okay I'd like to start the public hearing for markart Mark cot uh subdivision uh it is 6:02 p.m. on the 23rd of July uh this I'm going to repeat what I said last time2 7:23 turn off your cell phones okay so I'm going to repeat what I said last time because we didn't have everybody in the room so this application was first considered in October 2023 staff recommended that the hearing be continued the board board concurred the board continued the hearing to December which was subse subsequently continued till February 2024 at the February 2024 hearing the planning office staff recommended that the proposal should either be continued or withdrawn redesigned and resubmitted due to the proposal proposal's Road being located directly adjacent to the Northerly lot lines that Road location would require a waiver staff found that the need for the waiver could be eliminated by Shifting the roads location Southward which would address some of the planning board's concerns about the subdivisions impact upon the over all overall area particularly the Fallon Drive subdivision following this planning board meeting the applicant approached myself and staff about the possibility of granting the town a full easement to the town-owned property to the east to allow full public access to the town property through the applicants proposed Private Road the planning board cannot accept an easement this is the purview of the select board to assess the utility of such an easement to the town staff asked various departments such as the Conservation Commission and the affordable housing trust and the highway department and so on about how the property could be used in the future there are no plans to modify the town-owned parcel conceptually or otherwise the easement question is a separate consideration from this hearing the planning board is tasked with determining whether the project conforms to the subdivision bylaws this proposal requests several waivers from the town zoning bylaws these waivers require that the planning board find that they are in the public interest these waivers require that the planning board five I'm sorry this will be Central to our decision here tonight at the 7:16 public hearing a week ago there were too many people for the public hearing to continue in the meeting room so the hearing was continued to this this evening at 6 pm here at the library for tonight's public hearing public input will be limited to 5 minutes each to allow those who wish to speak or ask a question through the chair adequate time please if you are going to voice the same concerns already voiced you may not need to duplicate them so I would like to uh ask the applicant to give us the Spiel they gave us last week uh good evening uh chairman board sure uh so my name is Matthew Pike I'm a registered professional engineer in the state of Mass I'm here with South Coast engineering on behalf of the applicant so Mar marot Drive subdivision is it's located at assesses plat 52 lot 28 uh 52 lot 28 is located on the east side of drift Road about a mile south of Old County Road the current law is accessed from drift Road by an approximately 10t wide gravel C path the existing lot is undeveloped and it's primarily comp comprised of Woodland and F field and contains approximately 16 Acres of which about 2.5 acres is wet within the existing lot we are proposing a 40ft wide roadway layout with a 22t wide paved way based on recent concerns that have been expressed by abuts and um in the planning department we've also created a a second U conceptual plan that will reduce the what you see here as a n lot subdivision to an eight lot subdivision and we'll also pull the um Perimeter Road away from the uh adjoining land and so I just want to say here to like I said last week contrary to some of the Flyers that have been going around town uh this is not a high density subdivision this is not a 40b subdivision this is not apartment building subdivision this is a standard uh per the zon and regulation subdivision each lot exceeds the 60,000 Square ft that are required by the zoning regulation the proposed lots are of similar lot shape size in a area of neighboring subdivisions to the immediate north and south and actually this subdivision has less lots and less lot per linear foot of roadway than the neighboring subdivisions as well um so I just get to the storm water so the storm water from the roadway will be directed to catch basins leading to a a closed conduit drainage system the closed system will discharge to a sediment for Bay which leads to an infiltration Basin uh in addition to the roadway bmps the underground infiltration units will be installed at strategic points adjacent to the proposed dwellings and HMA driveways the storm water treatment bmps will receive treat and recharge the storm water from the site as required and it's designed in accordance with the Massachusetts storm water stand standards the Westport rules and regulations governing subdivision of land and the Westport storm water quality and quanty control regulation uh and like I said based on previous review comments the project has been reworked as requested uh initially months ago there were eight design waivers and we are down to two design waivers with this plan that you see today and potentially One Design waiver if uh the roadway is pulled away from the northern property line and the lots are the Lots Essen will be reduced to to eight Lots as well if we pull it away from the northern popul L and so that's all I have to say I'm going to introduce the uh applicant's attorney Jonathan good evening my name is Jonathan Silverstein I'm with the firm of blatman B Browski Hy and Silverstein um as uh Matt just indicated um and I want to be clear there are no waivers from any zoning provision requested and obviously the planning board doesn't have the ability to Grant zoning waivers only the zoning board of appeals work these are uh as shown on this plan nine fully zoning conforming Lots on the revised plan that was submitted a week ago uh there would be eight fully zoning conforming Lots so just for clarification no zoning relief is required for this plan this is a by right single family residential