panels go into the basin. No, they don't. The water's underneath the basin. Underneath the panels, the water is
underneath, but the panels themselves are not going into it. Um, I think that that was the only basin that the engineer Molly Morgan identified as needing um some debris cleared out. I think Derek Miller said that it's the debris was still inside it. It needs to
be cleared so that it can drain properly. We visited after a we visited on a pretty wet week, a rainy week. Yeah. And this is still open too. So And one of the things that I
saw that one of the engineers I was it ours or theirs said that there's no grass growing yet. They're not supposed to be planting grass. They're supposed to be planting pollinator mix. Mhm. Mhm.
So, do does our agent in here know that? Oh, here's my thing. Does the applicant know that? I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman. Who did you say you you drove by and saw the grass? Is that No, it was in the report. Oh, in
the pictures. And it shows in all the pictures. There's nothing growing. Yeah. Yes. But uh and the engineer called it out and said there's no grass growing yet. Yep. It's not supposed to be grass. It's supposed to be pollinators. Okay. Yeah. One of the conditions under
approval was to have a pollinator mix. I will make a note to follow up to follow up with Brad. Yeah. Rosine. Well, this is still under under construction. I know it's mostly built, but it's definitely not finished.
It's in April with nothing. Yep. So, as Dia had said when she was going over the site visit, when they went out, we had gotten um some photos from a a neighbor saying that they could still see the utility pad from their property.
And there was uh so they asked, you know, can the planning board require additional screening? and we reached out to them to see if they would be amendable just to include it instead of, you know, us having to compel them to do it. And they said, "Sure, you know, we'll add a couple of plantings there."
So, this is what they added, um, which is up around here, which was to screen it from across the street. So, it's a it's a mixture of some evergreen plants like holl and and
whatnot. The deer don't eat hollies yet. Yeah. Yes. If they get hungry enough. Some holl. Some hollies. Right. And we had the conservation agent
approve the the planting list as well. And which path are they trying to screen? Um this this one right here. That one. Okay. That's the neighbor on the other side was saying that after the uh it was in
the winter and so um obviously there are no Yeah. leaves on the trees and they could see right over. Yeah. Stays green. So all all that stuff is is now on pads as opposed to hanging
up on top of holes. And and this is that driveway is a long driveway. This is definitely back in the woods. It is long. Do you have anything else for that?
I I think I think Derek Melo and I felt like we wanted to see this landscape screening plan on the ground over just on this because we were like it looks adequate but it's tough when it's you know it's kind of cleared out in the entrance of the pathway and the
connection to Division Road. So you you get a lot of angles of this utility pad. So, you know, I think especially coming from uh yeah, the north down in a in a southward motion, you coming and you see it on your right hand side. I think that
that's the angle we're concerned about the most. Did they saw the telephone pole on the ground near the road? And I assume that's going to be the connection to the grid. Yeah. So,
um how long till they connect? All I have is that it's incomplete. So when I follow up with Rob regarding that grass versus pollinator, I can also ask when do you think you're going to establish this connection. Okay. Any questions? Mr. Chair, I I did I drove by there and
I thought I thought it looked actually good because they don't have the same scenario as main road. Okay. Right. So I think the P how many PS did you see? It's probably just the P. Yeah, that's good. That's just they're just on the ground still, but I mean I'm sure that's going to be the one that takes it from
the ground. But um we'll get a lot less calls than we did on me. Yeah. So, next is 549 Plaza at 549 American Legion Highway. Review of SW Coal report
received May 2nd, 2025 and site visit from April 24th, 2025. All right, that's me again. Um, a site inspection was conducted on April 24th, 2025 with um the applicant Mac Long, Derek Melo from SW Quill, and myself. I
wanted to join um because the owner has businesses in operation but they still have some open permits with building. They haven't submitted an asbel. So we kind of wanted to see what's going on. Derek Melo's reviews attached. I've just sort of condensed it. Um so there was
like a little bit of a layout parcel shift or conveyance in the back regarding building B, which the asphalt needs to reflect that building B is no longer part of this uh 549 plaza plan. Um they have a drive-thru and a kiosk. um on site that still have open permits
with buildings. So those two um operations or those two buildings are not in operation. Everything else um on the site is in operation and has closed off its permits with building. Um other items to address, rip rack needs to be installed in the
swale/spillway. Um underground drainage to accompany the required roof drainage was not installed for the eastern structure. Um Derek actually def Derek from SW Cole defers to the applicant's design engineer for comment um which there is none at this time. So that for
that eastern structure the roof drainage is just emptying out into the grass area at this time. Um so Eslehole feels like it should be installed but waiting for comment. Um the ballard placement is okay. The dumpsters on this eastern side are not on the pad but on grass. So the
owner is um meant to fix that up with the tenant. And then the handicap parking sign was deemed by building to be borderline too high, but it's fine. There's no need to change. So, it's it's slightly above um state and federal regulations for ADA compliance, but
within a um enough of or a small enough margin that building deemed it to be allowable, permissible. There needs to be deb debris cleanup throughout the site. And lastly, a thicker binder course was installed instead of the approved top course for the asphalt. Um, SW Cole is
fine with it, but they do refer to the planning board to see if a surface coat um be required, which was what was um detailed on the approved plans. So, do we have any any uh way to concur with what they say they
did? Do we have a core sample? Do we have uh a affidavit from the from the applicator? Because You can say a lot of things. I just don't know if we know if it's true. No,
that's very true. Um, regarding Yeah. the core sample. No core sample to my knowledge, but Dererick Miller had a visual inspection and he's the one who But you can only see the top. But you can only see the top. Yeah. But that's they were just installing the binder. So, it's binder and top and whatever the detail said. If you know, typically
years ago, they used to just go inch and a half, inch and a half, right? Now it's two or two and a half or like I did a piece of 195 it was 18 in so black base and all of that. So the wearing course is a tighter mix. So if he did thicker binder which is good in preparation of
till he's finished and then does the top that's a good idea. But he said he he didn't do a binder in a top. He just did a thick binder. Yeah. It's not a house. He's got a speck on it. So he's got to follow the speck. Did he? That's the question.
