Say hello. >> He might have You know what, Ken? There's a tab that says panelists. He may have been flipped. >> Oh, I see. Okay. >> Recording in progress. >> Good evening. Uh, and welcome to the
September 3rd, 2025 Yarmouth Planning Board Meeting. I am Joan Crowley, chair. The public is welcome to attend our meetings in person or via alternative public access provided on the town of Yarmouth website. Our meetings are generally held on the first and third
Wednesdays of the month, but a additional meetings are added when needed. Um, I will begin by taking roll call. Susan Brida >> present. >> Deedra Gaquin >> here. >> Will Rubenstein >> here. >> Peter Sloach >> here. >> Ken Smith >> here. >> Joanne Crowley present.
>> Seeing that we have a quorum >> present, I'll now call the meeting to order. Please join me in the pledge of allegiance. I pledge to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under
God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Thank you. >> He's back. >> Uh we have a pretty full agenda this evening. Uh we'll begin with uh our local comprehensive plan which we are
ramping up for um acceptance at uh town meeting uh the special town meeting in the fall. In our packets uh Kathy provided redline versions of uh public comments and others um with uh updating
changes from our last meeting. I'd just like to note that two action items have been added and one was removed. Um I think I I think I have those numbers right Kathy from the last um update but we'll go through it as we as we do. Um
one was removed as per the uh police chief. >> Correct. >> Yeah. Um uh and then we also have comments that came in through uh the energy committee and selectoman Argo uh with regard to energy. Um and Kathy's
going to uh go through some of these. She and I went over a lot of this today and as you as you went through it um if you had a chance to pick up the red line version, most of it is um a bit of
editorial um I think um but important um additions from the public in terms of language is important and adding in uh particular phrases and words. Um I I don't think it's substantively changed
anything um at all. Um and the and in my own personal opinion that the the um the amount of public comment um which was good uh but what was also uh obvious to
me was that the um the document itself stood pretty strong and I'm I'm very pleased with that. So, uh, Kathy, if you'd like to just walk us through the most important ones you think we need to go through, um, because these will be
the edits that we put in the final that needs to get out, uh, for, um, the, um, uh, public notice, right? Well, the fi the for the final public hearing. Yeah, I' I'd like to have it. Um, maybe you
can talk very briefly about schedule, but I did talk to Jeff Bag today and I'm kind of hoping that we can come to some general consensus tonight with regard to any changes and then maybe the board can just say Joanne, myself and and Jeff will finalize it. I'd really like to get it on the website um before I advertise
it. So, we would be a little like a day late and I don't or two days late and I don't like that. So Jeff indicated that, you know, if we provide him with some of the redline edits and the results of this meeting, um he could have us a draft by hopefully by the 12th, no latest than the 15th. We can take a quick look at it and if everything looks
good, we'll post it and we'll be advertised on um the 17th and the 24th in preparation for the October 1st public hearing. And then we can do a lot of public advertising and publicity for it uh as well. And people will be able to go to the website and see the latest
and greatest version. So hopefully we'll get there tonight. Um this is one thing that's not incorporated into uh the the um notice from Liz Argo. She provided some comments, energy related comments that we can go through um kind of maybe at
the end. Um but I tried to incorporate all the other comments um in here. I don't really know how much you can really see all of this, but just the table of contents, the things that we talked about, um, expanding the table of contents, putting the abbreviations in the glossery in the appendix, moving that chapter 6 targeted action plans to
right after chapter 3 existing conditions, which the commission was fine with, um, including that draft September 2025 on the front so that we can distinguish between um, the current draft uh, that we have. Um, just some minor edits. I did have some comments on
the maps. I thought some of them like the water resources one was really hard to read because it had the aerial in the back. It was so dark. So, they're going to try and do more line work with some labels on that in order to uh to address that. Um the next one really had to do with the with the um Yarmouth snapshot.
I think this was the place where Liz Argo wanted to insert some information with regard to how much savings we have had with our solar and we can talk about that when we talk about uh her additional comments. One other thing in the vision here is um you know the
energy committee really wanted to uh expand the vision to include things about energy sustainability. I think we could make a very simple modification to the vision and just say you know instead of saying the importance of clean healthy environment we can say importance of a clean healthy sustainable environment
>> and then it will address you sustainable is probably a good word to have in our vision statement. >> So if everyone's okay with that we can make that change. >> Sure. Yeah. Um, and then it kind of it follows through. I'm sorry you can't really see any of this, but um, it follows through in the growth policy at
the very end, the last sentence there. As our community grows and evolves, the town needs to ensure the protection of historic and cultural resources, promote resiliency and sustainability, and steward our valuable water, environmental resources. So, it's just adding that extra word in there, I think, makes some sense.
>> Can I ask a question, Madam Chair, before we get too much further down the road? Just I'm sorry I should have mentioned about the table of contents. >> Sure. >> Is there is there going to be any more? >> Yeah, we're going to elaborate. >> So all of the So we're going to go natural systems, built systems, community systems in the table content
to include all those subs. >> Okay, cool. Thank you. Definitely. >> Got it. I just wanted to circle back to that. >> I think that that would make people understand a lot better where where how it's all laid out and where to go for what >> in addition to the swapping of the >> Oh, definitely. >> of the action plan. Okay. Thank you. >> It's all in that comment there. That first thing. Yep. No, good question.
So, I'm going to add the sis and sustainability unless I hear otherwise from anyone. >> Um, existing conditions. Um, one thing that I noticed is the actions, some of the actions were not just taken by the town. They were taken by the commission. They were taken by mass DOT. So I just put in or regional and state entities so
that we know that um when I was going through the original um draft the water resources title is the same font size as the as the um main body. So I just wanted I feel like it should be bolder and stand out. So maybe
a bigger font for that so that it's really the heading kind of sticks out with you a little bit more. So that's just a simple uh comment there. But getting back to on the next page on the recent actions, do we really need to even say by the town because we or by anybody? We can just say recent actions
related to wastewater. >> Agreed. >> Okay, >> I'd like to also make a comment whenever we refer to the comprehensive wastewater management plan in the in the action items. I I think we list that as an
acronym, but as we go through the action items, I went through them. We what we refer to it a couple of different ways. The town wastewater program. >> Okay. >> The Yarmouth wastewater program. Why don't we just use CWMP
>> comprehensive wastewater management plan >> and and have it mean we've got it here identified. Um and I I marked my copy up Kathy so I can give it to you. >> Thank you. >> Awesome. Okay. Um,
simple edit. The open space rec plan was in 2023. Um, the next page we have that great um, map that I think that BSE group did and we just were hoping that maybe we could get that in landscape so that we can read it a little bit better. Sometimes the white text is hard to read too. So,
they might have to do something a little extra there. But, we try to make that more readable because it's a great uh, it's a great map. Um, >> and you're you're thinking that would be a single page. >> I would think it would be a single Yeah, just landscape. >> Yeah.
>> Um, so energy, obviously there's a lot to talk about with what Liz had, but I think maybe we can talk a little bit about um just what what the energy committee had. So they they provided a
very nice um comment letter to us uh kind of outlining how they feel like the the talking about their vision a lot of talking about sustainability and secure energy and then also their mission to really um improve sustainability throughout the entire town of Yarmouth.
Um and then they talk about the difference between goals and objectives and basically I think their main crux of their in addition to the s you know adding something reference to sustainability really comes from their interest in adding performance standards and I'm sorry you probably
can't read this very well. Um really not very clear unless you look at it online but what they did is they took our actions all of our different actions that we had for energy and then they tried to put in some different performance standards. We don't have any performance standards in here. Um I
think we're going to be addressing our progress through those annual um annual reviews. We just don't want to set ourselves up to fail. Oh, you didn't meet that performance standard, but oh wait a minute, but you did make really good progress. So we're trying to keep it more positive and a little bit um
less punitive maybe uh in the LCP. So alls I ended up doing um for that is I I let the energy committee kind of promoted the energy committee to do that. So basically um one of the comments had to do with the fact that
the uh Liz Argo mentioned that the energy committee's five-year vision was old. It was 2021. So they are working on a new one. They've just kind of reconstituted the committee. They've had a couple meetings already that when they hadn't met for probably like a year or so. Um, so then basically saying the energy committee is currently working on
updating their five-year vision and identify strategies to create a town powered by clean, affordable, and secure energy. When we get to the action item, you'll see where I added in talking about strategies. Um, so that those are just we'll come back
to this section unless you want to talk about Liz's now. Do you want to >> um Well, I I think we can we can talk about Liz now because I think it'll be an easy discussion if we do it right now. >> Okay, perfect. >> Because I've I I've gone through it with you, Kathy, and um members of the board,
you may have only seen this for the first time now. It looks like the red lines are extensive. They're not. her moves. >> With all due respect to um Select Woman Argo, her ability to redline and edit is
a is as good as mine, which is awful. So, most of this is in the plan, right? >> So, it looks like it's red line, but it's really not. It's actually in the plan. I think the most important element is that um if I may Kathy, this next
paragraph on page 51 um she my sense is she wants to move that to existing conditions. >> Yeah. >> Um as as I read through her comments, >> oh the green communities. >> Yeah. The green she repeated that for
word for word. Yeah. >> And I'm I'm looking at it saying she she just wants to move that to existing conditions. Yep. >> Does that seem that's what I >> Okay, dear. Is that how you >> That's what Yeah, she she deleted and moved it. Actually, you can see >> the first paragraph's kind of already in
there just in a different location. >> I didn't know whether she wanted to move it all there so that the next paragraph made sense. These efforts >> achieved an electric usage reduction. >> Did the >> otherwise I didn't know why she moved them around. >> I'm not going to take
>> So, let's see how >> No, it's right there. I did, but oh, everybody else has yellow on. I This one I >> I just highlighted that because it talks about the Solar Wolf stuff, which I don't really think we necessarily want to be highlighting,
>> but the one that I had because it showed >> forwarded it to Yeah. >> And it showed the the blue that she took out and, you know, so it was whatever. >> So, so that that's the the one piece I think as I went through it that really
needs an adjustment. Yeah. Um, other than I think we do not I agree with Kathy, we do not want to talk about the solar wolf energy issue. Um, it's a bit behind us and it really wasn't a town issue per se. Um, although it was it was
more between the contractor and the individuals. Um and I I think the you know in general her comments have been incorporated um in most of what we have. Um as I said to
Kathy today on the phone when we were talking, I'm reluctant on the first page of her comments to include metrics >> that I'm not I'm not familiar with first of all. Um, and secondly, I'm not sure
it's it makes the the plan more informative. Um, but this could be something that could be incorporated perhaps as they work through action items in terms of performance measures. You know, did we save money or didn't we? And the saving of the money is nine
years hence. Doesn't happen until 2034. So I don't think the plan needs to jump into the ninth year of its existence uh right now. So that paragraph here about the much of the financial benefit
that's a very detailed and >> right >> and >> yeah it's too detailed for a comp the comprehensive plan I think >> and I I think it need there needs to be some attribution as to where the calculations came from >> there's no source
>> and who who who said what >> um how these numbers were arrived at. I know she's >> she's she's very hot on this subject which is okay. Yeah. >> Yeah. Passionate manager. >> Passionate. Thank you. Um so that would
be my recommendation in terms of most of what she talks about on the first page of her um uh note to us. I would like to know, you know, she offered to if we can get the electric usage reduction. I don't as a fact. Kathy, I think you had
mentioned that. It's it's nice to know that we're saving based on with all our different solar and I think that's what she's trying to show here is these are the different solar sources that were identified and she CVC gave some website information there. I don't know what the estimate means and then we're looking at numbers from I don't know 2017. It's
just a function of maybe we don't need all of this because we kind of talk about all these different solar projects already on the next page. The town holds multiple sites which she crossed out which I would like to keep in. >> And are there just for consistency purposes, Madam Chair, if I may, are there other sections of our LCP where we're going into this level of detail?