subdivision um as the chair indicated one of the waivers that uh was required under the previous plan was for what's called a Perimeter Road uh under the board's subdivision rules and regulations uh perimeter roads are not allowed unless physical requirements of the configuration of the subdivision uh require a perimeter road now um we had asked for a waiver of that requirement because although for the beginning of the Perimeter Road uh there's literally no way to put the road in other than along the perimeter and so no waiver would be requested for that but as a way to um maximize and and um make the roadway as efficient as possible and also to coincide with an existing Gravel Road that's on the site um The Proposal was to have the roadway remain along the perimeter uh for most of the property uh although the board has granted that waiver um as far as I'm aware every time it's been asked for and recently approved a subdivision on Thomas Cory Drive um that didn't even ask for the waiver but had a Perimeter Road uh we had asked for the waiver and the reason we raised the idea of an easeman was because as the chair said the standard for granting a waiver is whether or not it's in the public interest we knew that the town had landlocked land with very limited access rights and we thought it would be in the public interest to offer an easement so that the town would have full access to its land um that was something we heard from town Administration was something that the the town would support and would be interested in but we've heard loud and clear from this board that that's not something that it's interested in pursuing and we've heard frankly from Neighbors that there's concern about what could happen with the town's land if it had full access rights so this new configuration of eight Lots pulls the subdivision Road away from the perimeter it's no longer a Perimeter Road and we would no longer need that waiver um and it would also not uh provide the town with an easement to the town's land which hopefully should allay some of the concerns people have about might happen with the town's land so what we have now is a fully zoning compliant eight lot single family subdivision that asks for one waiver and that one waiver is that the layout of the road does not have a 25 foot radius on one side it has it on one side uh it has it on the North side but not on the South Side um and that is an absolutely necessary waiver because we just don't have the layout we don't own the land to provide for 25 ft radius on the South Side um and it's of no practical consequence because the constructed Road itself will meet all of the requirements including the radius of the pavement itself um where it meets the uh the travel public way so uh we've reduced from eight waiver requests originally um when this proposal first came before the board to one single waiver request we've put in a sidewalk um even though you know frankly it's a it's a sidewalk to a public way with no sidewalk um for eight Lots but we were asked to do it so we put in the sidewalk we eliminated that waiver we uh at Mr dl's request we um change the drainage layout so that um uh or drainage design rather so that that's fully compliant and I would note that um the board's peer reviewer has raised no technical concerns with uh with the subdivision as designed um and we've eliminated a number of other waivers simply because we heard at the outset that too many waivers were being requested and we're down to one single waiver that is literally out side of our ability to uh to not ask for and that is the 25 ft radius on the south side of the subdivision Road where it meets the intersection um and as a result uh the lot number has gone from 9 to 8 and um there is uh no longer a Perimeter Road once the configuration of the lot allows us to pull the road away from the perimeter um which is what's required under the subdivision regulations so uh that's where we are in summary and uh we're happy to answer any questions that the board might have okay I I have one and and that is um the requirement to not have the have a Perimeter Road um by moving the road 5 ft do you believe that that is compliant with the with the nature of the reason why we have that regulation well I guess let me answer that in two parts first of all yes perimeter means perimeter um it's not on the perimeter going and there's nothing in the regulations that requires some minimum offset um um I would also note that you you mentioned the reason for this regulation the reason I can imagine for the regulation is to potentially protect AB budding properties from glare and noise and other potential impacts of the subdivision road so I would note that the nearest house is 400 ft through densely vegetated land from this proposed roadway so I don't frankly see any need or any interest served by strictly enforcing this requirement particularly where as I said two months ago over the written objections of council for a Butters the board allowed a Perimeter Road without even uh requiring a waiver request so I see no purpose served by prohibiting a Perimeter Road here at all where there's hundreds of feet between this roadway the roadway isn't pointing in at any houses so there's no issue about glare there's the noise from an eight lot subdivision through eight you know 400 ft of heavy heavily vegetated land I don't see what public interest is being um damaged there uh and if you take The View that it has to be more than 5T the question is how much more because if it has to be substantially more than the physical constraints of the lot including Wetlands would require the Perimeter Road and if that's the case we don't even require a waiver because the regulation explicitly says that if a Perimeter Road is required based upon physical constraints of the L no waiver is requested or a Perimeter Road is allowed um so we wouldn't even have to ask for a waiver if this does count as a Perimeter Road but frankly if there's any ambiguity in the board's regulation about what constitutes a Perimeter Road that's not that's to be construed not against the applicant um particularly where it's not a regulation that has been enforced against any other