Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting - January 8, 2026

ZAV25-8 also was continued from December 4, 2025. And we have a variance ZAV2-9 that was continued also from December 425, 2025. And just to recap your your memory, the the the petitioner is seeking is um uh uh seeking a special permit and variances to construct a 56 uh unit highquality residential apartment building on a 200 270,53t lot. And uh we did open this uh meeting.

We had several public hearings and we had input from the neighbors and at the last meeting we asked uh attorney uh for the applicant to write a draft decision for the board to consider and I believe this is where we are tonight. Uh attorney Marky I believe you the floor is yours.

Thank you very much. So, um, thank you for the opportunity to present tonight and to my I after having had input from all of the neighbors with all of the requests, there were several at the first meeting. My recollection is there were several questions that were raised in the board and the members asked us to come back. We had some additional answers with some reports from engineering experts and from traffic

folks who had given input. After the last meeting, you had asked to put together a draft uh decision addressing all the issues and trying to put in all the conditions that you had verbally mentioned. I did my best effort to do it. I know that it was provided to uh the staff uh earlier this week and there may be some changes and suggestions that you have from that. I'm happy to answer

any questions, but I believe that everybody has over the prior to when he's had an opportunity to speak who had an interest in these matters.

Thank you. Uh, attorney Marquy. Uh, yeah, I we looked at the I personally looked at the decision today and it looks fine to me. We did some tweaking.

Nothing really major that changes the any subst maj the substance of the the decision itself, but um I know the board members are here tonight too. I'm not sure if they had a chance to look at the decisions, the draft decisions before, but we we're we're going to go through them one by one, I believe. So, um, again, this is a public hearing. At the last hearing, we heard from the

neighbors. U, I would ask if anyone here knew that who hasn't been to the previous uh, meetings and, you know, haven't had a chance to voice their uh, opinion either in support or in in opposition, please come to the podium.

That's it. But if you were here before and you you you voiced your concern, we did we did address your concerns and and I see unless you haven't been to any of the meetings uh because we will be closing the public hearing soon and uh you won't have any chance to uh to speak.

I was wondering if I could just speak. I know I was here.

I I believe you did, right? And No, I have been. Um but um is this something new that it was something I wanted to say beside the traffic? I know you had issues with the height and all.

No, it was just something um my husband was going to come to the first meeting, but please uh uh state your name for the records anyway. So it's Laura and Bullya and I'm at 209 North Quary. Um my husband was coming to the first meeting but he passed away.

I'm sorry to hear that.

I'm just going to tell you what he told me. He was going to come here himself personally, but he passed away in October. Now, he just wanted to talk about the aquifer and the wells and when you tap into all that.

Um, he said that, you know, when you're messing around with all that stuff, you know, it can stop the water flow and the veins and your wells can dry up. That's what he was going to say at the meeting.

Um, and the only thing I wanted to say was, um, I'm looking for like, um, trees and buffer zone from the, you know, the high the height because we're a little further down and um, so we, you know, you'd be looking right down where we live.

Okay. So, thank you.

That's what I wanted to say. Okay. I know I was here before, but All right. Well, wanted to let you know um what my husband was going to say.

Thank you. Sorry about your loss. And uh yeah, so you we did mention in previously that there's uh rags in in the town in terms of storm water. So they have to comply. And as I mentioned in the previous meetings, this is their first step. This doesn't mean they have a building permit. This is our their first step. Once they get through zoning, they have to go through planning and this is when the things with with

the buffer and the trees and the lighting and uh you know the the the height and the uh util. Yes, this is all going to be covered and you'll have a chance to to go to those meetings and voice your opinion. So thing was the aquifer that's what yeah the aquifer we we already have rags for the aquifer so they have to comply with those for the storm water. So I I can tell you that.

So Mhm.

But this is not our purview here. This is not the purview of this of this board. Um at this time I think uh the what's the pleasure of the board? I don't think we need to communicate with with the uh you think we need to communicate with with the attorney. I mean if this is the case we keep the uh the hearing we open or we can close the hearing and then we can

deliberate that. I think it's straightforward. I don't think there's anything unless Did you I'm not sure if you had a chance to look at the draft decision.

I'm satisfied.

I don't have any problems with it.

Okay. So, I think what I would suggest because we've always done this in the past that we probably take the cases out of order and start with the variances because obviously if you don't have a variance, you won't have a special permit, right? So, uh, I think we'll start with, uh, use variance ZAV2-8, which is the use variance. Uh, and, uh, uh, so I need a motion to close the public hearing on this variance before

we, we deliberate on make a motion that we close the public hearing on, uh, use variant ZAV-25-8 uh,0 State Road.

I'll second that motion. All in favor?

I. So the portion the public hearing portion is closed. Uh now we do have a draft decision from um attorney Marquy. I want to make sure I have the right uh decision here. And uh this is the special. This is eight. Okay. This is the one. Thank you. Uh did uh we can go through the um the findings.

Yes.

And if you have any comments or uh you'd like to add something or or delete something, just let me know. Uh the subject property at Zero State Road is located within the general business district. The property measures approximately 6.2 acres. That's 270,53 square feet.

Uh Lewis Properties LLC has owned the property since April 13, 2020 2017.

[clears throat] The subject property will be served by Town Water and Town Sewer. The property is currently vacant with no structures or improvements on the site. The petitioner Kevin Medeiros is seeking a use variance from article 18 section 375-18.2 two allowed uses to construct a 56 unit residential apartment building on the property where residential uses are not permitted as of right in the general

business zoning district.

There is a substantial area of ledge on the property located in the southwest portion of the lot near state road. And I believe uh attorney Marky did uh in his presentation point out when he had the uh the ledge. The ledge is is is a massive uh on that is close to State Road. Due to the ledge outcropping in the front portion of the lot, a retail building would have to be located in the

rear of the lot and would be hardly visible from State Road. The most feasible alternative used for this for the existing property is the proposed residential unit.

There would be less impact to traffic to adjacent streets and nearby residents if the property is developed with the 56 unit residential apartment building as opposed to a traditional shopping plaza or retail building. And I believe we asked for a traffic uh expert opinion and they did submit the documentation that shows that the 56 units will not generate as much traffic or less traffic than any retail. Uh due

to the ledge and the contour of the land, the building will need to be constructed with a walkout basement requiring the rear of the building to be four stories with an average height of approximately 45 ft.

Uh the proposed use is subject to site plan review by the planning board uh by by Dartmouth planning board. And again as I mentioned before this is going to be a public hearing and the neighbors will also have the opportunity to to attend those meetings and voice their opin their concerns. Uh there were four that were in support of the petition and five that were opposed to the petition

and I think we have those uh documented.

The board after hearing all the parties and concerned residents finds that the proposed 56 unit residential apartment building will not create substantial detriment to the public good or substantially dergate from the intent and purpose of the bylaw.

So this is a variance. So we need to look at the statute the the uh statutory requirements for granting a variance.

And we know there's four uh criteria that we have to to consider.

There are circumstances related to soil shape and topography that specially affect the subject property that do not generally affect the zoning district in which the structure or land is located.

So the property has unique topographical conditions that make the development of a retail building unfeasible and would require the building to be located in the rear of the lot. Due to the poor exposure from state road, it is not practical for the development uh of a retail building. The ledge outcropping located in the front portion of the law makes the lot extremely difficult to develop as a traditional

business/shopping plaza which would be permitted as of right in the zoning district. The most feasible alternative use for the property is the proposed apartment building.

A literal enforcement of the provision of the bylaw would involve substantial hardship financial or otherwise to petitioner.

The proposed 56 unit residential apartment building does not require visibility from state road to be economically viable resulting in in ideal use for this site. Denial of the proposed use which is suitable for this property would involve a substantial hardship to the petitioner.

Desiraable relief may be granted without detriment to the public good. The proposed use will generate less traffic to the adjacent streets and nearby residents than a traditional commercial retail use. The additional the addition of the 56 household to the area will only help local businesses and the town's economy. variance will not nullify or substantially derate from the intent or purpose of the bylaw. The use

of the property for highquality apartments addresses the need for housing in the town. Now the the special conditions or conditions the board's approval shall uh specifically condition upon compliance the following. The petitioner and or subsequent owner will secure all the necessary permit and approval from all applicable boards and agencies prior to the issuance of a building permit.

The proposed use is subject to a site plan review by the Dartmouth planning board. The petitioner/subsequent owner shall file with conservation commission if applicable prior to the issuance of a building permit.

petitioner subsequent owner agreed that trash removal from dumpsters by a refuge truck shall only be permitted between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. because I think there was a concern from the neighbors about the noise with the uh with the truck being near certain times and we understand that and we can place that condition. There was another concern about screening from uh

utilities or mechanical and I think this will will be the purview of this site plan review once they go to the planning board. So it's not ours. Um at this time I don't know if you have any I have nothing to add nothing to add nothing to I don't have any additional comments.

[clears throat] And if this is the case do we have uh do we have a motion?

Yes. I make a motion that we approve uh use variance zav-25-8 for zero state road as written.

I'll second that motion.

All in favor?

I uh well let's move to the next uh close that hearing close.

We close it. We close the public here.

Uh the next um case for this property is also a variance. It's uh the ZAV2-9.

Again, I would ask for a motion to close the public hearing on on on this case.

I make a motion that we close the public hearing on variance ZAV-25-9 uh for Zero State Road. I'll second that motion.

All in favor?

I I So the port public hearing portion is closed. Uh now we have some uh findings that we can go through again. Um they're similar to the previous one, but this might be because this variance is not for the use. This is dimensional relief on areas and height. So uh the subject property at zero state road is located within the general business district and the aquifer uh district. Uh the property measures

approximately 6.2 acres 27153 square ft. Lewis Properties LLC has owned the property since April 13, 2017. The subject property will be served by Town Water and Town Sewer. So those are similar to the one before that the property is currently vacant with no structures or improvement to the site.

There's substantial area of ledge on a property located in the southwest portion of the land close to State Road.

Um due to the ledge outcropping in the front portion of the lot close to State Road, a retail building would have to be located in the rear of the lot and would hardly be visible. The most feasible alternative use for the existing property is the proposed residential units. There would be less impact to traffic to adjacent street and nearby residents if the property is developed

with this 56 unit residential apartment building as opposed to a traditional shopping plaza or retail building. The front elevation of the building consists of a height of 31 ft with an overall height of 39 when including the elevator shaft. And this is the issue with well that was one of the requests that they needed uh relief on the height. Um the I believe the maximum height is 35 ft. And um

next one is due to the ledge and the contour of the land the building will need to be constructed with the walkout basement requiring the rear of the building to be four stories with an average total height of approximately 45 ft overall. And again I would repeat that the the the height to the top of the elevator shaft is the 45 but actual height to the top of the the building

the last floor is within the 35 ft I believe that was uh um within the zoning bylaws. Uh the board uh there were um the property has significant areas of steep slope that will necess necessitate the construction of retaining walls. The proposed use is subject to site plan review by the Dartmouth planning board and there were five abutters that were in support of the petition and five abutters that were opposed

of the petition. The board after hearing all the parties and concerned residents finds that the proposed 56 unit residential apartment building will not create substantial detriment to the public good or substantially dergate from the intent and purpose of the bylaw. Uh again we need to look at the statutory requirements for issuing a variance. There are circumstances related to soils, shape and topography

that spec es specially affect the subject property that do not generally affect the zoning district in which the structure or land is located. The property has unique topographical conditions and that make the development of the lot difficult due due to the location of the ledge and a steep slope of the land. The only feasible development would be to have a walkout basement which is used with residential

buildings but creates an additional story to the building.

Uh a literal enforcement of the provisions of the bylaw would involve substantial hardship financial or otherwise to the petitioner. The proposed 56 unit residential apartment building does not require visibility from state road to the economically viable resulting in an ideal use for this site. Denial of the proposed use which is suitable for this property would involve a substantial hardship to

the petitioner. Desirable relief may be granted without detriment to the public good. The proposed use will generate less traffic to the adjacent streets and nearby residents than a traditional commercial retail use. The addition of 56 households to the area will only help local businesses and the town's economy.

The variance will not nullify or substantially dergate from the intent or purpose of the bylaw. The use of the property for highquality apartments addresses the need for housing in the town and conditions. The petitioner will secure all necessary permits and approval from all applicable boards prior to issuance of a building permit.

The proposed use is subject to a site plan review by the planning board. The petitioner subsequent owner shall file with the conservation commission if applicable prior to the issuance of a building permit.

petitioner and our subsequent owner agreed that trash removal from dumpster by refuge truck shall be only permitted between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Um, again, I think this is very similar to the conditions and findings on the previous uh variance. I have no comments on this. Any the board members have any comments?

No comments.

Okay, then uh what's the pleasure of the board? I make a motion that we approve variance zav-25-9 uh for zero state street state road I'm sorry that with the public hearing is closed out we did close it I'm sorry the height you didn't close it out yet?

Yeah, this is this is the one for the height and the area. So you close it out.

Yeah, I did. I'm sorry.

You did the use. We closed the use and we voted on the use and then we closed this on the uh on the area on the height. Yes.

Because I I again it's I'm sorry it's we close the public hearing. So um you can give us a chance to even respond to the letter that was uh uh do do we have a motion? Uh I put a motion on the board.

Okay.

Do I have a second?

I second. We we voted on.

All in favor? No.

We move to Oh, you mean uh Yeah. Second.

Second. All in favor?

I Thank you. Uh the last uh I'm sorry, we closed the public hearing. Uh the the last uh case for this property is the special permit. And uh this is ZP25-5.

I need a motion. And this is for the um uh increase uh for the uh uh lot coverage over the 10% uh in the aquifer district aquifer 3. So I need a motion to close the public hearing on this.

I make a motion that we close the public hearing on special permit ZSP-25-5 for zero state road.

I'll second that motion.

All in favor? I uh same we do have a um a draft decision that we need to look at and I'll go through the findings. Uh the subject property at zero state street is located within the general business and aquifer 3 uh district. The property measures approximately 6.2 acres 270,53 ft. Uh Lewis Properties LLC has owned the property since April 13, 2017. The subject property will be served by town

water and town sewer. The property is currently vacant with no structures or improvements on the site. The petitioner uh Kevin Madair is seeking special permit from article 18 section 378-28.5 prohibited uses uses to construct a 56 unit residential apartment building on the property where the lot coverage is greater than 2500 ft² and above 10% of impervious lot coverage. There's a substantial area of ledge on the

property located in the southwest portion of the lot close to State Street. Due to the ledge outcropping in the front portion of the lot, a retail building would have to be located in the rear of the lot and would be hardly visible from State Road. The most fe feasible alternative use for the existing property is the proposed residential units. There would be less impact to traffic to the residents if

the properties developed with the 56 unit residential apartment building as opposed to a traditional shopping plaza.

The proposed use is subject to site plan review from the planning board. There were four abusers in support of the petition and five abusers that were opposed to the petition. The petition is proposing to connect the roof runoff from the apartment building to an on-site infiltration system in compliance with the aquifer overlay district requirement. So this is one of the requirements they have if they

connect I believe they get up to 10% credit too. So uh this is in our bylaws and and this is it has to deal with the aquifer which I know some of the uh buddies raised the the uh uh the concerns about this but the the applicant will will have to comply with the requirements of the aquifer and again this will be looked at with the site plan review when they looked at the

storm water design and they have to meet all that not only for the town of Damoth but also from Massd D. Uh, the board finds that the proposed 56 unit apartment building with an impervious law coverage of 91,167 ft is not detrimental to the neighborhood and is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the zoning by law. Uh, we do have some conditions.

The petitioner or subsequent owner will secure all of the necessary permit and approval from all applicable boards and agencies prior to issuance of a building permit. The proposed use is subject to a site plan review by the Dharm planning board. The petitioner or subsequent owner will file with the with the conservation commission if applicable prior to the issuance of a building

permit. And again, we referenced the the plans and architectural plans which would they also be referenced on the other decisions. Uh I have nothing to add to this. If any of the board members have anything to add or uh comment or to change uh I have nothing to add.

Nothing to add.

Nothing. Okay. So, at this time, I would ask for a I make a motion that we approve special permit CSP-25-5 for Zero State Road as written.

I'll second that motion.

All in favor?

I I I thank you.

Thank you. Um, so it's 5:30. I believe our chairman is here, but we will take the zoning board of appeal will take a fivem minute recess. Thank you.

Board of Appeals meeting of January 8th is back in session. Moving on to the next matter that's on the agenda for tonight's meeting is ZAV2-14.

The petitioner is attorney Michael Vy. I believe it's McVey.

McVey should be McVey.

Um the owner of the property is Martin Dartmouth Realy LLC. Uh the property is located at Zero State Road, map 53, lot 2. It's located within the general business partial aquifer zone 3 district. This matter was legally advertised on December 13th and December 25th of this year.

Make a motion that we wave the reading of the Buddishness.

Second that motion.

All in favor?

I I just want to clarify it did say this year that should be of last year, December. It was both December 18th and December 25th of 2025.

I believe that we have a letter from the building commissioner.

Um the petitioner in this case is seeking a variance to construct an Audi/V Volkswagen dealership on the site with proposed parking encroaching on the required 40 ft from the street line to 19.5.

They're seeking relief from 375-24.3C subp part 2 uh entitled parkings facility setbacks. Parking facilities shall meet the following minimum setbacks of 40 ft from the street. The property is located on State Road and the general business and aquifer zone district and it's identified as map 53 lot 2, which I've already read. All right, so let's see if I can find the letter from our building inspector.

I know it's here because I read it. Here we are. All right.

This letter is dated November 24th of 2025. It's addressed to Michael McVey, who's the representative for the petitioner in this case, and it states, "I reviewed your application, and at this time, your proposal cannot be approved due to non-compliance with current zoning regulations. The applicant is seeking to construct an Audi Volkswagen dealership on the site with proposed parking encroaching on the

required 40 foot from street line to 19.5. A variance is required. Your application is being denied under the following sections of the Dartmouth zoning bylaw. 375-24.3C2.

Parking facility setbacks. Parking facility shall meet the following minimum setbacks 40t from the street. Uh the subject property is located in general business partial aquifer zone 3 district. And that's our letter from our building inspector. Moving on to other town boards. The planning department.

They have some comments. A site plan review application for the proposed work will need to be filed with the planning board. Additional a special permit for a reduction in required number of parking spaces will be needed for the proposed parking facility as it is currently depicted. The requirements for the special permit can be found in the zoning bylaws on the article 24.

Conservation changes in building and parking footprints from existing conditions shall require the filing of a notice of intent to conservation. As a commercial development, any proposed storm water management system will require third-party peer review for conservation. That was from Mr. Mark Garrett.

Compliance with the following DPW regulations. The Department of Public Works construction specifications and standard details. It's the usual stuff that we're aware of. The storm water management, all things that would have to be done in order for them to get the permit.

Um, it says further goes on, completion of this step does not imply compliance with other town bylaws. We're well aware of that. Thank you. All right. So, we've read the comments from all of the town boards into the record. Are there any questions from any of the members at this point in time?

No question, Mr. Chair.

I have a question. [clears throat] I have a question.

Sure.

He needs another special permit from planning board.

The planning board takes care of that.

All right.

Yes.

Not from us.

No.

So, at this time, I'll call upon the petitioner, the representative to come forward and state your case.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, members of the board. Mr. Basset, uh, Mike McVey from Mark and Walsh, 50 Homer's Warf, New Bedford, Massachusetts. I'm here on [clears throat] behalf of the applicant PRM Auto Holdings. Um, as you described, essentially the the project that we're proposing is to bring an Audi an existing Audi dealership from another town uh, onto this unused large parcel.

Um, a member of um, a principal from the ownership group is here tonight as well.

Um so what we're asking for tonight is is simply a dimensional variance uh for the parking facility. Uh we're offering 19 1/2 ft where 40 is required. 40 is required for 100 spaces and we we have exactly 100 spaces. So um just a brief history of at least our involvement in this case. Um several months ago the development team ownership team met with the town's departments in a pre-development

meeting. Mr. Basset. [clears throat] Uh after that meeting and after some careful thoughtful review of the plan, they've put together um a plan that serves the best interest, I think, for everyone while minimizing the the amount of wetland that is going to be uh have to be mitigated. It's going to be impacted. That is why we're here tonight [clears throat] because the simple question is why not just push

if I can um pull up the picture again of the site on GS. And I know this is exact a little faint but this property is large and it goes back in a really kind of strange oblong shape about 40 acres but as you can see it's got this wetland and stream that sort of bisects it. So the design team came up with a site plan that and they've it has gone through concom

stage the site preparation stage uh relocation a small amount of wetlands but you know uh balancing all the interest here they pushed the apologies my mouse isn't working but the site has been The project has been cited in such a way that the best use of the space, minimal push into the north into the wetland region, which really only leaves them the 20 ft um from the road to the parking.