>> No. >> And again, that's not be that doesn't disparage the facts, >> but I don't think it's consistent with how the rest of the LCP is put together. That doesn't mean that this isn't important information, obviously. and through our friends at the energy committee, I'm sure there'll be other
ways to make the town aware of these important kinds of more granular um results without having to put it in a document that's playing a little higher off the ground. Is that >> Yeah. Yeah. I I you know, I've used the 10,000 foot flyover example.
>> Yeah. Maybe we're at 5,000 ft. But um again, when Kathy and I talked about it from her perspective, it seemed a bit too detailed, but important and probably useful information for the energy committee um as they move forward. Um >> there's also one other small redundancy,
Madam Chair, on the second page, if you're done with the first page. Yeah. >> After the chart, >> I believe it refers to Martha's Vineyard and Dukes County, and I believe they're the same >> except for Cuddy Hunk. >> Okay. Okay. Well, I don't I won't tell anybody if you won't, Dearra. But I don't believe I believe you can
just say Cape C. >> You could actually say Nantucket because it's a county, a town, and and >> you could say >> confused, Madam Chair. I think there's a little bit of redundancy in there. I just can't remember exactly how >> except for Dukes and Nucket. Right.
>> I I thought could the all of this money discussion be distilled to a sentence that the energy committee estimates that it saves us 378,000 per year or some kind of >> I just don't know this what the source is. I don't think it's the energy
committee. I think it's Liz Arargo summarizing them and I don't I guess that's the question of what do we say is a source of this information. >> We don't have a source. >> We don't have anything. >> Well, she she compiled it. Maybe she can provide some more detailed information exactly on on where that >> according to the blah blah blah.
>> Right. Right. But >> probably bills but >> my concern is the clock is running and does that information make this a better document? >> No. >> No. >> No. >> I would only argue madam chair that if it's something that you could share a reasonable deadline on when if Kathy
communicates to the select woman that you know can you give us his answer in 24 hours because we're trying to post a document for public notice. We can leave it blank now and send it to to to um Jeff and then he's got a lot of other things he's working on to and then we can fill that in. But I guess my my
inclination would be to talk about on the next page all of these sites and solar panels and whatever. And then at the end of that just say the town is estimated saving approximately 700 or $378,000 annually by avoiding you know
and then one sentence. So, I think the information that we were looking for, what I thought we were going to be getting is information on the net savings that we get from solar, which she's provided here. We just need to confirm it. And then I thought there was more information on um a new solar initiative, but I'm assuming that that
is and I I'm afraid I did not have a chance. I've been in meetings all day to to talk to Liz. She's more than open to have a conversation about all of this. Um but >> what did you refer to it as? Smooth. She said something solar and a word just >> she said there was some new solar initiatives there incentives or
something that were coming in the in December and the only thing that she added in had to do with this um the state's goal articulated in an act creating a next generation roadmap for Massachusetts climate policy and the Massachusetts clean energy and climate plan above above pivoted the focus from
energy reduction to en to greenhouse gas reduction the climate leader community certification program evolving from the green communities program creates a new voluntary framework for towns for meeting these goals by bringing by providing tools and resources to help municipalities reduce emissions by
electrifying non-electric energy uses and maximizing the efficiency of buildings and transportation. The Armouth Select Board is currently reviewing the benefits in becoming a climate leadership community. If you guys wanted to keep this in, I would make that last sentence the first
sentence because it's under recent town or recent action. So, at least bring it to >> But do we want to keep it in? Yeah, it's up to you guys if if it is truly something that they're looking at and this is >> well we >> one one option could be that it that
would be an action item >> but it's the second sentence is the state's goal. So we'd be promoting the state's goal as opposed to what Yamoth wants to do. I like the sentence. Y select what is currently viewing
benefits in becoming a climate leader. But then if you put that at the beginning, the second sentence be the state's goal of articulated. So jump from the board of selectment to the state. >> I could just get rid of the first sentence al together. Just say which is four lines long.
>> Just the arithmet select board is currently reviewing the benefits of becoming a climate leader community. The certification program evolving from the green communities creates a new voluntary framework for towns by meeting these goals by providing tools and resources to help. This is almost informational too, >> right?
>> Um I don't want to >> I don't think it's necessary to be candid with you. So >> I think it's all great information. I don't think it changes this document one bit. >> And to me the f the just on a practical level the most one of the most important
things in this entire section is the last sentence in 2025. The town of Yarmouth has awarded a three-year grant to hire a part-time municipal energy manager to lead efforts to reduce energy use and cut carbon emissions. I mean, that is exciting stuff. So, because it
practically says to the town and the town's people like and there's going to be a dedicated person at least on a three-year part-time basis to trying to execute on this on behalf of the energy committee as well. That's exciting stuff because we It's very exciting to talk about we're designated a green
community, we're getting all these grants, it's all wonderful, but to hear that there's actually money allocated in terms of humans, town resources and human beings to execute on it is a pretty big deal. So, I I wouldn't want
that to get lost either. Um because I don't know about you, but when I was reading all this, I was like, well, who's going to do all this stuff? And of course the energy committee as it was it was a terrific memo. It's very clear there are a lot of people on the on the volunteer side who are ready to roll and
clearly select woman Argo as well. But now to have this person and I don't know Kathy if there's been any progress in actually hiring this person. >> I think they're having trouble finding someone for a part-time position who's qualified right >> this. So there's been some discussions. Is this something that we need to make a full-time position and expand it to
other things? >> Maybe we could just forget about the last 62 seconds of what I said. But You know the idea though is that it is >> someone retired. There could be a retirement said that's exactly what I said. >> The retirement talent in the town is awesome. >> Sure. >> Could be someone.
>> Oh, it could there could be someone that's retired that would be interested in that as a part-time position. >> Great resources. >> We have awesome obviously awesome talent bank. >> So I'm I'm unclear. What do I say? What do I do? >> Thank you.
>> You thank her for what you do. you to tell us what no I think less is more and what Susan was also saying about not regurgitating state goals in a local comprehensive plan I think is point well taken and I I agree with you I think the comment about hiring someone is going to
capture more attention than a sentence that goes on for four lines that talks about you know Massachusetts clean energy climate plan blah blah blah blah blah what will capture people's attention is we're actually going to hire someone to do this >> and I think that anybody reading this who is as passionate about these issues just like every other section in this in
this document. There's there are committees. There's ways for you to get involved and it could spark people to clearly based on the memo we got from the current chair seems like a very well >> uh thought out and very excited group of people and hopefully that'll then build
some momentum to find someone to actually >> to be hired for this position. >> So, did you want to re orient things? Do you want to keep in the reference to the energy conservation page? I love me a link.
>> The link is a little old, too. That's my only >> deciding what to do with this two-pager. Is that what the decision is? >> Yes. >> Yeah. The three pages here. Again, a lot of it is moving stuff around, >> right? >> The very first paragraph is already in there. It's she just pulled it from a
different place. Mhm. >> Um, and this would go where? Right at the beginning of our our Where would this go? >> Where on page 51 would it start? I think she was starting it. Um,
hang on one sec. She started after the first sentence >> right on the note on page 50. >> Yeah. >> Thank you. >> Right here. >> Admit the town spends more than a minute to alleviate. So right here she would
start. >> That seems like a reasonable move. >> I still want to include all of these listings of these buildings and everything solar. Yeah. And then at the end of that might be a good place to so so I'll move this paragraph these
paragraphs over. >> Right. The paragraph that's on 51. We'll move to 50. >> Yeah. And then um I'll leave in the paragraph that she erased at the top of her second page. And then I'll just that mentions all the solar and then we can
add in the town estimates savings of approximately and we can just say the town. Yeah. Because she is the town. um of $380,000. You know, I could put that paragraph in there at the end of that. So, nothing on um
the town hall. >> I don't think that adds anything to this. >> And then the solar the every time I read solar systems, I kept thinking of the solar system. All right. So, I'm sorry.
Get around here. So, th this we're going to keep in. >> So, were we going to talk? Are we keeping in? So, we're going to get rid of the second, the third, and the fourth paragraph. >> On which page? >> On the first page. on projects.
>> I'd like to documentar >> we don't need the second >> the third paragraph is already in there somewhere. >> Yes. >> In recent actions. >> Yes. >> What the in addition recognizing the benefits of renewable energy was the first town that's in there already.
>> Is it? Oh, I didn't even realize that. >> 51 Yarmouth became the first town >> where Pidge. >> Oh, no. That's I'm looking at something different. Let's see. So did we want to move it here? >> Fine. I'm fine.
>> So keep that. So the second paragraph right here, these efforts achieved in elect. Do you want to keep that in? She doesn't have that statistic. >> Yeah, we don't need that. >> We're going to keep the third one in. >> Yes, >> but you said you like a link. I mean, there is a link right there. Yeah, it's
just that's why it's >> um it's just a little old information, but we can certainly add that link in somewhere. >> Sure. >> So, I'll say add in >> old >> um >> I know that there's other things that we've done. I think there's some stuff from 2008.
