Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting - April 30, 2026

Call upon everyone to stand so that we can pledge allegiance to the flag.

I pledge allegiance 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.

I'd ask that you all remain standing for a moment of silence in honor of our soldiers who are in harm's way in the Middle East.

Thank you.

I have a couple couple of announcements that I need to make.

First is that the Sherbet Farm B hearing um actually that would be better served at the uh 6:00 hour. Um, this meeting is being recorded by Dartmouth Community Media and I guess I could state them now and we if we have to we'll state it again at 6 o'clock. So just so that the the viewers at home and the uh people that are in attendance this evening, we have 340B projects and the next meeting that

we have is for Sherbet Farms which will be heard this evening at six o'clock.

Then beyond that, we have two others.

One which is Hawthorne, the Hawthorne 40B, which will be heard on May 21st at 5:00 here at Town Hall in room 304. And we also have the Hathaway 40B project, which will be heard also on May 21st, but that will be at 6:00 here in room 304.

So um just to make it clear, we have one today at 6 for Sherbrook and we have two on the 21st of May. One at 5:00 for the Hawthorne 40B and another for the Hathaway 40B at 6:00.

So, we have an administrative portion of tonight's meeting, but it's my understanding that the U petitioner may not be attending or there's some concern that there may have been an agreement that may have been struck. So with with your hon with uh the permission of the members of the board, I'm going to take the um that matter and I'm going to take them out of order and we're going to

move to the public hearings portion of tonight's meeting if that's okay with my members.

Yes, sure.

All right.

So, moving on to the public hearings portion of tonight's meeting. We've got case special permit ZSP25-6.

I believe that this is a continued matter. The petitioner applicant is Jenny Reynolds. The owner is Tracy Nunan, manager of 8 Bono Court LLC. The subject property is located at A Bono Court, also known as map 121, lot 19.

The property is located in the general residence district. This was legally advertised on January 22nd and January 29th of 2026.

I think we've already waved the reading of your butters list on this. We we opened the hearing. We did open the hearing, but it doesn't say it's continued on on the agenda. That's the only thing I was just wanted to make sure that my memory was correct.

Uh we've already read the denial letter into the record from the building commissioner as to what his concerns were. I may want to do that again if we have it.

I did put it in there.

Do we have it?

Okay.

See if I can find it.

I think I did.

We have it there.

May not be in mine, but I think it's in yours.

Okay, I have it here cuz I read it last night. Let's

All right. This letter is uh dated December 5th. This is from the building department. It's addressed to Jenny Reynolds of Prime Engineering. It's regarding Apono Court. and the building inspector indicates that I have re I have reviewed your application and at this time your proposal cannot be approved due to non-compliance with current zoning regulations. Applicants seeking to add a 56 576

square foot addition to a non-conforming structure built in 1950. The current structure meets one 10-ft required yard setback and the front yard setback of 20 ft. The addition is proposed to be built 11.9 ft from the street. A special permit is required to increase the non-conformity of the structure. Your application is being denied under the following sections of the Dartmouth zoning bylaw. 375-10.4D3B.

Subp part B indicates in addition buildings or structures may be placed a minimum of 10 ft from all perimeter lot lines or 20 ft from a street line if the lot upon which the building or structure is to be located was in existence prior to October 26, 1993. The benefit of this exemption is available to lots which already had buildings or structures located thereon prior to October 26,

1993, which my understanding is that this is one of those buildings.

Mhm. and also be for compliance of 375-6.2B2 non-conforming structures. When the expansion or alteration of a structure cannot conform with the development standards for structures in the zoning district in which the structure is located, the structure may be extended or altered by special permit granted by the board of appeals. The board of appeals shall issue a special permit.

Excuse me. The board of appeals shall not issue a special permit unless the board finds that the extension is not more detrimental to the neighborhood than the existing non-conforming structure. That's the legal standard.

Let me just underline that in case I have to come back to it.

And it goes on to state that the subject property is located within the general residence district. So that's the letter that we we've already read that letter into the record, but I felt it was important that we do. So um gentlemen, at some point, I don't know whether or not I know it's part of this this evening's packet, but there was also another letter that was submitted on behalf of numerous of Butters. I think

it's total of seven or eight couples uh who are uh either immediate of butters or butters of abutters to the property.

And I'm not necessarily going to read it into the record because it's not my practice to do so. But if if you haven't read it, have you both read the the letter?

Yes.

Okay. So, given that, I would entertain a motion that we make it part of the file.

I make a motion that we accept the letter dated April 27th. Is that April 27, 2026?

Yes. to be uh to be included in the uh uh in the file.

Can I get a second?

Second.

All in favor?

I the eyes have it. So, part of the file uh it's April 27th. I've read it. I know that it's the same letter that you have there.

Um and I'm sure that they're going to be these concerns are going to be touched upon probably vocally by some of the people that are here in attendance this evening.

Um Mr. Medeiros.

Yes. I just want to make uh the announcement again that I am here tonight as a an ab butter of the property that's being uh discussed and not in the capacity of my role on the select board and I appreciate you exercising an abundance of caution and doing that again. Um but at this point in time I'm going to call upon I believe the petitioner rep we already took the podium petition petitioners

representative uh who is here to explain to us since the last time we had this before us if there's anything that's changed.

Good evening Mr. Chairman. For the record Christian Fallon principal engineer and president of Fallen Corp representing the applicant. Um, we're taking over this project. Um, originally, uh, Prime Engineering was was involved.

Um, I know you heard Mr. Rome's presentation, but I just really want to touch on a touch on a few things. Um, I did have a chance to to read the minutes from the last meeting. I went over all the submitted documents. And, um, for me, I just wanted to go over um to hit on just a few topics. mainly um that this is a special permit. Um certainly different

than than a variance request. Um as you mentioned, you know, the key issue is going to be whether or not this proposal is not more detrimental to the neighborhood. Um I did have a chance to to go by this this property. Um, and I think this aerial here, which is a mass mapper showing, you know, GIS property boundaries, gives you a good if you if you haven't had a chance to go out there, which, um,

if you hadn't, I I highly recommend it because I think it's very critical for this project. Um, and really order to to vote on it. Um, we can go over plans, we can go over architectural plans, we can talk about FEMA. Um, but I think the important thing is here whether or not this is more detrimental to the neighborhood or not. And I think the only way to for you to do that would be

to drive by um this neighborhood. But if you haven't, this is this is very helpful here. Um this gives a good neighborhood consistency of what the neighborhood consists of which is very similar small non-conforming lots of which majority and I'm sure many of the abutters properties um buildings are less than the 20 ft front setback and 10t side and rear setbacks. Um, I think that's very important. That's a fact.

Um, the lot itself is 4,940 ft.

Uh, pre-existing non-conforming water waterfront lot. The dwelling itself 720 ft. Um, it is in the velocity zone.

And one issue why we're here tonight is because the town um by eminent domain took over 41% of the lot with the sore ement. Um that's to the east of the building. Um, so the only area uh viable direction the owner could put an addition on would be towards uh Barno Court. Um, can't go to the towards the water, can't go to the east, can't go to the north. Um, the addition

itself is is 24 by 24 addition um, which is a total of 576 square ft.

That brings the total structure to 1,296 square ft, which is a total percentage of the lot, 26%.

I think that's very consistent throughout the throughout the neighborhood. Um the setback we're seeking uh the required frontage setback is 20 ft and we're at 11.9 ft which is relief approximately 8.1 ft. Um I think it's important to note that the setback relief we're we're seeking is from a paper street, not a not a roadway that cuts through that cars are going to be driving through. It's actually a grass area um

that the butters use to um walk through in order to get to the the common dock area. Um the abu to the direct abut to the to the to the south is closer than the 11.9 ft.

Um, so if we're talking about consistency, that that's a great example is our is our neighbor. Um, the in in regards to the other building requirements that where we meet, you know, the height height requirement, we're not increasing impervious area.

We're maintaining the residential use in regards to traffic. Um there's it's it's a it's a single family house adding one bedroom. Um I don't think you know it takes an engineer to to know that's not going to increase traffic flow here.

Um in regards to the environmental issues which are not your purview, but I think it's important to note that the project was approved through the conservation commission already.

in regards to FEMA regulations which seems to be a concern from the abutters.

Um you know at this point we're here for one thing is the relief of the front setback from 20 to 11.9. The applicant whether whatever happens tonight it still has to go in front of the building department and and file the building permit and they have to meet state and local building code requirements.

um that's not your purview in regards to, you know, I saw some concerns. So, this is a Airbnb.

That's again, it's not the issue of the the zoning board to to deal with that. I think the town has regulations and and if if this is allowed to be an Airbnb, so be it. Um you know, I think, you know, some of the abutters, you know, at some point may turn their houses into an Airbnb. Um, and again, we're we're not here to to discuss that.

I did some of the comments, you know, the plans may be missing some details.

Um, the one thing I noticed on the plans is that the proposed deck on the civil drawings isn't shown. Um, that's towards the Ponaganit River. Um, so that's something that would need to be cleaned up.

I'm not looking for the board to I don't think the board could vote on that with that being an issue because it's not shown on the plan. And I think that having that deck there, I would have to talk to the building commissioner, but that may it's not going any further out than the existing deck, but I'm not sure since the deck's increasing in size, it may it may trigger some relief for that as

well. I don't know if that was missed by the the building commissioner or not, but it's something that, you know, I would want to address and and clarify going forward.

Um, again, I'm I'm just here, you know, as the engineer and I know what butter is. I mean, it's it's a beautiful neighborhood. Um, being down in South Dartmouth, but just looking at this, um, it's for me it's and it's it's factual that it's it's consistent with the neighborhood.

Um, I think the fact is if if these butterers here tonight were in favor of this project, I think it would be an easy vote for you. Um, but unfortunately they're here opposing it. Um, which is their right. I don't I don't blame them for that. I'm glad they're here. Um, because that's their right to do so. But in all fairness, I think, you know, looking at this, I think it's very consistent. Um, and most

importantly, you know, I don't think, you know, it's more detrimental with this addition going on to this building. Um, just because it's it's similar to every other of these police at least dwellings within the area. And, you know, I can I can walk you through, but I think it's it's pretty clear um just by looking at this right here. And, you know, Mr. Rome submitted these as an exhibits so they

should be part of the record.

Thank you.

Which exhibits are you referring to?

Uh I think these were exhibits A and B that he had.

What are they specifically? Are they the plans? The house design plans?

They should or the addition I should say. Design plans.

I received the the package.

I just want to make sure I have the same thing that you have.

Yeah.

That you believe was submitted.

Are you talking about this? Those are the architectural plans. Okay. And and then I also was it was a narrative from Mr. Ray. Okay.

That was from the last at the last hearing. Okay. I don't have that here right now at this moment, but I understand I we've we read those.

Mhm.

Okay.

All right. Mr. Fallen, I think maybe at this point in time we we'll uh try to hear unless unless any members of the boards have any questions for Mr.

Fallen.

Go ahead.

Okay. Can you um go back to one of the other Yeah, that one right there. So, the road that's labeled Bono Court.

Yes.

It is uh Buminous at that point.

It's Buminous to right here. It stops.

Oh. So, so partway before it even reaches the house, it stops stops right pretty much at the front of the house. And then from there it's all grass until you get to the to the dock.

Um if I Yeah, I can probably zoom in here.

Go to Oops.

Okay.

So this is this is the edge of pavement here. This is our grass area.

This is the dock and this is actually the property line very close to it.

So they would be coming 11.9 ft from here.

Okay.

Again, this is the abuing property.

This is the house.

Okay.

Okay. Thank you.

I don't recall I was there today. I don't recall there being a dock at the end of the roadway. Maybe I I missed it when I looked over. There's a dock there. Is that dock floatable or is that actually permanently affixed?

Floatable.

It's there. There were boats there today.

Was there? Okay.

Okay.

Tide. You probably didn't look over the seaw wall.

Hold on. We We'll have a chance.

I was concentrating more on the roadway that leads up to the house and also the house itself, but maybe I just I was just caught by the fact that it was just water in the front.

Um, is there anything else you'd like to ask, Mr. Human?

No. No. I was just I was looking at it to see how close the next house was. Um, I really don't have a problem with the 8 ft.

Yeah.

11.9.

Right. No, I know that, but you're asking relief. Yeah, that really you're asking for 8T relief.

I don't have a problem with that.

All right. Um um Mr. Chair, I I agree with Mr. Fallen.

This is a special permit application.

Yes.

But part of the special permit, we need to look at the criteria for granting a special permit. So whether this is not detrimental or much, but I don't think we can just exclude the fact that this is in the flood zone and the proximity to the water and the the the size of the building. You know, I think we we're not going to exclude that as and I understand we're not here to grant the

building permit, but we need to look at also the other uh factors that with the setting of this particular lot. So, but I agree you're here for a special permit, but uh so the standards or the criteria are different than than a variance.

Okay, that's all.

No, I acknowledge that as well. I I acknowledge and you started off with that, Mr. Farland, that the the legal standard for a special permit is certainly not as difficult and it's much easier attainable than a variance. But um and I do agree with you that this should be viewed by every member of this board before making a determination. I did not know exactly what Barono Court was. I had never been on it before in my

life and I've lived in town all my life.

But if there's ever been a unique piece of property and a unique neighborhood, this is it. Um, when I tried to drive in, there was a vehicle trying to come out. So, I had to back up in order for that vehicle to come out. And then I was in there for a bit and I viewed I looked at some of the other properties which are very, very nice, very they're small properties, uh, well-kept, but they have

to be small given the size of the lots.

Uh, I just don't see how Barno Court, quite frankly, was ever expected to accommodate all of these homes when it was first designed. The thing was more designed for a horse and carriage than it was for an automobile.

So, when we when I analyze this, I look at the totality of it all, not just, you know, what's exactly within my purview, what's not in our purview. And you you're right with some of the comments that you made that the certain things may not necessarily be within our purview. And one of them is we're not here to determine people's property rights for a short-term rental. That's not our job.

