Planning Board Meeting November 17, 2025

Okay, let's um it's 7:01, so we're going to start the meeting. Planning board meeting of November 17th, 1925.

It's a um we're virtual and we're going to do a roll call. So, Kevin Melo, Kevin Melo is our um alternate tonight. Kevin present.

Kevin Estes here.

and Maruite here.

Nick Sopatis is um out this evening and Helio will be coming in as soon as possible.

So, we're going to skip the first one and we're going to go to um application for planning board. Oh, no. We're going to do the first one. I'm sorry. I'm looking at this thing upside down. We're going to do the first one. The definitive subdivision for Linder estate white oak runs map 31 lot 16-4.

Yes. Um do we first do Can you hear me?

Yep.

Okay. Lori, I think your connection something's happening.

Um, I I correct me if I'm wrong, but do we need to do a motion to re-enter the public hearing for this? I don't know where you guys are.

Um, do we want to wait on that one is what I'm saying until Helio gets here because we need four we need four votes.

You're just asking for a continuation.

We're asking for a continuation on the special permit, but the definitive subdivision um uh we I I think we only need three for that.

That's not a That's what I'm saying. That's what I said that if we're doing the def definitive subdivision first.

Yes.

Yes. But is is that not a public hearing that we need to reenter?

That is how it's listed. So, um I'm not voting on it, but um it's I caution.

That was just a subdivision. That should not have been listed under public hearings.

Am I wrong or correct on that?

Um I I I don't know. I thought definitive subdivisions are are public hearings and it's ANRS that aren't.

Wasn't this a This was continued though from what?

Yeah.

No, it's But we can do it if we can do a vote on that on on it tonight.

It's the other one that's continued.

Yep.

Okay. Until we get four votes, let's go down to number one under administrative items. Approval not required. PR-25-7 780 Collins Connor Road.

Okay. Okay. So this is for uh reconfiguration of map 71 lot 56 into five total buildable lots. Three estate lots and two conventional. Um it is within the single residence B zoning district. Uh as required for the three estate lots. We need the form K estate lot covenant. The planning office does have that um as well as the access easement has been established and shown on the plan. Uh it would satisfy 1.101.

101A of the Dartmouth subdivision regulations that states that every lot to be created has frontage of the distance required by the zoning bylaw on a public street or a street the clerk satisfies uh excuse me certifies is maintained and used as a public street.

Um I don't know if the surveyor is here if he would like to add anything feel free.

No I have nothing to add.

Okay so that's it for me.

Any questions from board members?

Any questions from the audience? Do we see any questions from the audience?

Nothing. Don't see any.

I don't see any.

Okay. Any qu Okay, last time I'm going to ask any questions from the planning board. If not, I need a um a vote a um Yep. And the motion would be to endorse both the both the plan and the estate lock covenant. Just both need to be mentioned in the motion.

Do I have a motion?

I'll make a motion.

Congress made the motion.

I'll make a motion to approve the uh uh ANR plan and the uh covenant.

Do I have a second?

Second.

Second.

So I have a second by Kevin Estes.

Kevin, yes.

Margaret, yes.

And Laurianne Miller, yes. Motion carries.

Is Helio on yet?

Okay. Um discussion on special permit rules and regulations.

Does anybody have any questions or do we want to wait until we have um our town planner here to go over this or does anybody have anything they'd like to ask Ross now?

Well, I I've read it all, but I would like to uh I would I would feel more comfortable if uh Dan was here also uh to ask him.

Yeah. Uh because I I did read the whole thing today. Li, you'd be very proud of me.

And I do I I know, but I hate reading on online and I did I read the whole thing and I do have a couple of questions. So maybe if we could wait till um Yeah, it's up to you Rossible with you too. No, this was this was mostly just to um kind of for me to point out to you all that we do have the the one with um you know red lines and comments, right?

Uh so to go through that if you can and in the meantime if you have any questions or comments uh if you could let Dan and I know and we can hopefully have a nice polished one um or at least one better and eligible for for hope potentially a vote discussion on the ETH at the next meeting. So, um, that was the only reason why it's on this agenda to kind

of put on everyone's radar and to, uh, take a peek at it if you if you have a chance in the next, uh, two weeks.

Well, I I'm just going to ask one question, Lori, because um, it's mentioned in here a few times that we can't do anything without prejudiced or with prejudiced, but down in uh, section 341, I guess it is, it talks about that again. And I thought we couldn't do anything with prejudice or not prejudice.

See, an application may be withdrawn without prejudice by written notice to the chair.

Okay. And the comment on that is now the red is by the planning boards and the blue is by town council, right? Okay. So, Yep.

We can withdraw something. Okay. An application may be withdrawn without prejudice by written notice to the chairman.

That's not us withdrawing it. That's they're asking and he said that it shouldn't be the chairman.

I understand that. But I thought further up I read something about uh you know pre no prejudice. You know you can't it's nothing to do with or without prejudice. Like you know on the zoning board we have that all the time. But I didn't know that uh I didn't know that the planning board could do that without prejudice or with prejudice.

Yeah, we've done it we've done it in the past.

I don't remember that, Lori. I'm sorry.

I don't I think we've done it once or twice where they weren't ready to go on and we said we'd withdraw it. No, no, we I remember withdrawing things without prejudice and saying you could come back in and and we wouldn't refile. You didn't have to pay for the additional pale. Okay. You didn't have to pay.

Yeah.

I think I think the point he's trying to say because I I found Margaret where it where it is mentioned again in uh um a couple pages back and it essentially it seems like the the main point is that it can't the applicant can't withdraw without prejudice without the consent of the planning board. So they essentially have to ask first without just saying we withdraw without prejudice. You know they have to ask for

the cons the consent of the planning board can do it. Okay. If they That's what I'm taking away from it.

Okay, that was my question, Russ. Okay, so maybe when Dan comes back, you might want to talk to him about that.

Yep. I'm gonna I'm gonna start right now on my documents.

It just confused me a little bit. Okay, which doesn't take much tonight.