>> Is that how old it is? 2008. >> Well, >> well, it's one way to find out. Um, so I mean it doesn't even talk about some of I mean it talks about the solar panels on the town hall, but it doesn't talk about them in other locations. And then they have this summary down here of
energy savings results. And this is 2007 and 2008. >> I don't know why that's there. >> I would not too long ago to be relevant. It's over a decade. >> I got excited by a link, Ken. I'm sorry. >> I got excited by a link, too. I think that's follow. >> It's also true that it's incumbent upon
commissions and committees when there is no town staff to try to help the town update the website. Right. >> And in this case, they haven't hired that new manager yet. >> Uh renewable energy. >> All right. The next paragraph, much of the financial benefit. >> I don't think we need that.
>> It's historic and it's it's interesting, but the comprehensive plan is supposed to be forwardlooking. This is historic. an educational on those it talks about what happened but >> so we're taking that out
>> I I don't think well I would take I wouldn't use it I don't think >> the section is called recent actions >> this is the beginning part this isn't recent action >> this isn't recent action we're still on the left side we're still on page 50 I'm so sorry >> yes >> got it
>> I just don't know if that makes it a better document I I just don't I I'm I'm again it's it's more detail I think the paragraph beginning with much of >> the chart below I think um >> yeah then when we do an >> I'm comfortable with adding that green
from the report >> it would be nice though if there was a place to direct folks to learn more. >> Yeah. >> Like this, Madam Chair. Right. To learn more of these more closer to the ground details. It just sounds like there isn't a place on the town website for that
information to live currently. >> Energy Committee is the one group that I never got in touch with. I'd reached out to them many times and sent a questionnaire and never heard anything back >> until now. >> Yeah. >> Um, so I don't know a lot about energy. Like I met with the recycling solid waste and I learned a lot of
information. It was very interesting, but I I don't have a background at all in any of this energy stuff. So, there might be something out there. Um, >> you know what? They've had four months to send in the something. >> We're torturing ourselves now trying to fit this in.
>> Interesting, but it's not it's not the right place. It's not the right document. >> I mean, unless someone feels compelled to include it, I I would I would suggest that we we not >> include this paragraph. Yeah. Okay.
And then I think we've all decided we're not going >> below. No. >> Yes. Not do the chart. >> I'm not going to do the chart, but we're going to try and keep this language in there and then maybe add um the amount of money that's saved. >> Yes. In one sentence.
>> Yeah. >> And then I'll find out about Dukes County. And then I don't think we should talk about Solar Wolf. Um, do we want to talk about I'm sorry I keep going all over the place. Future renewable energy projects in review by the town of
Yarmouth include solar for the >> I don't know anything about this. >> Well, >> do we know that? >> Yeah. If you know Do you know that's a fact? >> I I thought there was some solar in the new DY intermediate in the school, but I
can't honestly tell you if that's true. I mean, I know the GPW building was um this is what kind of came about to some of the discussions because I know that they're solar ready and they actually tried to get solar on there, but the the
credits made it not worth it to do it at that particular time. And I think that's when Liz had mentioned that there's a new program coming about. And that's what I was wondering, okay, what's that new program so we can maybe, you know, prepare ourselves for that. I don't think it's >> and I think in the case of the school
which was opened probably what around the same time if not a year or two before or maybe just after the >> DPW building I think the same thing was the school is a sustainable school but it isn't necessarily a solarp powered school those are two very different things
>> I'm sorry go ahead >> so I I think you're right I think to speculate on what could happen in the future in this document is probably not wise even though we all think this is a good idea Yeah, >> it's not the right home. >> What is the purpose of a landing hospitality building?
>> A restroom. >> Restroom. >> Sounds much nicer when you say hospitality. >> That is absolutely >> mean so many things. >> Hospitality. >> Oh no. >> In that context it does. >> Oh no.
>> Yeah. We just don't. That's speculative. We don't know if that's a fact. I mean, I think we're being speculative on the numbers, quite frankly, because someone an anti-energy person is going to get up and say, "Where did you get the number $472,000?" >> And we're going to say the town
calculator, right? >> Select board member Liz Argo. >> Okay. Reference Ray P. >> She has some I mean, this was her job. So, I mean, she >> But this could also be the impetus for either through the select board to hire this nice person, >> right? and or reinvigorating the energy
committee to update its website >> and you know galvanize a whole bunch of stuff I'm using technical terms on on multiple fronts but not inside the LCP madam chair >> I agree um so Kathy moving along uh I
think that paragraph future renewable will strike as well um and then the balance of her comments are really realignment of where these sentences sit We've already agreed that state goals. Um, >> you taking out that whole paragraph?
>> The whole paragraph. >> Yep. >> Yeah. >> All right. >> That should take care of it. >> Okay. Moving on. um town services. Yeah, the the police chief indicated that they have the triple redundancy now at the
police station, so it's not a concern. And then it also isn't an action item anymore. Um Richard Simon from the finance committee just wanted a clarification that the grant program for the libraries is awarded by the Mass Board of Library
Commissioners. So I did that. Um, so the the this this kind of is kind of weird, the targeted action plan. This is exactly taken from the LCP template. And the one of the last items is performance
measures to assist in determining whether identification actions have been met or achieved their purpose. Um, but then later in that document, it says performance measures are optional. And obviously, they didn't say that we needed to add performance measures because they've already reviewed it. So, I just wanted to to double check and I
sent an email to the commission to can we just remove that bullet item because it just causes confusion because we don't really have performance. >> There was confusion at the board of selectment over that. Yeah. >> Yeah. So, I I don't think I think we took it verbatim, but it doesn't necessarily have to include the performance standards. So, that's what
that's about. Um, they're really good about getting back. >> So, we will strike that. >> Um, as long as there's I can't imagine there'll be an issue with the commission, but yeah, I would strike it. Um so a lot of these changes um I think kind of some of them go back to the um
the edits that you had given me on July 30th that we hadn't have enough time to incorporate in um but just identify and obtain permits for additional affluent discharge um because permit could be allow versus actually what we really want to do is
get the actual permit um for water supply. I think we had talked about promote water conservation and protection to all residents, not just water customers. Um these are just I underlined some stuff that will be underlined.
The next page is um we talked about considering banning the use of herbicides, pesticides next to waterways and wetland resources. >> We're just going to keep going unless you tell me to stop. >> Keep going. Keep going. >> Um >> we'll keep up. All right. Open space.
Um, prioritize present potential conservation restrictions or land acquisitions. Sometime times we can provide the benefits with just a CR without having to actually purchase it. Um this this four and five came out of I think the edits from Joanne about print and disseminate u maps of conservation
properties and trails to continue to bring awareness and then enforcing appropriate enforce appropriate and legal use of conservation areas versus the continue um under design and land use. That first item we had struck the large the extra
adjectives large scale and and substantial um from that first action item. Mhm. >> And then, oh, where are we? This is one that came out of a comment. I think we had kind of talked about it about this is under transportation and
connectivity. Um, evaluate the potential for undergrounding overhead utilities for roadway improvement projects on a project by project basis. Um, I would really have liked to have gotten it done >> um for the Route 6A village centers, but it's
>> and we we're getting a memo from VHB on what's involved in it. >> But it just I'm afraid it's going to like bog down something so it doesn't move forward or becomes so expensive that it bogs it down. So, it's I think it's trying to balance it, looking at it and seeing whether it's something that
might make sense. I'm really looking forward to the memo because I keep hearing that there's all these like when you connect to someone's um house if they're not if their electrical system isn't up to speed, you might have to upgrade they might have to upgrade their electrical and so all of a sudden you've increase the costs to these people who
may not be anticipating it. I'm not sure and that's why that memo from BHB will be very helpful. Um and 13, you know, as feasible. said this was changed just to support the funding design and implementation of the mass DOT Cape Cod Bridge program to replace the Sagamore and Bourne bridges
and then just >> took out the in surrounding transportation network. >> Um maybe add an S at the end of bridge. >> Yeah. >> Y >> I was right there with you, Madam Chair. >> Uh and then on 15 um I would make it evaluate.
>> Oh yeah. Thank you. >> Thank you. Oh, this is under um mitigation energy. We kind of already talked about this about we're not really including performance standards. Um but I did modify item number three to talk about and develop the energy committee's
five-year vision plan with objective strategies and performance measures they can >> and that's the language right from them. >> They already have it. They already have it. They've got Yeah. Yeah. They got their work plan. So um >> transition >> and then number seven is just evaluate
trans this was another comment from the energy committee was um evaluate transitioning from gas powered handheld equipment to battery operated equipment such as leaf blowers and lawnmowers. >> That's good. >> So um and again instead of continue just
support the efforts of the recycling of solid waste and then number five it's it's the gate house at the transfer station. Just that clarification. >> That would put someone out of work. >> Correct. >> No, it won't put anybody. Somebody has >> still got to have someone in. >> Somebody's going to be there to stop the cars.
>> Is that the Is that does that include the the place for >> It will not be the weight station. Just Just residential trash. >> Okay. Just res. >> It's already in the capital budget plan. >> Okay. >> You didn't hear that from me. >> No, no, but I just meant
>> Yeah. The recycle. >> Anybody would know would be Um, oh, economy never ends on the economy. Um, number seven, we just had talked about promoting and promote local products. Number nine, we added in grayfield and
brownfield properties with regard to different types of properties the community development corporation might look at. Um, number 11, support the efforts instead of continue the efforts. Uh, and then this was a good Oh, this was a good idea. Rewarding um item 12 from Joanne about evaluate how Yarmouth
can apply the 2024 2029 Cape Cod Commission comprehensive economic development strategies to expand our economic development strategies because it was very convoluted to keep a breast of that was like >> okay >> convoluted.
Um, and Mary uh Wagan did want us to include in the actual action item with an annual production goal of 62 affordable units. um tried to put that in before and it just didn't get in. Um and this is develop capital and maintenance plans for municipal
buildings. >> Mhm. >> And then under public safety, this is where develop and actually the fire chief and I had a conversation. and they're actually working on this right now to develop an update of the comprehensive emergency management plan which focuses on emergency operations
for all hazards natural and man-made. Um and then again we got rid of that triple redundancy that was already um completed. And then this was just a small edit and promote fitness programs uh at the senior center. They do a pretty good job
with that before to chair yoga in my older years. Kathy, I have a couple of just editorial comments on this. I'll give them to you. The use of the word continue, you know, I've I've kind of >> Yes. So, support the collaborate, expand,
uh I guess provide technology classes >> and I would >> Are we under senior surf? Where are we? >> Yeah. >> Number six, >> senior and age friendly. >> You're senior. >> Okay. So, what did you say? >> Number two would be collaborate. >> Number three would just be expand. Yep.