No, I mean the the det and Derek knows that. Whatever the detail is, you got to put top on it later. U I I went by the other day and and looked at this property. My recollection of the plan was that it was going to be paved around
the buildings so that you could drive and access these overhead doors and everything. Um, and I know it's it's some sort of they sort of control access that is
you can't get into your just drive up and get into your unit, but um it's now just gravel around around these buildings. And isn't I recall that
it was supposed to be paved so there was some circulation around these buildings. Is that going to happen or what? I remember there was a discussion about that and the connection to the buildings that are not on that lot on the back in the back, right? And quite frankly, I
don't remember what we decided. I mean, we we we approved a site plan, so whatever it says on the site plan is right what it should look like. Yeah, we'll follow up on that. Um there are a number of things that are still outstanding on the site, so it may just not have been done yet. Um, but we'll
we'll double check the site plan. May I ask when you visited the site because one part of the turnaround is paved with the rest being gravel that where the till dusk bakery is, they've got a page turnaround on that. Not complete with that top course, but they've got one. So
that's the update there. So are they current with paying the fees for a consulting engineer? We require hospitals. Yeah, they they are we we've had instances with this
applicant where he's just gone ahead and worked and then come back and tried to seek modifications. Let's try to avoid that. Let's here's the plan. Build a plan. Okay. Um, next is zero Adamsville Road,
file number 25-007A, an approval not required, request by the applicant to withdraw a two lot plan of land located at zero Adamsville Road described as assessor's map 77, lots 5A and six.
This was an ANR plan that was submitted to us last week on Friday and I was out on Friday. I did talk with the applicant on Thursday. I advised them that the plan that they had that they were considering submitting constituted a subdivision amendment and therefore the
planning board could not endorse it. The reason why it's a subdivision amendment is that they're modifying a prior plan from the 70s, relocating the road right of way a little bit to the north. You can see on this plan there's a bit of a
curve and where that curve is, it's actually straight back 90 degree um a 90 degree uh ingress from Adamsville Road. And so that requires an amendment to the subdivision. You can't do that through
an ANR plan. Um they submitted anyway on Friday. And then on uh yeah, yesterday they came or uh it wasn't yesterday, it was it was May 12th. So yeah, I guess this was last week and it was the previous Friday. Anyway, it doesn't matter. Um they decided to withdraw it.
They came in and asked, you know, would the planning board endorse this? and I said, "No, we could couldn't recommend endorsement of this because you're modifying the subdivision." And so they're they're requesting to withdraw it without prejudice. Which of the two lots that they were proposing?
They're not proposing any any new lots. Actually, what they're doing is modifying this lot line right here. Yep. To pick up some lot area and and frontage, road frontage. It's a non-conforming lot right now. doesn't show the existing lot conditions, but
it's non-conforming due to uh it's it's undersized and and doesn't have 150 ft of frontage. So, they're trying to bring it into conformity, right? Um but the means they went through to try to do that wasn't the appropriate track. So,
this was uh something that was approved by uh an ANR plan back in the early 70s, so 50 years ago. Um, and I think the lot requirements then were smaller. They
were 40,000 square ft. Um, but the planning board, probably a newly instigated planning board, I think without any help, approved a
subdivision via an ANR. Mhm. That's what happens. It's uh it's weird, but it sure is a sub. It's still a subdivision. Sure is a subdivision now. All right. So anyway, I would entertain a
motion to accept the withdrawal. I move uh to accept the request to withdraw without prejudice the two lot plant land located at zero Adamsville Road described as assisted map 775A and six. Second. All those in
favor? I I Okay. Next is planning board southeastern southeast regional planning and economic development district serpent. Uh we need to appoint a commissioner from the s of the from the
planning board. Mr. Chair, is is your job? I I could do it again. Want a motion? Would you like it? Yeah, sure. Second. I think uh our chair has been part of
sered since before sered and he represents Westport incredibly well. So I would move that uh we appoint our chairman to the surf commissioner. Okay. All those in favor I wait I think I
second it just follow please. Thank you. Just follow. Just Yes. Okay. Uh, next is solar projects in Westport. A status update.