Now, [clears throat] I took a look at other locations, similar auto body automobile uh dealerships on Route 6, right on the street. So, Colonial Honda, right? Colonial Honda, Route 6 to me, similar size parking lot. And I know this isn't exactly scientific, but you know, it's definitely not 40 ft. It's 20 ft uh from the edge of the curtain of the road that I can see for the basically the the beginning of the

parking facility. Same thing down the road at Colonial Chevy. It's exactly 20 feet, 19 feet. So, Nissan, so you your your argument is that there are two other locations along Route 6 within a quarter mile that have a 20ft setback already. Is that what you're saying?

Correct. And that it would be pretty consistent with what's on there. Um, and like I said, you know, the hardship is the property has this it's large. It's it's expansive, but it's got only so much frontage on Route Six, and it and it spreads in the back, which is, you know, burdened by wetland. It's got this odd shape.

You think that uh it meets the burden for um the variance?

Any questions of uh the representative?

I have no questions.

I have no questions at this time.

Well, there's always the argument, the counterargument on these things is you could always make it smaller and it would still work for the business. But, um, you know, it is Route 6 and the only concern I have is that sometimes things get abused. So, one of the examples that he's actually set over there, they park cars on the sidewalk. I've seen them on the side, not not the sidewalk, but an

area that's town property that's grass and it's not 20 feet from the property line.

So, I don't know who's been asked. I think they actually removed it not too long ago. I went by not that long ago. I don't know if our building inspectors enforced any of that, but someone obviously spoke to them and they've they've changed sort of their behavior, so to speak. Um, I don't know if you're familiar with I don't think you live in the area, so you may not be familiar

with it, but I'm sure there may be people.

I [clears throat] visited that site for another client, but um yeah.

All right. So this is a public meeting.

Um so people in the audience if they have any objections or if they're in support of this they can come forward.

So let's start with anyone in objection.

Is there anyone who has any comments in objection to this particular project?

I have a question.

If you do the rules are you not going to come up to the podium then identify yourself name and address just for the record. My name is David Sylvia. I live at 190 W in Dartmouth. Um, and I just want if he could go back to one of the screens he just had up there where it shows the like I I've never seen anything what they want to build or what you know. So

he has a proposal there I think. Yeah, that one right there.

It's an aerial view.

Okay. Is that something that on the the lower left side there's like a brown area there. Could I ask you what that is?

Absolutely.

Storm water council, can you provide us an explanation? I believe that is storm water. Yeah, this is so what is it? They're proposing to put a pond there or something like that.

I'll let him answer, but we have an We're very fortunate on this board. We have an engineer who puts these things together, Mr. Helen Schuba. He's very familiar with projects of this type.

Okay. Do you know what that is? I mean, is that's a retention pond, detention pond for storm water, I believe. Yeah.

Um, so that's what it says. I don't haven't seen any uh design on it, but this is a potential area.

Okay. So, is any of this already approved or not approved?

No, they have this is their I believe uh this is their first step.

One more if I may, Mr. Chair. One more thing I'd mention. I know this you went through this in the last hearing. This is the logical first step. Should have started with that. This is the logical first step for this project. We're not getting a building permit. If it is approved, we're going to have to go before.

So, it's possibly a pond though.

Possibly.

It's a storm water management.

Okay. retention pond.

Okay.

So, it's designed to basically accumulate water that comes on when we have some um I I understand that. Yeah.

Increased water rate.

The reason I'm asking is it's kind of close to me. So, okay.

And you and I think you you really want to hear is when they go before the conservation commission because the conservation commission has jurisdiction over wetlands and they have con jurisdiction over um detention ponds.

So, they they have both the tension and retention ponds. So they will exp.

Could I take a picture of that? Would that be all right?

Excuse me.

Be Would it be okay if I went up there and took a picture of that board?

I have no problem. There's actually probably a better thing you could take.

Oh, it was up there a [snorts] second ago. Now they think I'm I guess I'll take your picture. You can feel free to go up to if you like to take a picture of this is public information. You could you should get a copy of what we have.

Where could I obtain that?

I'll do I'll give you this.

You can take mine.

Thank you.

There you go, sir. Mr. Chair, we can provide We can provide this individual with a digital copy. So if your taxes went up, you got a little something in exchange.

Mine did.

I'm trying to figure out where does he live?

So is there anyone that would like to speak? I I asked an opposition. This gentleman came up. He just had a question. Come on up.

Please state your name and address, please.

Uh my name is Gary Aruda. I'm on 55 Ellswick Street. Uh I'm not in the butter. My neighbor's in the butter. He couldn't make it. I'm just here for speaking for him. My question was, I mean, I've been on the property. Uh, I know the area very well. I'm an avid outdoorsman and I know the area very well.

Actually, today I was kind of walking around and where it is cleared. The area that's cleared, how how far are you going back further than that?

Actually, the way this works, you have to ask me the question.

I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sort of back.

You ask me. We asked them.

Okay. the area that's cleared. Are they are they going any further north?

Because there's vernal there's vernal ponds there and I know there's marbled salamanders and I have crayfish in my property. So, and it's extremely extremely wet and those are all things that would be addressed before the conservation commission. But if he knows, we'll ask him to come up if he could explain whether or not they're going to be do any further clearing be and he may not know, right? He may not know.

Gotcha. Yeah. My my understanding there will be no further development other than what is on this plan right here.

Okay. Okay.

So again like the Mr. Chair the chair said any work that would involve the resource areas would be before the conservation conservation which okay so we will we be notified about that. So I would be notified of that. That wouldn't come from our board. That would come from another board and who who actually send Mark Garrett sends it out. Mark Garrett would be the individual who would be sending those out.

Right. Mark is the is takes care of the Damoth conserv conservation. Correct.

There were a few people speaking. I didn't hear what you said. So Mark takes care of the Damoth.

I don't know if he's still he might be.

Was he leaving soon?

So there will be an inter.

Okay.

But there'll be someone to be sending it to you.

Okay. Right.

That was my biggest concern was uh the wetlands and what they plan on and where the I mean since Walmart came in, we have a lot of water crossing Ellswick Street and I'm just concerned and they have retention ponds which I've never seen water in.

Okay. So, you know, I mean supposed to work but the thing is I think it's safe to say that you see where that purple line is along there sort of jagged. Correct.

That is probably the limits of what they're going to be able to develop.

That is the limit there. Now, this is a conceptual plan. It's not something that we're certifying. All we're doing here today is determining do they have to park the cars 40 ft or can they park them 19.5 ft.

Gotcha. Okay. So, I really should be at the at the conservation uh meeting.

Okay. All right. Thank you for your time.

Come on up. Just again, please state your name and address.

David Sylvia, 190 Wrig in Dartmouth. Um, now that you handed me this, I'm looking uh at the bottom of the brown. There's a a dotted line that comes around, starts right near Route 6, comes around. It says 30ft park and setback and then 20 foot uh building setback.

And that dotted line runs all the way around on the lower part of the retention pond and goes across and then back down. I'm just wondering what that line is for. That dotted line. I could go up there and show you if you can't see it.

It it it means you can't park within 30 ft from the side and you can't build 20 ft from the side.

So yeah, that's the side. Yeah.

So are they allowed to drive through here?

No, this is a setback line. It's not There's no pavement there. Um Oh. Uh no, there's no pavement there. I I mean I can show you if you want to.

Yeah, sure.

You can absolutely. Let me let me just reiterate one thing. this plan may not be their final plan because when they go before the conservation commission these concerns that you raise the board may feel that they're adequ they're legitimate concerns now I'm just trying to find out what I I can I can I can help you with that so yeah B no they're not driving this is the edge of the pavement here see this line

down here this line no there's no this is only setback but the setback follows the property line so because you have a property line here you have a setback that setback applies Their payment is right here. They they don't they won't go beyond this this line with the pavement, but they can't come payment.

No, this is See this is this stone stuff.

Uh I think there might be hay bales. I'm not sure. That might be the hay bales they have to place before construction.

All right.

The only problem is most of this is not a audible. It's not picked up by the by the uh microphone. So, it's always problematic. If you want to ask another question, I ask that you go to the You're done.

Great.

And again, they have to go through site plan review. So, you'll have again, you'll have another chance to go to the planning board meeting.

So, there'll be two more hearings probably one before site plan review and conservation because it's a special permit. So, they have to advertise. So, you'll have a chance to go to the planning board, too.

All right. Thank you.

All right. Is there anyone else that'd like to speak either in favor at this point or in opposition to this? Come on forward. Same rules apply.

Yeah. My name is Carol Cino. I live at 551 State Road. So, I'm literally the corner of Arcadia and Route 6, directly across from the driveway of that thing.

I have no objections to the thing, but I'm very concerned about the traffic flow there because when you pull out of Arcadia Avenue, you have people coming out of Walmart that immediately get into the lane to come to that turnaround in Route 6 median. And it's hard to already to pay attention co to traffic coming up from the west and paying attention to traffic coming down from the east. Never

mind the ones that come out of Walmart really quick and they shoot right over to the passing lane to get into that turnaround. And then that's a two-way in andout if I read it right with no other e exit or entrance to that property. So, I I was thinking it would be beneficial for traffic reasons because personally, my house, I bought it in 1997, and I've had no less than seven cars go through my front yard,

and I think four or five of them have hit the house, made contact with the house. So, I wanted to know if there was a way to make that driveway kind of like the Walmart where you don't have the in-n-out right lined up with the median strip so that you dump people out of the property further down Route Six to the so they'd go to the next median. You know what I mean?

That's I understand, but quite frankly, um I'm always concerned about obstructed view.

Mhm.

I don't see where that's going to be a situation because any of the parked cars come well beyond the direction of traffic that's there. The parked cars are actually in an area where you're not looking out to see what's coming in when you're exiting.

This is an issue that'd be best draw brought up is before the planning board.

Okay.

And they would be the ones maybe to make a suggestion that they have an additional entrance way so some of the traffic that leaves will leave further down right the west on the property site. Exactly.

rather being so close east to the to the connection it's busy there already to try to keep your eyes on everything going on never mind cars now coming potentially out of that driveway and I understand your concerns but those are would be better brought up for the planning board okay and then the other thing is the lighting which would also be planning board I presume if if they're going to

do that okay all right I think that's it thank you very much very welcome I if I may add Mr. chair I think at the planning board they might raise they might engage another traffic consultant to look at this too. So that would be your concerns will be addressed and again also they have uh uh uh regulations regarding uh lighting and you know I know you know at night and they have to have buffer from

residential and all that. So that will be taken care. They're not this is not our purview here tonight. So as in a butter because that's why I'm here. Um will I get notification when there's a planning board and the the conservation commission? Okay, great.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

All right. Is there anyone else in the audience that would like to speak either in favor or in opposition to this project?

All right. So, there not appearing to be anyone else in the audience who would like to provide any comments.

So gentlemen um what any questions, any thoughts, any concerns?

Uh, Mr. I, Mr. Chair, I think I'm very familiar with the area. I drive down that route six every every day and I don't think this is an issue for the property to be there that that kind of uh uh facility and uh also as attorney mcvey coes I'm very familiar with all the the the actually from the Chrysler deal on route six no uh east from almost the the the the

New Bedford uh city line west to uh by the Nissan and the uh all the dealers that right on the street, you know, but the concern would be maybe parking on that easement. And this is something the uh the build they'll be in violation and the building commissioner is here. He's also the zoning officer if makes you know we can put a condition that there will be no parking on the uh or but they can't

because Anyway, so but it just requires that there be supervision, but I hopefully they they understand that.

I'm sure they do, you know. So, I think it's a good thing for for the So, gentlemen, I haven't put together any proposed any suggested proposed findings on this. So, I'm going to put that b that onus on the on the council.

Attorney McVey, if you'd be so kind.

Um, so if we've asked this before, uh, so you're familiar with it, is that you could put together some proposed findings and some legal rationale for satisfying 48 section 10. We'll take a look at it and then we could put you on for the next either the next meeting or the meeting after that so that we can uh, review it and then potentially vote on it.

That sounds good. Thank you.

So, I'm short a secretary right now. Um, but I'm not sure when the next date is.

I should know when the next 22nd. I thought we just I don't know how many matters we have on. So, we have to speak with her, but it should be fast. I think this one.

So, when's our next date?

22nd.

The 22nd.

We can do the 22nd.

January.

Do we have a lot on for that?

22nd.

That [clears throat] give you enough time.

Yes.

All right.

So um we'll we'll continue the matter to the 22nd with an understanding that if there's any this is the first time it's on so there's no there are no time limit issues on this um so that it would be granted as a matter of right continue. You want me to make a motion?

Sure.

I make a motion that we continue variance case ZAV 25-14 uh to January 22nd.

January 22nd uh 2026 at 5:00.

Second. No motion.

All in favor?

I I The eyes have it.

Attorney Mcy, we'll see you on the 22nd.

Thank you. Have a good night.

Hopefully that date work that date works for you.

It will work for me. Okay, fair enough.

All right, moving on. The next matter.

Um, do I need to take a recess?

She's She's coming out.

Oh, okay.

The next matter we have is variance case ZAV2-2.

The applicant in this case, well, excuse me, 25-12.

the applicant in this case.

[snorts] Folks, we're still in session.

Excuse me. We're still in session. Thank you.

I'll start from the beginning. Variance case ZAV25-12.

The petitioner is Paul Cussen. The subject property, he's also the owner.

The subject property is 1 Cleveland Street, also known as map 117, lot 169.

The property is located within the general residence district. It was legally advertised on December 18th and December 25th of 2025.

Make a motion that we wave the reading of the buddies list.

Second that motion.

All in favor?

I I I the eyes have it.

The petitioner is seeking a variance to construct a one-story addition 9.5 ft x 25.7 ft. 9.5 ft x 14.2 2 ft by 14 kitchen extension and a 9.5 by 11 12 porch extension encroaching setbacks encroaching into the required line of sight triangle and exceeding the maximum amount of lot coverage. A variance is required for the following to encroach setbacks from the 20 ft to 6.7 on Cleveland Street. A variance to

construct a visual barrier in the intersection sight triangle setback and a variance to exceed lot coverage from 50.9 to 54%. Article 375-10.4D setbacks subp part two intersection site triangle setback 3B article 375-10.4F and percentage of lock coverage.

All right, so let's see what we got here. Must have a letter from the building inspector.

I see it. I just can't put my fingers on it.

I have I got it right here. Just Here we go. All right. The letter is dated November 24th of 2025. It's addressed to Mr. Paul Cussen. It's regarding one Cleveland Street. I have reviewed your application and at this time your proposal cannot be approved due to non-compliance with current zoning regulations. Applicant proposing to construct one-story addition 9 1/2 ft x 25.7 a 9 1/.5 x 14.2 two kitchen extension

and a 9 and 1 half x 11 12 porch extension encroaching setbacks encroaching into the required line of sight triangle and exceeding the maximum amount of lock coverage. The a variance is required to encroach the setbacks from 20 to 6.7 on Cleveland Street. A variance is required to construct a visual barrier in the intersection site triangle setback and a variance is required to exceed maximum lock coverage

from 50.9 to 54%. Your application is being denied in the following sections of the Dartmouth zoning bylaw 375-10.4D setbacks intersection site triangle setback at the intersection of streets.

The corner lot shall not have any visual barrier placed in the triangle formed by a line connecting the two points 25 ft back from the intersection of two street rightaway lines and the lines of the rightway to the corner of the property.

A visual barrier is an object or any group of objects which block the direct observation of approaching traffic between 2 feet and 8 ft high. Fences of any type over 2 ft in height are prohibited.

B. In addition, buildings or structures may be placed in 10 ft from other perimeter lot lines or 20 ft from street lines if the lot upon which the building or structure is located was in existence prior to October 26, 1993. And this is one of those lots that deserves that benefit or that's entitled to the benefit. 375-10.4F is the percentage of lot coverage in the general residence district. This is

additional relief that they're seeking.

All uses on a lot which include but are not limited to buildings, structures, driveways, parking areas, gravel areas, walks, patios, storage areas, impermeable surfaces, etc. shall not cover more than 50% of the lot. Natural areas such as landscaping, gardens, lawns, etc. are not regulated within the 50% requirement. The subject property is located in the general residence district. All right. See if I got any

other town comments. Any other town board comments on this?

I do.

I've got the board of health is indicating to us that there is town water and town sewer serving this premises. Conservation Commission is saying that an interim intermittent stream is culverted along the south side of Bridge Street opposite of subject site. There there do not appear any conservation issues here. All right. I wasn't aware that there was a stream in that area, but it doesn't appear that

any conservation issues. And then typical DPW regulations and u that's about it as far as comments.

So at this time I'm going to call upon the petitioner. petition his representative to come forward and state his case.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh Paul Kussen.

Um I'm here representing myself and my wife Nancy. And what I'd like to do is I have some plans which I think you may have in front of you. I'm not sure with uh along with the engineering plan and along with some pictures that I think might be helpful by me uh board and give you these plans. No, you're talking. Is it this plan right here?

Yeah, one of them is that plan. I also architectural. Yeah, we have them. We have the architectural.

Yeah, we do. We have the architecture.

These being these being the architectural plans.

Yeah.

Okay. I got them.

I have a full set. But but attached to each package here is some some photos that I think will

that we may have an exemption. As you had mentioned, this house was built uh in uh 1891.

Uh so it's prior to the 93 uh 1993 reference that you made in your in reading the information you got from the building inspector. So on the plans the area that is on the architectural plans the area that is darkened is what we're proposing as an extension. the building.

Um what we're proposing is an extension to the kitchen which would be uh in in depth would be um 9 ft 6 in and in width 14t 2 in. And to the Cleveland side uh there we're there's an existing porch that we're just extending along with with the kitchen addition.

um regarding the pictures that I that I have attached will show that in the area that we live which is the corner of Cleveland and Bridge Street. Um and the pictures that I have attached show where we've staked out where the addition will be and how far it is from Cleveland Street. That's the first picture. Uh the second picture I know I know just attached to the So you can at that picture you can see

there's a p my pickup truck and a driveway which is on the other side of further away from the proposed addition.

Are those markings still there?

I'm sorry. Yes, they're still there.

Where where the pickup truck is?

Well, no. I'm talking about the stakes for both the porch and also the proposed edition.

The porch expansion and the proposed edition. You have stakes marking that off.

The the stakes are where the addition comes out. Yes.

And they're still not the porch.

I would like to see them for the for the porch edition as well.

It it's parallel with the porch. If you look at the architectural plans are straight across.

What we want to do is show how far out we're coming out out to Bridge Street.

Okay.

And so that first picture shows where the stakes are. And it shows where the where there's a driveway there, my driveway, where the where the truck is, and we're going uh just to the first to the edge of the first tie where that is.

On the second on the second picture is my direct butter. Um, and you can see where their stoop is even further closer to Bridge Street than what we're proposing. And that's an existing condition. And you can see by the picture as it relates to the truck.

The the third picture shows a house diagonally across the street from our house and it is closer to the street than what we're proposing.

Substantially closer to the street than what we're proposing.

Uh and the next picture shows a property diagonally on the other side, the same condition. Uh that's that whole area, all the houses are relatively close to the street. And you can see by the next picture the the fire department old building and that's right on the that's right on the sidewalk.

Yeah. None of those are corner lots. You would agree, right?

Uh that's correct except if you look at well the next picture shows you you know across from the street um how bad that building is and then the next p picture shows the next corner and that fence is is the same my sight distance is nowhere near I mean this is an issue.

I'm not sure it's an issue. What street is that on that? You think that's on North Pleasant and Bridge?

Two two houses up from my North Pleasant. And yeah, when you're going up Bridge, I'm I'm on I'm where the fire station is.

Uh and the fire station also is like 2 feet from the property line, but it's So there's a fire station, Cleveland Street, then my house, and two other houses around that's that's that corner.

and they recently did a nice job on their home. They redid the whole thing and got a building permit and so forth.