>> Number four would be provide. And on number five, I would move promote fitness programs to the beginning of that sentence. >> Okay. >> And evaluate addition of exercise rooms. >> Is it as the same as a comma? >> Okay. Yeah. But but two separate
sentences or one? >> No. No. Just evaluate. So I >> I can give this to you when we leave. All right, I think that's it. And then the implementation matrix matrix.
Again, this is a lot of this was just truncating to make it simpler and easier to read as we go along. I think if people want the real details, they'll look in the targeted action plan. Um, so I don't know if you want me to go
through all of them or whether everyone had had a chance to look at them and I will obviously correlate any edits we make to the verbiage in the action items will get correlated here as well. Do you want to go through them or did
>> unless someone has some comments? >> Is there a reason why you struck the ones from uh action three about future phases? I mean that is literally what we're going to do >> about what? >> Sorry. Page 132. >> Yep. >> Action three under water resources. Is
there you just less is more? Is that why you cut all that out? >> This was a truncation from some edits from Joanne. So >> these these action items are fully described. >> Yeah. In the in the body of the document. >> Got it. Then then perfect.
>> I put in the two to eight because I know that that was like >> No, that that needs >> commented on. >> No, that needs to stay. Now I understand the rest. Thank you, M. So this is where Kathy I think if we wherever and I know this could be um tricky but wherever we refer to the
Yarmouth wastewater program generally >> I think it has an official name the CWMP and we can just use those >> and then make it in the glossery right and put the put the acronym in the glossery >> um >> in the appendix sorry So th those were my only my only
comments on the right >> action items. Um and again these are this is me kind of trying to reduce um it >> some wordage here because it's already covered yes in the body of the document. >> Understood. Uh, and Kathy reminded me when I spoke
with her today that the items that are um in highlighted in gray are ones where um remind me again that zoning bylaws >> bylaw or other regulatory bylaw changes supposed to highlight those
>> and then the ones in yellow are the ones that are new and as I counted them I think there were two new and we eliminated one. >> Oh yeah, the the undergrounding and then the emergency plan. Yep.
>> I think I think this will read much easier. People can look elsewhere for the details. Um there were some you know the CHC was added into all the housing ones as Mary requested in that committee. Oh, I see. I see. Added in as a
responsible partner. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. A lot of CHC. >> Yeah. And I added You had I had missed the planning board on some stuff. >> Oh, yeah. >> Like what? No, you guys are involved in everything. That's right. No, not everything, but pretty much.
>> I don't think I had any other. All right. Pencil's down. >> Pencil's down. >> Apple is shiny. We're good. >> Jo, >> ju just one specific comment because it
it sits outside of the um wastewater program >> on the page 146 >> action 13. Again, I would just stop after sewer flows designated for new growth in the
CWMP. >> It's not in the CM. >> Oh, it's not. >> These are land use control regulations that sit outside. >> Oh, okay. >> Oh, did you want to say the Oh, you're saying the three the eight phase. Did you want to change that? I mean the sewer program that that word
say the C8. So the sewer allocation regulations are not are they are not part of the comprehensive waste water management program or not. I'm just trying to use that acronym wherever we can.
>> No. Okay. No, but I think within the eight designated new growth within the eightphase CM C. >> Oh, okay. Yes. >> Okay. Great. >> Yes. because that's a separate that's a completely separate piece of work essentially.
>> The the land use controls basically say you have this amount of flow coming now and you have your new build here. You have to stay within that amount. They don't tell you how to spend that extra amount of sewer flow. And that's where I think the sewer allocation, we need to keep track of when people keep
expanding, right? How much of that m uh money, how much of that flow is being eaten up so that we don't all of a sudden realize, oh, we we gave all of our flow to phase one and two and phase 8 can't even do their existing conditions because we gave it all away. So, we need to keep track of all of that
in some fashion. >> Okay. >> Madam Chair, there is one other thing you mentioned about libraries on page 151 in action two. Do we have to refer to MBLC there and not M MLCP or is where or is the initial grant from
MLCP but the funding construction money comes from MBLC? >> This the grant is awarded by the library commissioners. Okay. >> So you just wanted to reference that >> in addition to their grant but the next hunk of money is coming from the NB >> I think. So
>> yep. Okay. Anything else on this? >> A question. Is the time frame when we should begin or when it should be completed? >> It's a frame. It's a frame. >> It's a frame.
>> That's a good question. I think you'd want to start it within some of those times. Some of those you might finish in time. So like if it's one to three years, you may start it in the first year and get it done by the three years, but you want to be sure you started it by the third year. >> Okay? >> Unless it says ongoing. Ongoing is
ongoing, >> right? >> Because you know our our grade time our our grade paragraph the one that's community design land use we have 1 to two, one to three, two to five, 3 to six and two to five on it's just so do we
prioritize what we're going to be looking at in terms of which of those time frames comes first. We're supposed to have a conversation at some point, Madam Chair, that later this fall. >> I think like if you get on page 139, for example, I think we talked about doing
the architectural site design standards, looking at our design standards earlier and first because we want to make sure we're getting things the way we want it, but we also heard a lot of good feedback from developers. What can we do to get the general design that we would like to get without adding an ridiculous amount
of additional cost? Um, but our current design standards aren't clear and they're only advisory for commercial development south of of six. They're not mandatory in any way. I think we need to be clear about that. Madakis, you know, that's something that we're going to have to look at sooner rather than later if we want to move forward with that.
So, that's why it's one to one to three years. Hopefully, it would be something that we would be completing in that time. The full rewrite, that's going to take a while. And then doing the growth incentive zone, that could be 3 to six years. And then the rules governing the
subdivision of land. Um I don't think that's a heavy lift, but it's something that needs some concentrated time to do it. We're just antiquated. We're referencing We don't even everyone use HDPE pipe for drainage now. We don't we have to say you have to
use concrete or corrugated metal. What are we doing? So it just needs to be updated um and and clarifications maybe on some of the fees and stuff like that that are in there for um inspections and stuff. But I I think Peter brings up a very
good point. If we were to grab all the grays, Peter, >> you're gonna be busy. >> We grab all the grays that we're that we're responsible for and we at at some point once this is approved.
>> Um we focus on what we think are the priorities >> um as best we can. Some of them will be driven by others. >> Yeah. Um, but I I think you rais a good point. Um, and we can always adjust these things. >> Um, it's not we're not locked in, but I
do think as you go through it, you see PB come up a lot >> and there are a lot of grays and we should probably just take a a good look at the grays um, the highlighted ones and say, what do we think are the ones that we can tackle first? Um, maybe some
lowhanging fruit and then then move forward. I think it's it's a really it's a really good comment, >> Madam Chair. The simple question is where did these timelines come from? Did we just >> Yeah. >> Okay, fair enough. >> Everything in this is just Kathy.
>> I got it 100%. I realize it's a guess and maybe that's something that we should talk about. >> For example, like the Giz, I mean, it expires in 2031. That's right. >> So, we have to do something in in that timeline and I think we want to do something sooner. It's all going to be a function also of obviously we're going to need consultants. So, we're going to
need to get grant money. Um, we also hopefully will have more horsepower. We're we have a new um community development director. Maybe they'll hire a full-time person for the economic development. So, all of that will help some of some of this as well as we move forward. Like the growth incentive zone. Those guys could help on that.
>> Yep. >> But these are all on my bucket list, my planner bucket list. >> I don't think I'll get to all these >> list is never ending. Kathy, >> that's also true. Madam Chair, we talked about it maybe a few meetings ago that at some point later this fall when we reorganize
board we did say we need to go up to 30,000 ft again as a group start to look ahead to the next thing that we have or things that we have to chew on and here they are. >> Yeah. >> Um we might have some money and they you
know I always follow the money. Um, I think we have like we might have like $40,000 for hiring a consultant to help us with the design standards. I think we can >> to help us with what Kathy >> the design standards. I'd like someone to go comprehensively look through it
and help us develop some design standards that are reasonable and aren't overly ownorous, but are kind of getting us the design that we're looking for. >> It's going to be a multi-step process. I don't think we can to do a full I think we do need to look at a full rewrite at least look at everything. We have all
these recommendations from the mixed use. We have a whole bunch of different things that we specify and what uh what we wanted to look at in the re in the re redoing of the zoning. So it's going to take a little while to figure that and pull pull the community along too. So that that alone would be a
would be a big big effort. I remember I was looking through all the old the old zoning bylaws and they used to be like this and they're like three pages and now we're like like this. And I also found a 1965 master plan for the town of Yarmouth
>> 128 by 24. >> Less is more as as Jim as Jim Sabin likes to say. >> We should talk about that. >> Less is more. >> Yeah, less is more. So So I think So on this discussion um do we have a
participant? >> It's Jim. Um Jim is an attendee >> but I don't believe there's anybody else. Madam Chair and I don't know if he wants to unmute himself and contribute >> if that's what you're >> Yeah, that's where that's where I'm
going. Uh if we >> He is unmuted. That could be dangerous. >> Uh Mr. Sabin, are you joining us? >> Hello, Madam Chair. Believe it or not, I have nothing to add. You guys are all doing awesome without me. >> Do you hear your voice?
>> And I'm enjoying uh the uh meeting tonight. Well done with the LCP and uh keep up the good work. Nothing else to add. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Jim. >> Miss you. Okay.
>> So, is it okay the consensus of the board that Joanne and I will >> finalize this and you guys don't need to >> see? You need a motion uh to to push this forward. >> If you guys agree by consensus, that's all I >> Yes. >> You okay with that?