This was requested. Mark, you requested this a couple meetings ago. So this is the latest update on um this matrix is the latest update on uh solar projects. We haven't received any solar projects in a number of years. Um but there are a
couple outstanding um and various stages of construction. As you heard about division road from DIA, that one is nearing completion. Um there are a couple of others that construction hasn't started but are
construction is anticipated to start um sometime soon. The route 88 solar uh we've received reports that construction resumed as of last week on that. So,
we'll have to have the consulting engineer go out and regularly do site visits as they're actually I think it was Derek who told us that they resume construction on that site. Um, the Pineh Hill Road solar that is
currently under construction. Um, they're addressing some of the final site plan requirements from the special permit approval division road we went over. And then Ironwood renewables. This is one on Horsene Neck Road. This was
approved in 2022 and they haven't started construction. However, they are anticipating beginning construction. Um, and they said in the beginning of 2027. So they're that that will take them
right up to the line of when I think they'll have about seven or eight months to uh to get to get the thing done. Otherwise, they may need need another special permit extension if they haven't made substantial progress on the site.
just they they got an extension from the planning board. I think it was a year ago and then due to um uh one of the acts passed by Governor Healey last or yeah last year um special permits got
extended. So uh the their special permit would expire sometime in later 2027, but they haven't started construction yet. So we'll see what they decide on doing. Yeah, thank you for doing that. Um, is
there a copy of that point of that? It's in your packet, but if you want this, you have my copy. It's on page in the in the iPad. In the iPad. Okay. You he can have this. Um, and uh I think I think it
was you John who asked about the Yeah. the if all you know what is the cap what is the output of all of the completed projects weren't you asking something along those lines John yeah so they've got here they don't have uh totals I'm
surprised by how many have been constructed and you have the megawatt size of each of them and you have uh beside states and stuff like
had there 20 total. Uh one was withdrawn and um then it looked like one other is denied or something. So
18 active and it also shows woodlands cleared on each of them. I think uh it would be helpful um on the woodlands cleared to get a
total and same with the megawatts approved if those two columns could be but I think this is really helpful. There's one more that's actually not on here. It's that one we considered um I think it was just a pre-application
and they never moved forward with it on Horseneck Road. They were going to do some directional boring underneath. It says withdrawn on that one. Is that the one that is not grow? Okay. Yeah, that is that is on there. That's on there. Yeah. So, it's
uh 20 that came before us, but two of them uh are not going to happen. So, it's 18. And most of them constructed with three or so, three or four uh still under
construction. Do we have a a total of the megawws that we Yeah, that's what I was asking for. Both the total of the megawatts and the total of the land clear uh forest not land cleared. It's what forest cleared? Woodlands cleared. Woodlands. Yeah. Do you have a total on that? How many? No,
that's what I was asking for. That it it shows uh how many acres in each project, but it doesn't total the whole column. I mean, you could go and total it yourself, but I think it would be easy
if if you guys just total that that column of woodlands cleared and total the megawatts because it's an obvious question, right? And yeah, and and I'm sorry. Yeah. Yeah. I I think it's easy. Just take the words out of that column,
you can get it. Yeah, that's that's an easy. Yeah. And It would also I don't know if we have this information is how many acres of panels there are versus how much woodland is clear.
But I guess you could use the size of the megawatts. Yeah. Do you know how many acres we have all total or getting and that are active that are getting ready to be constructed? um how many acres of solar
panels you will have. I not talking about the solar panels themselves like how much space each project and acreage takes up. You said you've got that per Yeah, we have. But uh so it's woodlands cleared versus area used. So some of
them that I'd like to know know both. So you know how many acres does do these things take up and how many um what percentage of that was woodlands that was cleared. That'd be good to know if we have that information. We have 32.2
acres under construction or slated to be constructed because not all of them are under construction right now. I don't I don't know what the ratio of uh force cleared to uh the the panels the panel area is.
I'm sorry. That's 32 acres for what's under construction now, not what has been constructed. Oh yeah. So that's that's the entire site. So it's 32.2 acres for the entire site and that's No, it's for four different sites. Four four
sites are under construction. Under construction. Three of the four are under construction. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So there's 20 total. Four of them are under constructed.
uh three of them I think were withdrawn or denied and the rest were all complete were all constructed. I think that's about right. So which of these is the
uh Westport gravel and sand lot? Uh, it's No, it's it's just called Westport Stone and Sand. Um, yeah. Yeah. Old County Road 536 Old County Road. Mr. Ch, I got to say that's
one of the best ones I've seen. It's great because there were no and we got 6 and 12 megawatts out of it and it's reusing the wasteland. That's I would really that's why I came tonight was to find out like how many
acres we have all total dedicated to solar work here in town and then of those acres how much woodlands were cleared. Well, my calculation is 134 and a half acres of woodlands of woodlands not just
but it could be I just did this quickly here 134 Well, I think if if you just do those summary uh totals, uh I'd love to get a hard copy of that,
too. Okay. Uh and maybe at the next meeting. And I think there's general interest in what this table shows. If you wanted to send it to Shoreline or something, I would
think they would find of interest. I'd also like to know I don't know where you get this information is how many acres of woodlands we have. Yeah. So, uh you you mean how many acres of woodlands in all of West Point? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I think that's
uh I think Joseph Englesby may have I think he probably included that in the A uh report. I I know he had a GIS mapping of different soils and woodlands in the
climate resilience draft agore. You may remember better than me whether that's in there. I think it's in there. Is there any way of of a map that you can look at and just see where the solar arrays are?
We don't have a map for that. We would have to make one. You could break one in. It's not updated, but we do have some spots. Oh, yeah. Would that be really hard to update?