And there was not that issue raised at at that time. And if you look at um at the next picture, you can see I have an existing fence there that was that was built I don't know 15 years ago, 20 years ago. And you can see the stakes in that picture as well where you know I don't see that sight distance here. If you look at the engineer drawing it shows where the sight

distance triangle is and it barely creates a problem.

You can see where where where he's showing uh where that triangle is.

Mhm.

And and I don't know what I'd like to do is just it might be hard for the board to see if I may.

Yeah, sure. You can approach.

So the triangle is right here. So this is Oh, yeah. Okay. I see that. Yeah. Yeah.

So this is the addition.

That's the porch and that's the line you're talking about right here. So it barely Damn it. What would have been the porch?

There's substantial distance here. So when you're on this corner, if anything, there's a problem with the fire station.

All right. Well, we can't change that.

But so I don't know. I want my my other members, co- members here to take a look at that. You see the point he's trying to make cuz there's a superimposed line, a segmented line there. You see it?

Okay. All right. That's his argument. I just want to make sure I understand what your position is.

So what I'm saying is that when you look at [clears throat] that that It only it's only a bit of that torch.

And with all due respect, it's not a visual impairment to that intersection.

Mr. Cussen, you you do understand if it's just a bit, then we could also say just a bit. You could make it just a bit smaller, too, and then we would have to cut, you know, I just need you got to be otherwise she gets on me.

I mean, all right. No, we we we could cut that angle on the deck if that's what you want. That's what we would do.

Um I'm not saying that. I'm just because Okay.

I'm just I'm just explaining that, you know, there's obviously a lot of this has to do with what the temperament is of the neighbors or what their thoughts are, what their concerns are. Uh I know quite frankly what I would like to see before I would approve this cuz I haven't gone by there. I've driven by a house before. Uh, I don't even know. I didn't even know that was your house,

but I've driven by this numerous times.

Um, and it would be nice, I think, if you would extend the rest of it just along the porch. Do a little outline of what the the little string thing that you did there with the stakes. And that way I could just go on site and take a look at it.

You could do that if you could make your approval. Hope the problem that I'm having is it's taken us so long to get to this stage. I'm losing Not your fault. Not your problem. We're losing.

Well, you said it, not me. But I was thinking it.

All right.

I I understand. But what I'm what I'm saying is is that um it's straight in the line.

So you don't Yeah. So it's straight in line with with the existing stakes that are there. So it really went maybe but if you drive by and and you have driven by and the existing stake.

All right. Um and and the percentage of the law increased. We're asking for additional area. Now I don't have a lot of concern with that because we've granted that before to other people. I'm not saying that we'll grant it in every circumstance, but you know that doesn't really unless some other members I have here. If they have some concerns, they'll ask you those questions.

Um so at this point, there any any questions anyone on the board would have at this point?

I my only question would be if you shortened the porch, you wouldn't even have to be here, right?

I don't think I have to be here period.

Wow.

Because but but the building inspector asked what prior to 1993 any house that was built prior to 1993 comes under I think the section that you referred to that that allows setbacks to be my understanding is allows setbacks to be different.

It does but it's 20 ft but is it is it 20? It's 20 but at the end then it can be 10 ft. 10 ft and we're and and so but you are within the 10 ft Mr. C if I don't you're six you're asking to be 6.7 with all due respect to the building inspector I hate to bring this up but I I don't know where he gets 6.7 from it's on your plan

11.4 is on our plan there's no 6.7 on our plan from Cleveland Street. Yeah, we're not doing anything on Cleveland Street. We where within this where within the the Hang on, let me bring it up.

You're adding a porch. You're adding You're expanding a proposed porch 6.7 ft from Cleveland Street.

That's incorrect.

All right. Show me where your plan is.

Here's the pictures.

No, no, no. I'm talking about the plan here. Your plan says you're 6.7 ft from Cleveland Street.

Cleveland Street.

But that was granted a long time ago when we built when we built the addition. When we built the house, the existing house

this we were granted the distance here.

So we're within that distance.

Well, if that then that would be a special permit and not a and not a variance. No, we wouldn't need it. Well, that would be a special permit because it's an extension of a pre-existing non-conforming structure.

Am I wrong about this?

Uh um you had if he had a various any record of any prior petitions for relief on this?

Oh yeah, the zoning board. We came to the zoning board many years ago before my time because I don't remember.

Of course it was.

I'm going to ask you just again.

I don't remember either.

So they can pick it up.

No.

Oh, so that must been like over 20 years. It was uh probably about 15 18 years 15 years ago maybe.

The building is there already.

Well, that wasn't part of my packet to see whether or not there was any prior relief that was granted for this site.

There were uh I think yes, this is what I usually go by.

Has there been any action taken by the board of appeals regarding this property? And it says no. Well, any action taken, but it was doesn't my understanding wasn't previous action.

I think it meant all action, any action, but I mean, you can see the house. It's I just left a couple of more pictures there. It's pretty obvious.

The pictures are fine. It's just that you're you're here with a plan that shows you you're 6.7 ft from Cleveland Street and you're here requesting a variance for relief from two things. One is the setback requirements and it specifically says 20 from 20 ft to 6.7 on Cleveland Street and and the lock coverage and the lock coverage. The lock coverage I'm not so concerned about. Well, let's

just see this. Let's see where uh well, here's what I'd like to do if it's okay with the board. Eliminate the extension of the deck at this time and I'll come back later if I need it.

Okay. Okay. So, when you say eliminate the extension of the deck, it's just we don't typically act unless we have a plan.

The plan's right there. Just I I understand that you may have So, what I'm what I'm what I'm saying is is that where the extension is on the deck, you just corner. Okay. No, this corner out. Okay.

What I'm saying is Oh, the entire rid of the entire and just grant for the other part. Yes. Oh, I can do that.

Yes. I if that's where things are going to go. I still have to hear the public public comment.

Okay. Is there anyone in the audience that's would like to come forward and either provide any comments in opposition or in support of this project?

Again, I'm going to reiterate. Is there anyone in the audience that would like to come forward and [snorts] speak as to any concerns that they have either in opposition or in support of this project?

All right. So, I can repeat report to our viewers at home. There's no one even raising a hand or coming forward. So, gentlemen, this is going to reduce his lot coverage too. So, I want to put there's a lot to be said here. So, my problem is is this. I don't have any findings that I prepared on this because I wanted to go and take a look at this project. I am inundated with the next

two cases that we have. One of them being your case as well, which has been going on for a long time. And there's another big one coming soon. And when I say soon, like within the next half hour to hour. So, um I'm not prepared to make any decisions here today. I am prepared that if you want to put together a proposed decision um and that's assuming that these board members are okay. I think what he's

trying to do is given his time constraints he's willing to put aside the proposed porch expansion. So if there was any granting of this it would be strictly for the proposed one-story addition.

Correct. That's all I'm asking for now.

Well, if you do that um I would ask you to come back on the 22nd.

I'm not here. Sorry. That's so why can't you approve the the the small addition to the kitchen?

Cuz I don't do it that way cuz what we do is we actually all other people that have come for for not not this board, not this board. This board provides an extensive set of findings to support where it's at. And then rationale. It goes through 48 section 10 rationale and then provides verbiage that explains what our thought process was as to how we arrived at that conclusion. Now, I know other

boards will just give a blanket approval with no justification. We've never done that. I know that since I've been on this board, we haven't done it.

I've been here when people recently have have asked for a small, you know, small the relief.

This is smaller. It's it's 9 by4. It's it's it's not even we're asking for 11.5. It's it's nine it's 9 by4 it's 9 by4 yourself any favors by trying to make that argument with me. Just being just being upfront with you.

Well, if you want to come by and take a look, you can come by and take a look.

But I don't see where I have I was planning on doing that as well.

Okay. But I don't see where I would have to make your findings and that sort of thing. I'm not an attorney. I'm not going to.

So, go ahead.

You don't want to prepare them because you're not a lawyer. I will prepare them. But you may not be on for the 22nd. You might be on for some time in February.

And there's nothing stopping you from hiring a lawyer, but and that'd be fine.

If you want to come forward with some draft decision, you can do so for the 22nd. If otherwise, it's going to be on the ETH. When's the next date on the ETH?

February 8th. I mean I mean February. Is it the 8th? I meant to say February.

I don't. That would just that would just deny me that that would just deny me the ability to do exactly what I want. And I'm you know I'm paying a lot of money in taxes and I I you know I I don't understand paying a lot of money in taxes Mr.

and that's a sensitive issue for me right now since December 31 very sensitive with me.

Sorry I I expect this is not a big issue and you're making it a big issue.

Okay. So, no, no, no, no.

We can we can vote to deny it, too.

So, there are a lot of things. We have options. We can either vote and deny it today if we want to deny it or if you want to approve it, then we come back for a decision cuz I don't have one here. And I'm not going to have him brown nose me to to to actually come forward. All right. He's not going to browbe me here to to come forward and put something.

That's not my intent. My intent. My intent.

Well, it certainly seems that way.

No, but right. I'm here, Mr. Chairman. I We're all trying to do this since November. I'm listening to you. You're going to listen to me. We're all volunteers. You're asking for relief. Relief that we have to find rationale right?

Under 48 section 10, we have to find rationale to support it. Something we've been doing. I've been doing for 10 years here. And now you're you're pushing me to do something because you have time constraints.

Correct.

All right. So now I want to hear you.

Um if if you don't give me the approval, then I won't be able to do the addition.

I can't wait. Sorry, I I not your fault.

I can't I can't wait only because I'm losing my contractor and and we're going to be in out of town for for a few months. So I don't have a problem if you want to make it subject to your approval of looking at the site and maybe I can work with Christian or something to to come up with some justification uh uh because what we would be doing is is uh possibly doing some work inside the

house during that time.

All I can tell you is this. We have not voted on a a single right a single petition in which we've not had a set of findings and also the legal rationale to support a variance under the statutory requirements and well the statutory requirements what this are are you telling me that one of the statuto requirements are now you're going to tell me what the stat no no I'm just no I'm not I would not do

that okay no what I'm trying what I'm trying to say is that my understanding is you can't be a detriment to the neighborhood. That's one of the that's special that's special permit.

Okay.

Special permit. This is a variance.

There are four prongs, right? Some legal scholars will say that a variance is a legal fiction.

So we [clears throat] try to be very very creative here in trying to find ways that are supported by the facts and by the law to reach these variances.

All right. So, all I can tell you is this. I can put it on for the 22nd. If you don't want to put it on for the 22nd, then you can withdraw it and you can withdraw it without prejudice.

Right.

Your engineer is here every week.

All you have to do just Mr. C revise the plan because you have to re he has to revise the lot coverage because your lot coverage is smaller now. I think 1% whatever. We have to reference a plan and we have to reference numbers. You know, we've been doing this for for 20 years. This is the way to do it. And we're not, you know, and we're trying to accommodate you by saying, "Well, get it

fast and we'll be here. We'll take you next week, you know." Uh, and again, I don't think we're being difficult at all. So, I I understand you're not trying to be difficult. I'm just problem my is my own problem in that with my time constraint. But if if we can go to the 22nd, um I guess we'd have to do that.

Mhm.

I'll entertain a motion, gentlemen.

the unit to me.

I make a motion that we continue uh variance case ZAV-25-12 for one Cleveland Street to January January 22 2026 at 5:00.

Second the motion.

All in favor?

I I the eyes have it.

Mr. Cussen, I'll see you on the 22nd.

You won't say me.

All right. Well, I'll see someone on the 22nd. And Mr. Cuss, I would like to go by there. So, uh, I'm sorry.

I would like to go by there to look at the court.

Stop by.

So, do I need to announce or just can I just walk around the sidewalk?

You can just walk around. Yeah.

Thank you.

Okay. Thank you.

I understand you're take you're eliminating the uh Well, I'm going to check I'm going to check with Christian now as to what we can do to maybe uh take take away that that that sight distance and change the deck a little bit so we can we we won't need it would look nice with that corner.

Yes, I think that's what I think that's what we're going to do.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All righty, folks.

So, actually, it's already 6:30, huh?

Mhm.

Moving on to the next matter that's on the agenda. its comprehensive permit ZCMP25-1 which was continued from December 4th of 2025. The petitioner applicants Mr. Paul Cussen. The owner is Bliss Investors LLC. The subject property is 970 Tucker Road. It's road map. It's map 46 lot 2 located in the single residence B district. We've already gone over the advertisement. This is the continuation

of the 40B case. Most of the people that in the audience are well aware of this case. It's been going on for almost six months now.

Well aware.

Um I'm going to kindly ask that we just keep it down to a low rumble. Um we are in session.

I already told them where's my stuff?

Susan.

Susan.

Yes.

Um, I don't have a copy of it.

Excuse me, folks. We are in session.

I'm coming. The thing kept moving, but you should have this.

I have it, but I Well, I had it. I looked at it this afternoon, but I don't have it here.

Where's Michelle? Is she not here?

She's getting she's getting some material.

All right. Are we going to go? Are we going to take a recess? All right. The board's going to take a short recess.

We're back on record. Um so I just want to make it clear. I know there are a lot of people in the audience and I don't think that everyone's here for the case that's before us right now. So, um, the the one that we have and we just opened, reopened because it's a continued case is the 970 Tucker Road. This is the Hawthon the former Hawthon Country Club site. That's what we're actually working

on now. And if you've been to and I see familiar faces here, so you've been to some of the prior meetings, we've been dealing with all the peerreview experts in providing us information either to verify some of the representations that are being made by the applicant or to provide us explanation to answer the questions that many of you have, sometimes some of us have with regard to

um the project site where it's how it's going to impact maybe water, how it's going to impact traffic. Those are all things. So tonight we're at the point where we're dealing with uh storm water and it's called civil also the civil site plan review but it's storm water review and the expert for the for the uh petitioner in this is uh Mr. Farland. So I'm going to give him the floor so that

he can explain to us maybe what's changed since the last time they came before us. Um maybe things have gotten better in the sense of you know the impact on the water flow or whatever it may be. But I leave it to him to explain to us. M Mr. Chairman, before we do that, I just want to clean up some previous business and that is um we were asked to take a

look at the ability for the fire department to make access on.

I have that I but I have that further along.

I have some additional information I'd like to submit to us, submit and discuss.

I'll just I'll just raise it then you can take I'd rather not do that right now if that's okay. I want to go to him because we have an expert here that's going to also provide us some comments.

Thank you.

We could do that. Thank you though.

But I do have it here on the list.

I'd like to I'd like to I will give you an opport I will give you an opportunity. Absolutely. Thank you.

Okay.

Um Mr. Farland, the floor is yours.

Good evening, Mr. Chairman. For the record, Christian Fallon, principal engineer and president of Fallon Corp.

I'm here tonight representing the applicant. Um prior to um the submitt of the revised set of plans and storm water calculations, we did have a chance to meet with the town peerreview consultant. Um this was before the holiday break. We went over, you know, the detail um game plan of how we were going to approach the um comments that were made by the consultant. Um considering this is a 40B project,

design plans are 100% yet and um the plans do have to go in front of the conservation commission which their jurisdiction is going to be the the storm water. Um the storm water design has to meet D storm water requirements.

Um that's something we can't ask for waiverss from. Um that's something that we have to comply with. um just so the abuters are are made well aware of that.

So there's no there's no uh leeway with with waiverss from the storm water requirements.

We did take a look um at all the comments that that were made. Um several of the comments um were things that could be addressed post I like to call it post approval of the zoning board if the zoning board does approve the project because a lot of the details may may change. Um for instance if we go from 100 right currently we're at 138 uh building units. If for some reason the

zoning board only grants 120 units we lose some lots. storm water calcs have to get regenerated. Um, and just so you're you're made aware, redoing the storm water calcs probably takes about a good 40 hours for an engineer to to redo, even with a small minor tweak of a of a roadway or or lot areas change, impervious areas change for a project this size.

Um it's a lot of it's a lot of work and it's a lot of work that shouldn't be uh burdened by the applicant. Um at this point the most important thing is the design itself with the storm water basins. Now I can tell you the storm water basins we designed them very conservatively. We we looked at the area down gradient and those basins are maximized right now for the development.

If the development does get reduced, the basins would get reduced. Um so they're definitely when you look at the pre and the post sub um runoff air runoff numbers, the post development right now is significantly less than the pre-development.

Um and that's because of the size of the basins, how we how we designed everything. So certainly um when I tell you that this my main goal is is and my expertise is storm water um I take that into account and and from all the years I've been doing engineering I've never seen one of my storm water basins fail. Um so there's a lot of conservative numbers that go into these storm water

calculations to assure that this project will have the same same result as well.

Um, we do know that the town of Dartmouth does have some more stringent regulations than than the state. Um, we did update as the the board requested and the town peerreview consultant requested of us to update the waiver request. We did submit a revised one and we did further peerreview consultant uh give a good breakdown of an Excel spreadsheet with some clarification of if it's a waiver

complete waiver or if it's a waiver right now during the ZBA submitt and something we would be addressing later on um such as during the conservation commission permitting um that we we would put that as a a postapproval waiver. Um, a good example of that, I don't you may understand some of it, but like uh catch base in great capacity. That's something that we haven't done right now. Um, it's it's not really I don't

think it's important to the to the board um to make your approval to vote on if we need to add another catch basin. It's not really going to be a big big ordeal.

It doesn't change the size of the storm water basins. It doesn't change the number of units that we're proposing.

Doesn't change the density or the traffic. Um, so there's things like that that we we um kind of worked on with the consultant and as engineers we hopefully agree are on are on the same page and I hope the board can understand some of that as well that goes into the the size of this project. Um because for us to do that right now, it's just things if things get changed, it's just a lot more

work that we would have to continue to do uh repeatedly.

Um so I'm not sure, Mr. Chairman, if you if you want, I mean, I'll be glad to go over the comments. Um I'll be glad to go over the peer review, but we did have we did prepare a response letter, which was 45 pages long. Uh it would take me over an hour to to go.

No, we don't need to do all that. But one of the majority of the majority majority of [clears throat] the stuff that we revise is really technical.

Um the plans themselves haven't changed much.

That was my question.

For the abuters, they wouldn't know the difference. Um the big things that we did look at which I think the abuters were concerned with was the drainage on the northerly side. Um, I know one of the abutters um had a concern with the with a with a stream coming down with water. What the peer review consultant wanted us to do is break out a design point with the water that's going directly towards towards them in the

precondition [snorts] and then evaluate it in the post condition. So, we did add a design point and the calculations demonstrated that there is actually less water going there after this project would be built than what's currently going there now.

That's what we do as engineers, that's our goal. Um, so they could be assured that as long as this gets built per the plans, that would be the that would be the case. It would be actually an improvement to what they have currently.

Uh, we looked at that. Um, another one of the comments were the the irrigation pond um that's on site that was used for irrigation for the golf course. um we didn't evaluate that during the preconditions um just because I didn't think it was gonna hold much water and I didn't think it would be necessary. However, we did evaluate it per the peerreview consultants comments and it was

determined that that didn't change that didn't change anything. Um it was also determined that that area is not under jurisdiction of of um Mass State Wetland Protection Act. We did provide um the notice of intent filing which was originally done on this project which approved the wetland boundary. Um and that wet line as I previously stated in other meetings is good until March 2026.

Um so we're not too concerned with that.

That wetland boundary wetlands really don't change much over time especially when you have a property that hasn't changed. Um so we're not too concerned with that. Most importantly, we've done a I think a great job keeping as much of the work outside the 100 foot buffer as possible. Um certainly you'll see other 40B projects throughout the state, some that are presented to the town presently, there's

a lot of work within that 100 foot buffer zone. And I'm not just talking storm water. I'm talking buildings pvious pavement. So this project there's no impervious pavement. There's no buildings within 100 feet of the wetlands. The only um rock we have is some grading in the storm water facilities, which it makes sense to have them close to the wetlands.

Um that's really all I had on storm water.

I do want to add um I'm not sure your agenda. I could stop here or I can just touch real quickly on on wastewater and water. Um, but that's up to you if you want.

No, I have that later on. Okay. Um, at this point, I think we're going to be Well, there's a couple things we could touch upon now if you wanted to about any landscaping design and, you know, tree lines and um any type of uh retaining walls where those going to be located so that people can get a better sense as to what the visual impact might be as an immediate abut.

Sure. Um, is any of that on that plan?

Currently, the plan that you see here is is very similar to a landscaping plan.

Um, there will be street trees throughout the entire development, which is which is typical of a residential subdivision. Um, the details that we don't have um is landscaping that would be involved in the community building.