But when I have to make a determination of whether or not the extension is not more detrimental to the neighborhood than the existing non-conforming structure, I do have to take into the fact that it has been used based on some of the testimony that we received from some of the abuters that it has been used as a short-term rental. So given that, given the character of the neighborhood, giving the roadway that

serves this neighborhood and serves more particularly serves this property, you know, I don't know how it won't be more detrimental, but um I'm obviously here to hear to listen to people. Uh, I also I'm a big proponent of preserving people's property rights. Not only people in opposition, but also the person who's actually here before us who's trying to improve their property, make it a better property for whatever

reason, either for them to use or for them to be able to um to profit from it.

Um, and that's again that particular issue is not something that we consider either in a variance specifically or in a special permit. But again, I think when you look at just by I think statutoily when it says that it's not more detrimental to the neighborhood in order to make that determination, you can't do that in a vacuum. It you have to take it all into consideration. And when you take it all

into consideration, then you know, wherever the weight comes to each and I'm only one person on this board. I'm only speaking for me based on what I know and I'm still waiting to hear if there's any other updated comments from some of the abutters. But, uh, to me, you have to take all of that into consideration when making the determination if it's not more detrimental.

Um, just specifically because we've granted additions to people's homes on numerous occasions. We've had situations where a butters are not in favor of it and we still have granted it. Sometimes what we do is we try to lessen the impact by making suggestions to the applicant. The applicant takes that and then comes back to us with something that's revised. And then when we review it, we sort of look at it and make a

determination that they've tried to accommodate what their need may be, that being the property owner versus the interest of the abutters. Um, I don't know if that's going to happen here, but all I do know is that's sort of what my feeling is. I wanted you to know what that is. I know this, you've done a hell of a presentation for your client in trying to set forth to us and trying to

narrow the issues for us. So that you know we're looking at this just on one issue which is the dimension of 11.9. I get your argument. It's 11.9 from a street. Not only a street, a paper street and right across from the paperway there's a property that's just as close or closer than the 119. So therefore you're not asking for something that's completely outside of the box. I get the argument.

But when you look at the community, the neighborhood as a whole, and that's something we have to look at as members of this board, um, then we have to weigh that all out.

Thank you.

So, at this point in time, I'm going to open it up to the anybody in the public who'd like to come forward and Oh, but before you do that, I just remembered.

So, I received a telephone call from um, Attorney Farriia. Attorney Faria could not be here tonight because he has a medical issue. So, um, he did want everyone to know that he should be fine and he should be able to make the next hearing that we do have here, but he wasn't able to make it this evening.

Okay.

Thank you. Um, Mr. Madaras through you to Mr. Farland. Is it possible for Mr.

Farland to show the um plan of the house? I know when Mr. Ray was here, he had um the schematic of the house.

We don't know if he does, but I know that we have it here. We actually have a paper version.

The one that looks We can do that if he can do it. I'm He's computer savvy.

I can't.

You can't.

I can't. I can't. Sorry. Yeah. Yeah.

There it is.

So, I'm looking for the one that um Oh, yeah.

If I just may for a minute.

Yep.

I've been asked I need you to identify yourself again. Every time someone Heidi Silver Brooks Heidi Silverbrooks nice to Well, good to see you again. Um but every anyone who comes up you need to identify your yourselves and your your residents. Thank you.

So this is this is actually the cut that I wanted to look at. So right now um the house that exists is that back entrance that we see on the far right and what we see to the right of that small door and the six windows. So that small that door.

So you're talking about the lower roof line. The lower roof line is the only thing that exists.

This exists here.

Yes.

Yep. And so what is going to be the view of the neighbors is this side of the house.

So that's the basically what you're saying is that's the east elevation view.

Mhm.

Okay.

So I just it it seemed a question with that. Well, there wasn't. It would just seemed like when there was some discussion, it sounded like they were putting some of the house over the current house, but it's all going to be I see what you mean above. And so, right now, it's a onebedroom, but when done, it would be a threebedroom.

The interior plans.

I just want to make sure that that was I was correct in that.

How many bedrooms are there going to be at this point? Is is that correct? Is that a correct statement? It's only a onebedroom unit now and they want to convert it to become a three-bedroom unit. Back to only look to me like is one bedroom being added.

That's the current bedroom.

No, this is the this is this is the new addition right here.

on the second floor.

That's the main floor.

So that's the fir All right. So we will call the main floor which is the second.

So this level right here Mhm.

This is going to be a bedroom. This is an art studio.

But there is already a bedroom on that second level.

This is all brand new right here.

Okay. But in the existing house there is a bedroom.

Yes, there's one bedroom.

Mhm. So now it will be two bedrooms and an art studio.

Yes.

An art studio with a closet.

Yes.

Bedroom.

An art studio with a way. It's a If you want to call it a three-bedroom, it can it can be a three-bedroom.

Well, I just don't want anyone here to believe that it's going to continue to be a onebedroom.

Yeah, definitely not a onebedroom.

Well, it's definitely going to be a twobedroom, but it is an art studio with a double bowl sink, a shower, and a toilet.

Two bedroom.

All right. And a closet.

Just going to call a We were, you know, I was born at night, but it wasn't last night.

Right. And I think these two gentlemen feel the same way.

Thank you.

Hi Sean Sean Redford from Five Bono Court. I'm going to butter. Um I just wanted to to point out that um he keeps referring to that the the setbacks are are no different than what what's existing out there. He keeps referring to the sideyard setback of the adjacent property to the south. So sideyard setbacks are very different than front yard setbacks.

I'm not sure. I think and I'm not to cut you short, but I just want to make sure we're on the same page here.

He's he I if I understood him correctly, he's saying that there's a paper street there. And it appears to me that it is a paper street.

Yep.

That they're proposing because it's a paper street, they can't use a sideyard setback. They have to use a front yard set setback. They're supposed to be 20 feet from it. And they're proposing to put something that's 11.9 feet.

Right. His position is that the person who abuts the paper street on the other side, they're also well within the 20 ft set back from that street.

But but that had I don't know if that's accurate because I don't see that on an actual plan with a dimension showing me that I'm going off of what he's just represented.

And then um the the two the the I wasn't trying to deter you from making your argument. I was just trying to make sure that you understood what I understood.

Sure.

Okay. Now, do you believe that that's accurate?

I don't.

Okay. And can you tell me why?

Um because it's that this the sideyard is is different than the front yard on on that that property there.

Okay. So, we're talking So, if I'm looking at that photo, it's that house that's sort of let's say Yeah. Right where his arrow is, right?

So, you're saying that that house is not closer than 20 ft to the paper street?

No, I'm not I'm not saying that.

Okay.

Oh, all right. Fair enough. All right.

But I'm saying I guess what I'm saying is that this is the that's the frontage.

This is the front the frontage is here.

Okay.

But that's not the point that that's not the point that the engineer was making.

The point he was making is they're saying we want to be as clo in essence. We want to be as close to the paper street as the person who's already as close that close to the paper street.

That's what I think that's your argument. Is that your argument, Mr.

Farland?

Yes. If that if that wasn't a street, a paper street, they wouldn't even be here. All they need is 10 ft.

That is true.

Pam Red Fern also reside at 5.0 Court.

If I may address that um one particular item, the difference is that there is vehicular traffic that brings folks over to Bono Court. The vehicular traffic for the house next door does not come near that paper street. That's the difference. The addition would block further sight lines from pedestrians walking on that paper street. So you could not see them coming. If you had come to the site today, I saw this

gentleman park right next to the right in the between blocking the pedestrian traffic and blocking the vehicular traffic. Very similar. the sightelines would be detrimental to people coming from that dock and walking up the paper street. That's the main difference between the two properties.

Okay.

Sorry. I had one more I had one more item. Um he he's also talking about Could you zoom out of the your um the map here?

and and then zoom back in. And really, if you were to focus on all of the um Can you zoom back in a little bit more?

Is there an area you want me to zoom in on?

Between Clarence Street, the water, capture that going up to Paper Street.

So, if you see all of those houses along the Paper Street, they keep saying that this is, you know, adding this is no different than all of this. So all of this kind of sets a line here coming down the alleyway coming down the right of way and what they're doing is they're you know they're going out to here.

So they're they're not being consistent with what's going on in the neighborhood.

I'm not sure if you can come back to the podium. I'm not sure I follow that line of argument, sir. Do you do you understand what he's saying?

No.

Okay.

No, but I think if I thought the paper street you're looking at the paper street is on this side, right? That's the area that they they're seeking relief from. That's the the street line that they're seeking to place 11.9 ft away from. You're pointing further north of this property site. But I'm not understanding the point. The the point is he's talking about being consistent with the neighborhood and I'm

talking about the consistency of um of the house setbacks along the along the paper street right now is what I'm I'm talking about the other houses there but I don't know if that necessarily applies because that barn old court kind of just turns around that paper street is very very short there the rest of it paper street comes all the way through from also comes all the way through from

parent street all the way down There's actually two paper streets.

So there's a property on what we would call Bono Court which their address is rear Clarence because the paper street goes from Clarence to the dock. The Bono Court paper street goes from Howland Avenue to the second paper street.

So people have converted this paper street to their own use.

Uh no we have to we keep it open.

That paper street is open and it it we just don't tar it because the um maintenance of Bono is covered by the property owners not the town. So in discussion with how much do we want to tar, we chose to tar only the Borono core. And the folks that used to use that other paper street, we said we weren't taring that and they would have to drive down Borono Court to get to their street.

Back to being a unique area.

Yes. And so when we've spoken before, when this particular property was renovated several years ago, there was harm done to Bono Court, which if you drove down it today, I'm sure you it's it's it's a site.

It's a site. And so we're looking at, you know, with the with the current residents, you know, repairing that. But it falls on the onus of not a bono co-op.

I'll let I turn it over again. Thank you.

Just just a little history.

Well, hold on. I I think it um Mr.

Schubo to make a quick comment.

Mr. Chair, I just wanted to I think what Mr. Farland was uh making the analysis that the the lot is similar to to the lot sizes in the area and the house the proposed addition would be similar in size to the other existing houses that are in the area. And not to be specific on the setback from uh the street or the side setbacks, but most of those houses existing don't meet the required setback

in the zoning district. That's why he's referred to and I agree with that, you know. So, it's not I I think he's right about that as well.

But I just I I just find this to be very very cluttered. It's very very tight to begin with.

Let's hear from this John Bruce Brooks, owner of uh Three Bunnel Court. Uh, one question I have is if you've got nonconformity, and I can understand why you' do a special permit because it's already existing the nonconformity, but by granting this special permit, would you not be creating another nonconformity by having that setback because now you've created another issue?

We're just expanding on the non-conformity under the rules. That's how it's defined. But you can expand.

But are you but now are you creating a situation where they have to come back for zoning for a setback because you're you're deviating away from the zoning bylaw of the setback. And it says if you're building it into conformity, right? That's what it says. If you're going to build it within conformity of the of the standards, well, the standard is still a 20 foot setback. Even though it's non-conforming,

I feel that it should still have to go through the setback zoning for one. And in essence, it is because it's requiring a special permit, a determination by this board that it's not more detrimental to the neighborhood that grants them the relief that they're seeking. Otherwise, it's a circular.

I I I just wanted, you know, because I just feel I understand what you're trying to do, but it doesn't go there. Oh, they've got one or two options. And here the building inspector has determined because it's an And you asked the question the last time. You did touch upon this as well.

And I get it and I'll be honest with you, I struggle with this sometimes. I think we as a board struggle with it sometimes, but this one is fairly clear that it's a nonconforming structure and they're just seeking to expand upon it, right? And well, my question is why aren't they expanding upwards for one?

And why isn't the single floor on that side instead of the double floor? No reason for that. So, I don't really see a purpose of having to encroach within that 20 feet when you're still getting the same thing if you were to flip it around.

And I I I'm not in a position to tell them what to do.

But by doing that, you're blocking the view. And if you want to like there's quite a few they may further block the view if they if they decide that they want to come back with something different and add on the the one-story building add on there and just make it let's say you know 14 ft away from the property line so it's a little bit less and then come before us it'll be a much bigger structure.

Mhm. But I mean, I I did read like the purpose of the zoning bylaw, and I do find that there's I counted seven different things in there, and I'm sure you have, too, that contradict what we're talking about right now. Um, danger wise, you're blocking the view down to the dock for people swimming or on the dock. I mean, we should be able to protect our rights to that. It's our liability. And by

blocking our views right now, I've gotten phone calls of saying, "Hey, somebody's down at our dock. What are they doing? Do you know who they are?"

Because people can see from their houses that they're down there. Now, if you're going to be blocking the views for us to be able to protect our own property and our liability, I I see a problem with that. Um the other paper street, my father-in-law drives up that street every single year to keep it as being used as a paper street and not uh not dedicated and dead that it's just not being used just to make

sure it's still viable.

Thank you. I'm sure I thought a few months but Pam Redford again of 510 Court. I just want to circle back to um all of the comments and um information we had expressed.

Excuse me. Just one second. I'm sorry, sir, but we can't be because this is being recorded and she needs to take the information. No problem.

I just want to circle back to the information we had presented on behalf of the Abutters. Uh I know Mr. Farland wasn't here at that time. All of this um the holistic view um that you talked about in the beginning, I think that's very important to really understand in reality what would be built today. The drawings were not modified, but in our previous hearing, we talked about how

the elevations do not meet FEMA. And so the elevation drawing that we're looking at now actually needs to be raised at a minimum of 7 ft to meet the 19 ft flood elevation to the underside of the structure. That height and that um mass is very different from what we're even looking at today. It's not truly representative of what will be built.

The dock um I'm sorry, the deck um was not shown before. it's shown in elevation. Now, again, will that be truly representative of what would be built? Um, in actuality, I think there there are many concerns that you've heard from us. We're we're a very tight neighbor um community. We're um my husband and I moved in.

You kind of have to be given the proximity from house to house.