It takes time. Yeah, it takes Yeah. I think that would be also interesting for lines if you're going to send information. Yeah. Where they're all located. Yeah. Well, thanks for putting this uh together. Yeah. I think it's really
useful information. And you said that we haven't had an application on solar for quite a while. We had we had somebody come in and they were going to do it, but they needed an easement over somebody else's land and they're having a fight and so it's not
there's that. We talked to someone who wanted to build a solar canopy off on a property over at um on Forge Road and haven't heard anything from him in a while, but that was kind of
interesting. It's over a paved. It's a like already paved site. So to have the canopy over top of it. Yeah. Be correct. Yeah. So is that the the industrial place there? It's one one of those properties over there. Yeah. 85 Forge.
The uh Mr. Chair, if I could ask for one other piece of information, which I think we had the last time we looked at this. You're totaling up all the megawws.
uh and I think it would be useful um to know how many uh megawws of electricity are used in Westport. And I think we calculated that
before because we we said that there was my memory's correct like 150% of Westport's electricity need it had been approved in projects not
constructed but approved. So I think that in order to do that calculation uh uh the planning staff had figured out what the entire town uses. Mhm. And that would be useful. Compare those two
numbers. You can do the average house types. Mhm. We do know the number of residents the uh what's there are a couple that are missing their their power generation but um there's roughly
45 and a half constructed and it's and that number is probably something close to 50 just under 50 megawws constructed that's actually
generating power 55.67. Yeah. Well, you'd also want to know, I mean, if if if people could be surveyed to find out how many homeowners have solar
panels and use that to or part of their or all of their electricity uh generation, but it take some sort of survey, I guess. Uh Do you remind me of how many um what
was the maximum amount of parents that our bylaw finally decided on? I think it's 14. No, I think it's 12. 12. 12. Yeah, it was 16 and then it got at town
meeting lowered to 12, right? Yep. And that makes it, I think, about the the edge of what's profitable for somebody to come in and do it. So, you're not going to get on an easy site, you might get
somebody to come and do it, but on a hard site, I don't see how they how they do it. Unless it's the wrong property, they're going to do it themselves. When I when I first got involved with an indictment, that next stamp said 25 acres was the break even point.
you know, that's a while ago when things were more expensive. So, but now without subsidies, I don't know what's going to happen. So, what we don't know is what um the new law that was passed or the
new regulation that's coming from Massachusetts uh to enable uh a one-stop permitting for for renewable energy. Um, I went to
uh with DIA, we went up to the CBTC up in Worcester and I sat in on one of these uh things that was talking about this new thing and it was so full of gobbledygook that I couldn't afterwards I couldn't figure
out what that's going to mean here. Um because apparently you're supposed to have somebody some entity in the town that can do do all the permitting for somebody coming in to do that.
So I don't know who that would be, but it's not us. So I, you know, so that you'd have somebody that would shepherd the whole project through conservation, through the planning board, through building.
Um, and have to complete all those things within a year. Um, but we have nobody who's capable of doing that at the moment. So I don't know how that's going to work. And if a
year to the they they come in and say I mean none of our our things from us have taken anywhere near that len length of time. So but I have no idea how it's going to
work really. I mean, it's if it's going to work, if it's going to go into effect, but uh they got a lot of work to do to convince everybody that it's going to work because I don't see how small towns can can do
it. There's no there's no money to hire an extra person to do that. Um and all of our all of our committees are siloed. We're not supposed to
make our decision upon what's happening at the conservation commission or at the board of health or at the zoning board. You know, it's supposed to be we make our own decisions with blinders on. So, I don't know how it's going to work,
but it'll be interesting. So, I think we're done with that. Uh, next is Granite Post Road file number 13-2C review of S SW Cole report received April 20th.
Thank you, chairman. So, SW Kohl's comments from this review have actually already been incorporated into the final as for Granite Post Road, which we do hold in the office. Um, trash racks were incorrectly identified as uninstalled. They are reflected on site. It's a
little too early to determine vegetative health. There are some bare spots that were identified that need to be receded. Reinsspection in warmer in warmer months is advised. A PVC pipe from law 115 into an easement was not originally reflected on the plans. The asill does now reflect
this infrastructure and um a shy of 8,700 has been retained for the remaining 5% of work to complete. We will motion to release the shy um at the next planning board meeting as we do have that final as built now. So I'm confused. I thought they were
suggesting to hold 8500. Yes, they suggested to hold it to complete the remaining 5% of work which is now completed. So we got that as not with enough turnaround to get it onto this agenda. So okay, may want to check with Derek if we should retain anything for
the grass growth. M okay. We'll entertain to accept the as build. Mhm. And so they'll be done with us and Yeah. release, you know, however. So we can we can opine whether or not the town should accept the road to the select board for
next year. This one has been accepted. Oh, we did. Yeah. This this this was one of the two. Okay. So this is just wrapping up some outstanding items. Okay. Next is uh the planner and
assistant planners reports. A recap on town meeting. So, both the accessory dwelling unit and short-term rental zoning bylaws passed and those have been forwarded to the attorney general's office. Just a note about that, these take effect
immediately um even while they're under review. However, the town bylaw is not effective for 90 days on the short-term rental um regulation uh for the select board.