>> Move it forward, >> please. >> You're not a contentious board. We don't need to vote. >> Not about this. >> No, I'm kidding. I'm kidding. >> Please move it forward. Awesome. >> Okay. So, the second item on our agenda this evening um are the draft zoning
amendments. >> Um these are being posted and may already have been posted on the website today and on September 10th announcing our September 17th public hearing. >> Yeah. >> Uh and you'll note I may have started at
our last meeting, but these are now referred to as draft articles. >> Yes. Um and so I I I want to make that note. Um so we have two draft articles. One on retail sales of commercially caught live lobsters and then one on
boat storage um that are in our packets this evening. Kathy, you want to just run us through quickly? And >> I don't think anything has really >> changed >> changed other than anything that you guys had mentioned before. But yeah, this has been on the website for a while and all the notifications and it should
have been I meant to check but should have been in the paper today and then next Wednesday in preparation um for the 17th and then I'll also do some publicity. I kind of gave them the heads up in the communications department that I'm going to need some help getting the word out about it.
>> I I this was really helpful to see it without the red line. because it's a culmination of a lot of work and a lot of input from a lot of folks and madam chair my I guess as I was thinking about the 17th if we could this is connected to the issue in front
of us >> is I think for a lot of folks there's the whole okay this is all great but when when when >> so what I'm getting at is >> is there a way for us to be prepared on the 17th as a board to share with folks that what we're talking about is this is
an article special town meeting that's going to happen in November mber then there's going to be x number of days then y number of days like I think people would like to know and I'm sure Mr. Kie would like to know like when is this actually going to become in effect and I think it would be just
not frankly educational but also just the right thing to do as a public service to help educate folks on the 17th in addition to the conversation about the article the draft article itself but the practical the practical bit of well then you better show up on
November blankety blank because then 100 days from there and then when we get to 2026 Mr. Charlie will be able to x y and z. Do you understand my general point? >> We can do that in like the next steps process. >> I wasn't sure when, but I figured next in two weeks would be the right time to sort of and the same thing with the
voters. >> Yeah. >> Perfect. Just the same thing with the voters too. So that everybody that shows up here will be very passionate I'm sure in one direction mostly. Um but to also just have people leave us some practical like okay now I understand we're way closer than we were practically what 10
months ago, eight months ago. Um I I have a Kathy has provided me a standard format for when we have public hearings on amendments and I can we can just insert that this particular dates and some approximate time frames uh with review with the attorney general and the
like. Um so we can we can definitely do that. I think that's and I would review that at the beginning of the public hearing no matter what. And I assume the select board is as interested in all of this as as as the public will be in terms of they're also clearly want to
recommend something and understanding the practical impact of all of this as opposed to the philosophical one. >> I did make a request to be on the 7th of October, but I haven't heard back. Bob was on vacation last week. So remember, we're going to try and because they
haven't seen this boat version. But Madam Chair, it ties into the fact that the boat the second zoning article when we get to it has a timing component to it, but obviously it you have to go to the zoning board of appeals first. So I assume that if someone was able to get a permit in the middle of
April 1st, 2026, then they will be able to just immediately put their boat out in front as opposed to if they you know what I mean those kinds of practical things. >> Absolutely. Typically the zoning but the zoning is effective on the date that it's approved.
>> You ultimately need to get approval from the attorney general and if the attorney general says nope nope then whatever you've done in between it's at your it's almost like at risk. >> So you could go ahead move forward get a special permit. Um, but then it's not
active until, >> well, I guess it's it's active, but if you went ahead and did it and then the attorney general said, "No, that's not legal." Then you'd have then you would spend all that money and time. >> It's null and void. >> Literally have to pull your boat >> out of your front. >> Yeah. Driveway. >> I can't imagine that attorney general is
going to have any issues with these particular zoning amendments. It's only, you know, >> well, I just wasn't clear off the top of my head whether there was x number of days because for a lot of permits and lots of hearings in our town, there's x number of days you have to wait until certain things can happen. >> We have 30 days to make the formal um uh
submission to the attorney general and then they have 90 days before they have to get back to us and then when we get it back, I think Mayor Mazowski has to do some posting requirements. So then mid December in essence would be in effect if it was >> you're just saying that you're it's in
effect at the date it was voted on November 30. Okay. >> Yes. >> It could be revoked in 90 days post 120 days later. It could be revoked. >> Right. >> Unlikely. >> I can confirm that with Mary Mowski, but that's my understanding.
>> Thank you. I appreciate Madam Chair. I know we're slightly off subject, but it is related to the article draft articles themselves. Um, on this same subject, I I will be attending the September 11th zoning board of appeals meeting um to uh
just run through these. I think it's an important polite >> um uh thing to do uh given that we're um we're creating something that in essence is work for them.
>> Um and so I I will be there and Susan has a former member of the ZBA is is going to is going to join me. So, I'm I'm looking forward to that. I will also add on the 11th there is a um a petitioner who would like a variance related to an
RV and where it's parked. >> So, it could be an interesting meeting from that perspective. >> Well, that actually >> to be there >> that actually ties into the explanation that that Kathy wrote. I actually wrote the second sentence says currently boat storage is allowed and I actually wrote
currently boat and RV storage is allowed if located behind the front face. Right? Because it's for camping and recreational equipment. >> That is correct. Currently >> I think it's an important it's an important place to kind of reinforce that we're not making separate rules for boers. It's this is the same I mean we
are creating sorry we are creating a separate rule for boater but you can't say currently boat storage is allowed if located behind the front. I mean it's not entirely accurate. It's RV and boat storage is allowed if located behind the front face of the building. >> Yes, I think it's >> and maybe you didn't want me to bring
that up and I apologize if I did. >> No, I just it's just that the explanation is related to the change. >> Ah, I see. >> Not >> I just didn't want to confuse people by saying >> rec and I don't that's the last thing I want to do. >> No explanation. Yeah. Yeah. Your point's well taken. It is.
>> All right. Any other comments on zoning amendments? Yeah, >> Madam Chair, can I can I just touch back since we've talked about it before? Just on a quick one and I wanted to actually hear Susan's thoughts on it. Being a former ZBA member, I still have an issue right here. The very first sentence, if
a boat cannot be parked or stored at the rear to the rear of the front of the line of the lot and the bottom line, you go through the rest of which we all know and then limiting the dates. Well, if they can't store it the rest of the year, but now you can let them park it
out front for those April and November. I guess my question to you, we put an undue burden on ZBA for somebody in that particular example. And that's the petitioner who brought it to us in the very beginning. >> What is it? What's the concern? >> The concern is that the petitioner who brought this whole thing up, >> right,
>> bought it to us because he has no place to store his boat on his small on his small lot. >> Correct. >> So, you're telling that person, here's the example. So, I'm just I'm asking you from a ZBA perspective, and I know you can't answer for them, but I'm just asking for clarity if there is any,
>> is that you're going to we're going to tell that person, well, fine, you can keep it April till November on your driveway, >> but you have no other place in the winter time to keep your boat, so go find a place to store it. >> Right. >> That is what we discussed. >> Yeah. No, I think that was our intent.
remember um when we went to board of selectment, I think it was Tracy that said >> she doesn't want it anytime. >> Yeah. I I'm not here to worry about Tracy. >> I think that um I think that was a reasonable compromise because we we a lot of people don't want them at all. I
thought we would >> I thought the conversation was >> That's the comment we're going to hear, Madam Chair, >> next week. I I'm sure we're going to hear it, right? But the but the but the trade-off was you now you now can pack your your boat um virtually you know in
your driveway whereas prior to this amendment you couldn't at all. >> Now we're giving you at least six months and then the other six months you got to go to work because because a lot of people don't want them at all. >> So >> a lot of people do. >> Yeah. That's true. That's true. And you
know one of the things that I was actually gonna I don't know if Mark has those statistics. How many people actually >> are in that situation? I just didn't I we never I think we asked and I don't think we ever followed up on that. But >> I don't I just don't know. But but that was a very compelling case that the
fellow brought forward. I don't know if he's >> What day do you go to ZBA, Madam Chair? >> The 11th 11th. >> I'm going to ask if you can get on the agenda. >> Yeah. I don't know that that that's going to happen, but >> they have an open I think like they have an open comment period.
>> Yeah. But I'd like to be on the actually on the agenda. It's a really good thing. >> Kathy suggested it beyond the gen. But >> if I can, Mr. Smith, um, >> at our last meeting when we decided to move this to ZBA because
>> which I have no problem with. >> Yeah. >> We wanted to try based on Susan's experience um, she had I remember you saying clearly the ZBA looks to the planning board to give some boundaries. >> Yep. >> It helps them give some boundaries. So,
um, as best we could, you know, we outlined these boundaries. Um, >> so that's that's kind of where we where we landed it. Um, and yes, the boat owner would have to find another place after November 1st to >> right >> to store it, right?
>> We'll see what the zoning board of appeals um says. I don't know. I don't know of any um petitioners who have come to them like the RV petitioner who's coming for boat store. I >> um I don't I don't think so.