Yes. My husband and I moved in during CO. they these people are really welcoming and a wonderful neighborhood.

We welcomed um the owner of this property as well doesn't want to engage um with us certainly that's their right but when you're affecting people who've lived here for over 30 40 years going to just overnight try and change the neighborhood and we have the ability um to maybe talk about it that even hasn't been engaged or thought about really respectfully just engaging your neighborhood. I think that should be a

minimum of how like common civility and decency should be built um into our community.

I think um the teams changing doesn't really change the fact of all the concerns we talked about um safety um really kind of again making the community or built structure of the neighborhood detrimental more detrimental than what exists today. I truly believe that's true. The safety factor of pedestrians walking along that paper street is real. We have grandchildren going there every summer

and jumping into that water. It's a real joy to see them jumping in and really enjoying um the sun and you know just the safe kind of enclave that we have today. So, I just asked the board if you could really consider all of the commentary that was um discussed. Um you know, I know uh very rationally um um limited to really what's the facts.

There is an emotion amongst the people here today. Um that's why you've seen us here repeatedly.

Thank you.

Is there anyone else?

Hi. Uh Ben Sperry from 22 Clarence Street and 10 Bonu Court. Um I just a sort of a quick comment based on um why two addresses?

Oh, sorry.

You said two addresses.

We we own two houses that that that are ab budding each other.

One is Clarence Street and the other is just one property closer to the water.

You rent one of them out.

We do. Yeah.

Okay. And what type of what type of rental do you do there?

Um long-term preferably. We have done Airbnb, but we are not currently doing that. Um, so my opposition isn't to Airbnb or rental at all personally, and I understand that that isn't ideal for the community, but here we are. But what my comment has more to do with um the the the non-conforming lot, and that yes, I mean, almost every lot is non-conforming in the neighborhood, but the the

you know, the burden here is, you know, is it more detrimental to the community?

And understandably, yeah, if if one of the houses were did not have the addition that it had 20 years ago and they were looking to do that now, just because other people have non-conforming lots is something that is detrimental, not considered more detrimental as a as a result. Maybe I'm not explaining it well, but just because there are non-conforming non-conformances and there are other lots that are in similar

um position to where the this one would like to be, why would we accept that?

It just seems like that is detrimental.

That sort of is the definition of def detrimental given the number of people that are that are that have spoken here and and not not that the number of people dictates whether it's right right or wrong but I just feel like saying that this is not detrimental would be a would just be not true you know in every in every definition I've seen more more detrimental I would say yes

just well I I think part of your argument if I understand you correctly is that given the density that exists in this neighborhood, even a small addition is detrimental. Given the level of density and the on percentage basis, when you look at it in a ratio, it's significant.

If we're talking with, you know, all the lots were 15 or 20,000 square foot lots and you're just putting an addition that's only 11.9 ft collectively or at or at large, it wouldn't be that significant. But given the level of density that's there and the density is significant there, I haven't seen anything like that before in Dartmouth.

So, um there must be other areas like that. If there's that one, it's not not it is unique. There's no doubt about that. And um and I I really and I agree with Mr. Farland, which is and not necessarily that it's going to work to his client's benefit, but I agree with him that it needs to be viewed um just because of the the mere because paper that plan doesn't do it justice to

actually understand. I can imagine what it must have been like during a snowstorm that you guys had to have 3 feet of snow on that roadway and with no place to put it.

But that's a side issue and I'm not here to bring all that up, but it's just I look at that and say, "Wow, this is different."

And I guess, you know, just because it is so tight, you know, it's should we make it tighter? It just seems to me that that's not really looking at it the way that we should look at it.

I get it. Thank you.

Do you want to say something?

Uh, yeah. Uh, so yeah, I understand. I mean, I've I've been on this board for what, I don't know, 20 years and longer than me and I've been a professional engineer for 35 years.

Uh, so I understand, but also we need to understand that if the applicants reduce the size by 8.2 two feet of the setback. They can go directly to the building department and talk to the building inspector, assuming they meet other requirements that they have to do with the flood or whatever. And the height and they can probably do addition that would be slightly smaller than this one, but

certainly they might be able to extend.

I'm not sure if they can extend to the east or because of the easement there, but they can probably do something similar to this and by right so all the issues and the views and won't come to into play at all. You know, I just wanted to make sure we both understand what's really here. I mean, even though it's a small lot, but they do have the right to develop their lots.

If they can meet the standards, but they don't meet the standards, that's why they here. But if they can meet the standards, they won't be here. And unfortunately, you folks will have no say on that matter probably if they go to the building department, you know.

So, just keep that in mind. So, thank you.

Okay. No, thank you. That certainly puts it in perspective. we're really looking at it is we're trying we're trying to come up with the balance here somewhere you know so that's why I think at the last meeting I said look into the size maybe we can do something still achieve what you want but make the neighbors maybe a little happy or if you can't you have every right to go and do what you need to do

in compliance with the zoning bylaws you know so sir My name is Frank Silva. Three Barono Court. I've lived there for almost 60 years. You say Three Barono Court. Yep.

Didn't that gentleman say he was from Three Born? Oh, okay.

Owners.

Excuse me.

Owners.

Owners. Okay.

And all access is on that 10-ft ride away in front of our property.

And the house was bought as a single bedroom.

And we live with it. But now if they go to two or even three bedrooms and it's an Airbnb and they're renting it, we're going to have a ton of traffic back and forth on that road.

And we as neighbors have paved it and we used to maintain it right to that driveway. That's where the hot top ends and that's the way in. You try and get a big truck down there, you better be a good driver. Every time there's a project down there, they hit the guardrail and the fence, they drive over the car, the uh slate driveway, the walkway, and they get tangled up with the telephone pole.

It becomes a nightmare.

So, to have a big construction job there, it's going to be a nightmare for everybody. And I know the state says you can build a property and the town will have to adapt it, but we don't want to adapt it because if you get three bedrooms and comes Fourth of July, they could have 12 people in there.

So I hope you deny it. That's all.

Thank you, sir.

Here we go again. Enid Silva Three Bono Court. This whole area that you have just examined was a summer cottage area for businessmen in New Bedford. It was called Fernell. They owned the whole piece of land. It got divided up probably long before I was born, which is more than 85 years ago.

And it got divided up because there were certain houses that could be sold to other people. And that 10-ft rideway is the only access to all of those cottages back in the day.

Now they have all kinds of rules and regulations about building and by lot size and paper streets that never existed when this little area came into being.

Everyone on the street on the lane own their houses, occupy their houses, do not rent out their houses on a regular basis to strangers.

Our little neighborhood is going to lose its quality of life.

Our little neighborhood is going to change from being safe to not safe because we never know who's in that eight bar court because there's no communication with the owners. if they're renting it or if someone's stealing from it. We don't know the difference and we are concerned. They may not be because they're not living in that house. But we are living at Bono Court and we as a community would like

the quality of life not to change for the money and the dollar of a B&B or a rental.

If it's not going to be a consistent rental, year- round rental, and it's going to cause more grief and more confusion on that lane, I think that our quality of life will go down the tubes.

And how do we react to that? Pull back our taxes? I don't think so.

Make a petition. I don't think so.

Because once the zoning board of appeals grants this applicant the right to do what they should be able to do on a public street with the right frontage and sideyard.

That would not be a problem. But this is not on a public street. This is not in a neighborhood where everyone has been conforming to the rules and regulations.

The rules and regulations didn't apply when these build these lots were divided up and we are living with it and enjoying it and we'd like you to come down and visit it but don't stay.

Thank you.

You're welcome.

Hi, I'm Jane Shapi. I'm at sixpano court and my neighbors have made beautiful, beautiful arguments against this special permit. I just want to emphasize that we already know exactly what it's like. Although maybe not exactly because it was a much smaller piece of work done, but that particular house 8 Bono had been kind of fixed up a few years ago and I for one and I bet most people here would agree that it was

hell for us all. Um, bushes were trampled. We couldn't get I know I had trouble getting to work in the morning. I couldn't get out because it really it's a lane. It's like as as um Heidi said last session, it's like a driveway.

So, you're having an enormous truck, many enormous trucks barreling down a driveway and you're trying to get out or your child is trying to get out. Were you trying to walk your dog?

Then finally, gratefully, we were thrilled.

It was completed and the Airbnb started.

And in the summer, we would have four, five cars parked in that lot. And that's with the onebedroom. I can only imagine with the three bedrooms. And these are going to be larger bedrooms. It's going to be fabulous. And that is way at the end of the lane. So it's not as though it's at the beginning of the lane and they can pull in and we're like, "All right, there are the cars." No, they're

going to go past every single one of our houses and come out and absolutely make it the most congested little sidewalk lane in the world. And I'm against it. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else?

It's your third time.

Sorry. Um I just wanted to be able to um to talk a little bit about um the property itself and the easements on the property. When when the owner bought the property, the easements were in place already and they so they bought the property with those constrictions on the site. So, I think asking, you know, the board, you know, for the the variance or the special permit because of that is uh

should be a non-starter because they purchased the property with that um easement already on the site. It's not something that was um placed on the site um after they purchased it.

That's to say.

Thank you.

Right, gentlemen. Um, obviously I got to give Mr. Farland an opportunity if he has any encounter to anything that was said. Is there anything that you'd like to add to provide to us or um either uh emphasize or clarify?

Um, you don't have to say anything. I'm just asking if you I'm just giving you the opportunity. Sometimes less is more, but I'm just letting you giving you the I want to be fair. I'm trying to be as fair as I can to everyone. part of the process.

As I as I stated in the in the beginning of the meeting, I knew these butters were going to be here. Um, three bono court, five bono court, their properties front setbacks are significantly less than what we're asking for. Um, six bono court, significantly less what we're asking for. So, if we're here tonight, if I'm I am a town resident, I think this is a fair proposal. Um, I think it's consistent, not as the design

engineer, but also as a resident of Dartmouth. And I think as far as the value goes, when you increase when you improve the property values, and ultimately I also own a real estate company. um it and increases the value of the properties above it as well. So, all right.

Thank you.

Thank you, Michelle Sperry 22 Clarence Tenbanu. Um I'm just kind of taken back by what you're saying. Um you have to talk to me.

It's an established neighborhood. Um, and if you do look at the lot sizes, like the frontage, this addition is going to take up that whole space where the other cottages have yards and places to park cars and push your snow into.

Um, I'm just in I feel that pushing into that space is just it's your property. you should be able to do what you want with it, but we're going to have to absorb them having less cuz they're putting a house there. So, they're going to push their leaves into the laneway. They're going to push the snow. Everything just gets squeezed.

Um, with this building size growing, it's just making it tighter and it's not going to be good for anyone that lives there.

Right. But just a counter for that.

Right. I'm just We're just dueling a little bit. Dueling. Yeah. All right.

You did hear my colleague here say that we're basically arguing about 8 ft because if he's 20 ft, he's 11. He's asking to be 11.9. So if he cuts it back by 8 ft, he doesn't even come here. You don't even have an opportunity to be heard. This gets allowed and granted by our our building inspector. So we're really arguing about 8 feet. But I do agree with you that density is a

concern. I I I'm not taking away from that argument, but he certainly for me he put that into perspective. I I can't believe I didn't even think about that yesterday, but he put into perspective that we're arguing about 8 ft. 8 ft by whatever the the length of the building is.

That's a lot if you think about it with the amount of people that we most wouldn't be and this lot it's a small special cluster of of it. It's tight and that I get maybe I'm not making a clear point. I just feel eight feet in that neighborhoods a lot. And I think to not register and really look at that I I'm not trying to Well, you're sharing your opinion with us.

Yeah.

And I appreciate that.

Thank you.

The whole world's coming back up. That's number three for you, too.

I'm sorry.

I'm just going back to my point that what's represented on the drawings is likely not what's going to be permitted and built.

We're mind we're mindful of that as well.

Yes. Okay. That I this this gentleman has made that abundantly clear.

Yes. As as an architect with over 30 years experience, I understand that you can build up. you have every right to build within, you know, the the actual law and zoning and permitting. What we've been shown on the documents, which hasn't been modified today, does not conform in any way to what's today's codes. Um, they're they're citing old codes. the the structure is represented as CMU block when the

conservation commission approved pile foundations. Those things are very very different and as a working professional he should understand that and should have corrected it. So for those things not to be corrected today and you know represented uh with what approvals were given to me just speaks really volumes.

Rosebrook Street Bunnel Court. Just want to reiterate I did send a letter with all the setbacks of all the properties.

So to state that this is actually there's others that are a lot closer. That is not true. The uh front bunnel court, three bundle court is 14.

I think it's 14.8.

Um I think that's the closest one. The only other one that you're trying to point out is the sideyard. And I did not do sideyards, but I did do all the front yards on that property. All the on that street. So that's not true. And then he complies with front yard.

But if he's complies with front yard, the issue is sideyard. The sideyard.

Wait a minute. The sideyard turns into a front yard because it's bordering on a street. So because it's bordering on a street, he's got to have 20 ft in both sides. If if if his house is facing Bunnel Court and he's listed on Bunnel Court, is that not the front yard?

No. The other side just because he looks at the water. So I can turn around and say my driveway side is he actually has two in essence potentially. The argument is he has two front yard climbers that he has to meet, you know. Well, that's it. And then also that grassy area we drive, we park there, we use that. Um so to say is not used that is not true at all. So I just that's it.

But that's okay. So gentlemen um I think we've taken all the public comment that we're going to get on this any thoughts that you want to share before we decide that we're going to close the public public uh meeting on this?

I I my preference would be I'd want to go down and take a look at it. I didn't get a chance to do it. You know something? I think that that's a great position to take.

And um just because what do we have in terms of time frame on this?

Well, if they don't grant it to us, they're going to grant us an extension, I'm sure.

All right. So, and I'm sure they're mindful of the fact that we have other 40b projects going on and we are a volunteer board and Mr.

Faren's already chuckling it, so he gets it.