And so it's either 90 days after adoption or if the attorney general's office makes a decision earlier, right? Um so just wanted to let you all know that that part, even though the zoning bylaws take effect that night, there's going to
be a lag for the the short-term rental piece. Um but the selectman's or select board's office is working to develop an application for that. Okay. So just a just a a question
um with the ADU change uh we changed our bylaw because of the change in the state law. Mhm. Um and so effectively we amended our our bylaw or did we replace it? We amended
ours was an amendment. So, the the new bylaw that I read, the draft one that you guys sent around, uh I don't think I just looked at it quickly. It doesn't mention the number of bedrooms, but I think our original
one said one bedroom. Mhm. We can't restrict that. We were advised by council you could not restrict the number of bedrooms and accessory dwelling unit, but the square footage still stays at 900. Yeah. Yeah. It's 900 square feet
for a bedroom or half of the existing dwelling, whichever is uh greater. Well, so for Oh, I I see what you're saying for so for the the Yes. the size of the ADU um is 900 ft or one half the gross
floor area um of the principal dwelling on the site. So, if you have a 1500 foot house, you can only do 750. Yep. What if you have a 5,000 foot house? Then you can do 900. So in that 900 ft, you could have five
bedrooms have as many accepted as many as No, not there's a minimum bedroom. There's a minimum. So I started saying there's a minimum square footage of I think it's 90 square
feet for a single occupancy bedroom. Um, so I mean one of the things, however you, you know, do the geometry to fit things in there. One of the things I find a problem with that is like if you're looking to build like this is a senior house and handicap accessibility
and I mean I don't I don't know if we should be I mean I think we should be a little more flexible with the size of it if you're trying to put bathrooms and everything to be able to get a wheelchair through and it just doesn't make sense to me. So it's got to be 900. There are a lot of there are a lot of
twobedroom two bath condos and that are less than that. No, you figure 30 by 30, right? The the state set of Yeah. I mean, I like how large have somebody stay. So, it's in the state law. Yeah. Somebody sleeps
over. I thought you could you can go to the zoning board to get a waiver for additional things like ramps and u access. Yeah, if you need dimensional reliefs for from setbacks and stuff, you
can you can do that. Um but for the it's the state the enabling legislation puts the cap on 900 square f feet. So we can't unfortunately doesn't cover garage though. the garage. It doesn't count
count the garage if it's for park parking. I think it I don't have any objection with that because I mean the purpose of this starts out with the name granny flat, right? To to allow uh a senior to stay or have their kids come
in. And so, as Manny said, that might be one bedroom for the person and might be another bedroom for caretaker for that person. Uh, but the risk of a use is that they all turn into
VRBOs and it destroys the original purpose of this is allowing seniors or others or, you know, modest amount. But if you can put five bedrooms, then all of a sudden, you know, it's a party
house. And it's and so I think having that limit of 900 allows it comfortably to do the main intention for this and reduces the likelihood of misuse in
terms of intent of a well it has the restriction that do we not sorry there is a restriction may not be used as a short-term rental right and plus uh when we did the short-term rental bylaw. We also passed the town bylaw which allows
the the select board to regulate them. Yeah. So that they can um approve them on mass like they do with the East Beach. That's only an option an option though to restrict short-term rentals. Communities don't
have to do that. So while Westport did, there could be other communities that might end up having that that very issue. Mr. Chair, so can a mobile home be used as you can use mobile home like the like we can't do mobile homes in Westmore
except on East Beach or you can get a bu you can get a trailer permit. I'm I'm saying like a mobile home is not a not a camper. Well, I I I looked at a a thing in Dartmouth. They had a big
uh public meeting on ADUs and it was packed with people. It was supposedly trying to tell you how you can do one. And he said there's three ways uh three different kinds of
edus. What is approved at the state level is only that lives up to the Massachusetts building code. The other two are
RV standards that are I guess national, I'm not sure. And the other one is manufactured home standard. And um neither one of them I think are approved in Westport.
But you know, somebody asked, well, can I can I buy a tiny home online and put it in and make it ADU? And they said only if it is up to the building code in Massachusetts, which
most of them are not. I think they're building some pods that are pretty pretty nice. They're building these things out there right now that that meet all those codes. They're like little self-contained pods. They Oh, yeah. Yeah. Yeah. But I'm not sure they built they meet a standard residential
code versus a manufactured home code. Um, but I, you know, I don't know. It's something that it's beyond what I understand to be
able to figure out, but because I think it'd be great if we could have tiny homes around here. Uh, next we're going to So, this is our one-stop grant application. We're going to submit
one of these again this year. So, this started as uh this started as the as potentially being a component to the Head of Westport project, looking at how that area
um functions as a village commercial area and using that or working on that in tangent with some of the improvements that we are hoping to do through an MVP grant um to improve climate and storm
water and flood water resilience up there. But in talking it over with Serpent, I was starting to think that for the one-stop program, it may have been a little bit too small in scale to look at just that one area. So, what I'd like to do with with this is to develop
um work with SERPA to help do the public engagement to develop um village commercial zoning districts in the town's historic um historic commercial centers. So like Adamsville, head out of Westport, like I said, maybe include um
Central Village, do the point. Um so that way we can help deal with some of these nonconformities but also support the small business this the small business economy um in Westport because it if they need to change a use a little bit
it becomes a whole thing where they have to go get a variance from the ZBA and and I think these are all places that um you know that the community like enjoys the community enjoys having these small commercial areas.