The community building design is really conceptual right now. So, there will be landscaping around the entire community building. Um, there will also be landscaping at every one of these houses just as you would typically see in a residential development. Um, as far as screening goes, how we typically like to work projects like this is we like to work with the abutas. Some abuts like

um a stockade fence. Some of Butters rather see uh Leland Cyprus um which are like Abberites but they're a little bit better the deer don't attack them. Um so that's really we're we're open to that discussion with some of Butters. I know there's several of Butters along Tucker Road and along to the property to the south. They may like that open view um of seeing the land. So we don't have

anything set in stone for that is what I'm trying to get to. Um but but if there's something that a buddies rather see, we we we surely would try to um appease them.

Right.

Well, if if there's no actual landscape plan that's been submitted for the board to review, then I mean I don't I don't know where is there there is. There has been. Yeah, there is.

So can you not share it?

Oh, I can. Yeah, sure. Because I was going to say there's going to there's going to be a lot of conditions about landscaping and screening that will be made up written up by the board if they don't have a plan to work from.

You can see this plan right here is probably the screen. You can see the I'm sorry.

One at a time. That's this plan here is probably the best one for them to see because they can visualize it. I can go to the plan set which one be more difficult to see.

Um but certainly that was part of the the plan set.

Mr. C, you wanted to say something?

Yeah. Uh Christian, I I think it'd be helpful to show we show buffers on that particular plan all along Tucker Road, the the houses in back of Tucker Road, what's being and that's on this plan. We also submitted a landscape plan uh for the for the community building, uh the turnaround that's going there, the the pool, all of those things. So on the large plan, you can see what is being

proposed as buffers. And I would consider that to be the landscape plan.

It's it's it's it's a plan. Typically an in typically you'd be looking at a plan like Christian has right there.

This is sheet this is sheet nine which is part of the landscape plan. It also has a landscape table um which has the the plantings that we have proposed.

So this is along the houses.

This is the proposed landscape screening um along the houses along Tucker Road.

These plantings are every 10 feet apart.

Actually, the questions have to come through me.

Sorry. It's okay. We'll get we'll get there if I may. Um, Mr. Chairman, um, Leland Cyprus. These are uh planted um 4 and 1/2 to 6 and 1/2 ft tall and these these grow approximately 3 feet a year. Um, so these these would again the preference of the of the owners that buy these lots. They may keep them at 10 feet. They could let these things grow to to 15 to 30 feet if they wanted to.

Um, so that's that's what we proposed along along the edge of the of the property line.

What about like with the sidewalk areas?

Are they going to be partly paved? Are they going to be grass? And I I presume there's what? One tree in front of each house.

There is at least a at least one tree in front of every house. Um some of them may have two.

You can see here these are all the trees that we proposed and these are the same trees that are part of Dartmouth um specific trees that they request in at the planterboard level.

And these trees are planted at 12 feet 12 feet in height.

You're talking about the ones in front of the houses?

Run in front of the houses. Yeah.

So, and they're very slow growers.

Yeah. These are We got silver maple, American elm, and and lynen.

Okay.

So, that plan has already been submitted to us, correct? I haven't seen that plan. Maybe I just failed to look at it, but it's been submitted. Yeah, there's a total of 34 plans in the in the complete set.

All the plans the plans at this level right now are probably 90% drawings.

So all of the issues that you addressed with the uh our peerreview person they were provided to him when the plans were provided on Wednesday. We did provide him a draft of our response letter. um before vacation. So, we're not anticipating him to obviously have a response. Um but we we we provided um as quickly as we possible. We had obviously we had uh vacation break with the holidays. My

office was closed for two weeks.

I'm not not looking for an explanation.

I get it. I just want to I just want to make sure that they had an opportunity, but if they didn't, but I at least like to hear from them at some point. Mhm.

Does anyone any members of the board have any questions at this time based on what's been provided to us?

No, Mr. Chair, I think will we leave it up to the peer review to That's what I'm expecting to do as well.

M.

All right. Sorry.

I Mr. Chair, I just certainly just cuz I I'm as we're going along over the hearings, I've just been trying to take notes so that for when and so since you're getting kind of further along here and they're saying they're close to done with what they're submitting. um on on the retaining walls if they could just show where they are the plan the height of them and then where the is

the drop off towards the the site or away from the site and that so just in case the board needs conditions related to safety.

I don't even know if those are on this plan or if they're on another plan.

I can show they're not in this plan.

This is just the landscaping plan. Are you good with the landscaping plan council? Would you want me to go around the perimeter of the property?

I I mean unless the board or other people do. I just the these are just things that the board's covering that maybe hadn't been discussed at the meeting before.

Sure.

So there is a retaining wall that is down.

near East River. Um I think it's a road.

So this retaining wall here um I'm sorry. What sheet is that on?

So this would be I'll go I'll Sorry. Didn't mean to interject interject.

No, no, no. Listen, I might that [snorts] might have no problem with that.

Can you see my Can you see my mouse?

Mhm.

So this retaining wall is is in this area here that's on the north side of the site.

Yeah. Keep in mind this is a 100 foot buffer already that the town owns in between our property and the closest of butter.

Okay.

Um so the downgradient site is after the wall.

So this is about going down. Yeah. So this this drops down.

The max height of this wall um I believe is about 12 12 feet. and it just slopes.

It goes right down to to nothing here.

So So the only question I would have is if if if the board from a safety perspective is it is there going to be a fence on the retainer something to keep someone from going over the a 12ft wall, children running around playing or that type of thing. So I could Mr. Chairman if if I may any anything higher than than four feet there would be um a fence above that. Um

especially with the house being right right behind the wall right behind the house here.

And we have these are conditions that we can we can make up as we we progress closer to the decision.

Um that was one wall there.

There is another wall

So, these are walls here that are behind not really they're on our property. Um, these would be down in this area here. Um, because this grade slopes off slopes down uh where am I? Right in this area here.

So, to get this roadway in, we had to cut cut this area down here.

And these walls aren't aren't as high.

Um, most likely like eight 8 feet in height.

Again, I would say anything higher than than 4T, we most likely would have a have a fence. Um, there's some internal walls that really are probably max of about 4T.

And that's really that's really it for the walls. I would say the biggest wall would be on that one that one corner.

Mhm.

Up in this area here.

Is there a detail as to how these are going to be built? These would be anything anything higher than four feet most likely would be ready rock. Um did a big block stone walls. Um pretty typical you'll see throughout um any engineering.

Again, we're not they're not they're not finalized yet, but we could add that detail to the plan if if the board wants to see it [snorts] and we can certainly show a a fence on it as well.

But again, these details really, we don't we don't put these details in place yet because the lots may change.

Um, if the lots change, then maybe we wouldn't even need that wall. Um, for instance, if this if we didn't build this lot, we may be able to grade down 3 to one and and we may not need the wall.

So, all righty.

Anyone else have any questions?

No no.

Well, we're going to call upon [clears throat] um Mr. Mark Gabriel to come forward and provide us if he's here this evening. Oh, here. Here he is.

[clears throat] We do have an understanding that you don't you didn't get a lot of the information other than some sort of a plan sometime just before the holiday, but and I don't count the holiday [clears throat] week, so I get that. So, what can you tell us? Well, first of all, uh for the record, Mark Gabriel of Niche Engineering, uh civil sight and storm water peerreview engineer for the

town of Dartmouth. Uh so what can I tell us? Yes. Uh just a a small correction there. We did we got the full submission uh last night. So uh plans storm water report and today we got the updated waiver list. Um and as Chris mentioned though, we did um converse actually a couple of times before uh break which was good. got to go over any questions that he had on the peer review comments

that we submitted. Kind of got an understanding where he was going with the waiverss. Um corresponded with him a few times over email too to make sure that we continue to help the process move along. I got a lot of data to look at and I will be looking at that in the you know couple of weeks to come. U as you've heard from Mr. Farland there will be [clears throat] uh a lot of the

comments are just going to be you know post approval. Uh they'll be getting on the final plans later on. And I did uh peak through the letter a lot of the storm water comments he had started to address already in the revised storm water report. So I'll be looking at those calculations to make sure they jive with uh the comments that we had given before.

Okay.

Anyone else have any questions of this gentleman at this point?

No, I have not at this.

Attorney Far.

All right.

So I guess we can move on to water and sewer.

What can you tell us uh Mr. far above. I understand that you uh they submitted a peer review. Um but you may not have had an opportunity.

Maybe you can just update us as to where we are.

Sure. Um again, as far as the So Stantech is the peer review for the for the wastewater and water. I don't know if they're here tonight or not.

They're here.

Um but we've wor we started working with them probably over a month ago. um we provided [clears throat] the information that they requested. I think we are um from there I did breeze through their revised um letter which I think was uploaded today and um so maybe I should have started with them first on this to have them tell me what it is that they're at and then yeah I mean it seems like they did they

did the review. So, I think the most important thing is there's enough capacity um in the in the in the wastewater, which is important. Um and there's there's enough water.

Um those are the two big big things we're worried about here. Um there is some details in regards to some inverts being changed. Um everything in this report I I pretty much agree with. The only thing I I we may have a little um work to do is with the with the sort easement as far as you know what we can do and can't do in that easement based on the placement of what you have

for retention ponds in in that.

The retention ponds all the retention ponds are outside the easement. Um so it's just a matter of making sure that there's no infiltration from the existing shoreline that's going to go into the into the storm water basins.

Um so those details I think we can work out. Um, so I think I think we're we're in good shape. Um, but I'll let the peerreview consultant uh speak on on their report. Thank you, Mr. uh I can read it here. Mr. Carlson, correct?

Um, Kirk Carlson, Stantech Engineers.

Uh, sorry, Kirk Carlson, Stantech Engineering.

Um, we did the peer review for uh the water and wastewater. I'm I'm here uh as the wastewater engineer. Uh my uh colleague Ryan Stackpole couldn't be here uh for the water side, but I'll try to cover those. Uh as you said, yeah, the big most of these are just um tweaks the drawings uh except for the storm water detention basins. Uh our concern was not so much that the the basin was

in the easement but the sloping for the basement takes the easement out. That easement has to remain level so that they can access vehicles if if something should happen to that um uh pipe and it has to be serviced. So uh is it actually level? That area now is level.

It's level currently it's level or it should be level.

It was and that's that's a sewer pipe that actually serves a large part or is that a drainage?

Correct. It's a 27 inch rainforest concrete sewer. It's very large one major and it collects the sewer from the northern part.

Northern part. Yes.

And where does it go? Directly to the sewage treatment facility pretty much. There's there's the one other bigger pipe that all collects in from the um uh eastern side of town.

Comes together. It's like I think it's 36. I'm not sure 36. And then it flows into the plant. But it's very close to the headworks of the plant.

Mr. Chair, I think uh Mr. Barber is here and there may be a a a plan that may be able to show you on the screen in a little while that will show what he's describing.

Okay, Mr. Chair, if I may, um the plan up right now is is is actually the easement, and I and I'll be glad to to walk through that entire easement area.

Keep in mind there's there's definitely areas now that have the same slope that we're proposing. I think the most important thing we did is to make sure that where all the sore manholes are, there's no grading that changed around all the sore manholes. I think that was the most important thing. Um and the access will still be as it currently is. They'll be able to access this this soup areas that we we

can look at. Um but again, I don't think it's certainly not a not a dealbreaker.

Um, we certainly don't plan on changing the location of the storm water basins.

Um, but again, I think we can work as we we we have on this project and many other projects with Stantech and and Tim Barbara to make sure that they're they're satisfied. Um, but I would like to if since we have them here, if we can just walk through the easement just to look at the areas, that would be great.

Yeah, I think they have one that they've put color on and that might be easier to see. So, I don't know. Do you have that as a slide that could be put I don't think it'll be easier to see to be honest, but I know Mark, do you have it?

I have on my computer.

Would Mr. Chair, would you like to see that? Um, Mr. Gabriel has taken taken it and actually highlighted it in color so that it's very clear to see where the sewer line is running.

I think I saw that, but I I think it's important that the the people that are here get to see that as well and the viewers at home.

Whatever is easiest for you. I think the wire is over that way.

But while you're doing that, I'm going to ask Mr. Carlson if I could a couple questions.

So, you've obviously reviewed their proposal and you've made some comments.

And so is there anything you can elaborate further so that the people here have a better understanding as to whether or not what they're proposing here in this with this project as it impacts its demand on the water clean water source and also wastewater what we reviewed it it uh and uh there is sufficient capacity in that interceptor but we did not evaluate what what the impact I can ask you just to speak a little

louder I don't hear very well I'm sorry so all right so as far as the demand on the public drinking water source. There's sufficient capacity to serve 138 units.

That was a conclusion. Yes.

So uh and what about the wastewater part of it?

Wastewater. Yes, that it was a there is enough capacity in that intercepting sewer to accept the flow.

And where would the connection point be?

That's proposed.

There's uh several uh manholes along that where they just connect into the closest one. I think there's three connection points along the the uh intercepting sewer pretty much is the uh flows along.

So is one of the connection points along Tucker Road?

No. Uh the sewer is in an easement behind.

So they're going to connect the connection point is there, right? Yeah. This this the sewer is going cross country in that area. uh behind it. Went through the old um uh what was it? A a country club.

Country club.

It went through the country club.

Okay.

And and it just that runs from north to south along the country along the

I didn't break it.

They can't get it. Can I I've got something up on the screen there.

That's us now.

I don't have the water.

I promise you there was something different. There was a plan there.

Oh yeah.

Oh, thank you. No, that's okay.

I can't.

Sorry.

I have a secret.

as long as you have.

Well, I guess we could move along if we need Mr. Carlson to come back. We can always ask you just to uh answer any questions we may have. Is there something else you wanted to speak to us about? Uh well the water side um I guess the total pressure from the model was below the mass D guidelines so that uh confirm the acceptance of that was uh can you explain that to me layman's terms please?

Layman's terms uh we did the computer modeling and uh the pressure readings in the street although sufficient uh were below D guidelines. So that's recommendations now in Tucker Road. Is that what you're saying?

Yes. In the 8 inch water man, the casting cast iron water man.

Okay.

And are you suggesting that need something needs to No, just uh um just an approval that that's okay.

Right. So it doesn't meet D guidelines as it stands now.

Right.

Right. But is that going to impact the system at large with 137 units being built?

Uh we do not think so. Uh the uh the other thing that we needed was um was written confirmation that the um oh wait confirm no additional water demands beyond those uh shown. So like irrigation or something like that that would change the conclusions of calculations calculations that needs to be submitted as well.

I believe he did touch upon that before.

all right, just so I can move things along, I'm going to ask Mr. for Barbara to come forward cuz I'm sure he wants to explain to us some of his concerns um with regard to maybe wastewater.

Good evening, Tim Barber, director of public works.

Mr. Barbara, unfortunately, I know you submitted this on 16, but I've not seen your memo as of yet. So, I will look at it, but I I didn't have the benefit of having read that prior to your presentation. So, if you could just keep that in mind.

Yeah, at at the time uh we weren't sure whether Stantech was going to be attending the meeting and there were a couple comments that we wanted to make including the uh the storm water detention basins being placed over the uh sewer easement, but I just heard I believe I heard from uh that those were going to be outside of that easement area. Yeah, we'll further discuss that to uh work on their their

grading outside of the emania.

Right.

So when you say that that's moving forward with the project that you would have discussions with Mr. Farland, correct?

Correct.

Okay.

And do you do you do you foresee any difficulty in them being able to still move forward with the project if they move this these detention ponds outside of the easement area?

I don't if if they agree that that can be worked out. Yeah. We so we basically we're looking for the easements are designed over the over the sewer crossings to to be able to access for future maintenance and repairs. Uh so so when we're looking at access, we need to be able to bring vehicles through there uh and machinery to be able to to work on any any any operation and maintenance issues that

that are needed to to be worked on. So if there if the access isn't there, if the slopes are too steep, you know, our our vehicles and equipment can't access it. So So we're just looking for, you know, that access to be maintained.

And right now, you guys access it from that 100 foot buffer that's that he spoke to about on the northern part of this property that borders the northern portion of this property.

Uh we would uh access it from different points along the easement.

Okay. But that would that would be one of them.

Yes.

All right.

Are there other good whenever Mr. Yeah.

Other comments um included uh just cleaning up some of the plans. Some of the plans were were tougher to read. um you know some of the the line weights and and shading over the the layout plans where normally you'll see uh you know utility plans uh specifically sewer and water which are which are bold and and then the drainage uh design on on those plans would be a lighter shade where you have you have your drainage

and and grading plans which are which is specific to that and the sewer and the water utility plan should should be specific and highlight the water and sewer.

Is there anything else you want to share with us?

Um, no, just just uh I think there's some cleanup of the of the plans and the details to confirm that all the details in in the plans meet DPW specifications and the rules and regulations of the sewer and water installation. Well, in fairness to them, they've they've explained as to why that that hasn't happened because of the fact that we're still trying to discuss. There have been

changes. So, they started I think at 147 units. We're down to 138.

Yeah.

Um but they they are I think at one point it was represented that they're 70% complete if that number is correct that their plans were somewhere around 70.

Maybe they're a little closer. I don't know. Uh but they would start to finite that as we move forward and and the comments start to sort of shrink if you will. Correct.

Correct.

Um, as far as capacity, yes, uh, Stantech has has stated that there's there is capacity within the intercepting sewer, the 27in intercepting sewer.

And what does that mean?

So, the the the direct connection to that to that main below their site that's in in that 30-foot easement has currently has capacity to accept the flows from the development.

So, the pipe has capacity. The pipe has capacity, but how does that affect the capacity down the road to the sewage treatment plant?

Correct. So, so the the treatment plant is impacted by you know additional flows which is going to which will push the flow the capacity up towards that 80% with other capacities like biochemical oxygen demand treatment up over the 80% as well. So the more flows obviously the you know the more impact on on the percent of capacity that's left at the treatment plant.

Okay.

All right.

As far as water, they looked at a I think a 1 to 2% pressure drop in Tucker Road. So it's not it's not it's not a high drop. Um there there was you know there it's question that whether or not there will be additional demand um on the site if they will have any irrigation or any any other water use. So that should be looked at as well.

Gentlemen, any questions on Mr. Tim Barber?

No, that's all clear.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right.

So can can I just ask a question because as I'm like I said you do a lot of for me it's I'm sorry I just because I'm trying to refine a list for the board to consider later. It says no additional water sources. So right now it's however many homes and is it has the water from the community center building been factored into that? Yeah. So okay. So additional sources would be anything like you were

saying no irrigation on any of the lots would you say that? Right. I just want to if you could provide a list of things that should not be added would it be pools? Would it be irrigation? Like what types of things would be restricted?

Yeah. Well typically a pool wouldn't be uh drawing you know constant water but but irrigation would. So if it's planned for irrigation um throughout throughout the development then that should be uh in the plans and specified for the amount of water that's proposed to be drawn to to to complete the calculation uh further.

Well, we always want these things to look nice. Summertime can be brutal, right?

We are going to want the availability to have sprinkler systems. So, we're not going to want that as a condition that it can't be.

Well, okay. But so, that's a question, right?

I may just interject. So, flow and pressure are two different things, correct?

All right. So, pressure drop is one thing. The amount of flow sufficient to feed an irrigation system is something else.

Correct. And flow is much more difficult to correct than it is to correct pressure.

Yes. So you know there is there's sufficient supply with within the infrastructure to supply a facility. It it creates more demand more peak demand which you know which costs more money as we need to purchase more water from supplemental sources. uh but the you know the pressure drop is related to the amount of draw. So so that also you know if the more known uh water demand the bet the better the

calculations are. So okay Mr. Chair if it's if it's all right with you then I might um talk to Mr. Barber and to the Stantech representatives about an appropriate condition that if they wish to add additional water sources, what process they would have to go through with the W with the um DPW director, whoever before they can add those to confirm the impact. Something I'm just talking off

the cuff here. Um Mr. Farland has noted they don't want a prohibition condition, but then it seems there need to be a condition about review potentially before that happens.

So, but we can work on that language if the board wishes.

It's also recommended at you know even throughout the development that that the water line is is looped for for redundancy and and in volume and pressure. Um and it's also recommended to loop to another source as well. Um if that can't be done then we understand but have they already submitted a waterline plan to you?

I part of the utility plans. Yes.

Yeah.

All right. Have you reviewed them yourself?

Yes.

Is that part of what our peerreview expert does as well?

Correct.

And it meets the requirements.