So, my preference would be to take a drive down there, take a look at it, walk around the property, and we put it on for some time in June, the first week of June, second week of June.

We're booked in May.

If we can do the first week of June, we would appreciate it.

Let me just check with our secretary here.

Well, let me make sure. June 11th.

Let's see what I got on June 11th.

No, you're clear.

Did you say I'm clear?

Okay.

She must have asked you.

Everybody knows my life better than me.

Yeah, I guess.

So, we're doing June 11th.

How about you, Mr. Human? Are you clear on June 11th?

I'm clear on June 11th. We have other Are you clear?

I will be.

Okay. All right.

So, um, obviously there's paperwork that needs to be signed in order for an extension.

Yeah, we can take care of that tomorrow if that's send it over.

I think at one point in time I actually suggested that we had it staked out so that we could take a look and see how much this would actually extend because it's one thing to say the the you know, just to say how many feet it is. It's something else to get sort of a stake.

If you're willing to do that, that'd be great.

I'll do it. And if you could let her know, if you could let Michelle know, and then I'm sure Alvin would go and I'll go another occasion to go look at that as well.

Mhm.

I'd like to see that as well.

I'll go.

Okay.

If you could let me know when the when the board is going to go there. Um Well, um yeah, I guess we could do that.

All right. Um we've got someone.

So, at this point, you're willing to sign the necessary documents. Will you prepare it? U you do understand If you don't, then obviously we're going to have to have an emergency meeting and I I certainly won't be too happy about that. Okay, fair enough. I've got your word, chairman, sorry to bother you, but I don't know if anyone's made this point in this whole time that we've been

talking. Every resident on that narrow 10-ft rideway has on-site parking.

They're not parking in the lane. They're not parking on the paper street. They're parking on their own property. Is this property going to be able to accommodate the parking of the rental cars that are going to come into Bono Court?

Well, since you bring that up, let me ask you something. Is there some sort of a roadway agreement between all the property owners on Bono Court that's recorded at the registry of deeds at which all the lot owners are bound by dealing with maintenance, repair, uh, snow plowing, and any of that? There is there is an association that uh a Howland Avenue association that was created back in the 20s because that's

when it was its heyday.

And is this roadway this private way and the lot owners part of that association?

Uh most of us and does the association speak as to the maintenance and upkeep of this roadway?

No, we never bother them with that because on the other side of that Holland Avenue, there's another 10-ft rideway that goes to the beach and the people that belong to the association are more concerned with a private beach that we have deeded in into our property than they are on our paper street.

Well, to address your concern, we can always make a condition that we put in there that is a condition to the grant. I'm not saying we're granting anything, but in the event if this board were to agree to grant the the relief that they're seeking by way of special permit, we can make it a specific condition that any parking of motor vehicles has to be specifically within the confines of that particular

lot. And I know it's under 5,000 ft.

It's not a big lot to accommodate a lot of cars. And then at that point a special permit can be I think believe it can be withdrawn if it's I mean it can be taken can the building inspector first he will seek enforcement but I don't know whether or not it they can bring it back before us for us to resend the special permit. I think it can be it's different from a variance.

Don't know.

I don't know lawyer but I don't know the answer to that one off the top of my head but I can I will leave that to your committee.

Can I ask you a question?

Sure. is every house down there has its own off- streetet parking.

Yes, sir.

And in that photograph that was up there, there were two cars parked in Bono Lane. Any idea what that was?

That was when Hold on. Just come on.

Sorry. Say your name, please.

I can talk right over her. Um that was actually that photo which is ironic was taken when the owner previous to Tracy was redoing that housing. You can see in that picture that Mr. Fallon had up it had the equipment in the that he needed and the two work trucks were parked in that the lane which we had issue with because that obviously that's only during the period of time of construction that that would

be tolerated if you will.

Yeah. You wanted to say something, Mr.

But that's why they were I would just say, Mr. Chairman, we have plenty of parking on our site and we would welcome a condition that there will be no parking on the private railway.

All right. So, um I think we we're pretty much Oh, did you want you want to add something else?

I do.

Okay. If we're going to give um this additional time, I think it would be great if those deficiencies or inaccuracies on the documents could be corrected.

Well, if I may, um certainly a civil drawing will be reflected with the setbacks, but at this point the applicant um as far as the architectural plans go, those are going to be submitted for a building permit. Um, so we're not going to be spending money on architectural plans right now for full construction drawings. They're not part of the special permit. They're not required.

Um, we here, like I said, we're here for the setback. As far as as far as the zoning goes, I will assure the civil drawings are reflected with any discrepancies. Um, but the architectural plans will not be updated.

All right. And as far as giving time, we're actually giving time for the board to go out, which I think, as I said in the beginning, I think it's I think I highly recommend a site visit. Um, we're not we're not delaying the project.

No, I understand it. But you're aware of the impediment that you may be confronted with, even if assuming that this board would have considered even granting the the relief that you're seeking. That there's and I think that they're pretty astute in this as well.

And I think you have some inclination as to whether or not they would have to be changed and height requirements and how the building would be, but that's between you and the building inspector.

Yeah, the build we have to meet the building code. We have to be under 35 ft.

The most important thing I think we're going on is 11.9 ft. Whether it's 34 ft, 34 1/2 ft or 33 feet is irrelevant to me. Um, and I think it should be relevant. I also don't want to be in a situation where it's almost physically impossible to actually build it and you're making us trying to make a difficult decision here just to find out you can't do it anyway because of the height requirements. So

if they have to if they have to take a floor off they would have to take a floor off.

Okay.

It should work on the ground as well.

There are two um there is un underneath the pebble grab which we all understand because we've seen it. You know those ground conditions should be accurately surveyed.

He's going to plot it out for us and we'll we'll see where that brings us.

Okay. Thank you.

I I agree, Mr. Chair. And if there's any changes from what we grant here that might affect the conservation, they have to go back and amend the conservation commission permit and they have to comply with the building permit. So we're not as long as the the the plans the architectural plans are correctly shown on the site that may not that things that might affect setbacks like because in Dartmouth I think the the uh

uh the deck if the deck is attached or set of stairs are attached to the building it's part of the setback. So make sure you know for egress if we have another set of stairs on the south side we're not intruding into the setbacks also.

Absolutely.

Yeah.

And the rest will building department will take care of.

All right. Just one more thing. Um could could they locate the the septic sistns that are on the site where the the actually the addition is proposed. There are two um sistns that are there that are covered up.

Um, I guess you could locate it if you want. Is there something there that you're aware of?

It's It's tied to Sor line. So, it's Oh, it's tied to sewer.

Yeah. I mean, if it's you have to remove it if it's in construction will have to be removed accordingly. And if it's all right, it's right underneath the addition.

I know, but I mean it's irrelevant. It's Well, no, it's it's not irrelevant.

Okay, hold on. Hold on. Hold on. This this breaks down fast. You got to talk to me, right? it goes through me and then I will ask him. So what is your concern specifically? Because this is more on site when they start digging. If they hit something then they've got to deal with it, right? I don't know what's in the ground. You suspect that there's something in the ground.

You suspect that it maybe you have more than just a suspicion. You get some rational basis to formulate your opinion that there's something in the ground.

That's great. But I'm not overly concerned about that. That's kind of be honest. It's it's outside our purview.

Okay.

All right. I I I just wanted to to I guess the the thing is is that they're presenting drawings for you to make decisions on, but they're not presenting the whole all the information on the drawings. So, you have the DPW who's looking at drawings. You have the board of health who's looking at drawings. You have the building department who's looking at drawings, and then you're looking at the drawings, and you're all

basing your you're all in your own lane basing your things on your own decisions. But when there isn't information on the drawings, for everyone to be commenting properly on the drawings, it's a problem because then we end up down the road that we like we've gone to the conservation commission. The conservation commission said as part of the stipulation that they need to have peers. They said they

were going to do driven piles rather than the CMU peers because they didn't want to go and and um dig up the ground.

So now they're proposing to do driven piles. I don't know how they're going to get driven, you know, equipment for driven piles down there, but you know, that's a problem. The DPW doesn't know about this, you know. So, if they're not going to update their drawings and and resubmit them to everyone so they know what's going on on the project, it's a big problem.

Sure.

Okay.

That's all I'm trying to say.

They will. Not at this point. We're not here to approve certain type of building or structure or a foundation. We're here. We're dealing with the 11.9. This is what we're dealing with. So, that's it's a setback issue. We're not we're not granting a building permit. They still once they go to the building permit, they have to apply a they have to file with the building permit and

provide a full set of constructions. It goes to DPW. It goes to all the different board of health, everybody in town where they can review it and and make their comments based on that. But that that you understand. So no, I understand. I just want to make sure that the information is is there.

The information that affects the zoning board of appeal will be on the plans.

That's what we asked the applicant and this is what we're concerned about.

Great. Thank you. Thank you.

I'll entertain a motion to continue to June 11th at 5:00. Well, are we still going to be doing that at 5:00? Are we going to do it at 5?

Yes.

Okay.

I don't have the information about that.

Um, I make a motion that we continue special permit ZP25-6 to June 11th at 5:00 p.m. Second that motion.

All in favor?

I I I The eyes have it. See you all on June 11th. Thank you.

All right, gentlemen. I'm going to take a short recess. Back in session and moving back as we took this matter out of order. It's an administrative matter.

It's an unusual uh type of matter that we don't typically handle, but um it's a request by First Dartmouth LLC for a determination of an for a determination of an insubstantial change in connection with a comprehensive permit case number 2018-18 issued March 11, 2021 for the town project known as the preserve at Dartmouth located off of State Road and Reed Road. I'm sure you gentlemen

remember this one. This was one of the first 40bs that I was ever involved in with um and it was one that we granted during the pandemic.

And it appears that there's some concerns about some fees and the applicability as to what what would apply would it be the time of the issuance of the permit or in present day given that there have been some uh impediments with the project moving forward. But we have town coun we have our council on this who's well aware of it who can provide us an update as to maybe what the issue is and where we're at.

Yes, it does have to do with what what types of fees that the town imposes are determined to be local regulations or not. Um, however, even though that this determination was scheduled and the applicants council was planning to be here tonight, there have been some conversations between the applicant and the town administrator about resolving the issue and so that the board may not need to take take it up. So, the

applicants council has uh requested slash consented to an extension of the deadline for the board to um make its determination until May 21st. So, and during that time, it's possible that it may get worked out and get withdrawn.

So, if if it pleases the board, you could just um make a motion to continue this.

Okay. So you feel comfortable that the understanding is that the attorney Babowski has agreed to continue the matter?

I have an email from Mr. Babrowski in which I suggested a continuation until May 21st and he said sure that will give us time to discuss um the pros and cons um and that need to be addressed. So um with the town so well he's a seasoned officer of the court. I I can rely on that representation. I don't know about my other members of the board. How do you feel about that?

Yeah, I'm fine with that. I'm fine with it.

Okay. All right. So, I'll entertain a motion gentlemen.

Um, so I make a motion that we continue the u the request for discussion.

Well, it's a it's a yeah, the request determination. Yeah, the determination determination for first Dmit LLC uh for in insubstantial change in connection with the comprehensive P permit case number 2018-18 that was issued March 11, 2021 to the May 21 hearing at 5:00.

Yep.

5:00.

Second that motion.

All in favor?

I I the eyes have it. So I think that resolves that.

Yes. All right. Now, we took matters out of order, but we're moving on to the public hearings portion of tonight's meeting. And that matter is comprehensive permit ZCMP-25-2, which was continued from December 11, 2025. The petitioner is Robert Lincoln.

The owner is Sherbrook Farms, Sherbrook Farms LLC. The subject property is located at 498 O Westport Road, also known as map 48, lot 29. It's located in a single residence B district. And this matter has been previously advertised and we've waved the reading of the abutters list. In this case, the petitioner is seeking a comprehensive permit pursuant to pursuant to Mass General Law Chapter 40B and the

comprehensive permit guideline 760 CMR56 from the Massachusetts General Laws and Dartmouth zoning bylaw regulations. The petitioner/applicant is proposing a development on approximately 81.8 8 acres to be known as Sherbrook Farms to be located at 498 O Westport Road. The development will have a total of 156 units of rental housing including 39 affordable units and the petitioner is requesting

waiverss from and it's several chapters of chapter 37 several sections of chapter 375 section 375-ash.

So, um I think we all know what we're confronted with here and what they're seeking and we've had numerous um uh abutters uh actually speak upon this and voice their opinions at prior hearings and we do have some we have an audience here today as well which I can only presume are also uh people that are concerned who are abutters. Uh I think I'd like to put place on the record two

things. one that um attorney Farriia who's an alternate member was not able to attend this evening because he's experiencing some me uh some medical issues but he is expected to do very well and will probably be present at the next hearing. In addition to that I believe Dr. Agai has consistently asked that I u place on the record that he has recused himself at all the other prior meetings and is recusing himself and

renewing his recusal this evening.

Correct. All right. All right. So, having said that, um, Susan, I know that I'm supposed to be following some sort of pattern that would make sense here.

I guess we're supposed to discuss something with the planning director regarding plan information.

Yeah. So, uh, the planning director was unable to come tonight, but I have notes. Okay.

So, and it and it may be helpful. The, um, the applicant's um, civil engineer is here, and it has to do with some questions regarding the plan set. So, with a what set? The plan. A plan. the plan the site plan set. So um you know these are just for clarification. It may just be if there needs to be some tweaks to the plans then they would just get rolled into a list of

you know potential uh conditions if the board were to approve it. So I I'll just go I'll just go with through what they are and and um I'm sorry I Damian Damian Mr.

Demetri Mr. Demetri, um, it might be helpful if you have the plans up there. Then I I'm I'm going to reference the sheets and then we can but you can start on the on the first sheet. So the first sheet does reference that it is um 10.813 acres right at the top at the under site information. Right?

And then if you go to the second third sheet right now are is that two lots or three lots? It appears it's it references a lot three but it points off the map to the north there.