Um, so how can we make it a little bit easier to do businesses do business in these areas? Um, and then to put some regulations on if there are any new developments in in these village areas
um what parameters we would like to see um on that development. So, this is to start the pro the community um engagement process to inform some zoning bylaw amendments at a future town
meeting. I think that's just a natural u way to go. I mean, if you historically this town is made up of a series of villages, and if we can continue
that that model and and make it known, you know, and we we certainly differentiate ourselves from our neighboring towns as a a town of made up of villages.
It's a great It's a great uh takes image. takes a takes a takes five. Yeah, exactly. And lastly, the last item here is the National Coastal Resilience Fund
pre-application. We applied to this last year. If you remember, this was a joint application with Little Compton and Dartmouth and didn't receive funding. We had were originally going to apply for looking at um thin layer deposition on
salt marsh flats, but since that wasn't a permittable activity at the time, we kind of tried to rope it into a couple of different projects under under the umbrella of um coastal resilience, but D has changed the regulations
uh around placing sediment on salt marshes. And so we're going to submit uh well we have submitted a pre-application to the the DNCF. Um the way it works is you have to submit a pre-application and then they'll invite you for the full
application. But the purpose of this will be to develop a feasibility study um for Westport's marshes. Um so uh I think it'll be later in the summer that we'll hear back if we've been invited. Um, but it would be a good start to get
get that going. Okay. Can you fill us in with the um the coastal resilience thing that we're doing right now? Um, sure. So, we have a couple
of meetings coming up for the tomorrow. Tomorrow um and the following week. Yeah. the barrier beach. So, it's the the it's part of the the barrier beach planning
um that we're doing at East Beach, Atlantic Avenue, and Beach Avenue. There's a public meeting tomorrow. Uh it's a virtual public meeting at 6 6 o'clock, 6 to 8. Um, and it's a it's
going to be like a coastal processes 101 sort of public education event talking about the the dynamics of coastal processes more generally and then how that directly has affected the three
study areas. So that's tomorrow. Um the subsequent week the barrier beach planning committee is going to meet to talk about um to talk with the what talk with Wood's whole group about the different
man the existing management practices um and then the uh to help begin to develop some of the recommendations. So Jim, you're on that committee. You'll get an invite and some some more information about that. Um that's at
10:00 a.m. on the 28th. It's really more of like a focus group type of setting, not like a public engagement um setting. But then on the 31st, we're going to do site visits at each of the three beaches with Woods
Hole Group. Um, and I not we I don't have the details that those haven't firmed up yet, but it should be uh weather permitting obviously, but it's I think it'll be around start around 10:00 in the morning that Saturday and go into the afternoon. We'll go to each of those
three beaches with Woods Hole. Okay. So, uh, Buzzers Bay is coming out with their report on the 28th. Next Wednesday, Mark Rasmus will present to the city here. It's it's our first in-person
meeting. We all wear name tags. So, while that's not a part of the barrier beach planning um that we're doing with Woods Hole Group, obviously has some really important ramifications for the the project. So, are the the two
groups at Woods Hole talking to each other? Wood's whole group only did a very small portion of that study. They had they were not part of any of the metric study. Yeah, the baometric study that
that was the only piece that they did. Um so they they don't know what kinds of conclusions are going to be drawn in that study. So we're all anxiously awaiting to see what Mark has to say next week. What time is that meeting
going to be? 5:00 in this room. Yeah, on Wednesday. Yeah, there will be a virtual component to it too. Um, we want the committee members to show up in person. Um, but for those who would rather tune
in at home, there is a virtual option to watch as well cuz we we're thinking that this room might get kind of crowded. Mr. Mr. Chair, I have a question or a suggestion based on the last item that
Michael went over and that is I I sent to you and to Michael uh about a 300page draft report uh that the state has done on climate the state's climate
resilience plan and it's out for public comment and public comment is due June 12th. uh one of I haven't read it. I just saw it today and it's three it's long. uh but in reading the news story in the
globe uh one of the main features I think of this is the state uh floating the idea of a fund that would
uh pay for with state funds a voluntary um managed retreat. So people who wanted who look at the whatever they look at and say it's time for me to get out. Uh there would be a program that we talked
about earlier but got you know no support from the East Beach folks. Um, so I I think that, you know, and then there's another scientific report out today about ice cap melting in in Greenland and and Antarctics that says,
you know, 40 in in 100 years, but um and possibly more. Um, but uh I think that the idea of, you know, if we're going to have any form of managed
retreat, Westport's not going to be able to pay for it. It's going to have to come from the state or federal government. Certainly not coming from the federal government right now. So, I think uh it would be useful at our next
meeting, June 3rd, uh to perhaps have uh Michael or Dia uh give us what their recommendation is on this and then to forward on behalf of the planning board
uh a a letter uh uh to uh Secretary Keeper on or wherever the public comments go uh on what we think of it because I think it certainly endorsing
the idea of the state funding uh managed retreat is going to be essential. Yeah, I I agree. Um and they put the emphasis on voluntary, you know, the cells, no eminent domain. That's just so
along these lines, I just sent to you, John, and to Michael uh a link to a one-hour program that was on WCAI that had uh discussion between
planners and people in the in in the far in the front line on the Cape on what to do about climate change and retreat. and planning and housing and stuff like
that. Uh, and I found it really interesting. I mean, I started listening to WCAI a little bit more. Uh, but I sent the the the uh link and Michael, could you share it with
everybody? Yeah, I sent it out this afternoon. Yep. Um, and John, if you want to send it to your climate resilience people, please do. Um because I think it it's exactly the same problems we're going to have in so
retreat in in Province Town uh in that downtown area is different than moving away. They're moving up. Mhm. They're building the moving all the building the buildings by building up
when people get get concerned. Um, and I assume that means they got to move the road up because how are you going to travel underwater? I mean, but cuz they have no place to go. They have no Is it What What's the
elevation now, Bob? Is it 18 still? Where? Elevation 18. What? Sea level building here. No, that's 16 ft. 16. 16. It depends on where you are and what which
velocity zone you're in. Like some of them like along Atlantic Avenue, it's 16 ft right now. Um I'm at 80. I'm good. Yeah. Well, you're good for a while. I I lost
like 12 15 years ago, I lost insurance for my house. Um, it had to go in search of somebody else cuz travelers didn't want to insure it anymore cuz I'm too close to the water. And I'm setting I'm 45 ft above the water. I'm in trouble.