No, no, no. That's totally fine. I will um I will definitely look it over with him and if anyone else has anything in the next couple weeks, feel free to um you can email them to me. You can stop by and point them out, whatever works best for everyone and I try to have a clean one. I wrote them down so I bet them. I'll I'll email them to you tomorrow Ross.

Wonderful. That sounds good.

Thank you.

Okay, Ross, can you be on the next meeting that this comes up so that Oh, you can watch it anyway. It's okay. Just that you understand if we do any more discussion, you'll understand what we're we're saying and not saying so you have the information.

You know what I'm saying? So you can hear what we say.

Yeah. Yeah.

You can watch it. You can watch it anyway. So Yep. I will make sure if I if I'm not on the meeting, I will make sure I I watch it and watch that discussion because you're right, that is important.

Yeah. That way you can get the feel of what we were saying or trying to get, you know, across.

Yep.

But I will come in and and actually I'll call and um make an appointment to come in and see Dan so I don't just pop in because I have um a number of questions on this. Um I'm going to email them, Lori, and then they can answer me or whatever. And uh maybe they're the same questions, but uh I won't go over them tonight. I'll just email them tomorrow because I did read it all.

Yeah.

Okay. Yeah, that sounds that sounds good. I think uh we'll help I got I got a little confused by some of Brian's notes, so I'm going to read it again tomorrow before I email you Russ.

Yep. No worries. No worries. Out of the way.

I went in and got I personally went in and got a a hard copy of it because I just find it so I like hard copies, too.

Yeah. certainly do that.

Yeah, I'm a hard copy person and it's easier to read the lawyer's notes hard copy.

Yeah, it is.

Have any questions?

Uh, none right now.

Comments popped in again.

I don't know. I there's there's one that's just Zoom user, but I don't know if it's I don't know if it's him.

Surely comes up with his name.

Yeah. Yeah. Um we do have enough people for um right uh for for both for both technically. Uh the subdivision I believe we only need three. And then if we want to just continue the special permit while while um while Kevin's here, okay, we can do that.

We can do that.

We just have to make sure we re-enter.

All right. We have to do the motions to reenter, you know.

Yeah.

Yeah. I need a motion to um go into a public hearing for um the definitive subdivision lender estates. Oh, we should probably do the other one first because that's a continuation for the application for planning board special permit PSP 252 state road assesses map 163 lot 63.

I need a motion to recess our regular meeting to go into a special public hearing and then to return to our public hear regular meeting after.

So moved.

Second.

All in favor?

Yes.

I'm going back to the old mode.

Margaret.

Yes. Yes. A thousand times. Yes. Lori.

Kevin.

Yes. Kevin and Lori Miller. Yes.

Um Kevin Melo, are you voting on this?

Um no, I will vote on it.

You're on the other one. Okay.

Okay. And Ross, so are we doing we're doing the special permit now? Yes.

Yes.

So Kevin, this would be the one that you vote on.

Correct. But you're you're voting to come out of regular meeting, which I'm not Oh. Oh, that's what you Okay. Yeah.

Okay. So that vote. Okay. My mistake that no word.

Um we just we just voted on that. So now we can we can No, we just now we can go into our um now you're in now we're in special meeting so I can speak.

Yes, if necessary.

Um so this this application uh was requested to have a continuence uh to the last meeting of the year 1222 uh at 7 p.m. would have to be a part of that motion. They also have filed uh an extension form for statutory deadlines that extends it through February of 2026 um in case it needs that long. Um I think that that's pretty much it. Uh I know the engineer is on in case he wants

to add anything else. Feel free.

Um if I may, I'll just I'll make it quick. Um, we've been working or trying to work with the town and the state to get the uh the three drainage structures in State Road cleaned so that we can locate the inverts for the DPW um for utility crossings. Uh they are cleaning them tomorrow morning at 7:30.

So, uh survey crew will be out there at 7:30 tomorrow as well. Hopefully, we'll be able to get all the inverts, update the plans for Mr. Dart, and then get you a revised set. We're asking for the continuence out that far to give uh Paul and DPW and Dan plenty of time to do this. So hopefully we don't have to request another continuence again.

So I need a motion from the board.

Uh motion to continue as requested.

Second.

Motion was made by Kevin and seconded by Margaret. Kevin, yes.

Margaret, yes.

And Laurianne Miller, yes.

And Kevin Melo, yes.

And Kevin Melo, yes.

Okay, now we need to Oh, Linda estates, I need another person to vote on. We can't do that until we get someone else here like Helio.

So, is three is three not not enough for a subdivision?

No, we need four for this.

Okay, we can we thought we could do we have any you you you need um I thought we could do three.

You need three, but if one person votes against it, so this is it's a super majority on this. It's a um No, we need four C. We need four. I'm pretty sure it's a special permit.

It's a subdivision. It's not a special I'm not voting on it. So, it's not a subdivision. It's not a special permit.

It'd be a special permit if it was OSRD.

Right. It's not It's It's a regular subdivision.

It's not.

No. So three of them if one you know it it's up it's up to actually them if they want you have to ask them if they want to take the chance that one of us isn't going to vote because then it's one of the three because then it would that's that's what I was Yeah. Exactly.

So we need you Yeah. Is there anyone Is there anyone here for um this the subdivision which was called Linder Estates?

Um, yes, myself and the applicant, Ben Ree is online as well. Um, Ben, are you comfortable moving forward with the three or would you like to continue and wait for a four or more?

Um, no. I mean, if we've addressed everyone's concerns adequately, then I think we'd be okay to move forward. Um, if I know someone mentioned that Helio was planning to join, I don't know how far out he is.

Yeah, I know. I've been trying to drawing things out, but it hasn't worked, I'm afraid.

Yeah, we appreciate that. So, do you want us to continue, Ben?

Like to to go forward with tonight's meeting?

Um I don't know. Does the board think that we're we're better off continuing?

I don't know. What is what what I mean? What is the uh do you have to do this?

Is it proper for me to ask if anyone's going to vote? No.