Yep. Um Damian Demetri Kico Engineers and Scientists 43 Street Bridgewater, Massachusetts. Um that is those uh leaders do not appear to be approp uh pointing to the correct area. Um the three lots highlighted in red are the pro um are the lots associated with the project. Note that all of the work is occurring in this front law, you know, with with maybe a minor amount um going over for the infiltration basin down

here. So the maj you know this is continuously owned by you know undercon ownership um but that the majority of the work is occurring down here. So I believe that that 10 uh.18 acres on the fire is associated with the the property that's actually shown and highlighted on the cover sheet there. And that third parcel is that little triangular piece in that corner. Is that the third parcel?

I believe so. Correct. Yes.

All right. That would make sense if that's accurate.

Okay. Um Mr. Chair, if is it okay with you if I ask him questions and he responds. Okay. I just don't want to break protocol. Okay. Um so I I guess I guess that's the question. There's all of the those three lots are shown, but the applications only for lot one. Like that's what's unclear as to whether or not the application is intended to cover all of the land or only lot one.

Uh the application that this is all being considered one parcel um in the in for the project. They're currently three separate parcels. Um we don't want to combine them. Actually, one of Nich's comments was making sure that they uh having a condition about the parcels being combined um to meet, I believe, the aqua for protection overlay uh zoning requirements.

Right. So, that's what that's what we're going to get to in a minute. So, does then it does it make sense though?

Should the site information be corrected on the cover page to be the total acreage of all three lots?

We can definitely correct that.

Okay. So, let me circle that. So, um can I ask a question? Are they adverse to us placing a condition that there's no further sub there's no further development on the property other than what's being proposed? Um I would have to confer with the applicant directly. Um but you know we can definitely um I would um include that suggestion. You know we we're amendable to um discussing.

Okay.

But I I'll include that in the draft and then when they review it they can comment if they have any concern.

All the pieces in common ownership.

I think it's all Is it all in common ownership currently?

Um yes that that that from my understanding correct it is under common ownership.

Okay so that that kind of so all these questions kind of flow from each other.

So then on sheet three obviously the arrows just pointing in the wrong direction. Um so on this do you want to sheet three?

There's an arrow. It's hard to see because it's in the bottom right but the arrow is not actually pointing at lot three. So there was some confusion there.

You put Well, well, you know, the the the planning director got his hands on the plan, so now we have the questions.

Um, okay. Um, when you go to the next sheet and um, Mr. Barber's here as well, and he likewise had some questions. Um, I just want to note to the board because it's going to come up later, I think, when we're discussing the waiverss. Can you go to the far the southeast corner?

There's a stand of trees there.

to the right. There we go. So, there's a stand of trees that's exists there. Um, if you zoom I don't know if you can zoom in any further.

There's Yeah, there's five of them. Six.

Yeah.

Yep.

So, there's discussion about maintaining those trees, but some of them, as you can see, are noted already as being dead. So that's going to come up with some of the comments um from the staff when it talks when there's there's discussion about maintaining some buffer between the existing residential homes and the project. And so that one there's already some dead trees there. So that

may I just wanted the board to visualize it and then we'll get back to it if that's okay. No. Is that where the emergency uh fire exit though?

Well, you want to go to the next sheet?

It is in that area.

Are you grading there? I think you have 10% grade.

Still being maintained there. I see it.

Yeah, but I don't know.

Some of them are dead.

Okay.

You're filling over there. I think like uh I believe it's a cut.

Oh, okay.

If I can go to the grading plans here.

Well, that probably drops seep grade there. Oh, look. Look at the look at look at the top shown on this on this plan. We we don't show them on every plan.

So that that may be another note that those trees trees are gone needs it right. the trees there's going to need to be I think the recommendation from the the town the planning director is that whether it's the existing trees or new trees or a combination that there be a buffer maintained for that single family home and this project. So um okay.

All right. Um I think then we get the next questions come to sheet seven because that's where the zoning table is.

Okay. So we talked about what lots there are. Okay. So this is where there just needs to be some reconciliation between all the parts. So the first thing is is that this this property is in um residential B.

Mhm.

But it's also in the aquafer protection district and some of the dimensional requirements are different or more strict in the aquifer protection district. So the zoning table should also reflect being in the aquafer protection district.

Um, I don't know. Uh, the setbacks are the same. The square footage is the same.

The lot coverage is is different.

Oh, the lot coverage. Yes. Well, well, that they need to seek relief if it exceeds a certain percentage.

Well, they'd need a waiver with it.

Yeah.

Yeah.

So, what's what if you look at that table um there's there's an aster. It's hard kind of hard to read. Well, I didn't bring my glasses, but luckily I have it here in front of me. Um, there's an asterisk that says a a waiver was requested. I don't know if there's anything with an asterisk on. Oh, over there for the rear yard. So, that's true. They need one for there. But the issue is the maximum

building coverage. They they have not requested a waiver for that, but it's not the the maximum permitted in the aquifer protection district is 10%.

Now, they're at 18.5 if you're only using lot one, but you may be at 7% if you're using all of it and but as you can see there's these inconsistencies.

So you may not need the waiver if you clarify that it's all of the lots. So we just and maybe not do a whole I mean it's up to you guys if you want to revise the plans again or maybe just submit a letter saying that that's what's going to happen because then that way we'll just the condition can be to update the plans to reflect that without redoing all the plans. Okay. Um zoning table.

Okay. Aquifer protection condition. We talked about that. All right. Okay. So the that where it says lot line subject to future modifications at the top of the lot one is that referring to merging the lots.

Correct.

Okay. Um, can you also maybe put that potentially in a letter clarifying that that means to merge the lots because to the chair's point, future modifications is unclear whether you're seeking to subdivide and do other projects on other port like it's unclear.

Okay. So, we need clarification on that one. Um, okay.

A a proposed condition would be the the lighting plan and the landscaping plan are older ones that were submitted early on, but there's going to be final revised ones presumably. is that they be included in the final plan set and have the same revision dates so that if the permit is approved post permit when the final cleaned up plans get submitted it includes those plans and they all have the same date on them

um revision date of that future time that future time. Okay. Yep.

Okay.

So it's one plan set, not a plan set and a light.

We can compile that all into my set.

Yeah, we we can do that.

Okay. Um, so those are the two related ones. Um, there was one other comment that the planning director had and it is from the zoning bylaw. I'll give you the section reference 375-24.3 little M five number numeral five. That's the section. It it it it uh restricts the maximum width of the project entrance drive to 30 feet. If you go down to where your main access drive is and it this does not have a dimension

for the width at the at the property line.

Okay.

So if it's can you show that provide that in a letter but then if it's more than 30 ft it's going to need a waiver.

Okay. Can you um reference that specific 375-24.3 M little m numeral 5

was three just a little m not an a big m and then a little three and then little m in parentheses and numeral five numeral five Um, and we could always email that to you. Can I ask Dan Diosa to send it to you if you if you Yeah. Yeah. If you have any followup, I'm taking notes, but Well, right now it's it's this mess. So, I it would have to get typed out.

Yeah. Any any clean um reiteration of it is always appreciated just so make sure that we're copacetic.

So, Mr. Chair, that was the first bullet point on your list.

Okay.

All right. Um, Mr. Barber has some comments on the plans as well, but we'll he's going to present his memo separately. All right. Um, I don't know, Mr. Chair, I don't know if it makes sense and I don't know if you want to ask Mr. Barber whether he wants to review his conditions first while the since they're about the plans now or do you want Whenever I can put him on a hot seat.

That's always good. Bring him up.

Did the board get copies of that yet?

Yes, he he provided to us, but I haven't had an opportunity to read it. I'm I'm hoping I'm going to use the presses.

Yeah, I'm I'm hoping to use it to go through it as he speaks about it.

Okay.

Good evening, Tim Barber, director of public works.

So, I I prepared a a memo in regards to uh the review of the revised plans as well as uh the ongoing evaluation of the sewer and water uh uh capacity uh impact as well as the peer review for the site.

Um, in parallel with the with the consultant peer review, the Department of Public Works has offered the the following comments regarding the revised site plans and sewer water analysis memorandums dated April 7th, 2026 for the proposed Sherbrook 40B Sherbrook Farms 40B development at 478 Old Westport Road.

The peerreview consultant is currently evaluating the impact on the water infrastructure based on peak demand information submitted in the memorandum and revised plan set and has requested additional time to complete this analysis.

And they they are also uh currently evaluating the impact on the sewer infrastructure based on the same uh revised plan set in the memorandum uh that was submitted and requested additional time. I would, you know, I would like to recommend or or request an extension uh to the closing hearing date to finalize this this evaluation. Uh so that you know this this section of the sewer infrastructure is critical. um

includes um a private pump station um about 9,000 linear feet of force man that was installed uh for a private development uh by the private development and then uh two local pump stations that also pump into that force main and and then the the last from final fourth uh north Dartmouth uh sewer pumping station impacts. So, so that that's what they're looking at. Um, we had met with with with

Damian uh and uh and Stantech uh to discuss uh what what Stantech needs for information and they they uh did deliver the memo. Um so that they'll be working on that and hopefully we'll have that in the next week or so to review. Um before you leave, when's our next when was the date on this that we needed to have final approval? They extended to when May was May 14th.

So May 14th. So right now it's extended to May 14th.

I believe it's the Is it the 14th or the 12th?

Well, the 14th is the last day the board can close the hearing, but the board was going to put in a meeting on May 12th if if that was the deadline.

Okay.

Um um have you spoken to the uh applicant as to whether or not they're amendable to extending that date?

Yeah, we he I received a text from him that he is, you know, if needed to extend to clean some stuff up and and you know, it's some final stuff. We're comfortable, you know, working with you guys to to um make this run smoothly.

Putting it out 30 days.

Well, one of one of the the June is starting to get tight as you know. the um Michelle had circulated all those dates for the board's availability.

There is a date that is not currently spoken for which is June 8th which pushes it out about 3 weeks. Um we're coming back June 11th, don't we?

Yeah. Oh, there's already a meeting on June 11 with halfway on June. We're putting that one on at 5 and we don't have anything else on June 11, do we?

No, you have Hathaway.

We have halfway report now and I have a regular All right. So, we don't want to do that.

Oh, I didn't realize that would be two in one week. I don't know how the board feels about that.

Well, the problem is is, you know, tomorrow's the first day of May.

Yep.

What else do we have in May? Do we have anything else in 11th?

So, June 11th.

June 11th is a Monday.

No, June 11th is a Thursday.

All right.

So, what else do we have in May? Oh, May.

Well, May um Well, you were going to have um Sherbrook on May 12th, which is in Well, they're not going to be able to make they're not able to get all that information.

No, we're not. I I think it would be more efficient if we could get them all of the proposed conditions, including water and sewer before the next meeting.

Um and then the next meeting after that is on the 21st at 5 o'clock. you need to um review and finalize and vote one way or another on Hawthorne because it h the decision has to be filed by the 22nd. So you have Dartmouth at 5:00 and you have Haway at 6:00. So you already have 240BS on the 21st and a regular case and now the preserve.

Well, the preserve may get right may get withdrawn. So you're going to give us all these dates because I haven't typed them all in yet.

Yep. All right.

Um, so then that in June, I think June we we said the 11th for Hathaway.

Hathaway has to close at by July 7th, which is kind of right in the middle of the 4th of July holiday. So the go there is the plan is to have two meetings in June, the 11th and the 29th for Hathaway.

Um, are you guys adverse to putting this on for the Monday, June 8th? We'd have two meetings on the first week of June. June 8th and June 11th, Mr. Newman, I can do June 8th.

We're just going to have to, you know, bite the bullet.

You're almost done. You're almost at the finish line.

Yeah.

Are you available, Susan, for June 8th?

I am.

All right. Are you available June 8th?

Yeah, you are.

My life revolves.

How about you? June 8th.

Yes.

Okay.

How about June 8th?

June 8th.

Yeah. He said yes.

We're doing June 8th. 6:00 or 5:00.

This one.

This this one.

Is there anything else we need to know, Mr. Barber?

Yes.

I do have a list of additional uh comments that on the on the revised plan set.

Okay.

Um that I can I can read all the comments if you like.

Can you can do that rapidly? Yes.

And also I just wanted to make it clear that the board of public the the board of public works also expressed their interest to you know to review the uh you know the peer review and uh and comments and and evaluation of the sewer and water you know prior to the closing of the hearing date enough time to do that.

Yes, absolutely. Thank you.

So um on sheet four we just uh of the revised plans we had just revise the utility plan to identify size and type of existing water main infrastructure.

Um on sheet six, revise plans to show a proposed saw cut for the new site entrance and add a call out for existing granite curb to be removed and also include a a note that all granite curb removed from Old Westport Road and not reused uh within the public right away shall be delivered to the Department of Public Works Highway yard.

Um, they own it.

That's right.

But they're going to need it based on the next comment. So, right. Sheet seven, uh, revise plan to show vertical granite curb to Cape Cod Burm transition. So, anytime you transition and you need to show a detail um, and label a sidewalk with the 5T uh, 5 foot sidewalk, a concrete sidewalk.

Sheet eight include size, type and slope of roof drains at all buildings and all inline drains and flat ends shall be uh reinforced concrete pipe RCP.

Sheet 14. The proposed water man as depicted on utility plans is not correct. Uh there are some inconsistencies and on how it's drawn and and whether it Yeah.

And so This is all technical stuff, right?

It's all technical.

Go clean up.

So, I would just suggest that if you can't work that out, then you let us know. Otherwise, no, I'll be honest with you.

Yeah.

I'm not really concerned.

Right.

That's technical stuff.

So, the applicant just got it tonight.

So, this they'll have the time to review it and and call Mr. Barber if they have.

If you guys can't agree on something, then that's when we get involved.

All right. Fair enough.

Drafting.

Not trying to take away from what you're saying. It's just that, you know, that's all well and good that you're making sure that we're dotting our eyes and crossing our tees, but I only want to deal with it if there's a if there's some uh you there's some disagree disagreement. There we go. There's some disagreement between your opinion and his, then we're going to step in.