Everybody's in trouble. We had they said, "We don't care. You're too close to the water." We had 4T of 4t of water in Hurricane Carol in the summer cottage. And then my grandfather jacked it up. So that was 54 and we've never had water in it ever. And that's 75
years. Yeah. There was there was water in our our living room in 54. Um our garage got full of seaweed and everybody our renters had to
escape, get tied together and walk up to the coaching club. So 38 was worse though than 5 years. Yeah. Yeah. I think the that uh state buyout fund that you're just talking about,
John, is part of the budget that the legislature is currently reviewing. So, I don't we don't even know if they'll it's going to survive or whether they right. I might be wrong on this, but it's a great idea, but uh remains to be
seen if it'll be be approved. I think that's why we should weigh in. Yeah. You know, the other the other way to to address that is um if the water starts coming up on East Beach Road is just not give any permits
to people and then the price will come down on those lots be easier to buy them out. So next assistant planners report. Um, so as part of the municipal vulnerability
preparedness 2.0 campaign, I was um trying to get some research about um the emergency management system here in town when something happens like a disaster. Um, so I've met with the board of health through board of health. I met with um
the director of public health Matt Armendo, also our animal control officer, Nick Vidmar, and our shared services coordinator, Olive Werki. also met with Lieutenant Nunes from fire and then Valerie and John from cable. Um so lots of info. I'm not going to you know
share the whole everything but mostly um I was trying to gather information on what items oh sorry let me backtrack on what items we need to include in these emergency preparedness kits which the campaign is trying to put together. We're trying to put together kits to be dispersed maybe about a thousand kits
that are just kind of like a starter to um emergency preparedness. So what in what item should we include, what information should be included? So there was a lot of um sometimes differing information. I think um the hardest thing about this research was pairing
down from the amount of items what are truly just the necessities because board of health was pretty strong on ticks. But then when we talked with fire, they were like, okay, that's not really like a necessity. You don't really need that in your emergency kit. Then again, board of health was thinking about Narcan. You know, it can reduce the stigma if you
include it in every kit. It's uh it helps folks um who are not even um using substances. It also helps sometimes old people with um some of the medications that they have to take. It's also helps with um because it's like a it's a blood
thinner. Um so, but then again, when I talked to FIRE and then we had an internal discussion with MVP, it's kind of like okay, let's do we really need to buy thousand Narcans just for maybe the 10% of people who are going to use it? That's an exaggeration, but still things
like diapers, baby food, etc. So, we ended up with a pretty I feel like solid list. Emergency radio, whistle, document bag, first aid kit, foil, blanket, matches, and waterproof match container, which we're thinking about. Should we include something like matches or not
due to liability? A small knifeless multi-tool that comes with like a Phillips head, a flathead, um, box cutter, other sorts of little things that you might need in an emergency. ice packs, hot packs, and a USB fan. So, that's I think a good step forward for
the campaign. But one other kind of aspect that this research has shown me is that Westport does need a plan. It's a little bit um uncoordinated. Obviously, it follows a reactive structure to nar uh to natural disasters. So, police and fire are going to head that. But when I was talking
with cable, you know, they shared with me that there isn't a set communications plan. And say we have an extreme heat situation where we're moving everybody to the old to the new high school. That's where cable's backup generator is too. And we don't have any kind of like
interdep departmental coordination over whose resources are where and what's going to happen and who's going to coordinate with who, what, you know, FM or AM do we tune into for information, what's going to be shown on the TV, what messages. So, you know, one great step with identifying the kits and excited to
see where the campaign goes after this in terms of how we can organize as a town more for these disasters cuz they are coming, especially as you guys were mentioning these hurricanes. I think that that's the number one um kind of event that we're almost waiting for at this point. So, definitely want to be
ahead of that. Um, so is this is this coordinated with the hazard mitigation effort? Not really. This is this is a separate grant initiative. So this is through the municipal vulnerability preparedness 2.0
program. Um it's it's more this is more of a people focused project and the the hazard mitigation plan is more focused on policy and and uh yeah policy. So yep.