No, I don't think you can.

I don't think I Sorry, guys.

How How Ben, let's How about we do this?

um we proceed and if there's any concerns at the end then we'll ask for a continuence and hope um this Ross they you guys have the Mullins rule in place correct.

Yeah. Yep. So he can he can watch the video and and sign the document saying that he that he is watched and is caught up to speed for the next meeting worst case.

Okay. So let's present the changes and and then if the if the board has any issues uh then at the end instead of you know asking for a vote we'll do the continuence. If everybody seems satisfied then then we'll ask for a vote if there all right. Excellent.

It works. Okay.

All right everyone I I think I'm done here. So um good night.

Bye Kevin.

Thank you. Good night.

Have a good one. Bye Kevin.

See you Kevin.

Okay. So you have the floor.

All right. Thank you. C can I share my screen?

Sure.

Jamie, can you just introduce yourself for the record, by the way?

Oh, absolutely. Sorry. Jamie Beset, Zenith Consulting Engineers for the record.

Thank you.

Uh this is a continuation of the one lot subdivision uh from I want to say two or three weeks ago.

I'm still frozen out as a participant on sharing.

Oh,

DCTV. Can we get him to share this evening?

I'm not sure who's on for DCTV tonight.

Here we go. I am able to share now.

Perfect.

Here

we go. All right. So, uh, since we last met, there were a couple of items that were brought up. Um, first of all, the the applicant, um, Ben Ree, he went and met with the neighbor, um, that lives, I believe the last name is LNO, that that lives in this property. Um what we've done uh based on the recommendation of the board u and and talking and been talking with the neighbors, we've

proposed a no cut restriction area in the back of this property. You can see this tree line in here where it gets closest to the uh the property that we're looking to develop is right in this vicinity here. So what we're doing is we're providing about 2500 square feet of no cut area. Um it's further dimensioned out um on this detail on this sheet here. Um it's going around

the perks. We gave it a little bit of room for grading based on um you know perk rate and and water table and stuff like that. So we believe that this 10 foot and then additional 10 feet which would make it 20 feet overall in here is um is additional screening that we're able to provide um to give this property owner a little more buffer. Um, one of the other discussions was uh the DPW had

had concerns about uh adding calculations demonstrating that the swale will uh will handle what we needed to. What we did was to make sure at the last meeting also the person who owns the property lives in this house. They had also expressed concern about not being impacted by water. So what we did was we actually continued the swale past their house and and and buildings down along with along the stone wall down to

the low point just outside the 100 foot buffer to a it's a massive wetland system. Um we've included uh the drainage calculations on the plan here which have been reviewed by the DPW and we did get a clear letter from DPW saying that they have no more comments and they're satisfied. Uh what this does um just in looking at it is it's a two- foot wide swale. It's roughly a foot

deep and it's stating that in the hundred-year storm with a 7.2 inch uh per hour um intensity curve uh I believe that's the hundredyear it but with 7.2 2 inches of rain per hour for intensity that this thing is going to get um it's going to get a few inches in uh height in the in the actual swale itself. So the critical depth is is very very low and the overall depth and flow is

fractional compared to the height of the swale. So there's no concern about there being uh flooding of any properties adjacent to us. Uh based on the calculations with the swale that we've included and that have been reviewed. Um they did have a couple of um items. Uh we were able to after we did the calculations were able to narrow the swale up by about a foot. Originally we were going to go with a three-foot

swale. Now we're at 2 feet. And um they had a couple of small note changes uh in the plan as well. Overall, uh I believe that was the majority of the comments that we had. Um and I believe that they asked for us to include a total I think the board asked for us to include a total area of uh proposed clearing.

Right now, this is where the clearing is projected to be. Um once the homeowner, whoever buys the house, whoever builds the house, they'll end up filing with a site plan and showing additional clearing. I don't want to try to anticipate and Ben is not planning on building the house as of as of right now. So, we know the septic unless it's reper the septic will go here and the house could go anywhere in this area.

The 100 foot buffer to the wetland is back here. So, they actually have a huge area that they could put this in. If I had to guess, I would say they'll probably put the house somewhere in this vicinity based on elevation, but to each their own. Um, besides that, I'm happy to try to answer any questions that you have. Uh that's that's it for me.

Well, I'm gonna say one I think it's great that put this the the the price uh the depth of that swale.

That was a question I was going to ask you. That's terrific. Thanks a lot.

Kevin, do you have any comments or questions?

Uh no. Um I I guess the only the only thing that uh that would really completely tie this up um is is the engineer um willing to add to the plan that uh what he's already surmised with the calculations that uh just a a guarantee that the runoff to the butters will not be increased. So what we have is we have the standard statement that the town of Dartmouth requires that we put in here.

And what it does is it uh has in here that um after the sign after the certification it says in addition all drainage systems have been designed so that abudding properties and ways will not be adversely affected. Um the presence or failure of any detention or infiltration system as designed will not threaten life or property. That's a standard town note, I believe. Ross, you can correct me if I'm wrong. Um, and

that was the note discussed at the last meeting, and that that's on the plan, and it references this plan uh up to this date.

Uh so, so what's the abutter's recourse given that that note is in there? If if it turns out that uh the that flow is uh is actually increased onto their property.

Yeah.

Well, based on the roadway, just the just the the creation of the swale, I think I can show you that it'd be near impossible to be able to increase flow offsite um to an adjacent person's property. We're creating a depression that's flowing in in the low point here down. Um right now what's happening is water is coming over and hitting a stone wall that runs on the property line. And

if you were to walk that stone wall, you'd see there's a slight rise at the base of the stone wall based on leaf litter and decayed material over the years.

Um that's actually built up a natural swale. So realistically, water is probably not even getting over there now. It's it's probably acting like a swale. So this is more of a belt and suspenders approach. But when you look at the overall flows as well, um you're talking about 0.2 CFS um for a larger storm. 22 CFS is um you could handle that many times over with a 4-in pipe. It's not a lot of flow. It's a

very small paved area of of you know, this is a very small paved area that's being put in there.