All right. But otherwise, you you need to have an opportunity to review it, probably assess it, and it's very likely you're going to agree to everything that he he has proposed. Possibly.

Very likely.

Okay. Fair enough.

Okay. Yeah, we can we can also hold a meeting to discuss, you know, the uh the request for revisions and the comments.

So, good.

All right.

Okay. Thank you.

So, um the um so I can probably then summarize and condense um the two letters from Niche Engineering and then the same thing if the applicant has concerns they can reach out. But I'll just point out a couple of things um for tonight since I'm neither of these engineers. But um we have the their letters. Um as I noted in in Mr.

Gabriel's letter about the civil there there is that there was the concern and and um Mr. Barber and Mr. Um, Giosa also pointed it out that the concern is about maintaining the buffers for the existing residential homes both across the street and the one to the southeast. So, the plan as it's been represented is that there's a number of trees and it's on I think it's on is it on sheet seven that

it shows which ones are there ones that have like X's through it? Now, which plan has that of which ones are being one of the sheets had Oh, it's the great maybe the grading plan. There was one of the sheets had which trees had like X's through. Yes. So, demolition.

Yep.

Sheet six.

Seat six. So, you'll see that the ones that are have crosshatch are the ones to be removed. Then there's a whole number that aren't that. But that the concerns with both the trees along the frontage and the trees in the southeast corner, including the ones that are labeled dead, which presumably aren't providing really much buffer at all and probably will fall over at some point, is

whether or not they're sufficient or should be supplemented in some way on their final landscape plan. So that's the first question. The second one is the ones that are remaining, making sure that they're adequately protected during construction because of the amount of grading and site work that's going to happen. Because if you say we're maintaining these and then they inadvertently, you know, it just happens

sometimes during construction or the root system gets damaged or something, making sure that they are replaced in kind or or similar. um and then that they're maintained in perpetuity to for that buffer. So those were the those were the concerns around the landscaping that affects the other the existing homeowners that the the um town planner DPW director um and also Mr. Gabriel wanted to bring to the board's

attention. What's the difference in elevation between the road, the center of the road, and where the the parking area is for the for this for this site?

I know it's an unfair question, but I'm going to ask you to tell.

So, we got 115 at this location violated here, and we'll go down to right down here. That's 92.

115 92. So, it's the proposed grade in that, but that that's the existing grade. It should be noted that we are coming up from that.

So, I probably should go to our proposed drawing. So, we're at 102. So, this retaining wall, the top of wall, bottom of wall, we're going from 113.25 down to 103. So, that's a 10ft wall um downward. So, that there is that's you're going to drive 10 ft above the first floor of these buildings.

So, the visual in essence other than looking downward is basically the second and the third floor.

Yeah. From the roadway.

Okay.

Okay. So, that but listen, the buffer is still important and and we want an effective screen, but we can add the condition.

Yeah.

Absolutely. Absolutely. And that's what you're just trying to make sure that they're on board with.

Oh, yeah. Just wanted you want to minimize that when you drive by. I'd much prefer it just look like a tree line rather than even know that there's a building until you get to the opening.

Yeah. And that's why we surveyed the trees along the existing frontage to just make sure and look at the trees that um we do plan on saving. um you know we'd rather have those large growth old trees um as a protection rather than clear cutting all of it and placing a wall of arborites or something like that you know uh uh maintain the existing where possible. So, as as we were

saying, a number of these are just technical. So, what all I'm doing is calling out for the board are the conditions or the recommended conditions um to address issues that might affect the public whether they're live right there, whether they're coming down the street. So, the other one was the um Mr.

Gabriel is recommending um some conditions related to the lighting and the lighting plans and having those updated to make sure that that they don't have any negative impacts. Um so the only butters here are the people across the street and the people to the east of this parcel and there's one there's only one lot owner that's that's the immediate butter there right?

Yeah.

Okay.

Yeah.

Okay. Is there going to be something along that easterly uh boundary?

Is there going to be some kind of a there's a detine or Yeah. So this is maintaining the existing tree line um that we have shown.

Oh, okay.

Or this this is the proposed tree line.

Oh, yeah.

I can still Yeah.

Is that a detention pond in there?

Yes.

Okay. Yeah, it's a a big cut down um to get to that. But this, let's make this a little thicker here.

Is that going to be fenced?

I think um on this top edge um it currently is not proposed that um but if wished by the board, we can put fencing along that edge.

What's what's the drop?

Five feet. So from here this it's a 3 to one grade.

Yeah. What's what's the from the top we go from elevation 116 all the way down uh to 101. So it's 15 ft uh from this location to this edge and then this is the access around the basin. Um so then this is then there's another additional down to the bottom of the basin is 95.

I I don't know if I don't know how I feel about a fence in there.

Yeah. I don't know if that homework is here but I don't know they might want trees.

Yeah. prefer trees to fences.

Yeah, this will be, you know, it has to be cut back um and will be loomed and seated. Um it can be allowed to return back to natural vegetation. Um this area here um does need to be maintained, but that's at the bottom of the hill um as that's associated with the um access to the basin for maintenance.

Where did where did you say there's going to be a retaining wall? Is it going to be right at the street? uh retaining wall is along this frontage here.

And so is that is that um level with where the sidewalk is going to be or is that higher or lower?

Yeah, the the the top of the retaining wall is on this side. So and then the drop occurs to get down to our access.

And then how long of a drop is that?

That drop is um roughly 10 ft at this location.

Is there is there what is proposed? So, is there any safety concern for the board with a 10-ft drop right off of Old Westport Road?

Mhm.

Yeah.

What is anything proposed there to prevent people from falling off in the middle like if someone's walking down Old Westport Road and doesn't realize?

Yeah, we can definitively add some fencing in that location for the next revised plan.

I think so.

Yeah, that that well, we're comfortable with that.

clumsy people might you know what or well it might not be but maybe it's not a person maybe it's a car goes off the road right a car I mean maybe it's just even needs to be ballards or something something there's a tree buffer through that hole right there's existing trees along that frontage right that we're maintaining and then additionally we'll have supplemental plantings so you know but I

I think I think I think a ch a small 5 foot chainlink fence is reasonable or acceptable able appearance fence of post and rail or um stockade of whatever.

What would the board Let's see what let's see what the planning director has for recommendation and then we can decide how we want to implement it cuz I want it to be aesthetically pleasing.

Yeah, you can do chain link with with the with the PVC like or like a black black chain link is what usually hides.

That's usually the most coated with black. Yeah. You don't really It blends in with the uh landscape, you know.

Yep.

Okay. Um so that that's again that's just highlights of Mr. uh Gabriel's um and then the other one is the um transportation.

um the the most significant um conditions on the transportation and this goes to the entrance across from Lucy Little Road. Um do you have a sheet that show it's probably sheet seven if you zoom in there and and and Mr.

Barber can speak to these as well. um is the proposal is and particularly with the UMass Dartmouth just very close where there's the potential that there could be residents who who work or attend the school etc. and making it a pedestrian friendly uh type of location is the installation of the crosswalks.

Um, one of the issues that there was a lot of back and forth with, as I understand it, from Mr. Bandini and Ba Bowman, who was the applicants traffic consultant, is how much of this improvement that the applicant would pay for. Um, and at the end of the day, the proposed conditions do have the applicant responsible. So when you look at the rectangle with all four crosswalks being responsible for

putting the crosswalks are just paint but the more important things are the ADA accessible ramps at each corner. So th that is proposed in the condition that the applicant be responsible for all of those and if the board has any questions Mr. Barbara can speak to that better than I can as to what what's needed at those um you know transitions from the crosswalk.

Um so that that was the most significant. There's also proposed to do similar to the other 40bs to look at things like the markings, the signage, etc. and try to and recommend kind of safety um installations as far as paintings, markings, signage, those types of things. So, there's also similar recommendations for that.

I remember we also had some discussions of making sure that there were no parking signs along Lucy Little Road and also maybe Alden, I think it was Alden Court or Alden, whatever it is in that area. That's something that was discussed heavily when we had more people here present because they were concerned that there would be spillage of guests and whatnot because of the number of parking spaces in relation to

the units.

I agree.

Okay. So, no. And Lucy Little Road and what I'm sorry, what was the other street?

It was Alden.

Okay.

All right.

Yes, sir.

Uh, could I request that the condition if written explicitly state how many or you know locations? I think it'll be in coordination with the DPW director.

DPW. Okay. All right. Yeah. So, just want to make sure you know um the extents of which the condition we would be agreeing to. I think we're very amendable to those parking if requested, but just wanted to make sure you know we're in the same understanding.

It was discussed and they were present.

Uh you had more people here at that time and didn't seem like as if there was any going to be any oppos opposition. Yeah.

Um and certainly it's a concern that the people that live across across on the other side the south side of O Westport Road that they didn't want to have and and be impeded by being able to use and have their own guests utilize the roadway.

Yeah. Completely reasonable. Okay.

And I like to volunteer Mr. Barber's time all as you can see I do it all the time. So I mean you might be able to talk and and then kind of help craft or articulate that in a way.

I mean, I'm going to write it very generically, but you all might be able to define it better than I could. Um, okay.

So, then, as we said, we don't have water and sewer yet. Um, except for some of the technical comments that Mr.

Barber has in his memo. So, then I would turn the board to the applicants waiver list. if you have this chart and um these were reviewed by Mr. Barber or Mr.

Giosa and so and I'm I'm the scriber here in um writing down and you you have a copy with the recommendations. Is that correct? Okay. So the chart was prepared by the applicant. The blue comments to the right were um your staff recommendations. Um almost all of them except for two are from the zoning bylaw. Um and most of like for the first three have to do with the fact that

you're in a single residence B district where typically you're only allowed to have one single family home. So those are waiverss that are required in order to actually build a project that's not a single family home. So that's what the first three are. If the board has any specific questions about any of these um then we can get we can get you answers if we don't have them tonight or

refer them to Mr. Josa. Um the next one similar to number four the height is the height of the district. So that's related to it. So the first one where there's a more substantive comment this is where we're talking now right about the the screening. Um and so the requirement in the zoning by this is in site um standard yeah that's the standards for parkings and driveways is a minimum 5 foot high

evergreen hedge and they're seeking to have a waiver for that in order to just do whatever existing and proposed they may show on the final plan but we don't know what they're going to show on the final plan. Um so the the suggestion on that is to make it subject to um the review by the planning director.

Can we go back to number four?

Certainly.

Haleem, why does this building have to be 7 feet higher than 35 ft?

It's a threetory.

Is there a parapet on these buildings?

Not the architect.

Excuse me.

I I don't have that information. I I don't have the architecture. I I'm It's only three story. It's only three stories high, right?

Yes. Maybe there's an elevator in the shaft. I don't know if the entire Yeah, if it's just an elevator shaft, I'm okay with that. But if the whole building has to be 42 ft high, but remember it's 10 ft lower than the I know that. I know that. But still, but when you drive up to it, we granted of relief on on height on uh regular projects, not even 40B. So, I don't know. I

I don't remember too many.

Anyway, I got to take a look at another look at those plans. Thank you.

Sure. We'll take a look at it. See what we can.

Okay. Number number six. Again, this just has to do with the scale of scale of the plans and that relates to the fact that the parcel overall, the three are is so large. So, that's just a technical item. Um, This has to do so and and Mr. Giosa explained on number seven pedestrian pathways within the sites between the buildings. They have sidewalks shown between all the buildings. Um Mr. Gio

was comfortable with this that they didn't actually have to have a bike path inside the project. So he was comfortable with that one. Um, this one is the parking. Number eight is that the bylaw requires that the parking be set back 15 ft from any building.

They're proposing 9.7 ft. Um, and Mr.

Giosa was comfortable with that.

All right. So, the next one has to do with the curving.

um they want to use uh Cape Cod BM Cape Cod Burm here and that was okay but as I Mr. Barber referred to it already in his notes once they get to the entrance drives where the apron um extends into the right ofway that it will have to transition to vertical curb for anything that's in the rightway.

Um the next again is bicycle bike lanes inside the fac inside the project. Given the layout and the closeness of all the buildings um staff did not felt that that waiver was not u problematic.

Um so then the next one is is a reduction in the width of the landscape islands in the parking lot from 12 feet to 7 1/2 ft. the staff is okay with that one, but it's the next one, the next two that have to do with landscaping in the landscape islands or in the parking lot that um they're seeking uh more clarification.

So, they're saying that they don't want to propose landscape islands every 10 spaces, but they're not stating what they are proposing. So, we need it more specific. If it's not going to be every 10 spaces, it's going to be every how many spaces? Or it's going to be if it's 10 spaces in some locations but not in others, then say, "Okay, on the east side, the west side." Just a little bit more specificity

about which where a waiver is needed or what the specification will be if it's not the bylaw specification.

I'm just letting you take your note.

Okay. Thank you. I appreciate that.

Now, um the next one is that the bylaw has certain specific planting requirements for the landscaped islands.

Mhm. and the applicant is just as asking for well it'll just be whatever we put on the final plan. So again um there there's a recommendation that there be a condition that that gets reviewed by the planning director. It doesn't say planning director here but that's what's intended. um so that it's not oh we put you know three shrubs in a however long right so that there's some reasonleness there to what's planted so

that's again um the landscaping island landscaped islands and then um there was a question uh that Mr. you also had whether or not you were referring to D6 as opposed to D4 number 14. Um, again it says that there needs to be shading over the spaces and this is just asking for a waiver again shown. So there needs to be some more specificity as to what they're requesting cuz this

is very this is a blanketish type waiver request.

Um the next one is just a requirement in the in the the ZBA's comprehensive permit regulations.

There was a a requirement that the plans that they submit show all of the trees over 4 in caliber. It's a how many acre site? 80 acres. Yeah.