>> I don't I don't remember seeing anything on an agenda >> and I I don't remember seeing anything either. So, we'll see. >> I know they're pretty strict on RVs. >> Yeah, >> they are pretty strict. They've had previous hearings with RVs and I don't I can't recall any of them >> especially have been looked favorably upon by a majority of the
>> they give them some time to figure it out. >> They give them some time to figure it out to >> come back and then there's a >> then the hand comes down. >> Yeah. >> Madam chair, can I ask one question just anticipating questions in two weeks because I think we're going to get a fair amount of them. in the under the
zoning article two in the third bullet point where it talks about parking in the driveway the section where it says without creating a traffic or fire safety issue and adequate remaining on-site parking for the property can be demonstrated I think it's fair to say someone's going to ask us who says it's
a traffic or fire safety issue and to whom do we have to prove that there's adequate remaining on-site parking and I'm not saying I know the answer I'm just saying I think people are going to ask that when they read this they're going to going to want to know like who do I go to? Because this isn't a ZBA thing. It's more of a
>> parameters thing. >> But but can I >> Or is it a ZBA? >> Well, it could be um one thing they could do when the applicant files an application for the special permit with the zoning board. The zoning board could then say >> either bring a plot plan or a site plan to show that there is adequate, you
know, the fire trucks, it's mainly firet trucks and ambulances can get by. Okay. >> They can ask that. They can. So when you come forward with your application, you've got that information and the board can then make a decision. It is adequate >> and they know that because we've outlined it like you said, we've given
the parameters of what >> and then they can determine what is adequate and they can do that by the application by asking what kind of information. >> Thank you. I appreciate your insight as a former member. That's very >> We'll see that. Let's see if it happens again. >> Very helpful. Well, thank you, Madam Chair. >> Anything else on the uh zoning
amendments? Moving on. Uh we have it in front of us. Uh uh you know we've asked questions at a couple of previous meetings. Um we and the 40B comprehensive permit application
for 897 Route 28 which is the site of the um u old laundromat. Um uh so here is the latest that we have from Kathy. uh she provided this um documentation to us to give us an opportunity to review
the application. We don't have any special permit granting authority here. Um it's just whether we would like to provide written comments to the ZBA ahead of their hearing on the 25th of September. Um Kathy, can you just give
us a quick overview of it and then uh remind us of some of the limitations since this is a 40B application? >> Yeah. Yeah. This is not not a local initiative one. This is what should be called a friendly 40bs. This is where they went and they got that letter of
eligibility from the state that they want to enact. Um hang on, I'm just going to get to the plans. So, what what they have done is this is the o the former laundromat site. It's like 1.09 acres. It's not a very big
site. It's on the corner of Route 28 and Pine Grove. Um there's residential zoning or residential um homes here. And then this is the Bass River Motel uh over here. Um they they incre they I don't know if you
remember what it was like before but they've put a little more thought into the laying laying it out where they've broken it down into three separate buildings and then they have the parking um to the side and to the rear of the of the buildings here coming off of the same >> there's no access to 28 which >> no access to 28 as well
>> right um there is none right now either um they basically are going with the same exact location uh coming off of Pinerove that's there now to access the the laundromat. I believe they have um there's 27 units. Um I'm not exactly
sure of the breakdown. They do have to have some of them that are threebedroom units. Um they are providing 1.1 parking spaces per unit. So 30 spaces that they're that they're providing. Um obviously with the chapter 40B, they
don't have to meet all of our He's vacuuming in there. Um they don't have to meet all of our zoning. they ask for very specific waiverss that they kind of go through um in in all of that. Um I think the key the key thing here with regard to um the site they did come
before site plan review which they weren't required to do but they did. Um I don't believe they made any changes to the plans based on anybody's comments. Um some of the comments that I had were obviously there's a lot of mature trees down here on the south end of the property. Uh and looks like they're
removing them. So, they want to make sure that there's an enhanced uh plantings to or consider a fencing. There's no inlot parking lot trees or buffer plantings along the eastern edge. So, there's nothing here. Although, there are some nice trees over on the Bass River Motel property. Um, with 30
parking spaces shown for 27 units, the developer should outline measures to restrict the number of cars per tenant as no on street parking or parking in the buffer should be allowed along Pine Grove. We don't want people all of a sudden parking here or pulling in perpendicular and parking half-hazardly. um with regard to that and then just
talking about street trees being a minimum two and a half caliber and then screening the transformer and the emergency um gas generator which is right here along 28. >> Um and then I think the biggest egregiousness is related to the
architecture. >> Um it's terrible. So, what what I would highlight is um this rear elevation is the elevation that's facing Route 28. >> Oh, hold on. >> Oh, that's interesting. I didn't know that. >> Yeah.
>> And which where are we? C >> rear. >> The rear bottom left. >> Bottom left. >> Bottom left. >> Yeah. Bottom left. >> So, not top left. >> No, that is facing each other, >> right? >> Or facing the back of the other building because >> this is facing our main street. This
this right here is facing route 28 >> and there's there's not anything we can do about that >> are facing Pine Grove these very boring >> right >> side >> but the top left is the most intriguing and interesting aesthetically at least >> and that will not be very
>> face each other right I know I I appreciate you bringing this up is there is there anything that can be done at this point in the process >> um >> except for our comments of course >> I said the proposed architecture is not Cape Cod style The rear elevation and the planer side elevation are the ones facing the public roadways and not the
front elevation which has more architectural detail. Consider different materials, possible roof pitch or more detailed corners, pediment and improvements to the elevations facing the public way. >> That's the pictures. >> Third building in Yes, thank you. The third building in the rear of the property could be a two-story building
to scale down the building as the project moves into the residential neighborhood. And then for reference, I I said I gave pictures of I'm just gonna go I went on the green stacks. >> There's really helpful that you provided those.
Yeah. See, that's that that would be >> this is it. This is exactly it. >> But that's not facing Route 28. >> No, >> that's facing each other like you said, >> right? Or the back ones face. Yeah, the back. And then So this is just an This is the one that they did in LOL, Massachusetts. It's on their project
website and you can see it. And then I went on aerial. You got >> What time was that? Low. >> Low. Great. >> And you can see the the um you know, at least this has a porch and doing something. Um but these plain sides, they they've tried to embellish it a little bit more with windows, but
these are the plain sides that would be showing against um Pine Grove. And then what I did see is another project that they had which is in Cambridge. And if you kind of you could kind of see that they had they do have some opportunities
for different types of roof. And maybe if you just took the top one, two, three stories, it looks maybe a little bit more like a bungalow or something that they might be able to make some improvements on. And so this is also a green stacks project. >> Abby, I found another one today in Hyannas and I was going to send it to
you because I had the other a couple of the others. Is it a green stacks? >> Green stack too. Okay. >> And it looks very much like some of the others that I had sent the other day. I mean it's there there are a lot >> of options that are more attractive than this building from green stacks. So >> I I think they built this elsewhere.
This particular developer >> that one in Lowel is is a carbon is I would a carbon copy. >> Yeah, it's exactly >> previous slide. >> That one madam chair. >> Ours would just be blue. >> Literally what we're talking about except different colors. at >> and then again that is facing each other
internally not externally. >> Peter, where where did you find the ones in in Hyannis? >> Um I mean Hyas is going through a boom right now. So there's a lot of new projects out there and and some of the stuff I had in my files were project. So
>> um you know with hip roofs and different sort of designs that are more attractive. >> So it's possible. >> Yeah. But they're at 35 ft right now, which I believe is on these buildings. And, you know, they're very >> Yeah. 35 right now. >> They can ask for a waiver from that,
too. >> That's where I'm going with it. To to do some architectural something to this. >> Oh, yeah. They >> answer or something just to address it. >> So, part part of their the initial conversation with them, Kathy, was that the concern was they weren't going to
find financing for a mixeduse project, right? So, is this why maybe they're pivoting to just a strict residential project? >> I I really can't say >> they didn't. Okay, >> I'm sure that's why. I think what they were finding is I think there was some interest in an oyster bar because I think one of the clearies has done that
elsewhere but then when they started realizing that they're not going to be able to have enough parking for everything on this tiny tiny property and I think that led them to >> I hope we'll have a chance to talk about that because to me of all the issues that may be the number one >> is I I appreciate the fact that there's
now more possible year-round rentals for good folks to stay on Cape Cod. I totally am excited about it and I like the mix of units and that's awesome. But you can't look me in the eye and tell me that 1.1 spaces
for 27 apartments is going to fly. It is absolutely a recipe for on street off streetet Cape Cod classic. Let's park wherever the heck we want. >> Right. And I'm not casting any espersions on anybody that hasn't even paid their first months, last months in
security, but it's just the nature of our community. And I'm I'm just going to say it this way, Madam Chair. I am disappointed in the lack of parking in this project. And I believe it will lead to unpleasantness.
>> Thank you. And Madam Chair, I I will echo that because there's, as Will just said, 30 30 parking spaces for 27 units, >> especially two and three. Originally, it was studios and ones. We're talking two and three bedrooms as well. Sorry, >> K. No, you're exactly right. Well,
there's going to be, you know, two cars for every unit. They're going be parking all over the place. >> You know, I know the project that earlier in South concerned about fire, you know, fire access. when you get cars parked all along the side of the building and everything that's going to happen, you're not going to have enough
parking with this project. >> Mr. I was concerned about that and because I like to go into the data. I went to the American Community Survey and discovered
that h 55% of households have more than they have two or more cars including a large percentage of single person households. And so it really is uh on
the single person households um 13 and a half% of them have two cars and then of course it goes up from there. And so, you know, I'm really all for I've always been all for walkable communities and and I I looked at the
census track because it is one of the more walkable parts of Yarmouth. >> And it is true that in the census track the PE number of people with two or more cars goes down to 45% from 55% townwide.
And also renters are slightly less likely to have more cars than owners are. So there, you know, I'm I'm looking trying to look at mitigating circumstances, but it's still seems way too low. The every Well, the other thing
is everybody has their pickup to go to the dump and these people will have their trash collected, so they don't need that. But it's still I still don't think that it's enough parking spaces. Is there no way to get that changed or you can comment on it. I don't think it's going to make any particular
change. I mean, >> and the ZBA doesn't have any >> They have huge amount to say about it. >> Absolutely. >> Say a lot about it and they can even deny it, >> right? >> But it would end up being >> I'm not disappointing Mary. We're in pretty decent shape with
the the affordable housing program. Thanks to Mary, she's awesome. Um so, um if that there are well, we're the planning board. When this came up in front of us before, let's start with Jim. Jim made a point of saying those
the mature trees on that site needed to be saved and I think a commitment was made that they would be saved. So, that's number one. But as the planning would the discussion I think at that point was the issue of more housing on Route 28 and what does that do to an
economic development plan. Um I remember Peter Smith, Mike Stone, and I think Mark Forest at one point said from the board of selectmen they're very very concerned about additional housing on Route 28 because that crowds
out the opportunity for economic development. So that's one issue. the whole macro issue of putting more housing and it's it's public housing. It's subsidized housing. It's not even market rate housing. >> That's that's not true. Anything that is not market rate is
somehow subsidized. >> These are not market rate housing. This is this >> 25% are affordable and the rest would be market rate. >> The rest are the rest. It's subsidized. So it's not like you're building million dollar condos. It's not Stewart's >> project on South Street in Hyas.
Then the then the the things that they're looking for waiverss from are monumental in front of zoning. Setbacks is a big issue. Packing huge issue and and all the comments here are quite quite accurate. They will cars will be on the street.