All right.

And just to top that off as well, the contours pitch from this side all the way down towards the wetland. Um, so it's this person actually is upgradient from over in here. So we would have to push the water uphill to get them affected. This was the only person that I was overall concerned with and that's why we made sure that the swale was dug in a little bit more.

Sounds good.

Thank you for uh getting a little bit deeper dive into that.

Anytime.

Ross, do you have any other comments?

Um just from my normal spiel, I know uh they were asking for four waivers um from the subdivision regulations to wave the requirement of a turnaround, wave the requirement of curbing, wave the requirement of street trees, and to wave the drainage requirements outside of what Jamie discussed. Um otherwise the since the this this uh copy of the plans does address the planning staff comments as well as the

DPW comments um from the last draft.

They also have added a note that was requested by the board of health when the when they discussed at their meeting. Um so unless there's any other questions from the board or any of Butters that are on then that's that's all I would have to say.

Ross, remind there's a stone wall that's being uh taken out and I assume that's being added somewhere. Can you refresh my memory on where that's going to be replaced or did they can they uh decide at the time of build?

Ross, do you want to address that?

Yeah, I would I would yield to you, Jame, if you don't mind.

So, we're showing the existing wall cutting across in this vicinity here. um it'll be taken out in the area as necessary. We're providing in case they have to take out all 60 linear feet and that would go down this area here.

There's also a second derry section of wall here which is 55 linear feet and that's also in this 230 feet of wall.

Okay, I'm good. for us. Okay. Thank you, M.

Margaret, are you good?

I'm very good. Yep. All set.

Are there any um anyone in the audience who has any questions?

Uh the three of us ready to vote on this this evening?

I excuse me.

Yes.

Hi. Uh this is Derek Fernandez. Um I'm want to be a Butters 147 White Oak Run.

I'm just speaking on behalf of my parents and myself.

Joe Joe, sorry.

Go right ahead.

Yep. Um just um couple quick things.

One, again, I just wanted to restate how Mr. Tribal and I felt last time. Um you know, my parents and I, we definitely don't agree with the plan. Um, we wanted to buy the property three years ago and I just don't understand now um how with the not enough frontage how it's going to it's supposed to get approved. Um, and then I guess this other question would be for the engineer um is it or in

for the planning board. Is it possible to put a no cut restriction area on the other other side of the property um which is 147 and is there any concerns too for drainage coming onto uh 147 as well cuz I don't see any discussion on drainage come drainage and cutting in regards to my parents' house.

Are you the property that abuts the back of the property to the south?

Uh yeah to the south. Right. Right. Um, if you look on the map, I guess, yeah, it's it's south. Yep.

But it's in the it's towards the back of the property.

Um, basically it's side by side. Side by side. So, where the house is going to go is going to be probably side by side with my parents house.

Can the engineer show us that on his screen, please? Can you share that with us on I've lost uh sharing capabilities again.

Uh DCTV, could you make uh uh Mr. There you go.

Here we are.

Thank you.

Yeah, I see where you are. You're um you're to the if I I'm reading this correctly, you're to the south and your house is behind um so Teresa's something. Is that correct?

It's behind uh Terresa Pimement's house.

Yeah. So, yes. Okay, I see where you are.

Yeah.

Yes.

So, that big the big property. Yeah.

South of south of Mr. Bowden's current property, the the Linda Estates lot.

Oh, you're right here.

Right there. Correct. Right there. Yep.

And there's also a pool house. If you see the other building there, it's also a pool house on the side.

Um, no. Are we looking at the right one?

I see the big house.

That's correct. That's my parents house.

What's your last name?

Okay. I see that. I don't see the pool house though.

So, it's the other small building uh near up on the right right hand corner.

Right there. Correct. Correct.

Yep.

Well, are you getting water now?

Uh currently no.

Parents getting are your parents getting water now?

Currently, no. So, that's what that's why one of our concern just to make sure if it does get approved that there's no water that's going to come over to our side. And again, also the I was if it was possible to put a no cut restriction on that against that wall as well, at least to a certain point, just like they currently have um on that west side of their lot.

Mhm.

Uh would you like for me to speak about the water?

Sure. Oh, I'm sorry. That's for the chairperson to Yes. Go ahead.

Okay.

So, right now, as I said before, the existing topography drains from the street area or in this area. This portion here drains back as you can see from the contour numbering going down.

We're not under this proposal. We're not doing anything over here. When they build a house, they will build a house most likely somewhere in here. I don't know where it will be. There'll be an a filing with uh board of health, with the building department, and whatever other boards are required at that time. May even be conservation. For us, the only thing that we're proposing right now

drainage wise, everything's getting into the swale on the complete opposite side of the site. So, uh there would be no additional runoff anywhere near uh the Fernandez property.

Does that answer your question, Mr.

Fernandez?

Um, yeah, I guess. Um, and how about the no cut restriction is the other question.

I I can't answer the no cut myself right now. I mean, if Mr. Reese wants to um it would I'm happy to speak on the no cut, please.

Um so after the last time we were here with at the meeting, uh Will the neighbor where we did place the no cut had reached out to me with his concern and I met with him and we went over everything and he had said that, you know, he would really appreciate some kind of a no cut buffer and I said I'd be happy to accommodate him then. Um, I never heard from you guys on on that

request, so that's why we didn't do anything down that side. Um, at this point, it's already been a couple weeks since then. I' really like to move this along, both myself and the property owner. Um, so yeah, I' I'd rather not go back and make another revision now. Um, I just I didn't think it was an issue because I never heard from anybody.

I don't know. I know you spoke with my dad. Um, I don't know if he if he didn't say anything that I'm not sure I'd have to speak with him about that.

Yeah, he didn't mention anything. You know, he asked though, where's the house going to be? And I had told him, you know, I wasn't going to be building a house on there. I really wasn't sure where the footprint was going to be. And he had said that, you know, he obviously wants to have some privacy back there.