So, what they've done instead is just show the trees particular in the areas where they're intended to be m well obviously in the back they're all going to be maintained in lot two but on lot one the ones that we were all that's what we were pointing out earlier when that he was sharing the plans all the ones along the frontage and particularly along the east. Um so what about the west side? Hold on.

What about the West?

Hold on. Hold on. You're going to have an opportunity, sir, to be heard. We're going I am going to open up to public comment.

Um number number 16 again, this is the storm water regulations talks about locating the existing trees and they're, you know, again asking for a waiver to just show existing trees that are in the affected area. Um, and then and then this is where it just comes back to, you know, making sure that all of the plans show the trees that are to remain and then there's going to be proposed conditions

about the maintenance of those long term. The the last one in the last box is a blanket plane waiver plan waiver I'm sorry a blanket plan waiver which under the um the guidelines done by the subsidizing housing housing agency plan waivers are not appropriate. So it's recommended that the board deny the plan waiver.

Okay.

Um and so that that kind of just is an overview of where the consultant and staff conditions are. Of course, there's then all of the general conditions that the, you know, that the board typically considers, which, you know, are more lengthy.

At this point for this project, they only have 16 waivers, right?

Yeah.

Yeah.

um a lot of the landscape waiverss. I don't know why it's so is it that tight that you can't provide because all I see is a big like large the buildings and all the the the uh the parking and the impervious surfaces. It's all in the front like really I mean is it really tight to to provide like a 10-ft uh uh uh landscape island for every 10 parking spaces or 15 parking spaces? You know, I

I I was trying to look at the landscape plan and I I think I couldn't find I'm sure I have one that they submitted.

It's because of the wetlands and that's why they're trying to confine this to to the location that they have.

No, I mean limit you might end up losing four or five parking spaces maybe or something like that, you know.

Well, and there was a lot of concern with the voters making sure that they had enough parking.

Well, I would you like me to Yes. Uh yes. So again, the the proposed design is the preferred design as stated by the chair. We're trying to reduce our overall impact area. Um there is the wetland and the ponds in the back of the site, right? You know, adding, you know, and then meeting those kind of indust type of developments, right? Um in the parking amounts that we found there, I

believe it was a uh the parking ratio.

Yeah. you know, the 1.76 is adequate for, you know, this type of area. Um, adding in those landscaped islands, you know, could potentially, you know, push to additional parking areas in the rear.

Um, it's just this is the preferred design and adding in, you know, additional landscaped islands and and of the such could, you know, I understand you can't you can't move 10 ft northerly of where you are right now.

You can't.

Could we right you're saying here I mean all I see like I mean I believe me and I I'm not huge on landscape or whatever but I mean when you see four or five buildings with how many parking spaces you have over thereund and you know the four it's all like open buildings and and um maybe because I don't have the you have some landscape on the end of the islands right?

Yep.

Yeah. Yeah, there is landscaping um islands throughout the property. Um again, we we were based, you know, on the design of the the site trying to just, you know, limit and compact the proposed development to be as as efficient as possible within that, you know, property line layout, right? So, so adding, you know, additional landscaping islands, um you know, again, we were trying to to get within that

1.75 1 parking ratio. Um you know so this is just an efficient layout to get that done and and that's how it was proposed. Um you know there is a big you know um amenities area that will be planted out. There is landscaping right?

You know the idea is that you know this will be a a visually um you know we're not trying the the appropriate area um you know with landscaping and shrubbery to make it a nice place to live. Um, you know, it's just m meeting that specific requirement as we're going through this permitting process where we stand and having, you know, the variance because we still have to go back to the

conservation commission, get approval from them that getting a variance for this condition now would just, you know, make sure that we can plant it um and and make this as compact as possible.

Can you just can you just show like um on the if you zoom in in the different areas like to the left of the amenities building to the left LF is that mean landscaping?

Yes. Yeah. Those are landscaped island just meaning it could you know I see them. I mean but you know it's they're huge buildings and you feel you feel they could comply and still and still minimize impact. I mean I I think so. But it's okay if everybody's saying, you know, not uh we're not here to decide on it today, but you want to strongly voice that concern or you just have a concern. If you want

to strongly voice it, let them know opinion. I mean, what's uh the thing is is this.

I'm not good at looking at I'm going to be honest with you. I'm not good at looking at this plan and know exactly how it's going to translate. This is not my area of expertise. This is your area of expertise. So, you know already that when you look at it, it might look compromised. Is that I mean actually apologize.

Do you have a landscape plan?

I might have a site rendering that could be useful cuz I mean 7 and 1/2 ft. You can have a large tree planted in a 7 and 1/2t island, you know, just uh you don't want to see like an old supermarket parking lot, you know, or You know what I'm saying? That's what I'm getting at. I was just projecting.

No, I I don't have the the rendering.

Um, do you have a landscape layout that shows the trees?

The landscape layout that we currently have is not up to date with the current site layout, but I mean it's it's got to be close, right?

Yeah.

Um, I do not have it in my folders on this one.

That's fine.

I mean, it's something to think about. I don't know. Just let the applicant know that we have a member that's concerned about that waiver.

Yeah. Okay.

You can note it. I'll give you an opportunity to do that.

All right. So, we've gone through those waiverss. I think at this time I want to open up to public comment. There are people here. Can you put it on the plan in which we have the three lots? Because this gentleman raised a concern about the westerly side, but I think once you provide an explanation, um, he's not going to he's not going to be overly concerned. You can come up, sir, if you

want to ask a question, but if I understand correctly, you're concerned about the westerly side of the property and whether or not there's any buffer or plantings being put on there. Correct.

Right.

Okay. Now, can you just show to this gentleman? Can Can I forget his name? Damian.

Yeah.

Can you just show where the property line is for the entire property and then where the construction is going to be where it's going to occur?

Yep. I just wanted to get that port.

Just show them on on the Yep. So, this big red line that I'm duplicating right now is the entire property, right? I'm not going to trace the whole thing.

Right? It's that big red line. I will choose a different color. The limits of the development are roughly actually and I I probably So you have it's probably closer to this right. So there is 200 ft.

This distance here um which our scale just for those doing math in their head is 1 in equals 20. This is about an inch.

It's gonna be hard to draw that way. I'm not gonna do that right now. um you know this is a distance greater than um you know 500 feet. Yeah, but that might be a little extensive.

Definitively 400 ft. Okay. So there's from where the build area is, there's a 400 foot buffer in essence that's going to be untouched.

Is that fair to say?

Yep. It's going to be untouched. That will remain in its condition.

Does the cover sheet have an have the aerial on it?

Yeah. And I would note as well that there is a wetland area.

Yeah.

Through here that we, you know, and a pond that you cannot touch that we can't we, you know, we cannot build on that pond. So, um, the cover sheet again, if we were to show this aerial, right? So, the majority of the development occurs, that's going to be real thick.

You're going the wrong way.

Yeah. Trying to get out of it. Come on.

Leave me alone. There we go.

That's too thin.

And blue lines kind of stink.

right is relatively again hand sketching here this area right so you know there's this whole pond and this area between that and the property line okay you have any further questions about that sir because if you do you feel free to come up to the podium that's right in front of my house Okay, take your time.

And one of the things that Hold on. I need you to come up to because we got to record all this.

A You can state your name and address, sir. Um, Brian Medeiros, 515 Westport Road, right across the street from this across the street development or farm, if you want to call it a farm. The there's there's plantings there now that the that the board of health made me put in years ago.

When you drive by, you can see it. It's on top of a burm. And that was to keep the dust down. I'd like to keep that there so I don't have to look so I don't have to look at this.

The uh So they had in the past they were required to put some plantings there.

They did they were to minimize the dust required to put it there and they built it up on top of a burm.

I do not on a burm.

They they they put a big burm.

Okay.

And then they put the and then they put the abides on top of that to make it even taller.

I mean, the other thing that I I question is I one is one of the first questions is I can't believe we're we're this far into this project and we're getting all this all this uh oh waivers and all this other stuff. Jesus Christ, you know. But anyhow, is that How far that's his house is the building your the con lot. The corner building.

How far is that from the street?

On the left. So, the one on the far left. No, the one on the far far left.

Yeah, right there. How far is that from the street? Um, so the setback for this building is 162. Um, that's a closer setback, so that's why we include it there. So at least 162 feet and then I would approximate um an additional 10 feet or so. So this the closest point is 162 ft. Correct.

That's the amenities building is 162.

Okay. No. And that's 62 to the property line, not 162.

Oh, 62.

Oh, 62.

Yes, it's close.

So, you're pretty close to the road then on that building's going to be pretty close to the road.

Yeah. Um, it is outside of the said the setback line, which I will show here.

Right. So, this is the town setback.

It's five feet along right so I traced that there and then again continued here right the 60ft frontage setback right so I don't need to right I mean those setbacks are for single family homes right yes understood it it is the town by law we don't need so to make this aesthetically pleasing to the eye of course the closer you get that building to the street.

It's worse. So, you're going to have to have some pretty big plantings to cover that eyesaw.

I call it an eyesaw because the first time we saw that what your rendition of the buildings were going to look like, we haven't seen it since, but it was pretty ugly. Um, do I like it? No, I don't like it. I think it's I' I'd rather see rocks there. You know what I mean? But um uh so I'm asking the board, okay, if they can make it and and take a ride

by there and see the Burm that I'm talking about. It's right across the street from my property.

And that would cover up quite a bit from not only myself, but from my other two neighbors on either side of me.

Um they're not here tonight. But uh um cuz they gave up.

They gave up on the town. This is like we're being sold out on this job. Four people to show up at a meeting. But anyhow, I'd appreciate it if you take that into some consideration. So I just want to understand what your concern is.

You're saying that there's a burm.

There's an earth berm there now and that has some type of evergreen tree growing out of the earth burm and you want that to continue.

Yeah, I want it to stay there.

Are you familiar with this burm that he's speaking about?

Um so I'm looking at the that's I was trying to decipher that. Let's go I guess existing conditions. Um in comparison to this building along the frontage I think which has been demoed.

Um, is it this burm?

There's a burm.

This is a graded berm here.

Yeah, there is. Yeah.

Um, so our proposed design would be that's that's going to be the um infiltration basin. Uh the um the slope of that will impact it. It won't, you know, I'm, you know, looking at what it is considering it doesn't go that far off site. Um it would be a drop down that burm um you know from the property line there would be a slope down to the basin from there and that burm would be

you know we're doing everything for this company. What's in it for us?

There's nothing in it for us, sir.

Nothing. Nothing.

Do something for us.

Okay, hold on. You have to talk to me, sir. Right. This this breaks down.

You have to talk to me. So you're saying that there's nothing in it for us. I agree with you. There's nothing in it for us. But unfortunately, we're confronted with it.

Is is your is is his house directly across from where the building's going or is it offset to the left there? Like would you be looking diagonal at the building or straight onto the building?

Well, take a ride by there and you'll see what I'm talking about.

So, your property is that is that the property there? That's what is it there?

Is that is that an orchard?

Yeah.

All right. So, you're the one that owns the orchard.

Yeah.

Okay. I'm not ready to give up yet.

You shouldn't and you shouldn't stay around just to piss you people off.

So, so, so I I think I think Mr. Chair that this goes to the questions that the planning director had and I think this gentleman is expressing about it says LS for landscaping right now, but they haven't fully developed what that land LS what is actually going there. And I think that's the question. Is that LS area across along the the old Westport road? Is that just going to be bushes? Is it going to

be trees? Is it going to be create some sort of screening for this gentleman's house? That's right. Is that the question? I guess. Is that your question, sir? That you would like screening so that you're not necessarily looking straight on at to that building?

Yeah.

Is that your I'm going to lose enough.

I'm going to lose the light. You guys are going to put lighting in there. You know, we've lived there for 100 years.

I've lived there for 68 years. So, this is got this is a change for me. So, when I look look out my my window and I don't see no lights and I can see the stars, that's all going to change. And that sucks. That really sucks. I might as well just live in the city. Sell the farm off. You guys are losing them anyway. So, left and right. But hey, we

can make another farm. We'll call it Sherbet Farm and grow buildings. Little flat houses in here.

You guys don't even know what a farm is.

Well, I'll tell you what it is. Come on out and help me sometime.

Thank you.

We'll take I'll take a drive by there so I take a look at it and see if there's something that could be done. Okay.

I'm always home. If you see the truck in the yard, come on.

When will your apples be ready?

They'll be in blow in another month.

All right. Is there anyone else with any concerns that like to come forward and speak? Come on up.

Um Norman Dilva, 523 Old Westport Road.

Um, I think what Brian was referencing, I could be wrong on this, but I think when they moved the entrance from down to to be across from Lucy Little, they had vegetation over there on the what would be like the left looking at this map here would be the west side. There was a lot of vegetation in there and it seems like when they moved the entrance that they removed it

all and that's why it doesn't really show anything over there. All the trees and stuff, it looked like it was taken down. That's that's just my interpretation, but I think that's what he what Brian's trying to say is to the left side of the entrance there doesn't seem like there's any shelter or anything, you know, to the road.

Um, my next question was I went to the Hawthorne meeting the other night and we I had brought up before about buses, whether it be school buses and so buses are having a bus stop inside the property. at the Hawthorne meeting, you said you were going to investigate uh whether they could have a bus stop inside uh you know inside the Hawthorne development. I want to know why we can't

have that same consideration here and get the bus stop moved inside the building like like you were going to do for them or try to do for them.

I don't know where we're at with that to be honest with you, but I'm sure that she can provide some light on it. the the way the conditions word would is worded for Hawthorne and could be done the same way here because you know that applicant thinks it would be safer and better, right, than having the bus stop, etc. is to have the applicant work with the school department and the police

department to come up with the safest location. So, the board's not going to tell them, "Oh, it has to be on Westport Road." I know the board doesn't, you know what I mean? They're going to say go work with right work with the town officials in charge of that and come up with the safest location.

Okay, that's fair. But obviously it's not it's not it's safer to have bus stop inside of the property versus on Old West Road.