>> Trees trees now become a huge issue. The issue that Jim brought up and then we even talked about it on the site where they down by the silver where they they took some free desert they they buffered the back. They want to take down trees. Um they then then the style it's not
even Cape Cod style and to think that on our main street and that's an area you've got across the street you've got a couple of really nice restaurants and I think you've got the Nicinelloo you've got the Dairy Queen that's a fairly active in fact it's a very active uh
strip in the summertime and you're going to have this facing 28 this is going to be Yamoth's introduction to house to to tourists is this project where the back of these buildings face 28. I think the the whole
I can't think of anything redeemable. It's overbuilt. The site only allows for 23 rental units. They want to build 27. They don't have enough parking. Uh the design is hideous. This materials are hideous. Then they want to uh you know
relief on the setbacks. They want relief on trees. They want relief on parking. this is not the kind of best foot forward for for for housing in the in the county in addition to the location. So that's my I see nothing redeemable
here. >> Kathy, >> I just think I always try in my site plan review comments to provide comments that I think they might actually be able to accomplish. It's totally up to you guys if you want to make, you know, a um a
letter stating all of these things that that Susan just went went through, but that doesn't give them anything that they can then they could possibly change to make it better. >> So providing comments about things like >> the roof >> like like even just putting like a little this you see how the porch like
just the overhang here. Even if you put a fake one over here and had like look made it look like a little patio or porch or something that would make it better >> facing 28 that Oh, sorry. Yeah, that you're talking about the side >> facing 28. I think they can do something to the backside to make it look better, right? >> And and and the whole side here, you
know, it's flat. It's it's all flat. And I don't even know what this material is. And I said, >> you know, maybe you want to look at different materials. Maybe >> the style is awful. >> This this might work in more of an urban area, but this is Cape Cod. And that's another architecture I think would make
a big difference and you might be able to and I mean if if Peter has some examples of some screen stacks projects in Hyannis that we can say oh look they're doing this in high why can't you do it here then there could be some push and pull with the ZBA of saying make it look better
>> and we want this condition and this restriction that you you know you ha have to have some type of an agreement with your tenants they can't park there and if people are parking there they're going to be towed >> got to be put in the leases >> right obviously >> and enforced but there needs to be some mechanism in in our zoning uh special
permit that says you shall do this so that we we can get them for zoning violations not just for them having tenant violations. >> So I guess my point would be >> if you want to write a comment letter what what can we do that might make it
better because I think >> it's a 40 >> you'll have to go a long way to make this better. I think you've got set >> so much better than what they s what we saw, >> but it's still it's still >> it's better than the first time around. >> It is, but that's never an excuse to accept it in the sense that >> we're not we're not saying that.
>> No, I know. But it's it's like saying, >> okay, it's a little bit better. It's better than what was there. And that I think that kind of thinking we have to stop. >> I understand. Except that Cathy's also trying to >> give you the practical side of it's one thing to just say we don't like it. It's
horrible. Well, here's all the reasons why when it is a little bit of a runaway train now that we can't stop. So, the question, okay, I'm just talking about it from our point of view. >> Well, we're the planning board. I mean, >> we cannot stop this project from the planning board's board, >> but the zoning can. >> Hey, but but but we're sitting here at a
planning board meeting. So, I'm >> We should represent what the planning talked about for years about Route 28. I think the appropriate way, Madam Chair, is if we have comments, let's give them to Kathy and let's present it to the ZVA board. At least
let them know our concerns. >> Would you want to do it as a as a cohesive board on the next meeting or is or do you want to provide individual comments? >> What is the timing on this, Kathy? When is this going to be? >> It's going before them on the 25th. Um the hard copies of the packets are going
out on the 15th, but if you have a letter, it can be emailed to the different ZBA members. So we we could talk about it at the next meeting if you wanted to after the ZBA and the deliberations and the other things you guys have going on. >> I think there's an opportunity to do Susan exactly what you're talking about
and there's an opportunity as Kathy is saying from a practical point of view to also ask them to do some practical things. I think both things can be accomplished. But you're >> if you don't agree, then that's totally okay and maybe you should write something on your own. That has no practical impact in terms of what we
what they could do. That's I totally respect that. I'm just saying that I believe it may look better >> and madam chair will obviously defer to her that if it does come from all of us >> or me, you know, as opposed to just four people thought this but one people
>> because the concept of making it better is not attractive to me. I don't think it should be there at all. >> Okay. And I think it should be rejected and let them sue us and we can make a case that that you know we have a long-term vision for Route 28. U the planning board has talked about this now for years and years and years and years
uh and and it's wrapped around we had conversations about this you know as we develop matter keys as you develop the site across from the town um and the need for economic good economic development on Route 28. This does not meet that test in any sense. You could go to the hearing on the 25th and stand
up, right, >> during the meeting and say everything you just said. Okay. Sorry. Or you could provide a letter. >> Sorry. >> I I'd like to. >> But I'd write a letter. >> Uh I I just want to clarify that a couple
of things. I don't think the consensus of the planning board is that housing is a bad thing on 28. I want to make that very clear. I don't think any of us feel that housing is a bad thing for 28 >> except for you.
>> I think additional housing I think additional housing on 28 should be seriously examined. >> But the majority of the planning board members feel that housing well done can be an important piece of the look and
the vibrancy of Route 28. We just hired some consultants where we have mixed use >> which was a really this is not mixed use >> would have maybe you would have liked it better if it were >> definitely it's farmers that it came to us as that >> right
>> um but what what I I do think is important is that um if we can um get Kathy our individual thoughts um I think Kathy has capsized for me anyway her comments ments and the
comments of all of the members of the site review um capture everything I'm concerned about. And if that were to become a note from the planning board, I would say um plagiarize the whole thing. Well, there's also one more very
practical thing, madam chair, under the water and wastewater section where I haven't heard this yet at the uh at the rack meetings, but >> there's an engineer from the from DPW who said there may be a moratorium on excavation on 28 after the final pave.
That's kind of practical. That's a practical concern when I don't know when they would possibly get a permit to actually even start this project. Would be well after the fall of 2025. >> They were made aware of that and they were going to I think move quickly on that. I don't know if they did or not. >> So, I mean, >> yeah.
>> So, it's true for everybody. >> Yeah. So, so that would be >> that ship is sailing. >> If you may, if you if you would like to submit comments directly to Kathy, please do. Um, but from my view, I think the the the
comprehensiveness of the notes from the site plan review uh capture all of my concerns, including those things from especially from the building department on where they're going to have to seek, you know, some support from ZBA on all
of these restrictions. They've got to they're going to have to get some help from the ZBA. >> They're going to get relief. They're going to get relief. They're going to have to get some waivers >> and the waiverss. It's not even a special permit. It's >> very long list. >> It's a it's a comp. >> So, um if we if if that's okay, why
don't we why don't we leave it at that if that's okay with everybody? >> Yeah, I'm following up. >> Um and and Peter, to the degree that you feel that you can um offer Kathy what other um stacks projects you're familiar with in terms of what they look like. Um
that would be helpful as well. It's always good to have good ammunition if we're going to go in that direction. Picture >> is worth a thousand words. Yeah. Well, >> Kathy, do you have the unit mix for this project? Number of >> Yeah, it's in here. >> I mean, I I know there it is. Hold on. I I I did highlight it. >> The number of units.
>> The number of bedrooms. >> Yeah, there is a breakout. >> Hold on. It is It is Here we go. Unit mix. Oh, okay. >> Nine studios, nine one bedrooms, 62 and
33. And it lists the square footage as well. >> Yep. It's on that page. >> And the other question, Kathy, um I see this work I see workforce housing used differently in every town and sometimes some
ZBA boards or planning boards will use it in a um decision and say, you know, limited to workforce housing. But and then I'll have to call and say what does what does that mean? Cuz do do you have a definition? I mean I don't know if it's in project summary here workforce housing. So I don't know if it >> no
>> has a definition that you attach to it. >> I think Mary might have one where it might be between like 80% to 120% median area income, but I think they're just calling it workforce housing because I think they want to rent to workers. >> Well, who who who wrote the project
summary then? Is that coming from them? No. >> Okay. All right. I just think if we use it or the town uses it, we need to know what it means, >> right? >> Yeah. >> When we see it comes from Right. >> Sure. Sorry.
>> We're going to be hearing it a lot >> in the next one to three years or maybe it's two to five years. Depends on what time frame we're looking at. >> There. See what you did. [Laughter] just holding us accountable.
>> My feet are so burned from being held to the fire. >> Oh boy. >> Okay. Uh any other comments on this agenda item? Okay. Um
Madaki's property update. >> No new no from last time. >> Okay. We're still meeting on September 11th, next Thursday. >> Um, moving on. May I have a motion to accept the meeting minutes of August
27th, 2025? >> So moved. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I >> I. >> Any committee updates? >> Live just a live and it's an important library committee update. Um, a week
ago. Yes. A week ago, Tuesday, at the board of selection meeting, um during the public comment period, um a former resident, uh I didn't remember the name, but we we lived here at the same time, but I think her last name was Grafton or Trafton. >> Nancy Trafton.