And um I I didn't know if you guys have any trees on on your side of the property or if it's cleared right up to the property line. Um, so but I told him I wasn't sure, but he he didn't say anything about putting in any kind of a no cut restriction or Okay. Yeah, the tree the trees there's no trees on our um side of the property line. That's why Okay,

that's why I bring up the my concern.

So, uh, Madame Chair, may I ask a question of Mr. Reese, please?

Sure. Yes. Go right ahead, please. Uh, Mr. Ree, we all want to kind of get this done tonight because it's been a while already and the property owner and everything.

So, even though it's not on the plan, when you start to build your house and there's a lot of trees there, would you necessarily cut them all down or would you leave some as a as a boundary?

So, it's not my intent to build on the property. um rather to just get it through this uh phase of engineering and then sell it to someone who would build their home there. I would have to think whoever builds their home there would want that same privacy. Um and so while I can't say exactly because I'm not planning to do the clearing and building myself, uh I would think naturally

anyone who purchases a lot like this kind of in the woods would want the privacy of leaving some kind of a buffer.

It's not that hard to revise this just by putting a no cut zone along that along that um that line. You could put a a five foot or a 10 foot no cut line.

I I don't see where that would be a difficult um proposition to do.

Would it be possible for us to approve this administratively if that's going to be the way it goes?

Yeah, we could could also you could also if you didn't want to do administrative, you could do an actual approval just make it a condition that it's a an alteration zone.

Yeah, just make it a condition that the you know the final plans will have that line drawn on it. That's just that's an option too.

Okay.

That sounds best for me because I'd like to push this through tonight, Madam Chair. But it's up to you.

Okay. We would put that as a fourth condition. A fifth condition on the uh approval. There's four. We could put that as a fifth condition that there would be a no cut zone along the south side of the property. Would that describe it correctly?

Um, we would need a width specified on that.

Yeah, we did provide a 10 foot in this area over in here.

So, right, possibly a 10 ft a 10 foot along this area.

The longest. Okay, fine.

And And what section of that of of the property? Like because if you just say the south the whole south border. The whole south border.

Yeah, the whole south border there. There's also a south border by all the way at the west side.

Yeah. If the I just want to be very clear about it.

Could we say the the side abudding the Fernandes property? I don't know if that's a proper description.

It's actually a great way to do it.

The the the west side is already the north. No, the east side. The east side's already got a no built. the west side. We can't I think that goes into wetland jurisdictions. I'm not sure we have the right the am I correct or am I not that the west side is wetlands.

Um there is a wetland that starts here and runs back.

We've lost your your screen capability again.

Oh, I'm sorry. Um I'd like to see what we're going to vote on please.

Thank you. I'm sorry. Yeah, there's a wetland in the back here.

And yeah, I think it does make sense if we if we write down if we if we talk about adjacent to the Yep. This area and here.

Yeah. Right.

That's what I'm just looking to delineate that.

Right.

Yeah.

One. So we could go two, three, four, approximately 450 foot section adjacent to the Fernandes property on the southeasterly side of the property with the 10 foot 10 foot buffer, right?

Buffer.

Yeah.

Okay. The south side and the southeast side.

Yep.

That little jaw, that thing there. Okay.

Yep.

How does the board feel about that?

We'll make that part of the um conditions and then we can vote on this this evening.

That sounds good, Madam Chair, to me.

Kevin, how's that sound to you?

Yeah, that sounds great. As long as uh the the uh appellent or the uh applicant is okay with it.

Yes, I'm amendable to that. A 10-foot no cut restriction on that side bordering the Fernandes property. That's good with me.

Okay, let's do Sounds good. Okay. Ready. Any other questions from the uh applicant?

Any other questions from any abutters?

Any other questions from the planning board members?

I had I had a question as as an abuter.

Okay.

This is Will.

I'm on the west side of the property at the driveway with 125.

State your name, sir. Sir, you got to state your name.

Yeah. Will Trouble 125 White Oak run.

Um, so we we've we've had problems with uh drainage when they built the house to the south of us. Uh, I went to the town when they were building it. I said there's going to be a problem with drainage and uh the town it fell on deaf ears.

Town said there was nothing they could do. Um, so I'm a little bit dubious about a 10- foot no cut zone. Really, it's going to leave a handful of uh trunks, not a lot of not a lot of privacy.

And uh we lost all our drainage. The water flooded up to our house, up to our doorstep.

And I spent $15,000 and $24 to raise my driveway because of it. We lost our light privacy. We lost our noise privacy. We lost our visual privacy. We lost everything. Um, so I'm a little bit concerned about what's going to happen on the uh on the rest on the around the back of us and the side of us. Um, so I I respect Mr. Moden's right to develop his property and to uh, you know, make

his make his money that he that he could use. Um, and the town's decision to if it's legal lot to build. Um, I I I just would hope there's some recourse if if all these wonderful engineering plans don't work out.

Um, and that's what the town told me when I went to them when they were building to the south of us. I said, "There's going to be a problem here."

And they said, "Well, there's nothing we can do. If it's a problem, let us know and we'll see what we can do."

I said, "It's a problem." And they said, "There's nothing we can do."

So, is there a recourse? Is there some way we can go if it is a problem for the Fandes or for us for uh you know water coming into our property or anything like that or is it just a done deal?

Uh Mr. Besnet, do you want to go over that that note that you uh you showed me earlier?

Yeah, certainly. But I think one of the more important things to point out is the elevations.

Um the property in which that he lives.

Uh you can see an elevation of 130 and 129 over in here. Um the roadway here we have at 130. There's a couple of feet above it which we're taking and pitching towards the swale the other way. And then you can quickly see 128 which is lower than his property. The next one is 128 here. So, as far as what we're proposing with this plan, there's this all of this water is still continuing to

come from his property down across our lot to the wetlands. It would be from what we're doing here. We're not proposing to raise any grades under this this this plan set, which would, you know, could potentially push water back here. And we're not picking up the grade here. In fact, if anything, we're cutting down into it to catch the water.