Um moving on. So Michael and I attended the 2025 Mass DOT transportation innovation conference and I also attended UMass Amherst Amherst Save by Traffic Engineer Conference which was kind of a repeat of the Mass DOT um conference. It was really exciting to go
to both of these. Um I feel like I learned a lot and kind of interacted with a lot of different people. um you know my takeaways I noticed these seem to be more discussion based panels over you know a lot of information to be
written down and distilled. So I took notes but I also spent time um just like engaging with the presentation. Uh I attended one on pavement just to kind of give me a leg up when I'm going going on these site visits. I can't say that I learned too too much about innovative
pavement. Uh there were some strong GIS network analyses to identify high-risisk and higher injury areas to target for a safe systems approach. Um you know here in Westport we don't really have um a strong GIS network that's maintained in
house. In addition we don't have um too many crashes. I think I know that people talk about drift road that people go very fast on it, but a lot of the uh kind of presentations were focused on really much more densely populated
suburban type areas or urban type areas that have a lot of pedestrian and traffic interaction. So kind of the framing of both the UMass um Amherst and the Mass DOT was was around pedestrian and vehicular road safety. Um which I feel
like we tend to have mostly vehicular traffic here. Um so uh there was an update to the American Association of State Highway and Transportation um officials guide book ASHTTO. That is like the golden book for transportation planning if you're
familiar. So they went over a couple of chapters of those. Um there was an interesting talk on lighting and designing for um designing around lighting. Designing for the darkest and most weatherprone conditions to ensure um accessible lighting. Um and an interesting takeaway from that was the
concept of illuminance versus luminance. illuminating an object like maybe just Naen versus having the path from me to Naen being illuminated and being and as the driver being able to see all of that versus just seeing Naen as a single as a
single person. Um so that was a new concept to me. Um yeah I think like I said and say by traffic engineer that framing was also about how they feel like it's based off a book killed by traffic engineer. So, okay, I guess in in traffic engineers world, when something goes wrong, they feel like
they're the ones who get the blame. And then I shared with them, I feel like when something goes wrong, you think, well, why do they plan for this? So, it's like everyone kind of feels like they're the ones to blame when things go wrong. And ultimately the conclusion is designing for safer roads and designing um safer streets comes with honestly a
lot of kind of I don't want to say anti-car stuff but you know traffic calming and um signage and um designing for the pedestrian and for the biker over designing for the car. So I think as Westport grows or changes there are
some concepts we can apply here. Um and then lastly I joined the coastal relocation network. This is just like an informal network of um planners, practitioners in the state who are just talking about managed retreat, coastal relocation, a new term, spatial expansion. You know, it's kind of like a
little touchy here and there sometimes. How do we want to really phrase this? How do we want to frame it? But I've joined one workshop so far and it was really interesting getting to talk with people in breakout rooms about um what coastal relocation can actually look like because I come from a perspective
where I lived in New Orleans for several several years and it's a very touchy topic there. People don't want to leave New Orleans but here in Massachusetts I'm I'm seeing that that conversation is not as contentious and and maybe especially like even in the Cape in Hull there are already examples of people
retreating slowly. So, that gave me a little bit of um intrigue and hope as to what that conversation can look like here in Westport. Well, you're in for a treat when you go to the I know to the beach beach beach
meetings. I know. Okay. Minutes. Mr. Chair, I've read all the minutes. I can only uh offer a motion on the first two because I wasn't mad for the last two on May 6, but I
would start with I I find them they get better all the time in terms of format and content and how they're organized. really uh thank the staff for putting these together the way they do, including all of the u
uh cited uh studies and reports that are required. So, I move to approve March 25th, 2025 minutes as written. Second. Any discussion? Don't call for a vote.
I'm just looking at it again. Okay. Um, all those in favor? I I want u I'll move same thing on the April 29th. I I move to approve the
April 29th work session minutes as written. second. I just have a question for whoever wrote them. Um, it says in the next to last paragraph on the first
page, the character of Route 6 is to be maintained. Um, did we really say that? You don't like those used car lots? Used car lots. I I think we were talking about the residential part of it. I missed it. I hope it's not true. Yeah,
I think it was to not lose the residential housing. Yeah, I think Manny's right. So, can we reward that somehow so it doesn't show up as we like it the way it is? Many do, but I'm not one of them.
Okay. With with those impending amendments, uh all those in favor? I I abstain. Abstain. Uh the meeting minutes of May 6th.
I was This is pre-T town meeting at the high school. Uh I was there it seems about what we talked about. So I'd move. Yes. I'd move it. I will second. I would abstain
again. All those in favor? I I abain. And then the next ones from May 6. I don't understand. Yeah. It seems like these things were were I mean I moved these things in town
meeting. Do they have to be because we already cancelled the or the planning board meeting? Mhm. Just I pulled them together because we had a we had posted the meeting, town meeting. So typically if you post a
meeting, you should follow it up with minutes. So I just called out the pieces of uh the planning board's contributions to town meeting. Okay. So these are the minutes of our meeting
though. No, they're the minutes of com. that pertain to the planning board. Yeah, the planning board had a did it. I don't think any harm in doing that. So, I didn't entertain a motion to approve. Second.
All those in favor? I move to adjurnn. Second. All those in favor? I I Mr.