>> Yep. Uh got up and uh mentioned she had lived here for a long time, brought her kids up and served on many boards and commissions in the town. One being the um I think she was on the original open space committee, microphone, >> very close to it, >> a planning board. um >> the planning board. She was on >> and the planning board and various
boards. Uh and she had some she raised some concerns about the use of the Simon site for the library uh invoking article 97 thinking that it might be protected use and and her statements very if I if you have time I would recommend you go
and listen to the um her presentation. She also submitted it in writing. So, someone in the town halls got it. Um, and made a very good case that that additional work had to be done because she thought it was protected uh for the playground. At least part of it was protected for the playground. So, that
was Tuesday night. Thursday night at the library committee, the the project uh you know, which I represent, the planning committee, >> building committee, >> the the project building committee, um Kelly Sears Jacobson came and and asked to speak. during we have a little public
comment period like we do here. Um she is the grand I think grand great niece of Joshua Sears the family that owned the site. Uh and she gave a very good presentation about the history of the site and went right back to 17 whenever it was 21 when the Sears family bought
it. Um and she she was also very concerned about the use taking that open space because it was her understanding and certainly from her knowledge of her grand uncle and the whole family um involvement with
open space that they would that he would not be supporting taking open space to put the library regardless of the merits of the library. It was the open space. So well, so bottom line is things could have slowed down obviously and I believe that the board of selectment made a
decision to have a complete legal review of the title and the need in the title. So that's one thing. >> Don't you have only 90 days left to to finalize things? >> The the I think I think um Bob Whitner has said it would probably take four months which would bring us up to
Christmas. >> Meanwhile, I think the filing date for phase two is the beginning of December. the library commissioners. >> Yeah. Right. So, they would miss they would somehow miss I believe now it may not take four months. That was Bob's estimate. >> Uh but the the filing date for the state
grant is a high date and they don't grant extensions. >> Then you miss the year. >> They don't grant extensions. So, that's sort of where it is. Um we did hire we did finalize the um uh the contract for the architect and they they're very very good. Um part of the conversation
Thursday night was um are there some alternative? Is there anything alternative at that site? So they looked at the Bridgewater uh building site. Um he and he's going to do some preliminary estimates to see how much it would cost to sort of rehab
that site. He felt fairly confident based on his knowledge of rehabbing older buildings. It was loaded with asbestos. It not energy efficient blah blah blah blah blah. Yeah. Exactly. and sort of said it will cost you more to rehab than it would to build new. >> And then I of course brought up the
issue that if we did that, I saw that as a cardinal change in the whole cont in the whole competition because we were going for new construction. Uh and um that's a two-story building. West Jamoth was ruled out because it was only one story and I said I just think that's a
slippery slope just because you'll end up with someone in West Jamouth also filed a lawsuit. So anyway, bottom line is the the we're still working on some things that the the contractor, the architect is going to go forward with as much as he can get done without impacting making hard decisions about
the site selection. In the meantime, we're waiting, everyone's waiting for this legal um review of the feed and the title. >> Thanks. >> Um so of course ancillary conversations, you know, Madakis is still alive. you know, maybe we should start planting a
flag over there because we may not have and we want to keep the money. So, so it became, as you can imagine, extremely muddy um because they don't want to the library people obviously do not want to lose the money. If they can get something um you know, they can if they
can pull something together. Um so, the earlier we find out about the site, the better the better off we'll be. But, but it's it's extremely complex. Now, >> you did mention too that the rec the rec plan mentioned that it was restricted
limited to um playground use. >> I both Nancy and Kelly um believed that that that was the article 97 that that somehow the land was certainly Kelly believed that the
donation of that site to the town and there's no question about ownership. I think the ownership of the town is pretty clear. It's the use of the land, >> right? that that they believed that it was to be a an open a playground, not necessarily the way we look at a playground with swings and all that kind
of stuff, but open space, right? >> Because she said back when they did donate it, which I think was 1931, it was a ball field. It was really open space. Kids play tag and ran around and they didn't have the equipment kind of concept that we have now. So her belief was um but again, they couldn't find
part of the problem is none of this the the deed stuff is written down. It's the title stuff that how That's very very very um >> that would be attached to the deeds. >> It's very lacking. Yeah, it's very lacking. And that's what Whitenau has said. This has been something that they've talked about forever. Uh we got
to get to the bottom of it, blah blah blah blah blah. So, they're going to commit to having a a review done of the entire deal >> title search, which takes time. >> But if you get a chance, um read Grafton's comments because they're very
well laid out. That was at the select board, not at the library. >> No, that was at the select board, but her comments were passed out at the library committee meeting. >> I I did I received those as um trustee over at the South the Armouth Library
Association. I can send those to you Kathy. >> What is that? >> This write up by this um woman. >> I've seen it. I don't know who gave it to me, but >> you allowed to then forward it on to us. >> Yeah, it's a public. It's a public document. >> If you have it, forward it to. Thank you.
>> I don't know whether I got a hard copy of it. I don't remember. >> I I got a I got I got a copy >> and then I'll forward it. >> Um any other correspondents or staff updates? Keep um
um we are going to be giving a um presentation at one cape about the Parkers River landing kind of as a a successful reuse repurposing story. Oh, and then they're going to be doing a for people who sign up, what they call a
um a mobile workshop, which just means site visit. It took me a little while to figure that out um to to go there. We did have a site visit with um interim Secretary of Economic Development
Stroba um a couple weeks ago. I don't know if I mentioned that to you. It was great to actually see it. They were very excited about it. um very um and Ellen Spoola from the economic um count seapport council um came and it was it
was really good. So that's being done and then we're also going to be giving a presentation through Mass DOT about resiliency about the Parkers River with um with Beta Group um at their moving forward 2025 seminar. >> So So we we are on the agenda for the
one one cape. >> Oh okay. That's at the end of That's at the end of the month, right? It's on the 17th. So, right before the ZBA, >> the same day. >> The same day. >> And then you get to roll right into the public hearing. >> Roll right into >> Oh, boy. >> Can I um Are you familiar with espresso?
Um, also, can you please give us just a quick timeline update on the Parker's River Landing and where it stands and then where we're going? Oh, what Ken said, >> what Will said. I was gonna ask it. >> Jinx, >> my understanding is um they got some delays. It took him a little while to
get their the building permit compiled completely. Um, so that delayed him a little bit, but my understanding is it's still November 2025. The rest of the park is almost pretty much done. It's really just the surface. >> Like I can launch a kayak in November.
See, this is why I bring up practical. Like this is what people ultimately really only care about. >> Yep. The last I heard Yes. But I don't >> Yeah. When's it going to open? That's the question. >> When can I take my kids? When can I put the kayak in the water? >> I'm not I'm not saying that in an accusatory way. I'm just saying that
like when people come to a public hearing, they're like, "This is all great. Now, when can the guy sell his lobsters at his house?" >> That's what they want to know. >> I would think if the weather >> I don't know whether the contract got extended is the only reason I hesitate. It was previously in November. I don't know whether the delays at the restroom have
>> Maybe at a future meeting you could share share an update. >> You think they golf in November? I mean, if if the weather I would think if the weather's decent, why not put a kayak out there? >> Absolutely. Boardwatch is beautiful. >> Absolutely beautiful. And the m right materials were chosen. It was not cheap.
It's that eBay hardwood. >> Made a big difference. >> And the rails bow out a little bit. It's a full six foot wide. And then then we have the the cable railings at the at the o overlooks and everything. And then there's nice these really cool benches and they put these little angles into it. They did a design stunning
>> and the playground is in and all that. Playground's in. The ship's in. >> Nice. >> Cool. >> The slides in. Yeah. >> Exciting. >> Yep. >> Well, when can I put my kayak in? >> Not me. >> I don't know. >> Hey, any others would like to know. >> Yeah, I'd have to talk to Amanda.
>> Madam Chair, just a quick update on capital capital budget. Uh they had their first meeting last week. I was away so I was not able to attend. Um this week we were supposed to have a meeting. got delayed to next week, but we're actually setting up meetings with all the town department heads. They're
starting to go through their capital plans. Um, one thing for not attending the meeting last week, I got punished with now I'm vice chair of the committee. So, >> congratulations. >> Congratulations. >> Um, so >> you're only one You're a heartbeat away.
>> Yeah. Thanks. Um, so it it's moving forward. Smy's doing a great job. She really is. Amazing. amazing person. >> Okay, thank you. Uh, anything else? >> It does last one year. >> Um, I I I do have one question and
Peter, I'm not sure if you can answer, but I noticed there was a public notice since I do still get the hard copy of the Cape Cut Times. The CEDC tourism >> revenue preservation fund
um is out publicly and the amount >> events 40,000 for events >> 40,000 >> 40,000 for events that's it >> used to be over a hundred >> okay that's the second round this is I think is to allow >> spent
>> for things like the um Christmas stroll to apply and and those types of things it's not they didn't my knowledge it's not truncated down. I think this is a second round. >> Is that fiscal 202? I'm sorry, man. >> Yeah, it is fiscal 26. >> So that means till July. >> So there's already I my apologies.
There's already been one. >> I thought so and I thought it was being specifically redone. >> Trying to remember there there was there were some unspent funds. So I think I believe that's I didn't read it or see that. But >> so the 2026 St. Patrick's Day money is already different that the
>> right that changed right. So is the extra funds that's no year money. Is that is that hold over from 25? >> Well, did it say 26? >> I think it said 26, Peter. >> So that would that would be this year. That would be current. >> So the fiscal year starts September 1st. It started >> started July. It started July 1st.
>> July one. Yeah. >> So >> um that could I don't know how they're doing it. >> I don't know how they're I don't know. >> I haven't heard any I think it's no year money. So if you don't get it all spent in one year, you can use it in another year. But but that may not be true. I had thought it was the that the pot
had shrunk significantly. >> Don't think so. >> Okay. >> What else do they need to reconstitute the board member? >> Well, yeah, they they need, you know, um they need a committee. >> There were funds that were already allocated out of that. So, that might be >> um >> who's allocating, Madam Chair? The
select board? >> I don't I don't know >> because there's no comm there's no committee. >> Peter just >> Peter and one other person, right? >> Peter. Yeah, the dictatorship leaders are going to vote on the 40,000. >> And he was actually voted as chairman
when he missed the meeting. So >> moral story >> never miss a meeting >> or at least come in by Zoom. >> It was a name. >> Everyone resigned and he was voted chairman because he wasn't there. >> Oh my goodness. >> Oh boy. >> Uh okay, moving on. Uh upcoming
meetings, Kathy. >> Well, we have our fun September 17th public hearing on the zoning amendments. Um and again the deliberation on that and maybe possible recommendation. I like I say I haven't heard back about the um oh and then the October 1st is
the public hearing on local comprehensive plan. Um I maybe just a brief conversation about that. I was planning on giving the same presentation that I gave to the select board. >> It was like 20 25 minutes. >> Yeah. >> I think it was fairly comprehensive.
>> Yeah. >> Talk about the LCP present. >> Yeah. Sorry. >> Oh really good. >> Yeah. I thought it was excellent. >> All right. So, we'll we'll just kind of rinse and repeat update and whatever. Okay. >> Susan, you and Deedra were there, right? >> Yes. Yeah, it was very good. >> I thought it was I thought that'd be fine.
>> No stone was left unturned. I mean, there was no there was nothing. Every possible thing they wanted to know about, we had an answer for. Kathy had an answer for. >> So, hopefully we'll be on the October 7th select board agenda for zoning. So, they can double see that and hopefully
agree with us. Um and then a regular meeting on the 15th and then we got to go back to the select board on the 21st um for the LCP and then any zoning. Oh um the one thing the September 12th is the deadline for articles.
>> I have the zoning one, but I haven't written the LCP one. I'm just going to put in a draft version of that. >> Put a placeholder in. >> Yeah, it's not it doesn't it's not very involved. It's just, >> isn't it just a statement to accept? >> Yeah, it's like three sentences or
something. Um, and town council probably will have some some say in that, but >> but I just remembered the draft articles are due on 912 and then the only one I don't have is the LCP one. We'll just submit the ones we have for zoning. >> So, we'll we'll, you know, whatever you
put forward, Kathy, just share with us on the 17th. That'd be fine. >> Um, anything else? >> Nope. I think that's it. >> May I have a motion to adjurnn? >> So move. >> Second. >> All in favor?