So there's no there's no increasing grading all in here. There's some slight modification of grade to make the driveway work at the right pitch to pitch it over into the swale here, but um I I don't see any way that there would be a concern about water flowing onto anybody's property. Uh the only one that we would have had concern with could possibly be the house to the north, which we ran a swale all along

that side because that's the direction in which we're sending the water. Um but again, he's higher than the vast majority of this property. And you can see with the elevation 129 here at the base of 130, you're at 126, 125, 124.

Same thing with our swale, 129, 128. So, it's just going to continue to run downhill and flow from his lot across this lot and down.

Is this a ra is this a raised septic field or is this a uh flush septic?

There's no there's no septic design that's done yet.

Well, then really answer the question, can you will the septic field be higher than the surrounding area and push water into my property?

So, I I can't I can't state what somebody else how somebody else is going to design it. If I was designing it, the answer would be no. Would not push water onto your property.

What was the perk test depth?

Uh perk test depth.

How high will the septic field have to be?

Um let me see. We have the test bits on here.

We had water table anywhere right around 3 feet calling.

Yep. which means that it's going to be 3 ft above grade which mean the raised field which mean that will push it into my property.

It would also push it into the Fernandi's property.

Well, no. I again I think that that's so if if if this were me designing it, I would design the leeching field right here over these two test pits. And you're not going to take and push this even if it's three feet out of the ground. It would put it at 130. You're not going to take and push it uphill.

You're going to swail it around to the back.

It's three feet above grade and you have to tail it off. You're going to push water into my property.

Yeah. You Yeah. No, I I disagree.

I've been a builder for 35 years. You're going to push water into my property.

I'm telling you.

Yeah. If somebody's pushing water into your property because of a septic, then yeah, that would that would be a problem. I know which was the problem on the south side of us is that they had to raise their system so they have a gravity feed. They put a 4ft retaining wall 5T from my property line and it flooded out my entire driveway. So what I'm saying is I really don't trust what you're drawing

here is not going to happen.

So unless you can prove to me that it's going to be I'll be happy. But I'm telling you it's going to push water into my property. Not to mention the fact that you're going to cut down about 100 trees to make room for this house and the driveway.

There's nothing to absorb it. There's nowhere for it to go and it's going to be a problem.

And I wish the town would see that and give us some recourse because I this is exactly what I said to them in 2002 when they built the house to the south of us and they said there's nothing we can do.

We ended up with water up to our doorstep and they said, "Well, he's not doing anything wrong. There's nothing we can do." I said, "I'm telling you right now, it's going to be a problem." And they said, "Well, nothing we can do." So, I'm just trying to get ahead of it and try to see that, you know, this could potentially be a problem. Maybe probably not to the extent that it was on the

south side of us, but um I think the Fernandees are concerned and I'm concerned that it's going to displace a lot of water. The house is not going to be small. It's going to be big. You know that. That's what people build. And it's going to cut down a lot of trees and have a lot of displaced water that has to go somewhere. And it's going to be into the Fernandes pool house and it's

going to be into my backyard.

So, if we can put some restrictions on this to try to mitigate that, it would be great. Yeah. you know, to the extent that the town can do. I understand there's only so much they can do, but if we if we could just kind of confirm and and have some recourse if there is a problem, I think it would be nice for the Fernandes and for us.

Madam Chair, may I ask a question?

Yes.

Can you move the uh septic and leeching field back if if we if we do additional perks possibly?

Yep. It It's a possibility. Again, I think that if somebody was going to build the house in the center here, if it were me, I would reperk it down close to the house. And they did have really good perks, a six minute and a two minute an inch rate. Um, so if I were going to put a house for myself, I would probably put it in the middle. I would

try to keep as much around me and I would put the septic up close for a cost savings. Um, that's what I would They didn't do any additional perks. Uh, they they are required to do four holes with two perks for new construction.

That's what that's what the state and the town require, right? And that's what you got there.

Okay. Yep. Of course, the the further the house is from the septic field, the higher the house will have to be to get gravity flow to the septic. Well, they could pump it.

Yeah, you could pump.

They could. So, so that might be a a possibility that require a that the house not be out of the ground a certain rate and we could they would have to have a pump system, which is what we have here.

That's what I have too. Yeah, it's actually a good idea because it's a it's a grease trap.

Yeah, I have a pump system.

So, would that make you feel better if we had a pump system? Required a pump system.

Yeah, that I I I watched the septics going in. They're all they're all, you know, based on the perk and we, you know, we we parked at 3 feet also and we are four feet out of the ground. And uh so that that's probably what this will be. But if it got closer to the house, uh, you know, the house would be lower and displace less water to the to the Fernandes and the septic system is

further away. Place less water to us.

Ross, I have a question.

When he goes to it would be the board of health to get permission to put in the septic system.

Yes.

Is that a public that's a public public meeting?

No. Their meetings are public.

No, I don't think they're public hearings.

Not for subjects.

No, not hearings, but they're they do all of this in a public meeting, don't they?

No.

No. Nope.

Oh, if you needed if you needed waivers or variances, then they would have uh they would have it at a public hearing. Uh they have one this Wednesday, but this would have to be designed in full compliance with the sanitary code and would not require public care.

Thank you.

I do know that by law they are not allowed to increase what is presently being flowed onto ex budding properties.

And if the engineer can prove to us that they are not going to be flowing pro any additional water onto abuing properties.

Whatever is flowing there now can flow by right but in the future they can't they can't make any more water flow in any direction.

Yeah. So, what we did was we've been through this with the town's engineers over at DPW and they asked us to provide additional um calculations and demonstrations that this would be the case here. Um, and we've we've passed them and the planning um planning department's requirements on that.

This also addressed the fact that the uh property drops from White Oak Run by about two feet right off the road.

Yes.

The the grading is is um addresses that itself. Yes, we actually have a profile of it as well from the edge of the roadway coming onto our site.

Well, Madame Chair, I I just I'm just going to say what what I think. Um I think it's something uh to worry about uh for a neighbor if they're concerned about water flow because once if it does flow in their property, to the best of my knowledge, Madame Chair, I don't think there's anything the town can do about it. And to to the best of my knowledge, well, the best of my knowledge, that's a civil case.