It meets the Yeah, it meets the pressure requirements. Um and they had just asked for uh confirmation from the fire department that it meets the the the pressures throughout for fire suppression.

There was also something about fire hydrants on this particular site. Has that been discussed?

Yeah. So uh just maintaining uh fire hydrant uh at a at a minimum separation basically minimum spacing uh which stands around 500 ft and uh water main inline valves at a maximum of,000 ft to to maintain uh isolation.

if if uh if repairs are needed that you can isolate the the Milwaukee.

So I have a question.

Yes.

If 139 units went online tomorrow, does the town have enough treatment plant capacity?

You're saying the sewer treatment plant?

Sewer treatment.

So it would it would push the percentage it would push the flow closer to the 80%.

Mhm. Um, we're not at 80% right now.

We're not at 80%. We do we do uh a percentage of of times we do exceed 80%.

Um, so it so basically that percentage would increase.

Okay.

The percentage of times that we do go over the 80%.

And that's usually with high rainfall events right?

Yes.

Infiltration. Okay.

All right.

Um, let's see what we got here now. I guess we can move on. Is there You wanted to state something about this easement area, Mr. Farland.

Yes. Um, I think you already explained that you're going to be able to do something where you're going to have your detention ponds outside of that area.

Well, the detention ponds are outside the area. I'll I'll go through this is the drawing that I believe I'm not sure who did it.

Mr. Gabriel, can you can you bring that down so we can have a bigger view or or make that smaller?

Well, the problem is the more I go out, the less you're going to see because it's really But I will if you want.

Okay.

Just so we can get an overview right now and then you can bring it back to a smaller size.

Well, not like that.

It's [cough and clears throat] not a It's not a perfect uh just zooming in and out.

[clears throat] So, we're looking at that big rectangle red area there. Yeah. So, the red area is the areas that they that they questioned um that there's some grading in the easement area.

Okay.

Um [clears throat] so, this easement area is is the blue um which you can't really see, but in the green the green line is at the actual saw line. So, it's not a straight it's not a straight line. Um there's angles angles in it.

All right. Um I'm going to interrupt you one second. I think Mr. Bob wants to provide a little clarification. I was just asking if the drawing can be rotating 90°, it might be able to scale up a little bit.

You want to rotate it 90°?

Yeah. Or Yeah. Go.

Yep. Might be able to zoom in a little more now.

All right.

Um, thank you.

So, the areas that they highlighted here in red, you'll see the black there's like black lines. That's our proposed grading. Um, So, what I wanted to do is just come across, start from one side and go across the other.

Um, there's no grading proposed within all the sore manholes. The the rims are all going to stay the same. Um, their access right now, I'm not sure how they access I'm not sure how they access it. Um, Tim, do you guys come from the abuing property?

because there's no easement that from our property down to it. Um the property just goes parallel with the rear of the property.

Yeah, we can access from the from the abuing property.

And when you say abuing a budding on the north on the south on the south on the south okay I don't think you can on the north right there.

Uh that that is the conservation easement I believe.

But is it but we can access is it feasible to access it?

I'm not sure. Okay. So, their only access point is this point on the south here. Um, I believe and I just want to I just want to make this a point that the slope in this area is the same as what we're proposing on the grading. Um, if you ever have to access this line and if you ever have to make a repair, you're going to need large excavation equipment. excavation

equipment will be able to maneuver along this line whether the slope's 3 one 5 to one or if it's flat. Um there's going to have to be excavation done there. Um there's nowhere in this easement language legally that says we can't grade in this easement area. Um certainly we can't put anything um permanent houses in this area that would have to be removed.

Council, do you want to say something because it look like you're ready to jump out of your seat. I no the only no before we get to her just me when you're saying this I know you you're talking about equipment heavy equipment and I understand that it needs to be you know they can have they don't need to access level level ground in order to get to where they need to be but trucks do and

trucks sometimes need to service this not just excavators and trucks don't do well on slopes we all know especially when they're dumping I will say right now a truck won't be able to access this right now okay it may not but if it needs a repair then we're going to need to do we're going to get things there. It's not going to go there by helicopter.

I know. So, my point is there a truck won't be able to get to through the their only access right now is through this point here. A truck won't won't be able to get there unless an excavator goes in and does a level area which is off which is off our property. Um, so I'm just going to go real quick along this. We're not changing any of the grades along this

entire area until we get to this red area here. Um again these are the proposed slopes which are three to one.

This is the only area that's affected.

Um if there's a condition that we have to keep this at the same percentage of the the slope that's there that's something we will do.

Um but certainly we're not going to have a level 24.

Um that's the sun for again the same thing. This is all along a slope. these circle things here. These are the saw manholes. Again, we're not proposing any changes in that area. Um, then you're going along. I'm just going to zoom out a little bit.

So, this is probably the most grading in this in this one area here. Again, these are 3:1 slope. This is a 3:1 slope. Um, so I guess we we can meet with DPW and see what the criteria is. It looks like it's about four to five to one slope currently. Um, so if that's the case, then we may need to add what we would do is basically add a wall

and do that keep that grading the the the way it is in that area. Um, that's certainly something we can do.

All right. Again, these details, it's it's not really a big deal. It's not it's not rocket science we're doing here.

Attorney Murphy, I think you wanted to say something to me.

Yeah. I mean, the easement doesn't have to say you're not allowed to grade. You can't interfere with the peaceful enjoyment and use of the easement by the easement holder. Um, in order to, it's not just a matter of access that there'll be a grade and trucks get in there. Now you have a a operating detention basin. The grading is relevant to the operation of the basin. Um and if they have to come in

and replace a pipe, that means they're digging up the basin and he's been hold the basin is they're digging up. Can I finish?

I'll let I'll let you make a comment.

Let us finish.

They're digging up that portion of with all the slope all of that area, the slope, etc. where the pipe is would have to get dig dug up on either side right of the pipe to get to the pipe relay whatever whatever the Mr. Mr. Barbara could speak to it better than I, but as an easement holder, if you disturb the dominant estate, the property owner's land, then you have to restore it. You could have

potentially a lot higher cost to have to restore a basin than if you have existing condition where all you have to do is backfill, etc. So that they are creating both um increased difficulty for access repair replacement and increasing the cost to the town of restoring the area afterwards. And um you know my intent was to uh speak with Mr. Arbor kind of and as to what would be um an acceptable whether he is

requesting a condition that they have to be completely outside of the easement with their basins or whether there is some middle ground that he would feel is acceptable. Um but you know this is a legal issue. This is not the board can't wave the town's easement rights. So um that is something that Right. No, and I'm not suggesting you would. Um, [clears throat] so that is it's a condition that I I

think that um Mr. Barber would be involved in recommending the language that he would request from the board.

Not tonight, but as you move forward.

Fair enough.

Yeah. No, you wanted to say something.

Yeah. I would I would just say I think there's again we we've worked with Tim on many projects. Um we don't see this being a major issue. Um, we're talking about the fill that's over the line is probably I think the worst case scenario we had an additional 3 ft over the line.

If you're going to excavate, you're going to excavate down the sore line is about 6 ft. If you're excavating 6 ft and 9 ft, it's not the end of the world.

Um, yes, it is a little more expense, but again, this this easement is is on our property. We do have the right to to um utilize it.

Okay. But there there is topographical change in that area anyway. just naturally correctly.

Yes.

All right.

Yeah. The slope in that area in in most of the soil line area it's not flat.

It's it's 4:1 5 to1 um with where the max slope we have is 3:1. And again I think with we can keep it the same with a simple boulder wall.

You know a twoft wall would would solve the the issue we're talking about tonight.

You're not making it any worse anyways in any case. In any case, well, we're making it 3 to one.

That means in most areas and you're saying your your sewer your detention pond is overdesigned anyway. So, you can tweak it. So, you you'll be out of their system. Whatever you need to do, you need to tweak the plans to comply, right? To make it either better or not to make it worse.

Exactly. Exactly. That's fine.

All right.

And those are details that you go through later and you agreed that you want to do that, you know. So, absolutely.

Right. So, let's move to something else.

If Mr. Barber is happy with it, I'm sure that he can tell us what he may have concerns with if there's something that they can't uh come to agreement with and then ultimately we'll we'll we'll try to see if we can come to a resolution issues.

Um, moving on to the next thing. I guess it's more of a legal issue. This has to do with the emergency access.

Mr. Cussen.

Uh, thanks, Mr. Chairman.

Hope you understand. And I have like a little note with agenda here that I need to follow. I didn't want you to get me out because otherwise I'll forget. So I wanted to make sure we did it in order.

Thank you.

Um at the last meeting and previous meeting we were that was all uploaded that was all uploaded to except the plan. Okay. So yeah, so um there were two so pri and the meeting before that we were asked to talk about fairway drive and whether or not the uh police and fire and all emergency vehicles had the right to use um fairway drive and in a case of an emergency.

So, we have had two attorneys uh and all of this I have copies if you'd like along with the plans that they've referenced to in what was uploaded. So, there was a letter uploaded a memo from attorney Jay Talon that Do you have that?

Have you seen that?

I haven't seen it.

Okay. Let me let me give you copies.

When when was that uploaded?

Monday.

So, what You know, I'll summarize basically this information. I want you to get all the information that just came in.

That's okay. We don't get it. We can't make any decision on it. That's all.

You need to check the under.

Did you get it?

I don't have time to look at it.

I have I have a copy. Thanks. Yeah, I print it. Yeah, I got No, there was only one upload, Mr.

Talerman. That's the only one I don't No, we don't have the other one wasn't uploaded.

Yeah.

Yeah, that'd be great. Thank you.

So, our first task was our first task was to uh see what rights the emergency vehicles had to access Fairway Drive. in the in the memo um that was written by Attorney Talon states that um and and I've highlighted all of the issues in in what I just handed to you that the applicant has the right um and the fire department has the right to use Fairway Drive. He ma he made reference to a Massachusetts appeals

court decision and he also made reference to uh uh Mass Board of Fire Prevention Regulations. It's a CMR 527 CMR 1.7.16.1 that states that a fire department emergency vehicles have access basically to go wherever they have to in order to address the emergency. Um, which I don't disagree with.

Okay, that's it. But that's not the point though, right? We made a distinction here. This is a planned development which requires another means of access for emergency purposes, right?

This is not an emergency where we need to get to a house because there could be people in there and now we need to trample on other people's property rights right?

That gets set aside because it's an emergency for public safety, right?

And the fire department has asked us and we've submitted a plan that shows where the access where the emergency access would be. Christian, you might want to show that on the plan. So, what we're right right on that plan right there that Christian has up on the screen, there's a there's the main road, there's a culde-sac, and then there's a a little road that goes right out on with a gate,

an emergency gate that the fire department has requested. Um, and we'll work out the exact details of that type of gate, etc. to access Fairway Drive.

But more important, but as important is also as he did the his uh investigation that what happened in 1980, Darthothy Agai and William Schuler created a plan that showed all of the that showed the lots and I've attached that plan to that memo.

Okay. And then what h so scheler and agi owned the property that is that we know have known as hawan country club and also the property to the south where the ais developed the property. So all of that property was owned by schula and ai.

Then in 1980 there was a deed that was given to Corkran Mullins and Jennison and the plan is also attached that showed that uh where the existing what was known at that time as right off of Fairway Drive. That shows where the existing condominium that was built back in 19 in the low early 80s.

um in which there are I think 18 housing units. They reserved all their rights.

Um so it said reserve onto the grantors and their their hairs, executives, administrators, successes and assigns an easement over across and under said fairway drive for access to and egress from Tucker Road. So in doing our research we found that we could use that in my opinion as a secondary means of egress. That's not our intent.

That's not our intent. Our intent is to keep it as an emergency access.

And then we asked attorney Matthew, John Matthew, and he comes to the same conclusion.

So based on both of these lawyers and the attorneys can talk to each other about any questions your your council may have. Uh but it's it's my opinion that we the applicant would have access to Fairway Drive out to Tucker Road for a means of egress and they reserve that right when a guy and and uh Schula sold the property to Corker and Mullins and Jennison part of the property.

But that there again that's not our intent. Our intent is to keep it as an emergency egress as recommended by the fire chief. And there was an upload again by the fire chief that talked a little bit about what he wanted.

Well, at the direction of the board, we did the we did the research.

Thank you. Thank you for that. But I just need to confirm. I obviously I haven't plotted this out but this deed that you're referencing book 1815 page 676 the one that comes from Schuler and Agai correct to Corkran Mullins and Jennison correct what parcel does that actually plot out to is that the parcel is that the entire No it if you original form original form a just one at a time

that was that was done that has the 132.82 82 ft of frontage along Fairway Drive.

I'm not sure. I don't I don't follow.

So, there's a plan that's that you provided me and then from that No, you don't have to come.

There's another plan.

All right. Well, but I just want to But my question is this parcel that's referenced in here in this deed is what parcel here?

No, it's not.

It's on the smaller plan.

Okay. It's on a smaller one. Let me see the smaller one. Is she referring to the smaller one? Which one is it on the smaller one?

That one there. Okay.

What What's happening on this one?

It's the Northfield Lane neighborhood.

Fair enough. Can I hold on to this?

Thank you.

All right.

Oh, yeah. It's here. Thank you. Well, you did submit this just on Tuesday, so I didn't have an opportunity to look at it. All right. Fair enough.

Well, we just got it task to do this task and um Yes. So we just have submitted that.

So obviously I got to I want to look at this. Um Susan comments on this.

Yeah, I I have a few comments, Mr.

Chair. So I I just want to start with the general statement that it's not the purview of a zoning board of appeals to make determinations of rights under title, right? That's not your purview as the general rule. So the question ultimately the question as to whether or not they have legal rights to access Fairway Drive is a private property issue between the actual owners of Fairway Drive which are um the you know

what are the condominiums and then they are shared rights and this property owner. Um, I will note that I looked at all of this right after the last meeting and you know what happened is, and it's even discussed in um, Attorney Matthews email, um, there was a lot of land, right? There's where the the um golf course is now. And then next door, and I apologize because public can't see all

this. It's very small in this plan, but that's parcel A. That's what we're dealing with now. Mhm.

Parcel B, and I apologize to you all because it's very small. Parcel B was all this other land below where you now have the um and I'm I'm sorry I don't have Northfield Lane, I think. Is that right? The Northfield Lane neighborhood.

And then there's all these other comm uh uh developments that happen further down on parcel B. Right. Over time.

Right.

Yeah. Off of Fairway Drive. So, what happens is the first deed out from a guy as Mr. cousin mentioned is only the little piece right here um which they call B1 because all of this where all the development is was parcel B so it became B1 and they did reserve an easement so we can acknowledge that but they didn't even need to reserve an easement because they still owned Fairway Drive and all the

land around North where Northfield Lane was going. So they reserved it, but they didn't even have to because they already owned all of the other land around this little parcel. However, subsequently they then conveyed all of the rest of the land on of parcel B, including the fee to Fairway Drive to a different third party and did not reserve any easements in the roadway. So um and that's what Mr.

Matthew says the reservation was not mentioned again in the next deed. So I'm not I'm not giving a legal opinion. What I'm saying is I believe there's a question of fact here, but it's not the boards to determine if the owners of Fairway Drive believe that the the the golf course property do not have access rights, they will be have to be the ones to assert it.

If there is a question here, and I believe some of the neighbors who live off Airway Drive have raised that question, then there is language that I might suggest to the board as a condition. So, I'll just go to the next point first. As far as the fire chief saying, if you build a fire, you know, an emergency road, this is what should it look like. That's that's fine. The fire chief cannot grant rights to an

emergency access drive. So it's it's kind of irrelevant what the fire chief says about how you build it or where he would like to see it. So I think we put that aside. So the next issue is notwithstanding um the case that was an appeals court case referenced by attorney.

This case spoke to the general rights like you know you two live next door each other. Your house is in on fire.

The fire truck can go over Helen's property to get there. that that's what that statute is intended to do. On dis December 11th, the land court with this exact same issue issued a decision.

Judge Smith, it was the exact same issue. 40B claiming that they had rights of access.

And I have the case right here. And I thought it was highlighted, but of course it's not highlighted, so I'm trying to find it. But I put the language um I wrote the language here.

This interpretation of 89 section 7 stretches the statutory language well beyond its plain meaning or the overall purpose of the statute. Furthermore, such an interpretation would in effect create new property rights for an owner through the extension of an easement to a different parcel where none previously existed. No language in GL chapter 89 section 7 supports such an extreme

outcome. So in December, a land court judge told another 40B developer, you cannot use 89 section 7 as a justification for an emergency access road if you don't already have an easement. I will say note the appeal period is still pending on this decision. So we'd have to wait. we'd know by the next meeting or not whether it was appealed, but right now the land court has determined you can't use it.

So I think where that leaves my my my conclusion for the board's consideration is where that leaves the board is there appears to be based on the members of the public residents on fair of Fairway Drive and the applicant a difference of legal opinion on title that the board is not charged under the law with determining who has title to what. But perhaps a condition may want to be considered saying

if in the event that your right to put an emergency access drive is challenged legally and you do not have that right, you will need to create an emergency [cough] access in some other manner or something to that effect. So that's kind of where I've come out after looking at all the legal back and forth and all these issues. So, I I don't know if that's helpful, and I'm I'm happy to provide any followup information.

I just hate the situations like that when it's potentially to interpretation.

Um, obviously, I'm going to spend some time just looking at it.

But certainly, it appears to me that they're trying to make an argument. Now, whether or not it applies to their parcel or was only to be for the remaining for another parcel, the intent was it to be for another parcel. You know, that's obviously open for interpretation, right? And that's what judges are for. So hold on. He wants to he wants to interrupt first. So I'm going to let him I'm going to let him

first. I just want to finish.

So I'll just take a look at it for whatever it's worth.

Yeah.

But the thing I'm always worried about that type of language is enforcability after the fact. Right. The building inspector already has enough issues of things that he needs to enforce.

So you know that can that certainly will pro make us look as if we had considered the issue. We were we're trying to protect the property rights of an abuing uh property owner uh by putting that in there so that the onus is on the developer to rectify it in the event that there's an issue down the road, right?

Where they eventually put up a blockade and they have the right to put up the blockade. Now, we're putting the health and safety of everyone at risk potentially in the subdivision. I hate that, but I don't want any of that. But let's see where things go between now and then. Uh but certainly this is a lot more than what I was expecting as far as an argument from on their side. I

thought they were just making the argument the 89 section 7 argument and to me that doesn't apply here right because we had been asking them from the first hearing for this information. We hadn't had it and Mr.

Cussen and I understand he didn't have the research yet but Mr. Cussen had even mentioned at a prior hearing oh we know we don't have any rights to use it as a roadway. So I think um that had led us all to that conclusion, but I understand then the attorneys did further research and I was doing the same research simultaneously. So we're bringing we're I'm bringing this information he's

bringing this information all to the board tonight.

Okay.

Mr. Chair, hold on.

Go ahead.

Mr. Mr. Farland want you want to cut me up?

You guys decide.

Mr. the chair. I just I just want to, you know, let the board know um you asked us to get a legal opinion, right?

Um we we this is a large parcel of land.

You know how much title is. The board's lucky to have an attorney on the board and an engineer. Um we did it as quick as we could. We got the opinion Monday. It's in our opinion, not my opinion, the attorney's opinion, that we have the rights to use Fairway Drive, not only for emergency, but access if we wanted to push that envelope, which we don't.

Um, okay. We understand we're not going to get an answer tonight.

Whatever the protocol is, um, we respect um no, it might be a situation where we have to do what what attorney Tom uh Murphy has said.

Mr. Chairman, I I I suggest if if you're we have no problems if you are the attorney, talk directly to Jay or or to uh attorney Matthew, but there again, I'm a lay person, but those rights were never relinquished.

Those rights in my opinion non-legal were granted and gave the the owners Schula Agai the right to use Fairway Drive out to Tucker Road.

Pretty clear to me from a lay person's point of view. Now, attorneys can make any kind of arguments they want on both sides, but from a lay person and and furthermore, we were asked to do this research and this is what we this is what we found and we're willing to continue.

Uh Matthew suggested maybe he look into a little bit more. Same thing you made, Mr. C. Times two. So now the thing is this. We have a lot of people here tonight and we have another matter that we still have to hear that's coming before us. I'm sure some of you have heard about it. It's another 40b.

Um and that one has a proposal for 300 units.