So what I'm saying to you people is why can't we investigate the fact with the police department and the public safety to get the bus stops moved into the property?

Yeah. Yeah. that and that will be a condition that they work with the police department and the school department to figure to to figure that out.

Okay. So, if they do get theirs moved inside, there should be a good chance that we can get ours moved inside, too.

Well, I don't know if they're going to get theirs moved inside because I don't know either. It's my understanding the school department, they don't have they don't promote or they don't usually want buses going onto private property and having a bus stop on private property.

They want to stay on a public way the entire travel time that they have with that bus. I I I think it's a question that the town administration with the police department and the school department need to have together. And I think that the fact that there's three projects that may generate a number of school children is going to facilitate that that conversation be had. We can't we

just can't tell you what the outcome of it is going to be because it's in their control.

I see where the one on the Hawthorn is much more practical to actually implement versus this. This they're going to drive in and that bus has to back into some lane of travel inside the site in order to be able to come back out.

We got everything so squeezed in there in this thing like the gentleman was saying about landscaping. Everything's squeezed in there. They get they they're getting such a bang for their buck.

They're going up three floors. They're not doing that at Hawthorne. I know it's you can't do it's apples and oranges. I understand that. But this project compared to Hawthorne looks like Beverly Hills compared to what this is going to look like.

You ought to go to Hatheraway.

See what Hatherway looks like.

Thank you for listening to me all these times. I appreciate it.

Thank you.

Anyone else wants to come forward and speak? Come on up. Name and address.

Melissa Gagy 489 and 483 which is directly across and on the corner of Lucy Little. Um I do have a problem with 489 and the sidewalks and whatnot. So if you look at the town lot a problem with 49. Not sure if I follow 489 is on the corner. So right where you have um I'm sorry come down towards the right right across the street. It's there's two homes.

Yep. So, right in that area there, that's my driveway, that opening, and then the next one over is also mine.

Thank you.

So, the first lot on the corner of Lucy Little and Old Westport, the town actually owns the corner, which stops me from putting up trees, fences, any type of privacy. I've maintained it or the family has maintained it. It goes back to my great-grandparents owning that property as well. And we've cut the lawn over all these years. I cannot put up trees. I'm letting rodendums overgrow my

windows at this point cuz I don't want to trim them. And if they can get away and have all these excuses to do things, I'd like, you know, to be able to add privacy to that lot as well or or put something on the other side. I'm wide open. My living room window is a matter of feet from the street. So, to add handicap sidewalks, which I'm not against as a physical therapist, I get

it. I'm open to that. But I mean, you're literally moving into my living room.

So, this is huge.

Yeah. I think that's what I was thinking. But anyway, so so the it the the issue could be I'm not a traffic engineer, but I spend a lot of time on a planning board myself.

When you're coming down Lucy Little, y you need to be able to see oncoming cars, right? So, they're trying that's called like the sight triangle or the sight distance. So when those when those cross get designed, they're going to have to work with Mr. Barber.

Mhm.

And I, you know, then they can determine maybe what what that sight distances are and figure out if there's somewhere.

I don't know. I like I said, but I I I cringe waiting for cars to come through the living room as it is, you know, a huge boulder stop, something like it's it's awful. I suspect you own to the corner.

Uh, no, the town.

No, they're just telling you you can't put anything there because of sight distances.

There's an easement line or some sort.

You You tell me. I would love to know. I mean, I've maintained it all these years.

I haven't seen your deed.

We've Yeah, I mean, we've been stopped from doing things in the house because we're too close.

Well, the So, they're getting permission to do basically anything they want across the street.

You know, you know, Do you know our planning director?

No.

Well, he's someone you could run that by. He'd be a great person to speak to about that.

You could even probably set up a time in which you can meet with them and he could explain to you what the requirements are there.

If you like to start some sort of not a tree line to block the view, I get I do understand that. But, you know, I don't have an option.

So, the board I mean there's going to be a proposed condition that the board's going to review requiring them to re you know, put in the crosswalk and reconstruct that corner. No, that's going to have to get reviewed by Mr. Barber and maybe also the planning director, Mr. Giosa. And that might be a time to see if there's something that could be done as well. So, I I would say, you know,

I mean, I'm fully to this, Mr. Chair. I can I can I can also speak to Mr. Giosa and Mr. Barber and Yeah. I let him know that there's a concern about the sight view on that corner there and whether or not she's going to be have some safety some some ability to add what she wants to for for me in the front.

Excuse me sir, it's being recorded.

Otherwise, it just muffles everything that goes on. I can't have you speak while we're we're doing this.

But thank you.

Um I'm sorry. What what's your address again? It's 489 and it's 483 as well, but the one I'm particularly concerned about is 489. I mean, they're both an issue but the other one has existing trees.

These properties.

Yeah, it's blurry.

How close is it? Very close to the corner. Is that the house right there?

Yeah, I would. Or right here.

Okay. Yeah, if you were to pull up, there's been um photos that have come up that have shown the line on the screen in the past where it lays out the different lots with the town and the lot numbers.

Is there a guardrail on the other side?

I thought it was a guard to the corner of the home.

Like I want to make sure you know Lucy Little would never be widened and take over the front corner is already in the her house is already in there maybe some guardrails or something.

This goes back to my great-grandparents.

It's never been foliage maintained by the town but she's talking about somebody hitting the house if they own that.

Doesn't own that though. It's going to be difficult. Okay. Thank you.

Thanks for showing me that.

Right here. Oh, yeah. It's so close there.

Yeah.

But once you figure out the site distances, maybe the town could put up something there in the in the right away.

The town doesn't own the corner, does it?

It does.

Oh, that's weird.

Yeah. Okay.

I can expand the street.

You see how close it is to expand the street.

It sounds like M Mr. Barb is going to look into it as well.

Oh, there it is. Yeah, it's got it right there.

That's not So, right. So, the key is just not cutting off people from a safety perspective, but Mr. Mr. Barber and Mr.

Giosa are probably the right people to talk to.

Okay. I mean, I'd love for them to do something or not even in crouch closer. You know, you're putting these sidewalks in. Is are they going to use town property?

Would the town never allow them to use that property? I don't know. I fear a turn only lane at some point down the road. Can we stop that? You know, that's it's close.

It's very close.

Hopefully there's something that they can do that will certainly lessen what you're you're experiencing.

Um, in addition to that, I mean, you look at AI and plans and things and 3D views. How come there's nothing that we can see like if we were looking from my yard to the site? You know, you mentioned the height. Why can't we get a visual of what that's going to look like?

You don't you don't have the renderings.

Don't have the renderings. Um and um developing bring I didn't bring my copies either.

It'd be nice to see that from eye level.

Are are the rendering is it on the website, the public website? Do you have all the pictures of what the landscape what the architecture is going to look?

Do they have the elevation right from the roadway? What it's going to look like?

That's what I'm looking for. How much I'm going to see from the yard.

Yeah, like the second and third floor just came in like there's all these programs that do that.

Why?

Yeah. And it having them create and develop specific renderings for individual lots and views is expensive. You know, we're talking5 $10,000 a rendering. Um they're not cheap for this type of thing. So we do develop them. Um I can check the website for locations um that you know I think it was um the town website. So to extend the deadline to close.

It's just very difficult to kind of understand what it's going to look like and what I don't want to say what we're up against, but we are up against what's going to happen over there.

I feel like with the house so close to the street, I'm almost part of the project.

Find one before. These guys Yep.

All right.

Thank you.

Anything? You're very welcome.

Anyone else?

All right.

We just need to give Michelle five minutes or less. She just needs to go print out the extension form.

Okay. because otherwise the because now the board is not is going to continue this beyond the current deadline. So if if you have permission from Mr. Lincoln. Yes.

Okay. I'll have to I guess document that in a text.

So we can just um I guess we can just we can just suspend this for now and move on to the rest of what we're going to do into the administrative portion and then we can come back to it. Yeah, she'll be Well, do you need Michelle for the administrative portion?

No, I don't need Michelle for the administrative portion talking about the administrative minutes going over that.

U So, um we'll just in essence just suspend the hearing just for a moment so we can move on to and make good use of time and move on to the administrative portion while he's speaking to his applicant.

All right. So, let's see what we got here.

So, moving on to the administrative portion of tonight's meeting.

I got to find my uh We have review and approval of administrative minutes of February 12th, 2026.

Any comments or questions, gentlemen?

Well, let me I I need to I can't find it.

I got it right here. Gentlemen, do you have a list?

No, no, I have that. Give me the the uh You have another one?

I have another one, I think.

All right. Good. You took mine?

All right. Oh, this is yours. I don't know.

I printed my own.

Okay.

So, um I have no comments, Mr. Chair.

I have no comments.

I'll entertain a motion.

I make a motion that we approve the administrative minutes of February 12th, 2026 as written.

Second.

All in favor?

I I The eyes have it. Next is review and approval of use variance minutes ZAV2-13 for 576 FS Corner Road. I have nothing.

No comment.

Neither do I.

I make a motion that we approve the minutes of the use variance ZAV-25-13 for 576 FSCO road uh as written.

Second.

All in favor?

I I the eyes have it. Review and approval of special permit 25-6 minutes for 8 Barono Court.

No comments, Mr. Chair.

No comments.

No comments either.

I make a motion that we approve the minutes for special permit 25-6 for 8 Bono Court as written.

Second.

All in favor?

I.

I. The eyes have it. Review and approval of comprehensive permit ZCMP 25-1 minutes for 960 Tucker Road.

No comments.

No comment.

No comments either. I make a motion that we approve the minutes for comprehensive permit ZCMP-25-1 for 960 Tucker Road as written.

Second.

All in favor?

I I the eyes have it. Moving on to review and approval administrative minutes of March 2nd, 2026.

No comments, Mr. Chair.

I have no comment.

No comments. Gentlemen, I make I make a motion. Are you going to do it?

Oh, sorry. Go ahead.

I make a motion that we approve the minutes, the administrative minutes of March 2nd, 2026 as written.

Second.

All in favor?

I I I.

I have nothing to add.

No comments, Mr. Chair.

Comments. I make a motion that we approve the use variance minutes of ZAV-25-13 for 576 FC Connor Road as written.

Second.

All in favor?

I I the eyes have it. Review and approval of variance ZAV 25-12 minutes for one Cleveland Street.

Cleveland.

No comments, Mr. Chair.

No comments.

No comments. I make a motion that we approve the minutes of variance KZAV-25-12 for one Cleveland Street as written.

Second.

All in favor?

I.

I. The eyes have it. Review and approval of special permit 25-2 minutes for 8 Barono Court.

That was 25-6.

Did I say two?

You did.

Let me read it again. I apologize, gentlemen. Review and approval of special permit 25-6 minutes for 8 Bono Court. I have nothing to add.

Nothing, Mr. Chair. I make a motion that we approve the minutes of special permit 25-6 for 8 Bono Court as written.

Second.

All in favor?

I.

I. The eyes have it. Review and approval of special permit ZSP-26-1 minutes for five turn lane.

I have nothing to add.

Uh, nothing. Mr. I I make a motion that we approve the minutes of special permit ZSP-26-1 for 5 turn lane as written.

Second.

All in favor?

I I I the eyes have it. Review and approval of comprehensive permit ZCMP 25-3 minutes for Haway Road.

I have nothing, Mr. Chair.

Neither do I. I make a motion that we approve the amendments for comp comprehensive permit ZCMP-25-3 zero Hathaway Road as written.

Second.

All in favor?

I I the eyes have it. Review and approval of administrative minutes of March 16, 2026 that were continued from January 8th of 2026.

I have nothing to add.

I have nothing to say. Yeah.

Do I? I make a motion we approve the minutes the administrative minutes of March 16, 2026 as written.

Second.

All in favor?

Iran.

I I the eyes have it. Last but not least, review and approval of comprehensive permit ZCMP 25-2 minutes for 498 Old Westport Road.

I have nothing to add, Mr. Chair. Do I? I make a motion we approve the minutes for comprehensive permit ZCMP-25-2 for 498 Old Westport Road as written.

Second.

All in favor?

I I the eyes have it.

So that concludes the administrative portion of tonight's meeting. So, we will reconvene back into the public hearings portion of tonight's meeting back into comprehensive permit ZCMP25-2 which is Sherbrook Farms. We are waiting.

So, the applicant's okay with you signing on their behalf for the extension. Great.

Is doing the form right now?

She'll be here any second with it. Um, but I think if if the board wants to I mean, we could take a short recess board, you know.

Well, what what else were you going to suggest?

You want to make the motion to to continue it today?

Yeah, we could and then he could just sign it after the fact.

What's the date? May.

Okay. So, we we agreed to a date of June 8th at 6:00 for the meeting for the for the for the next hearing and to and as the deadline to close the hearing.

Okay. When's the deadline to close the hearing? Currently, it's May 14th. Okay.

But now it's going to be June 8th.

June 8th as well.

Yes.

Okay. Um, so I need a motion to continue and also to extend the closing the closing date of the hearing.

Um, I make a motion that we continue comprehensive permit ZC CMP25-2 to June 8th at 6:00 and also to continue the um closing uh the uh deadline to close the deadline to to close the the the hearing to June 8th to June 8th.

So, it's the same at 6:00. Yeah. Second that motion.

We're not going to close it at 6:00. So, the meeting, right, but to continue. All right. To just for clarification, let's just reword that motion one more time.

Okay. I make a motion to continue comprehensive permit ZPMP uh ZCMP25-2 to June 8th at 6:00 p.m. and extend closing the hearing to June 8th.

All in favor?

Second. All right. Why didn't second that motion?

All in favor?

I I The eyes have it. All right. That being the only thing that we need now to have him sign the extension, I don't think we have any other business. Any other business you want to discuss? Any old business? New business?

Uh, nope. Nothing, Mr. Chair.

All right. Then I'll entertain a motion to adjurnn.

I make a motion. I make a motion to adjurnn.

I second that motion.

All in favor?

I I have it.