So, it's nothing that the town could do.

The town can't make people do things. It has to be done prior to. And if it's uh a gravity fed or whether it's a gravity fed or a pumpup, that's something maybe that uh I don't know.

I I would like to uh I would like to resolve this if we could this evening.

If we can't, then we'd have to continue it, which I hate to do, but But we don't have Do we have the right to tell them what type of septic system to put in? I don't know. But we can ask We can ask the board of health what he thinks. Again, we can ask the Chris.

It's up to It's up to everybody. I'm just saying, you know, I have a raise system, so I'm very familiar with it and I'm very familiar with the pump. So, I'm sorry if I if I may speak. I don't mean to sound like I'm just griping, but it we really really got hurt by what happened on the south of us, and I'm I'm a bit dubious about what everybody says about what's going

to happen on the north of us. Uh my wife is already shopping for houses to move.

She wants to move. Um, so if we could just sort of have some discussion about uh what what we can do to try to mitigate or if we can have some an avenue where we could talk with the engineers um for the septic system and all that sort of stuff um to try to mitigate some of the impact on us and on the Fernandes.

We didn't really seem to get up on the south side of us. Um, and that's but again, the engineer doesn't really have anything to do with the septic system right now. It's going to be before the board of health that decides it's not us.

And that's the problem.

It it also it also gets reviewed by the building department and I believe by Paul Dart.

Um, and I believe that they have the right to question if there's issues during the building permit process.

um they do apply for a storm water permit when you're doing these houses due to local regulations to the best of my knowledge including construction entrances, erosion controls. Um that is I believe the time in this situation where there would be a check and balance on grading for the house and the septic.

See, the thing that we got to be careful of is I could put together a septic design and a house and show it on this plan and typically we would and we would say conceptual location and grading, but it's subject to change. And the and this is the case in every subdivision.

Somebody comes along and says, I want a breezeway here. I want a I want a threecar garage or no garage. And the plan changes. And what happens is your staff being a DPW and building department and board of health and conservation, they look at it and they determine whether or not it meets what is, you know, allowed and been permitted by zoning or planning, etc. Um, I don't think me preparing a septic

design unless I knew exactly what was going to be built and where would be the solution for for Mr. Trible. Um, I think that understanding that the town departments are going to when somebody does eventually propose a house where they really want it and whether they reper it or not, that's the time in which, you know, the assurances will be made that water will not be directed because it's very clear my design sheds

no water towards either of their properties as shown. And I think by Paul and you guys know Paul is very stringent on his reviews. Paul has signed off on this. Um but I think I would wait for the official I would I would leave it in their hands for the official grading on the septic part of it. That's what they do.

So my so my concern is pretty words aside that should have been done for the house south of us. They built a retaining wall five feet high, six feet from our property line and it flooded out my driveway and my whole property and the town did nothing. The town said there was nothing they could do. So, you can say all you want, but I really don't understand is there some recourse we

have if it is a problem. They do it, they approve it, well, it's a problem.

You mean if somebody damages your property with flood water? Yeah. You have civil recourse against the town said there's nothing they could do.

It's I spent $14,000 2004 to raise my driveway because the water had had got displaced from White Oak Run because the properties are lower than White Oak Run.

It flowed off, got trapped between his retaining wall and ended up coming up across my driveway and up to my house.

So in in this case, there's nothing we can do. We're sorry. So in this case, was this the property AC is this a property across the street from you?

Right to just to the south of us.

This one right here.

Yep.

If is that the perial property?

Yep.

You see our driveway that goes right to the Yep.

Madam Chair, if I may.

Yes.

The on the other page of the plan, Jamie shows the topography. It starts at White Oak Run and then as Will said, it dips down almost immediately and then the whole land pitches to the rear of the property. I think part of the issue that Will had with the neighbors here house here. Uh back on the other page, you can see the the neighbor's house to his south is actually closer to White Oak

Run than Will's house is, which put Will's house downhill of that house, which is why he got the water from them.

Any new house that would be built on this property would be behind Will's house, which would be downhill of Will's house.

Downhill.

So, as Damian was saying, the water would really have to go uphill to make it to Will's property. The only reason that that house to the south of him caused flooding is because it's closer to the road or uphill from his house.

But this property would would be the opposite. And then as far as uh Alexa's way, which is the road that we're proposing, as Jamie said, you know, the drainage is more than adequate to handle the water flow that would be coming from in front of Will's house. So, it's really I think we really mitigated any kind of potential flooding. Oh, I I I I agree that that that the uh potential for

water uh moving to our property from this proposed uh uh subdivision is negligible compared to what happened on the south side of us.

It's just that on the south side of us this did happen. And um if for some reason this plan doesn't work and we do end up getting water, is there some recourse that I have?

I really don't want to go to court or anything like that, but um is there is there you know I I even went to the town as they were building and I said this is going to be a problem and they said no.

Oh, nothing we can do. Um so if there is a problem which I I see less way less potential for problem on this property but uh you know if there is is there some recourse that I have that the Fernandes have?

I I think there's potential for recourse anytime damage is done to property.

You know, if it's if it's legitimate damage, but I'm not an attorney. Um and I I don't believe the board is. Uh I don't know.

We we put a certification at the town's request on here certifying that we're in addition to the drain system is been designed so its properties and ways will not be adversely affected.

I mean, that's not something any other town requires that I'm aware of. and I worked.

Why? Why? Why did that not happen when they built the house to the south of us?

I I didn't have anything to do with the house on the south.

Oh, I know. I know.

This could be this could be a reaction because of what happened on the south side.

Okay. That was my question to the planning board. Really? Not not necessar Oh, I'm sorry.

Yep.

Yeah.

Yep. you know that I mean literally it was it was a real shot in the gut and uh um you know so you know hopefully things have changed and it sounds like they have which is good. Um you know we're trying to take you know Dartmouth is growing way too fast for it bridges so hopefully we can take some steps to uh you know mitigate some of the issues to people that have been here

for a long time which it sounds like you are. So, um, you know, and all the all the engineering has been done.