And there there are just about as many people outside waiting for that one. So I'm going to ask you to be patient with me that I'm not going to open it up for public comment um tonight. But one of the things that we need to do is determine um whether or not the developer here is willing to work with the town moving forward as far as continuing this because we're getting

close to the six-month date. When when's the date, M?

The date is February 23rd and so the only hearing you have between now and then is February 12th.

No, not for them. The 22nd.

You do have a hearing on February 12th, right Michelle?

Yes.

Oh, no, we don't.

22nd, isn't it?

I hope you do. Oh, right.

Hearing on the 22nd of January cuz I'm coming back for my own.

Right. But there's another 40B hearing that night.

But we I think we need to know where we stand as far as timing with this prior to the 23rd or the 22nd, whatever that date. I think what's when's the when's the six-month date? Is it February 23rd?

February 23rd.

So, we'd like to know sooner than that.

And we' like if we could know tonight if there's going to be cooperation on the part of the petitioner.

We want we want to cooperate, but we I think need to take it to the next step.

And on January when when are we going to meet next? Let me ask you that question.

February 12th.

February 12th.

February 12th.

We can discuss it at that meeting.

I have I don't have the authority to do to to extend.

Mr. Chair, go ahead.

Can we hold on one second? Michelle, I'm sorry. Michelle had provided all of us with some dates and I just want to double check if we can with Michelle.

Michelle, what I had in uh my calendar and maybe I wrote it down wrong was there is a next another hearing on the 22nd, but that's for the other 40b that's already opened and then on January 22nd and then the next hearings after that would be February 12th or February 26th, but February 26 is beyond your deadline. So my assumption was because you already have a 40B on January 22nd that if this were going to

be continued tonight, it would be to February 12th.

That's correct. Correct.

But I I just know I like to feel more comfortable in knowing that because it doesn't give us a lot of time if there's things that you won't be here on the 12th.

Correct.

No, Mr. Faren. Um, if I may, if you if you can ask the peerreview consultant when he he thinks he'll have his um response back on the um on the gas storm water on the storm water, I think that would be helpful.

All right. Um, I'm going to have you just step back from the podium in just one second.

[clears throat] So for just storm water comments, I could get that uh relatively quickly uh because the state storm water requirements, they've gone ahead and said that they've met them uh with the revised report. So I just got to go kind of double check that information in regards to all the other comments I have. I just need a little bit more time.

Then the 12th of February.

No, sir. I could get that done before the 12th of February. Absolutely.

So you could be prepared for the 12th.

I would be prepared for the 12th.

Right. So now knowing that, if I if I may ask, I'll go through you, Mr. Chair. Um, would the peer review consultant feel comfortable in stating whether the plans are further enough along that the [snorts] board can make a decision after his next response letter?

Just on that issue on on the issue. Yeah, I don't know. I I there's there's other issues. For example, as they've stated, they have a whole list of local storm water bylaw waiverss that that they're one of the dedicated periods of time that the board needs at a public hearing is to walk through all of the waivers and discuss them. And I think because the new list just came in this morning, um that the

intent was for the staff and peer reviewers as necessary to look through them and see whether they were appropriate, whether they would be detrimental um in order that they could give recommendations to the board. So that's a whole another discussion. I don't know, maybe it could take 20 minutes, maybe it'll take an hour, I don't know. But that's that's a whole discussion in of itself that has not

even been started yet with the board at the board at this hearing.

Well, am I to understand that you'd like to see if you could get just section segment by segment with approval of waiverss on those or just sort of the board's sense as to what the waivers would be for each segment.

We would like to have I think by [snorts] the next meeting and a good understanding of the waivers.

Absolutely. Well, we can't do that by the next meeting because the board needs to review the each of the waiverss at a public hearing. So, I don't see how we do that before they weren't they just recently submitted all the revised submitted today. Okay.

Revised the revised ones. I mean, they weren't they they [clears throat] I saw them for the first time today.

I can I can say probably none of the waiverss are detrimental to the to the public. Um, well, obviously there people there people are going to beg to differ, right? So, I get that. I I Excuse me. Hold on. Hold on. What are we doing about scheduling? Yes. Well, I don't know. The thing is this. If you're not going to be willing to extend this, then obviously we're going to take a different posture.

I understand.

And on the 12th, um, that posture may come to light. So, I'm not trying to threaten anyone. I'm not trying to say anything. I'm just saying I don't feel comfortable signing off on something when I don't know exactly everything that we're waving and we've discussed and these people have a lot more comments and they're, you know, they're they're dying to leap out of these seats to ask these things and I'm asking them

not tonight because I've got another one where there going to be people out there they're they're just as impacted by this as every f every person in here maybe even more so because they've got more a greater number 300.

Yeah. Let me tell you what what our position is going to be. Um, we want to cooperate with the board. I think the board has enough information to make their decision. However, you're correct and you want to go over the waiver list basically and and I understand and we understand that uh and also maybe even conditions of a permit we might want to discuss in a in an open in an open meeting as well.

the so having having said that um we at this time are not going to supply I mean the engineers will talk and and from what I'm hearing and what the applicant is hearing is that a lot of these issues are kind of technical in nature and typically these plans are more than 80% complete and it's very clear in the statute and rules and regulations that the plans only have to be sufficient enough to allow the board

to make a decision. So, we understand that. So, at this stage, we're willing to give a two week extension.

That doesn't Okay.

Go ahead.

It's not going to work because the board the board only can meet when it can meet. There are three per volunteers that all have their own jobs, sometimes have night meetings, already have multiple zoning uh board of appeals meetings a month. And so the reality is if the I have never worked on a 40B and I've been doing this for 30 years. I have never worked on a 40B in which an

applicant has refused to cooperate with reasonable extensions. They don't have to grant them. That's his prerogative.

The reality for the board will be if you do not get a reasonable extension that you you can meet before you close the public hearing that you're required to close the public hearing then on February 12th if you are forced to close the public hearing then there will be no discussions with anyone including the applicant and then I would work with whatever we have and I would put together for the board an extensive

decision with dozens of pages of conditions and the waiverss may or may not be granted because there will be no time for the board to properly review them in public and the applicant will get the decision they get. So they are, you know, to use kind of a common phrase, you know, biting off their nose to spite their face rather than potentially pushing this out, say, till, you know, April, which would be a

reasonable time if they expect to be able to see draft conditions and discuss them with the board. So that is as council from what's reasonably doable for the the waivers to be reviewed, the board to understand the waivers and for myself to work with the staff um peer reviewers and draft conditions that could be shared with the applicant.

That's going to take at least two additional months and I would suggest it get pushed out till the end of April. If it can get done sooner, the board can do it sooner. But I don't think that two weeks is reasonable in any way, shape, or form.

My other problem, my other problem is is this. I get it. My other problem is I've told everyone that they have an opportunity to speak, right?

And they haven't. Not everyone's had an opportunity to speak about this and have the peer reviewers answer their questions. So, I would not be able to render a decision even if they don't agree to a continu. Let's assume they don't agree to a continuence. then I'm not going to be able in good conscience to stand here and sign anything without having all the input from everyone that's here.

So what you're yeah the February 12th meeting would be the last meeting before the deadline.

Whatever can happen on February 12th would happen and then you would be forced to close the hearing and then you would have 40 days to render the decision. So then the board would probably have the opportunity for maybe one more meeting where you are given a draft um in advance and you review and we sit here and all these people can be here but none of them can talk and it would

just be the four of us walking through a very very lengthy decision with no input from anyone in March. That's what would happen.

I'm not doing that.

Well, we here's the best we can do at this stage is on February 12th if we could agree that we will discuss the waiverss at that time then on February to do as much as we can that night to discuss.

Okay. Okay. Okay. I get it. Well, it doesn't h I mean, well, just keep going.

As as a as a citizen, I appreciate all your time and I realize you're volunteers and thank you very much for your service. However, you can meet more often and many boards do that. So, and I know it's volunteer. I I I get that. I get it. So, if you're So, I don't know what the schedules are, but we're not willing to go out to April. I can tell you that right now.

But we are we do want to and and the board.

Will you at least agree to the end of March?

Yes.

The end of the end of March.

We just had one say yes.

Well, he's Jeff.

If we could extend it to March 31st, I think that that would be a fair compromise. We could see if we're still we're continuing to make progress and if we're heading in the right direction and we need another couple weeks, I'm sure that you'd be reasonable and work with us.

But I'm just telling you, I don't know what road and what path this is going to take.

Well, we don't The path is very obvious.

And talk No, I'm talking about the ugly path.

The ugly path. The ugly path where the ugly path is very obvious as well.

I don't want to go the I don't want to I don't want to do that either.

Okay. So, we're trying we're trying to within constraints that we have with our with our client who who doesn't understand why it's taken 6 months just to get to the stage and you're only meeting once and I understand why you're only meeting once a month. I'm a citizen. I you know I do volunteer work as well. So, we we need to we need to compromise and um and that's why I proposed March 31st.

How about the 15th? Let's let's come let's go to the 15th and then Well, if you keep saying no, attorney is because the amount of This has to go through me, right?

Otherwise, it starts to fall apart.

Okay.

I'm asking for March 31st on behalf of the members of the board. I also have an issue with the February 12th meeting where I'm going to be short one member, but I do have another member who could sit in on that if need be because he can miss one. You haven't missed any?

I have not.

All right. And under the was it what rules of Mullen rule? Mullen rule.

The Mullen rule.

Yes. You can actually just watch it on video.

All right. And I'm not questioning.

Listen, you have your right to do whatever you need to do.

Um, so I I just like to have the extra breathing room for us to be able to handle what we need to handle. It doesn't mean anything's going to go any slower than it otherwise would. It just means that we know we have that out there.

All right.

So right now the the the date is February 23rd. That's a Monday.

March 15th is a Sunday. Why don't we do the Monday the 23rd of March. We're going from the 23rd of February to the 23rd of March.

And let's see where we go. Okay.

And then if things progress, obviously I I would like to think that there'd be reasonleness on the part of the petitioner, everyone to to agree that if we needed some additional time just because I don't know even I haven't seen the waiverss lately. I remember when they were first filed there.

But let me let me because the thing is this. I understand that you want blanket waivers and I'm being told and being informed that blanket waivers are actually frowned upon even by the very drafters of 40b and the supporters of 40b.

I agree. They've re they have revised them but that's the issue. There is now a detailed list. I've just seen it for the first time this morning.

Um so you know but Mr. Mr. Chair, I would just suggest since you typically meet on Thursdays and I don't know what your schedule for meetings is going to be on in March, but the March 26th is a Thursday. So, I don't know, Michelle, if you have dates yet in March.

We usually do it.

So, I I would just say we'll make it we'll make that date.

March 26th 23rd 26th 23rd is a Monday. 26th a Thursday.

Okay.

But let me let me discuss for a moment waiverss.

Okay.

I understand blanket waivers are not uh generally accepted and we're not proposing blanket waiverss. We've made an exhaustive list but the whole premise behind waiverss is to de is to build the development and according to the plans that have been approved.

So in my opinion you don't even need any waiverss. We have to build a plan based on what you what the board has approved.

So we're showing where the wetlands are.

We're showing the entire site. So with all due respect that may be your interpretation of it, but the ones that I've seen itemized waiverss I've been doing 40Bs longer in many case in many cases that may be true. But the thing is the fact of the matter is you have to convince all of us and we have to all feel comfortable that what we're doing is in compliance with the law. And I

believe that it is instilled upon us to ensure that there are proper waiverss addressing each and every form of relief that you're seeking in relation to the zoning bylaws. Am I correct in saying that?

Yes, sir.

Okay.

I I disagree with that.

All right. That's okay. We can agree to disagree.

But I'm just saying that that why why do the plans Oh, listen. The plans are to provide people the ability to conceptually detail. It's a detail. But anyway, we'll just put that aside for the moment.

I think obviously we're going to be here all on the 20 on the 12th and I'm going to promise to these people that I am going to open it up for public comment.

And please remind me, please remind me just in case I am going to try to do it earlier rather than later in the in the process to ensure that the concerns and I'm sure there are things that you've heard here today that have sort of addressed some of the things that you've had mentally going on in your head.

Well, how's this going to impact me here? Well, how's this going to impact us there? And some of this has been it it starts to come together as the process rolls along. It may not be in a direction that we want it to, but it it does come together as to addressing the concerns that you have. We're going to raise some of those issues when you're here next on the 12th. And I'm going to

ask that we not be redundant on the questions that we when one person's asked a question, it addresses that concern, we move on to the next one.

Okay, fair enough. Um, so at this point, I guess we'll just get a motion to Yes.

I I would just um request and I think you want to address these.

I'm not going to read that now. No.

And I'm sure they can work through Michelle is that prior to the 12th, they'll need to submit in writing whatever Michelle needs in order to formally extend the um the hearing deadline until March.

He's been doing it for a long time. I'm sure he understands the process. We'll get that to them and I'm sure they'll work with us. And that's one of the reasons why I wanted to have it before the 12th so that we're not having an emergency meeting between the 12th and the 23rd when we're scrambling. Okay.

So, what time on the 12th?

It's at 6:00.

Thank you.

All right, gentlemen. A motion to continue this for the 12th.

You got it.

Uh, okay. So, on the on the 12th of You're not going to be here, right?

No. I'm going to be here. I'll be here.

I'll be here.

So, we're going to have attorney Farrier sitting.

Attorney Farrier will be sitting right here.

But then you come back.

He's going to watch the video.

He's only missing one moment.

And he said he believes that that's the only one he's going to miss.

Yeah.

So, Michelle, you tell me. Yes.

Uh I make a motion that we continue comprehensive permit ZCMP25-1 to February 12th at 6:00 2020. February 12, 2026 at six o'clock.

I second that motion.

All in favor?

I I The eyes have it.

Cody.

All right, we're going to go to a short recess.

Thank you.

The zoning board is back in session.

Moving on to the next matter that was on the agenda for this evening. U the last public hearing that we have for tonight.

It's comprehensive permit ZCMP25-3.

The petitioner applicant is Philip Cardiero. The owner is the applicant via PNS agreement. The subject property is Zero Hathaway Road, also known as map 57, lot 1. It's located within the single residents a district. And this matter was legally advertised on December 18th and the 25th of 2025.

I make a motion that we wave the reading of the buddies list.

Second that motion.

All in favor?

I. The eyes have it. The petitioner Philip Cado is seeking a comprehensive permit pursuant to Mass General Law Chapter 40B sections 20-23. 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 113 acres to be known as the Hathaway to be located at zero Haway Road in the single

residence district. The development will have a total of 300 units.

[cough and clears throat] All right. So, do we have any comments here?

No, I don't think we really need to to to do that because most of them are are with us.

I can move on.

So, obviously, we have a lot of people here in the audience. Um, I'm sure that emotions are somewhat high or high based on the fact that we're always concerned about what's going to be the unknown in our neighborhood. Um, and certainly this is not a small project. This is a very large project. I have we have two others that are 40BS that are before us that we started almost 6 months ago. And the way

I handle those is how I'm going to handle this one. And I know you're here, you want to be heard, and you will be heard, but tonight is not going to be that night. Um, we basically going to allow I'm going to read into the record brief explanation as to what we're confronted with when I say we, this board and you as well basically that we need to deal with uh from a legal

standpoint in order to uh see if we can uh I don't want to say use the word massage, but find a way that's going to be the least impactful on neighbors and the community at large if this type of a development is to move forward.

Unfortunately, our hands are somewhat tied and I'm going to explain that as we move forward.

And then after that, I'm going to allow the petitioner to provide an opening statement of and explain to us the entire project as to what they're expecting to do on this site. And then we will probably part ways and we'll schedule this for another date in which you can all come before us. And it's very likely on that date I will open it up for public comment. But this is a process. It doesn't happen. It's not

going to happen tomorrow. It's not going to happen next month. It's going to take several months. And we're going to hear they're going to and we're going to engage consultants. They're going to have their representatives that are going to come forth on civil engineering, on wastewater, on storm water, on if there's any environmental concerns. They will have experts speak to that. They will then pay for us to

hire experts to verify whether or not their representations are accurate and to determine whether or not there are going to be some adverse impacts. aside from the development itself as to let's say noise, let's say it's um lighting, um height, all of these things will be addressed at some point. Okay. So, in Massachusetts, chapter 40B is a state law that allows developers to receive

waiverss from local zoning regulations to build affordable housing developments. The primary purpose of 40B is to increase the supply of affordable housing by bypassing restrictive local zoning ordinances.

Each city and town in Massachusetts has a subsidized housing inventory, which is the percentage of their housing stock that is affordable. Towns that have 10% or more of their housing stock dedicated to affordable housing are exempt from 40B requirements. However, if a municipality doesn't have enough affordable housing, it may not be able to reject the 40B project. developers apply for a comprehensive permit which

gives them approval from multiple local boards in a single streamlined process which is before us.

The law aims to create regional housing fairness by allowing communities to plan for and meet their fair share of housing needs.

The hearing that's before us tonight for a comprehensive permit filed under the 40B um this has a process and the role of the board is very different than it is for a special permit in variances and that's typically what we grant when people come before us. They seek relief for a special permit or a variance. This is a whole different animal. It's much more complicated. The board stands in the

shoes of all local boards which includes all permitting boards. The applicant is not required to obtain any other local permits or approvals from any other local board or department and the board cannot require this. The board also cannot condition the permit on the applicant coming back to the board for other permits. The board's primary task is to apply the consistent with local needs standard of review of review

established by chapter 40B. This consists of weighing local concerns against the regional need for affordable housing. The board may deny a project, refuse to wave local bylaws, or impose conditions upon a project only where it finds that there is a valid local concern that outweighs the housing need.

The local concerns must be caused by the project. They cannot be based on a pre-existing condition. In addition, concerns like municipal fiscal impact, school enrollment cannot be considered.

If the town has not achieved 10% affordable housing units on the state's subsidized housing inventory, there is a rebuttable presumption that there is a regional need for affordable housing that outweighs all local concerns. Dartmouth is currently at 7.81%.

And I know there have been concerns, there have been some letters that have been sent to us alleging that we're that that we are above the 10%. And that simply has not been the situation. And we have council that can explain that to us further. And I know that what people are looking at the the one that's across it's on Route Six. The other 40B that's across from Caskin Pig, the [clears throat] preserve.

The preserve. I forget the name of that one. We also have one pending for Hawthon Country Club that's called the Hawthon. And we have another one pending for O Westport Road.

Sherbet Farms and that one's called Sherbet Farms.

None of those add up or equated or calculated into the SHA SHI which is the subsidized housing inventory calculation. The board has the authority to wave any local bylaws and regulations that are necessary for the construction of the project. As noted, the board is required to grant these waivers unless there is a local concern that outweighs the housing need.

The board is not obligated to grant waivers that are not necessary for the construction of the project. For example, developers often request waiverss for local fees, noise ordinances, etc. These requests are generally denied. And I know that there's something being attached to this one as well um that we've read. The board has right to have the project peer-reviewed by the developer's

expense. The peer reviewers are only permitted to review the project and materials filed by the developer. They cannot undertake their own studies. Peer review of the project's proformer is available only a spe in a specific situation. The board has to propose conditions, give the developer reasonable time to review the conditions, and the developer notifies the board that the conditions would

render the project uneconomic or not feasible.

So, at this point in time, is there anything else that you think I need to address? I know that I may read one of these letters into the record um at some point, and I know that there's a letter from the neighborhood. We've we've read that letter, have we not? So, I can read it into the record, but I don't know if it's most prudent tonight to do so.

Let's hear from the from the developer or their representative. Let's see what specifically they're looking to do. Um and then we'll have time to sort of hash over this and then the next time we're going to we're going to meet. We haven't picked a date yet, but we're going to be picking a date. We will open it up for public comment. Okay? And I just ask you to be patient with us. So, at this time,

I'm going to call upon the developer or their representative and to state their case.

And just one second. Attorney Murphy, did you want to state something? Just Yeah, sure. Because you you referenced the SHI that the town is clearly below the 10%. There had been some questions that the town administrator shared with me um regarding because the the regulations have about approximately a half a dozen different safe harbors as they're called. And if in if any community is within a safe harbor, then

it has the ability to deny condition um 40B permits with no right of appeal. So that's the benefit of a safe harbor. Um at the outset when the site eligibility letters started coming in and there were the three of them, they all came in around the same time. Um this project just is coming in later with this application. Um I spent a significant amount of time with the assistant town

administrator. We looked at all of these uh the definitions, what's required, and you know, needless to say, the town would have liked to have identified a safe harbor. And unfortunately, the town cannot qualify for any of the safe harbors. There was a question in particular about the land area. It requires that the the um units the the affordable units or the 40B projects on that land that would

have to be count that would be counted towards that minimum. Those units have to be eligible for the inventory. And because the preserve has lags so long, it is no longer eligible for the SHI until certificates of occupancy are issued. So no, the preserve can't be counted and none of the projects that are currently before the board can be counted because they are they are not eligible for the SHI. So it's been

looked at thoroughly. It was looked at thoroughly six months ago. Um, unfortunately wish I had better news for the town and the board, but that is that is the state of affairs and we've looked upon that for the last two that came before us. We I I strenuously looked determined as available multiple questions and I know that there were there was a letter that we received on behalf of the neighbors

which was very well written by the way uh and it gave us a great opportunity to look at um what the concerns were and potentially the the method to I don't want to use the word attack but to try to find a way to stop this if you will and um one of the concerns I had is was did we miss something? [clears throat] And I know that there's a time

sensitivity that was brought up that we have 15 days for the date that is first applied for. If we don't do that, it's waved. Do you believe that we have you're basically telling us that there's no safe harbor available to us in this circumstance?

Yes. After my review together with your appropriate town official, the determination has been made that the town cannot qualify for any safe harbors.

Right. So that time constraint is really not one that we can, you know, really relevant to us because it's not a remedy that's available to us. Thank you for clarifying that, Mike.

Oh, yes.

Dr. Ay.

Oh, yes. Um, I want to make it known um that one of our members who's an associate member or an alternate member of our board who is Dr. Agai has recused himself because he has a conflict in this context in this particular case and as a result, he's recused himself and he usually makes it publicly known, but I don't believe he's here this evening.

Um, so he will have he will have no input whatsoever with regard to this project. Thank you.

So you can go there or you can go here.

It's up to you.

If it's okay with you, chair, we're going to use both.

All right. Great.

Good evening and thanks for hanging out so long. It's been a long night. My name is David Calhoun. I'm with Sax and Partners. We are the applicant. We are the developer. It improbably said that uh our civil engineer uh Phil Cady was.

Uh but um we are the Hathaway um Dartmouth LLC. Um we filed for a project eligibility letter some time ago and during that process uh they have what they call a site walk and then they gather input from the various departments. Uh we are very very fortunate to get a lot of information at that point and because of that we spent a lot of time going through uh what was

brought forward to us. Uh and tonight I have with me Phil Cado of Allen and Major Civil Engineering. What Phil is going to do is quickly walk um through the project from a civil engineering standpoint and he will keep it brief. Uh he's immediately going to be followed up by uh Clay Smoo Smoo Architectural. Um and just quickly so you understand our team, our whole team is not here because it wasn't warranted

but our legal counsel is Mark Donahue from Fletcher Tilton. Our wetlands conservation folks is Goded consulting.

Our traffic engineer is Jeff Durk with Vanessa Associates. And we already have a traffic study that is well underway and we submitted as part of our application the proposed areas that we are going to be studying. And that's something that after this quick run through hopefully we can talk about scheduling and timing. And uh we are open if the board needs additional time because we fully respect that you guys

are under a tremendous amount of workload. So we're happy to work on a schedule that can hit both our goals. So with that, I'm going to turn it over to Phil Cado.

Thank you.

Thank you. Good evening. For the record, Phil Cordiero from Allen and Major Associates, principal with a business address at 10 Main Street in Lakeville.

Um, as David mentioned, I'm going to do my best to very quickly walk through the details of the application knowing we'll have several subsequent meetings where we'll get into detail. As Mr. Chair read, we'll discuss things with the peer review, um, the town's consultants, uh, etc., uh, wastewater engineers and so on. Uh so as David mentioned these are the stakeholders that are noted myself

uh Clay Smoo Vaness is not present God is not present legal council also not present here this evening but they'll be available for future meetings. Uh the site as most people know is located on Hathaway Road uh bounded by Hathaway Road and Route 195. Uh this is the location in a little greater detail. The yellow is the highlighted parcel.

Generally speaking, 113 acres. Uh map 57, lot one on the town's assessor records. Uh jumping in jumping in a little bit further, I just wanted to show the group what that looks like. 113 acres is the purple outline on the plan.

Uh most of it is wetlands on the parcel.

So we have uh about 16 acres plus or minus of upland area at the front of the site generally located here around Haway Road and here on the back side of the residential subdivision off of Eisenhower etc. So just for locus our residential subdivisions at the Eisenhower homes road is along the bottom of the plan. Uh New Hope uh Evangelical Church is here to the south of us. Uh the green on this map is the

town zone three zone 3 aquifer is digitized into the plans. That'll come into context soon relative to the development. The dark blue line is the amount of wetland area on the parcel.

Not the entirety of the 113 acres or the rear you know 75 80% of it is wet. We do have upland pockets cart paths throughout. We have not gone through the motions of full delineation other than knowing the full leading edge as a constraint relative to the development that we are proposing in the front uh historic and the blue shaded area that's a flood plane map. We'll get into the context of that later as well. um

environmental concerns that will come up. Past Commenset River uh is off locus several thousand feet away from the property uh and the development, but we'll talk about how storm water is mitigated relative to treatment adjacent to Pastor Manson. Uh jumping back in time, I wanted to just present the board and the public these aerial images um just [snorts] showing that the land has

existed for many years. In 1938, uh it was really open open farmland. 61 continued to be farmland. In in the early 70s, we saw the first houses really starting to appear. Uh and then the project continued to progress. The farmland was abandoned probably somewhere in the 70s, early 80s. And here in the 80s, [cough and clears throat] you can see the land starting to overgrow itself. So

the vegetation was starting to take hold. And I note that for the benefit of the future discussions that once, excuse me, once we get into 2000, we've got the land covered. Um the farmers put a lot of fill on the back of the property. Um we encountered that when we were doing our exploratory test pits and we'll again explain what that means as we go through the process. Um this is the plan

that we're bringing in front of the board for consideration. As David mentioned, 300 residential units, six buildings. It is located on the upland portion of the land closest to Hathaway Road. So the wetland system as we have it delineated by Goddard Consulting is along page north of the plan. Um so that will entail that we have to go through permitting with the conservation commission and I'll correct Mr. Chair

during the outset uh made mention that this is our only stop on the permitting train but we do need to go to conservation commission because it is a state level permit under the wetlands protection act. So there will be one other stop for us uh in the county department as we go through this process.

uh layout of the site um is again six buildings. Um these are multiplestory buildings because those familiar with the property obviously our our adjacent uh residents here very familiar with the site. There's a lot of topographic change on it. Uh we drop from approximately let me give uh 121 elevation which is in this corner to about 60 in this corner and there's about 30 ft of gray change

across the site. So that topo that topography has really informed the site plan that we're trying to present to this board. And what that does for us is we have six six buildings. These are uh flat buildings in the front. The architect will speak about those momentarily. The rear four buildings are split level buildings. Uh fourstory on the front half of the building and fivetory on the rear half of

[clears throat] the building. So, as the SL site slopes down to the rear, we're taking advantage of that topography by infilling it with the building. Uh, and then later on in my discussion, we'll be infilling it with the drainage enough to make sure we're mitigating the conditions here. Uh, layout of the site is born from the opportunity to make sure the site is fully accessible uh for

all emergency personnel uh fire apparatus, um, uh, delivery vehicles, passenger cars, etc. we bring to the application. We have 340 parking spaces shown on the site. We'll make sure we have the adequate ADA spaces. They're certainly noted on the plan. Uh but we can talk in greater detail as we go through the civil presentation at later meetings. Uh what we'll note about the buildings at the front is the building

page left is where our clubhouse amenity center uh feature area will be located.

[clears throat] Our outdoor pool area will be located here. And at the rear of the site, we also have some outdoor amenity. We do have a dog park. We do have a waste collection center uh as being necessary components to a development of this size. Um otherwise, it is uh it is circumnavigated by the pavement, parking spaces. Um we've done work to make sure we can maintain green spaces around the

perimeter of the project. Uh both adjacent to the church, but also more importantly to the neighbors on the residential side along along Eisenhower.

UFO pedestrian connectivity through here. And and again, oh, I'm sorry, miss.

Um, no, no, no, no. We're not going to allow any public comments and questions have to be directed through me.

I'm sorry. Um, am I doing it wrong?

Yes, it's okay. No, no, no.

Unfortunately, I have a question.

I know. I'm sure you do, but I'm not going to open it up for public comments tonight. Okay. We're going to be able to hold it.

Yes. Actually, what you're going to do is you're just going to write it down so we don't forget it and then next time we sit down, we'll go through the questions that you may have.

Please. Thank you.

Continue. Thank you. Uh so the the next portion of the discussion tonight as we get into the preview is really to inform the board how we got here. We've certainly studied the plan for quite a while. Certainly we know other applications were proposed on this location. Um [clears throat] there's a n number of challenges in terms of access, traffic, topography. as I mentioned. Uh

so we went through, you know, a detailed conceptual site planning exercise to try to right fit the site relative to all of those constraints. Uh you know, the developable land is obviously located along Hathaway Road. So we wanted to make sure we um focused the development there out of necessity. We had uh we looked at scenarios that had dual entrances. Again, the same parking circulation for fire apparatus. What we

learned early on is the topography is really the biggest challenge here.

number one. Uh and we started to move the buildings around to minimize not only the amount of earth work but also uh retaining walls that might be necessary on on either side of the site.

Uh so we looked at then changing up positioning of the clubhouse, positioning of the amenity area, bifurcating some of the internal roadways. These schematic crosssections are really to give an early preview of what the [clears throat] site was going to look like and again help help guide our decision-making process. Um and then we further went through revised it. We looked at what is the effect in terms of

grading on the side that abuts the church. What is the effect in the proximity as it as it affects the rear of all these residential homes along Eisenhower in terms of how close some of this area gets to um to those developments to their houses. So this is the plan that was presented in the project eligibility application and ultimately [snorts] approved by Mass Housing and is rendered in the decision.

Um, you can see that we had our clubhouse located in this corner. We had a driveway through here and again two curb cuts located along Hathaway Road.

Uh, what we read in the mass housing letter and the uh, Dartmouth Planning Board put in a letter of statement to consider alternative options to really lessen some of these impacts. So, we again took pen to paper between receiving the PEL and the application that's here in front of uh, this board to think about how we can move some of the activity centers. So, what you'll notice is we started to move the

clubhouse zone away from these residences. Uh move, you know, all of the entrances, move where most of the patrons would want to go, get it away from all of these residences. Um we have been in communication with the church who is very welcoming to the potential for 300 units of new um of new constituency to the church. Um but we still had obviously our driveways located in here. So we again took pen to

paper to say well let's eliminate this driveway through here allow fire access secondary fire access that may be necessary according to the fire department widen out our site driveway here to re really again the premise is take the activity center away from these residential homes uh and bring it as far away as we can and in the process increase that buffer zone uh along that part of the site and that buffer zone is

going to be comprised of two things as we get into the detailing later on. Uh natural trees that are going to remain and supplemental trees, evergreen trees that we are proposing to install in selective areas chosen specifically on site to further screen this project from those residences. Um uh evergreens uh arborite um balsom furs, things that retain their needles throughout the entirety of the winter and create

effective screening um uh for all of the neighbors. Now, when we get into the further discussion about the project, uh you'll hear me talk about storm water.

Um and I will tell you that uh we meet the Massachusetts stormwater standards.

I will tell you that we meet the town of Dartmouth standards. I will ask your peer review to vet my comment and assert any comments that they may have on it.

Um I will say to the board that we are seeking municipal connection for water and sewer for a project of this size. Uh we will seek electrical connections. Um, in terms of the water and sewer, we have already had initial conversations with uh, Mr. Barber in the wastewater division. He has made us aware of upgrades that would be required within Hathaway Road um, to support this project and we are actively working with

him to make those upgrades as part of this project. So, we will ask you to get his testimony to that fact and we'll we'll fact check all of those elements as well. Um we will note for you that we meet elements of the stretch code which is that it's an electric project. We will introduce electric car charging stations. Um we will we will provide those at first occupancy and and

scalable. Um we will note um obviously a full and complete landscaping plan along Hathaway Road with our inspiration driven by landscaping already along that corridor but then the supplemental landscaping through here um that we we believe will be of benefit to the neighbors. Uh we'll also have internal landscaping that we'll talk about. We'll also talk about site lighting um especially with our residential

neighbors. They'll want to understand how does this project how is it illuminated. So, we'll have several stages of illumination, low poles, LED light fixtures that are all dark sky compliant that are shielded and cut off.

We've provided a phototric plan that the board's consultant in the board can review and comment upon. And it'll show that uh we are cap capturing our light.

We don't want to illuminate our neighbors. All of that light shine is on our property. Um the architect will note that there are no balconies on these buildings. Uh so in terms of noise centers on the outer perimeter of the building, especially of concern to the neighbors on Eisenhower, um we we will have uh a means to to address that. Um and then lastly, we'll talk about uh the

fire department in terms of how they get around the site. Uh very loosely, we've given them full and complete access.

We've already gotten initial comment from them regarding the request for some init additional signage on the plan for no parking uh where no parking is proposed. And then lastly, we'll obviously [clears throat] get into traffic discussion uh through our traffic consultant who will provide the board all of the calculations that I'm sure the neighbors will want to hear about traffic concerns along Hathaway

and the intersections along that corridor and how traffic created by this development um can ultimately ultimately be mitigated. So I'll pause before I turn it to Mr. Smoo. David, one quick clarification. Um when we first started uh at the project eligibility letter phase, the buildings were high 40s off the property line, maybe 50 ft off the property line.

Yes.

Now they're pushing 100 ft off the property line.

Yes.

And to make that change, we literally had to redesign everything that we have before you. Uh so many of the steps that normally would happen during the ZBA process, your planning board was different than most planning boards.

Most planning boards that comment at a project eligibility letter phase, they write a very nasty letter. Uh, and the planning board actually wrote a letter with challenges. They said, "Okay, if you can get off the property line, create a bigger buffer, create more green spaces. They put things out there for us to chase. We've chased them." And I think we have them all. So, uh, with

that, [clears throat] like, uh, Clay Smoo to walk you through what the property is going to look like hopefully. Thank you.

Thank you. Yes, that's your Okay, great. [clears throat and cough] Thank you. Uh, my name is Clay Smoo. I'm an architect. Um, been licensed in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts since 1989. I started my own firm close to 25 years ago. I'm currently located at 8 Lyman Street in Westboro, Massachusetts.

Um, my firm has done many of these projects, several of them with Saxon Partners. Most recently with Saxon, we did 300 apartments in in I think it was five or six buildings in Falmouth that has been approved. We have a couple of projects in still in in the works. One in Weston and one in Shrewsbury. And Weston, what's that?

Weston's yours, but Weston is his, not Saxons. Saxons is in Shrewsbury. And also another one that's not yours is one that we just permitted for close to 200 units in Wearham uh that's uh controlled by uh AD makepiece company. So what I wanted to point out here and and and I don't want to belabor it too much really is the amount of urban design. My background is both in architecture and

urban design and urban design is really pulling back at a macro level and thinking about how the buildings work with the landscape with the light with the existing conditions etc. We started this project actually with a series of studies where we had one large building, two, three, four, five as as uh as Phil had showed you about the five buildings and we actually eventually settled on

the si on the six buildings for a number of reasons. One of the reasons is to really really break down the scale of these buildings which as I go through the exhibits you'll see we've tried to break it down both vertically horizontally as well as in plan specifically as that as it relates to the as to the abutters again one of the things let me get this uh pointer these

buildings on the on the I like to call this north this way and this this is east and west and south the buildings here on the east side that run along Hathaway again set back at least 100 ft to really mitigate the visual impact from Hathaway and and and again the same from the abuters. These buildings sit on relatively flat parcels. They are four stories tall. Um the building here at

the intersection which we call building A. This is the amenities building which is sort of chalk full of amenities including fitness, clubhouse, leasing, a full exterior amenities package including grills [clears throat] and pool etc. But we try to put that as far south as away from the abutters as possible to mitigate any sound or visual light intrusion. But one of the things we did here, again, these are on flat.

The these buildings are fairly identical in they flip and flop. And on this [clears throat] side, on the east side, on both of these buildings, it's four stories. And what happens on the west side is you basically have the equivalent of a walkout level. So you're four stories here, five stories from this side, but it's really four stories with a walk out.

Much like you see with your homes many times it's a twotory on one side and the back uh is three side. By breaking these buildings down the way we did we sort of and building them at different elevations you're really getting the stepping of the building. So when you view this from from the corner here, you'll actually see these buildings step down and creating this jagged edge is to

break the scale of these buildings down.

Going through, you know, not not a particularly fun graphics to look at.

It's basic these these projects, as I said, this is building a the ground level. This this sort of um light purple color again, this is the amenities package. Now, we actually have up on the upper level on floor four, we actually have a sky lounge and pub and whatnot.

So, for allowing the residents to come up here and have long views with the beverage of their choice of uh of of the beautiful uh landscape area and then all the buildings, it's a typical buildings that we all see, all designed Massachusetts building code with a center corridor and apartments off of the apartments off of the center core.

The mix is a a mix of studios, onebedrooms, two bedrooms, and the required 10% threebedroom units.

Building two very much the same. Again, in this case, we we don't have amenities in the building, although each building Whoops. Although we are still providing in these buildings sort of a great room [clears throat] with sort of the fireplace and sort of the community room for each individual building. And by breaking the buildings down in this scale of 50 to 60 units per building, you create sort of a sub

community within the community.

Again, now this is an a good example where floor this lower level. Let me just get the pointer out here. This these are the buildings that are on the on the on the western side. Again, this is the the walkout basement portion.

This area is really what we call unexavated coral space, etc. So that your first full floor is really I call it floor one. I call this terrace floor one, two, three, four. So again, they're four-story buildings with a walk out.

Same on building C. It's just it's just a matter of flipping and flopping. This is a good example of the prototype units. A studio unit generally about 18 feet wide. Uh a two-bedroom is generally 25 uh feet wide. Everything's sort of based on a 12 and a half foot module. So that's 12 1/2. This is actually the oddball. This is one and a half modules 18 and a half. This is 25. That's

roughly 37. And this is towards 45 to 50 which is the three bedrooms. So it's studio 1 2 and three.

Whoops. There we go. This is an example.

This is building A again. And this is when I talk about trying to break down the scale of the building both horizontally and and vertically. So here we are a four-story building really really look this building is sort of a fusion of a more contemporary with a traditional style in that we have a very strong base middle and top.

[clears throat] The top is this thing would be in a in a level of colors. It would be very neutral natural colors in the grays with the top being a darker color. It sort of creates the idea of an attic story, which is sort of a very very classic town home design, you know, in the New England area. And what we're doing is not only we break breaking it down with the base, middle, and top, but

we're breaking [clears throat] it down horizontally to sort of affect the idea that it feels like a series of h town homes that are conjoined.

This is building B. Again, from a layman's standpoint, they all, you know, it's a very similar look. But again, they are slight there is slight variations in the facade to create that visual interest to it.

Even though it's uh it's creates that visual entrance, there is a central entry here that's going to allow pickoff and drop off and there's all those associated needs that you need with a building like this. I think the important thing of the final site plan is that the parking is equally distributed throughout. So, wherever you live, you're going to get be able to get parking really close to your uh your

building in your unit.

This is the effect of what happens when you have a walk out. Again, this is the side that faces east, which is 1, two, 3, 4. And that one, two, three, four is here. And then you've got that walk out lower level. Okay? So, on the fourstory side, there's an entry. And on the fourstory with walkout, there's an entry. So, it's very easy to access the elevator banks and the um five stories

and all the circulation areas.

Same kind of thing. And this really gives you an effect a cutaway here. So, this is the east side. You can see the way it drops in down and you have that walk out. Very similar to many people's homes.

So, this is this is kind of an interesting little diagrammatic section.

And again, this is going to be real the the landscape program is [clears throat] very very robust and I'll let you know um Phil talk about that at a later date.

Haway is up here and you can see this thing sort of dropping down. We've got the buildings. We've got what I call the car parks where you have parking and landscape in between the buildings. And what's really nice is the buildings are axial north south by and large north south which allow east and west light.

So, you're really not getting units.