The engineering has been done and we have that notation on the plan that says it's um Can you read that notation again, please, on the plan?

Certainly.

And we make you put it on there.

Yep. In addition, all drainage systems have been designed so that abudding properties and ways will not be adversely affected. The presence or failure of any detention or infiltration system as designed will not threaten life or property.

Okay.

Does that answer your question? Um, it does. It does.

I mean, I this I mean I I understand where you're coming from, but we have no jurisdiction over I'm afraid septic systems and things like that. We just have jurisdictions over the subdivision, the plan, the engineer doing the um the flow, etc., etc. You know, the cutting down of the trees, we can we can prevent, etc. But I mean, when it comes to where the house is built and where

the septic system is done, that's that's out of our jurisdiction, I'm afraid.

I understand.

Like I said, I'm I'm trying not to just uh unload here, but it's just been I I hear you.

Yeah.

So yeah.

Okay. Anything else?

Any other questions from the audience?

If not, um what is the wishes of the board?

I uh make a motion that we approve given the uh the now five uh requirements that have been added to uh to the application.

Um we would just need to if we if the board decides to make a motion tonight, we would just need to have a motion to leave the uh public hearing first.

So one one quick motion before then and then and then feel free uh motion to leave the public hearing.

Second and Yes.

Motion was made by Kevin, seconded by Margaret.

Yes.

Uh Kevin.

Yep.

Margaret.

Yes.

And Lori Miller. Yes.

The wishes of the board. Now, I'd like to make Were you going to make a motion? I was going to make a motion to uh approve the application uh with the uh the the five requirements that are that we've previously stated um the f the four waiverss and the one requirement of the tree no cut area. Correct.

Yeah.

I second.

The motion was made by um Kevin and seconded by Margaret. Kevin, yes.

Margaret Laurianne, yes. Motion carries.

Thank you. Have a good night.

Thanks.

You too now.

Thank you.

Um you're welcome.

Okay, we're going to go to number three, Dartmouth Future Zoning.

Um, I guess we can do that at the next meeting.

I think so. We need more people.

Yeah, that was again again the ongoing discussion. Uh, in case anyone has anything new, we've had um a good number of members come in and mark up the map. So, we're definitely noticing trends on um that we'll we'll talk over further um little segue into my reminder that the next in-person workshop about this is on December 15th, so about a month away. Um so, we can have that map there. I'll make a clean

copy in in obvious marker to show where the trends are indicating on areas where there could be a potential overlay. Um, if anyone has anything in the meantime, feel free to stop by. Uh, anything new, anything changed with your markup on the map or anything, just feel free to come by at any time. Um, and and we can we can hash that out for sure. But that was it for that.

Okay. The minutes of November 3rd, 2025.

Any questions? Any question?

Madam Chair, is that that's the meeting that I left early. Can I still vote on those me uh those minutes because I was here for a good portion of it.

You were here for most of it, right?

Um yeah, you can vote on them because you were here for the majority of the meeting.

I was and you read them and you watched the meeting on TV, so you can vote on it.

Okay.

Any questions on these m uh minutes? Any corrections? Any comments hearing? None. I need a motion.

Moved.

Second.

Mo motion was moved by Kevin, seconded by Margaret. Kevin, yes.

Margaret, yes.

And Lori, yes. Number five, correspondence. I need a motion to acknowledge and file the correspondence from the town of Freetown, city of New Buffett, Commonwealth of Massachusetts, town of Westport.

Some moved.

Second.

I have a motion um from Margaret and a second from Kevin. Margaret, yes.

Uh Kevin, yes.

Laurianne, yes.

for your information. Do we have any um some committee reports?

Well, I went to a housing production uh meeting and uh we're really narrowing down. So, we will have I believe uh something that to present because we all agreed I think there were nine things that we agreed in priorities. Okay. So, we should be getting that very shortly.

Have you um voted on those nine things or have you just discussed them and you're getting ready to vote on them and print it out?

I you know I I believe we voted on them, Lori.

Is this a draft or Yes, it's a draft.

Okay.

Okay.

Yeah, that's why I was asking if you could give us what what they some of them were, but if it's still in draft form.

Yes, still because she had to make some changes, I believe.

Yeah, it's it's not public yet then.

Well, it's public, but it's not public.

Okay.

Right.

Um Ross, do you have anything for planners report?

Yeah.

Oh, go ahead. Go ahead.

Wait a minute. Kevin, did you have any meetings that you went to?

No.

No. Okay. Ros.

Okay. So, um I've been working with um Michelle Vieiraa from the zoning board office. We are drafting the 2026 planning board schedule. Um so, we have one tenative uh that hopefully we can confirm at the December 8th. So, if anyone has any dates that they know, big chunks of time that they know already that are going to be out in 2026, um again, if you could just shoot me and

Dan an email, that'd be great. just in case there's a trend where at least three members u aren't going to be able to attend then we'll reschedu that if that we have one pencled in. So and that um that was all just uh something to keep in mind ahead of December 8th.

Okay. So we have two things that we should be doing as planning board members. One, if you have any questions on um the special permit rules and regulations, and two, if you have any meetings that you are not able to attend, we should be um letting Ross or Dan know.

Yes. Yep. Perfect.

We have homework.

Yes, you do.

We have to do our homework here. Um anything else to come before us tonight?

I'm sorry I took so long, guys. It was just confusing with only having three of us here. No, no, no, no. You did great.

Thank you.

It gets a little confusing when you're trying to figure out who's voting on what and when was how it is. Yes. No, I'm glad it all worked out.

So, anything else? Any question? Any questions? Anything else to come before us or can we go home or stay home?

To adjourn.

So, I need a motion.

Motion to adjurnn.

Second.

Motion made by Kevin and seconded by Margaret. All in mo uh Kevin.

Yes.

Margaret.

Yes ma'am.

Lori. Yes. We are adjourned.