Every single unit is going to get that really nice natural daylighting. One of the things that Saxon is really good with as opposed to some of the other developments is they really push for oversized windows to really get the maximum amount of light in uh as possible. And then this is a view down halfway that shows it's sort of got a little bit of a perspective to it, but this is building B. This is building A.

This is the amenities. But you can see the way the top of the building is krenolated and the buildings are dropping. So it really feels like it's working with the landscape.

Some tabulations are in your packet. It really comes down to o almost equally six equal buildings. Although the distribu distribution of the units is slightly different. The amount of units are between 40 when it's in the amenities building to 57 uh when it's in just the sole um residential buildings.

some perspectives. This is coming in.

Let me grab this. This is the diagram up here. Again, building A with the amenities. This is sort of right at the what I like to call is the southeast entry. You're coming in. Again, landscaping. This is the pool area.

You're going to be able to come around.

You'll enter here. There's again at the base of this building is a very robust um amenities package. And then of course this is building A, C, and E. Building E down there.

And that I think that is the end of the slides.

One more.

Is there one more? Okay. Gotcha. There is one. So uh maybe there's two more. So this is from the bottom. Let me just see exactly where we are. This is a view looking from basically Eisenhower is over here. This is looking from this corner. This is building B, building A.

You're right. There was It ends at 14.

And this is a view from across the the street at uh on H uh Hathaway. Sorry, I had senior moment there. This is this is a view directly looking west uh towards uh building B and building A.

And that about covers in a in a nutshell. And the buildings are going to be clad in in in a woodlight woodlike siding. A lot of people have heard of it. It's called Hardy. It's a cementitious siding. It looks and smells like wood. The great thing about it is it holds paint for a really long time.

It doesn't rot and it and it does not allow insect damage. So, you're gonna have a you're gonna have a good-looking project that's not going to require paint for a long period of time, maybe 15 years plus, and then they can come back and it holds the paint very very well. And with that, I'll turn it back to to uh Dave. Thank you so much.

Dates.

Thank you. Um and just a few clarifications for the board. Um we are scheduled to have our full traffic uh study submitted to you on the 23rd of this month. Uh so hopefully um the board will have peer review uh engaged that could take it up at that time and start researching it. Um so [sighs] what are the thoughts Susan about excuse me attorney Murphy about um the the consultants that we're going to

engage? Yeah, we're going to use the similar situation where we'll have the town uh administrator work with uh trying to getting pricing and uh coming back with quotes and things of that nature.

Yes. And the um and the town planner Dan Gios is assisting as well. So, they'll I believe they'll be working together.

Town administrator Hadad and I don't believe u Mr. Gios is here tonight, but town administrator Hadad is here. Um and I believe they're they're going to be working together to get get the quotes.

Okay.

Um, so if if the board is comfortable, then the staff will proceed and and and get quotes and engage so that just to clarify, you're going to have for us a um an actual traffic study by February 23rd.

No, January 23rd.

January.

January 23rd. Okay.

So, but that's going to be really tight for you to actually have your peer reviews on board and look at it. So, we may not, but what do we have on for the 23rd as of right now? on the on the 20 on the 22nd you have the Sherbrook 40B.

Mr. Chair, on the on the 23rd, you'll be getting that report.

Yeah. So, they'll be we need time for all of that.

Yeah. You're going to need a good few three four weeks to review it and then have somebody we can engage someone too, right?

They haven't engaged anyone yet. Is there a mechanism through which um we could uh agree to a peerreview budget so that provided that your consultants come on board you wouldn't have to come back to a formal meeting to approve those peer reviews? So the way as I'm sure you're very familiar with the regulations um you know [clears throat] some in in some instances some towns some boards do

you know share all the quotes and discuss them etc. Um what what Dartmouth has typically done is they've gotten the quotes and they've made the determination which they have the ability to do under the regulations. um what's been done for the prior applications, but it it's that the you know difference to the board is the board um if it wishes um and they've done it in the past applications has um

voted to authorize the staff to do that process and to engage so that it doesn't have to come back to the board after the fact. But [clears throat] I the board has not discussed it here yet for your application. So it's it's however the board feels comfortable. I don't have any problem with that. No, we can keep it the same way, right?

Yeah, we just we can we we'll take a vote that will authorize the staff.

Authorize when you say the staff meaning Oh, I'm sorry. The town administrator.

Town administrator. We'll have the town administrator at least him and then he can utilize whoever's other uh consultation that he thinks he needs in order to make that determination. But I feel comfortable. It's just I don't want to be in another battle like we were with with the other two about costs.

Would you I think we should get at least like a couple try to get two three people to I think they did the same thing last time. Some people were getting back on time and that is where Right. [clears throat] I I think that they were having trouble with h getting responses as far as availability, but would you like I know you did um you did designate a board member to assist. want

to do the same thing just in casea he doesn't have to if if he's not if it's not needed but in case in case it's you know there's questions from the town administrator do one of you want to be designated vote on that we just we'll have no problem difference speaking with that Cody can speak to Haleem I have no problem with that okay um so obviously we're going to have to

put forth a vote about uh authorizing Cody to actually engage the peer reviews uh consultants engage the consultants for each and every one of the sciences.

So, you want to do traffic first.

I I what I would like to see happen is um you to engage a traffic engineer peer review. Uh we just went through it on two projects. Uh the civil in the peer review uh was a combined of roughly $25,000 for the two peer reviews combined. Uh if the board would like uh we could put that in a um a fund already so that there are no disruptions because often

what happens is the town managers uh get nervous that okay we're engaging these professionals and somebody hasn't put the money up. we would be more than happy to put the funds up uh and and then you can bill against it and yeah and and I mean that that would be appreciated if it was in advance because we did have issues with the other ones where they couldn't start work because

there were no funds but I the board and the town can't commit tonight like this is what it's what the cost is going to be. I mean right the peerreview cost will be what the peerreview cost is. So, um, you know, they're not they can't commit when before they even have bids as to what that amount is going to be. I mean, you understand?

We understand that provided I I mean, we just had two of them.

Uh, and they were within dollars of each other, two separate different projects, two completely different municipalities, and the traffic reviews are coming in around, you know, anywhere from 10 to 12,000. If you if would you if you would like to share the the peer reviewers who were part working on behalf of the town with Michelle then she can provide them to the town administrator and he could

potenti you know I'm not going to speak for them obviously but you know if there's names of peer reviewers that you wish the town to consider there you can provide those names is that we'll get that to you by Monday morning and we'll also get you a check uh by next Wednesday uh for 25 or $30,000. on whichever the board feels is appropriate.

There there's also be I don't know how much of the prior hearing that you saw, but because of the well and I believe you've already done as it a lot of this as you've stated with the with the uh you know the wastewater and the upgrades, but there there may need to be some um peer review funds in connection with the the the um water sewer review.

I think the the town administrator will have to confer with the DPW [snorts] director about whether that will be needed. We already uh undertook a lot of that and we had it um studied and evaluated and submitted it to the DPW uh and also he had us go back out uh to come up with the cost of the work. Uh so we have a letter with a approximate doll value and most of that study work has

been done. So I think he can step into that piece. So uh we we already funded that and did that study.

Okay. Well, then you know what? I like that's all helpful information and like I said, I'm just I'm just uh mediate not whatever. I'm just the MC here. Um I I'm not the one who will be making any of these decisions. Um so, but I think that's that's helpful.

Okay. All right. Um so we need a date in February, right?

What about late February? there. Are you suggesting did you say you'll have the report on the 23rd and then you were suggesting give if the if the report is in your hands on the 23rd and the peer review looks at it, they're going to need two weeks by the time they read it and then write something and get it to the board. And the biggest problem we see with peer review is municipalities will hire them

and then all of a sudden the hearing comes up and they show up the day of the hearing with their report and you haven't read it. We haven't read it. So it's a totally unproductive process. So we would prefer to give the board more time before we meet next so that these pieces and parts are already vetted by the engineers so they can report properly to you.

What What were you thinking? late February or maybe early March.

Uh early March.

Okay.

Normally the first meeting we would have the your traffic consultant come and go through the traffic report I think.

Right. So we don't have to have the peer at that time also.

So So what he's suggesting is we don't have to have the peer uh on the same date that you have your consultant come forth and just present it. And then I'm because the next meeting I'm going to be opening it up to public comment. But it's always nice when they're going to be asking questions and they're only going to be hearing from your consultant, not necessarily the consultant that's been hired and engaged

to represent our interest and look for and to ensure that there's compliance.

Our our experience has been that what we do is with the board's approval uh once a peer reviewer is hired that the two engineers are allowed to share information. And what they do is they're going to be proofing out our engineer study. They may come back and they may say, "Okay, that intersection that you're looking at, that's great, but we have a problem down here. Would you look at that intersection?" Those

two parties work together. they come up the goal is for them to come up with a consensus of what needs to be done and what is truly caused by this project and what are existing conditions. So our recommendation is when we [clears throat] finally have the traffic engineers here both of those groups are standing here and they have already reached a conclusion and they have a report to you at least a week before you

meet. So you read what they've come to agreement on. It's available to the public so when people look at it they can say okay this is really making sense and then we have a peer view meeting with both engineers they're doing all the talking they're answering all the questions they're answering the questions from the audience and it is truly beneficial for both engineers to stand here because they're pees they're

all signing with their professional license when they submit their reports there's nothing they can falsify uh but it is comfortable for the audience to have your guy your woman that can stand there and say here's what you want to look at but if we give you time in the engineers time I think it would be be beneficial so I I agree with that I wish the other two were the same

are there been any dates yet that the board Excuse me I couldn't hear you I'm sorry there been any dates chosen yet that the boards are available in we're looking at March 12th at this point and And that would give us plenty of time to engage Mr. Hadad. That would give us plenty of time to engage a consultant to review if they present us with an actual uh study by the 23rd of

January. That would be I would think it'd be plenty of time.

Yeah. Would it be also would like to do the same with the civil the same night so we could have an engineering night and you listen to the engineers. I mean it if you're going to sit here all night, you [clears throat] might as well listen to the pros.

I understand that. Um, I don't know if there's going to be enough time to do all of that, especially if I'm going to give people an [clears throat] opportunity to have public comment. So, a lot of this, I'm sure this is moving rather quickly. Um, but I just want all of you to know there are going to be different sciences that are going to be discussed. So, the next meeting that

we're going to have, it appears we're leading towards March 12th. It's going to be about traffic, the impact of traffic. They're going to do studies probably at the intersection of Smokum Road and Haway Road. Possibly Hathaway Road and Route Six, Haway Road and the off ramp of um uh 19 140. They're going to that's their that's their science, right? They're professionals in that area and they're going to tell us and

they're going to explain to us based on the number of units, the number of bedrooms, how many they call it trips of in the morning hours during the day and what the impact that'll have on the immediate traffic along um Haway Road and any other road that may be impacted.

So, they're going to have an expert that's going to explain their end by then. It appears that by March 12th when we come back and that's where the questions are going to be focused, right? They're not going to be focused on the height of the building. They're not going to be focused on the lighting of the building. Not at that point.

There will be another day for that. This is it's a system, so to speak. So, we're going to be dealing with the traffic.

Whatever your concerns are, write them down between now and then so that you'll have an opportunity to address them with questions through me for their expert and then our expert. I usually lean towards our expert as to, you know, what explanation he has for whatever the concern is that you may have.

Fair enough.

Mr. Chair, one one sure final suggestion and I don't know if it's it's something that the ZBA supports. Um people took the time to come here tonight and ask question wanted to ask questions. If the board is okay with it, uh we're open to having neighborhood meetings. We've done that frequently. Mass housing tells you not to. Uh they say don't don't do neighborhood meetings. You're just

letting yourself into a not a good night. But if there's questions and people would like, we could arrange for uh if there's a room at the library or if we need to rent a room somewhere and have coffee. We've found it very very helpful if people can sit and look at the plans with the architect, with the engineer, with myself and actually ask questions so that when they come

that's a bad offer, but I would leave it upon them in either individually or they have a they've sort of collectively formed a group against this, if you will. They're concerned. Okay, they are concerned about what's going on. I have a letter that I've not read into the record yet, but I've read it. Um and they've got they've got bullet points of concerns. So um obviously they would be

probably the ones to reach out to you and then communicate with the immediate abuters or whoever else is concerned so that they can let them know that there's going to be a meeting at some point to address some of that.

If there's a point person we can deal with and uh they I don't know who that is but you might want to explore that.

I will be here after we're done. if that person was there. Uh we'd be happy to uh find a venue and have coffee and roll out plans and and spend a couple hours and let people go through and you know, it's super helpful because there's nothing worse than coming here and getting up to speak and all of a sudden you realize it's not what's on the plan and the plans are very very difficult to

understand. So, uh we're here to do that and let us know.

All right. I I have a So, just to clarify, so there's going to be a meeting on the 12th and a meeting on the 26th. Is that the schedule for March right now?

That's what we'll go.

Is the 26th of March?

Yes.

26th is going to be Mr. Custo.

I'm available. Are you available on the 12th?

Uh 26.

The 26th is where is Hawthorne was continued? Well, that's the outside date for Hawthorne is the 26th.

All right. I can't do the 19th.

About the fifth.

I can do the fifth.

I won't be here.

So on the 12th, we'll do traffic and they may they may not be able to do the 12th. That's what they're trying to figure out.

We have 26 and you also you could because you're also going to need a night.

I'm going to be away. I think I'm going to be away 19th.

26.

[snorts] Well, the the 26th because we're already pulling it out. He wants to put both He'd like to do two two sciences all in [clears throat] one evening. He'd like to do five nights. He just can't do the 12th.

If we do the 26th, then we would just leave just this and we'd have the two sciences for that night.

And you're you're also going to need a continuation date for Sherbrook just to Excuse me.

You're also going to need a continuation date for Sherbrook.

Yeah, that's fine. Um we don't have to do it on the 12th. We could do the 11th, which is a Wednesday.

I could do that.

Which is a great suggestion. I got to check on that cuz I got a lot of uh Let me check on that. I'm not Well, we got to know now.

No, no, I I can't I have meetings on Wednesdays that might continue. I I wouldn't know. I know.

Oh, I didn't mean to get snappy.

How about the 10th?

The 10th. Tuesday.

[sighs] Let me see.

What about Saturday?

Saturday or Sunday.

So guys, I'm open to dates.

[clears throat] How are you on Monday?

Well, why why couldn't we do the 5th of March? What was the problem with the fifth?

Monday.

Nothing.

Did you have a problem with the fifth?

No. Michelle won't be.

All right. So, let's do the fourth. It's a Wednesday, but you have you have meetings on Wednesday. Same problem.

Monday is good for Halloween so far, except conservation.

Unless you want to do Tuesday the 3rd.

You want to do Tuesday the 3rd?

I can do any date in March but the 12th.

All right. How's March? How's March 3rd?

That's fine with me. Just take a quick look.

I believe is a Monday better for you than the Tuesday and Wednesdays.

Probably Monday is a better day.

Thanks. Monday's the second.

The second, sir.

Monday, March 2nd.

Clay Phil.

All right. Sold special meeting for you.

We'll do both both trades.

Civil civil and if we can get if we can engage both.

Yes.

We'll work with the town.

All right. You'll work on this.

All right, folks. So everyone in the audience, so you know, and the viewers at home, we're going to continue this hearing to March 2nd, which is a Monday, at 6:00 p.m. This will be the only matter that's on, and we're going to be discussing definitely one science, which is the traffic, the impact of traffic, and possibly a second if we can engage everyone to have everything done would be the civil part of it.

Oh, water. I think you said water. You did a lot of work with the water.

Sorry, I'm hard of hearing and I'm really having a difficult time hearing what you're saying.

Sorry, I'm trying to get closer to the microphone.

So, [clears throat] for everyone, we're going to be continuing the hearing to March 2nd at 5:00 p.m., which is a Monday night.

Oh, sorry. 6. Five other matters. I apologize. 6:00 [clears throat] p.m. We handle local matters at 5. The 40Bs are at 6:00. I'll make it clear. 6 o'clock civil as well.

Yes. And we're going [clears throat] to do the civil as well on March 2nd. So, they're going to be two sciences.

So, any comments will be limited to those two sciences on that night and then we'll uh hopefully be able to address most of the questions that you have. And obviously just because it's not brought up that night doesn't mean you can't bring it up on another evening, but it's just we like to keep it focused so that this can flow somewhat easily. Um I will share this with you. I know you may not have

experience with the other applicants, but it certainly appears that these gentlemen are much more willing to at least upfront uh make sure that we can get the ball rolling. They want to get the ball rolling on this. They're already willing to pay money. It's been other difficulties with some of the other 40bs. And I'm not trying to speak poorly about whoever those petitioners are. It's just the experience has

certainly already been different. Am I is this misplaced, gentlemen? No. So, um they're offering to sit down uh collectively with all of you or some of you to go over the plans to discuss some of the concerns. None of that stuff is is is written is in concrete, right?

It's not formed in concrete. There are things that they're going to modify based on the concerns that we may have.

Um I I didn't see anything on there about, you know, school bus stops because they're going to be children are going to be living in these things as well. So, um, whether or not there going to be any crosswalks for the main roadway or things of that, but that those are all things that'll be brought up as we go along. So, um, just remember, we're all in this together,

right? I live in this town. I love this town just as much as any one of you. I look at this and it's it's bothersome, right? It's not in my immediate neighborhood, but it's in my town that I love. It's bothersome, but there's not much we can do. At the outset, I explained the process. So, I'm here to we're here. We're all here collectively to hear your concerns, try to address

them, minimize them. I'd love to make this thing go away. It ain't going to happen, right? It's not going to happen for us. We have to find a way so that some of this can exist. And I don't know why the number's 300, but I'm not going to ask that question because if you couldn't ask a question, I can't ask a question tonight. But we're gonna find out why it's 300.

Um one one item that you know listening the town is very concerned is looking to get to their safe harbor. Um my quick calculation is that uh provided that we get approved uh you will at that point you will have safe harbor.

Um you'll have it for um provided that we pull a building permit within the first year you will have that safe harbor for two years. But you once we pull our building permits and things get going, our 300 units uh because it's a rental product. Some of your other projects are not all rental. You get credit towards your 10% on the full count. So there's 300 apartments.

Only 75 of them are affordable, but two but you get credit for full 300. You don't get that in your for sale product.

you. So if you're doing a 100 unit for sale product because it's rental and 20% of those are affordable there's 20 affordable that's all that goes towards your SHI whereas you do and that's where most municipalities come back and they say okay it is a large project strategically located close to the highway it has next to no abuts uh this enables us to protect other areas more sensitive

I understand the point but it's just it's small consolation for people that live nearby, right?

And there's also three other projects before you that would have put them over 10% if you hadn't applied. So, it's we understand, but it's not.

I don't think your three other projects get you there.

I I only one is for sale. The others are all rental.

Okay. But I understand the point.

Okay. So, um I'll entertain a motion.

Gentlemen, me. You?

Sure. Mhm.

I make a motion that we uh continue comprehensive permit ZCM.

Hold on. Hold on a second. I think he wants to make a point.

I Before you make the motion to continue, I think you need to make a motion. You were going to authorize staff regarding the peer review.

We didn't we thank you for reminding me about that.

All right, gentlemen.

We're going to authorize Cody Hadad, town administrator.

Yes. To engage both both peer review consult. Oh, no. All the peer reviewers.

all peerreview consultants.

Okay. I make a motion that we engage uh the town administrator uh Cody Hadad to uh to enga authorize authorize him to engage peerre uh people for this project.

Second.

All in favor?

I I So we've got that out of the way and then thank you very much for reminding us and now we'll move on to a motion to continue. I make a motion that we continue comprehensive permit ZCMP-25-3 to March 2nd, 2026 at 6 p.m.

At 6 p.m.

Second.

All in favor?

I The eyes have it.

All right. We're still in session, folks, so I ask you to be as quiet as possible.

Um, will we be able to find the um minutes of this meeting online? Yeah, it won't be for It won't be for a while.

It won't be for a while.

You can date.

It won't be for a while.

It won't be for a while. I can't give you a date, but you can watch this on YouTube TV if you want. We watch them.

Okay. So, gentlemen, um we've got some permit um some minutes. I I just ask that we we put them off table them till the next meeting.

I agree. We're tableabling all the administrative minutes and the and the review and approval of minutes for the next meeting.

We okay with that, gentlemen? We don't need a vote on it. We're okay with that.

No table.

Okay. Tabled.

Motion to adjurnn.

Make a motion that we adjourn.

Second.

All in favor? I. The eyes have it.