subdivision so uh yes I I think this complies and yes I certainly think that the interests that underly this regulation in the first place are in no way harmed when you have hundreds of feet between this road which is only serving eight lots and the nearest house so it's your contention that if we if we approve the subdivision that had a periment road without a waiver that we have to do that forever well no subdivisions I don't think that's what I said Mr chair what I said was you've allowed perimeter roads for every subdivision that's asked for not just one and to to my knowledge check back 50 years well I know that we've checked back many years and I guess the question is if you're going to deny it for this one where you haven't denied it for any recent subdivision the question would be why is it because this subdivision creates some special impact in to abutters in a way that other subdivisions did not I don't think it does when you have hundreds ofe you'll have your chance to speak individually but no convincing while we're having a hearing please so if the board routinely grants waivers from a specific regulation and denies it in one specific instance the question is whether that's arbitrary and capricious under the statute and I would argue it would be arbitrary and capricious to deny it for the first time in this case where there's no demonstrated basis to treat this subdivision different from others but we don't even have to go there because we're no longer we no longer require that waiver because we no longer have a Perimeter Road unless there's some provision in the uh rules and regulations that I have missed that defines a Perimeter Road as being within some distance of the boundary line and I looked for it and couldn't find it so not only have you never denied this waiver not only have you not required it just two months ago but we don't even require the waiver anymore well I would say that each subdivision is unique and each decision is unique to the subdivision so I I would not uh go with what you said but anyway uh other board members just a reminder there are 12 empty seats up in the first two rows for anyone in the back who may have a a problem hearing the discussion and um I should note that uh there's a stack of 8 1 half by 11 copies of the new plan if anyone wants on the table right there did I have a copy that oh I'm sorry Angy mentioned that you had printed it out I think I think it's the same one well it's 5T away Mr CH if I could as well just add please be quiet so I just want to add as well so based on uh the planner comments that they wished us to uh bring the lack okay we're not going to continue until this quiet a large one so I just wanted to add as well so based on the comments read that there was a desire for us to uh bring the lot line away from the perimeter uh lot lines and also reduce the Lots so even with bringing the peral lot line away from it this nine fully zoning compli Lots can still be attained for this layout but we've just further gone and reduced it by one lot since that was request us uh so we're going to go to the planning board first for their comments and questions and then individually to anybody that would like to speak or ask a question and when we do that I would ask that you come up here to the corner and speak to the whole audience and to us five minutes only Mike Mark that's cool um naan can you enlarge the intersection of marot drive and drift road so we could see that in a little more detail please so does this uh just to be clear here do you show the actual traveled way and the radius of it as it meets the southwest corner we know that the northeast corner has the 25 ft radius but you can't provide us with that similar radius but you stated the ACT Road itself will have a radius what and I can't see so the the paved uh radius is in the red uh hidden line so red dash line yeah so you can see that the the required radius right there for the payment and the required radius right there for the payment well that it's hard to see that Southwest radius there's just a lot there's a lot going on there there's a stone wall there's a there's a property line there's a lot of lines there if you were to zoom in on the cad drawing it matches it to me that poses a potential public safety issue because what is H I visited this site in uh in February and I saw some of the Town trucks entering and exiting and I can only imagine when this is developed with the house Lots you have the homeowners with their trips to work or to the market or to schools whatever you will have service trucks you will have delivery trucks there'll be uh landscapers you know with their long trailers and that's a very if you're coming let's say you're coming out of marod Drive trying to turn left to go south on drift Road I I have a concern that that is not an adequate radius for one for one thing that corner that you don't own has a tree in it and there can be you have no control over the vegetation in that corner and I think that that that's a danger that uh is very hard to see around that corner if you're trying to exit marot drive and so that that is a uh in my opinion um an issue of Public Safety of which I have some concern I I appreciate your concern 100% but what I can say is now you see the trucks entering and exiting the way now right now it's a 10t graveled way with no radius and a much steeper uh driveway uh this will be fully developed as required per the plan plan aboard and fire regulations so everything will meet has a level landing area as before we asked for the W from it now it has the level landing area and it has the required pavement radiuses per the fire eggs so it's and it's will be no different than the like the most recent subdivision that was also granted without the um the radius on the southern side it's clear that you can if you were exiting going north you can see around the corner you can see traffic coming but in this case exiting going south there just isn't you know with a sweep of a 25t radius there it's a it's easier it's more visibility and and so I I have some I question that yes I would just note again you have you an engineering pear reviewer this site meets ashto sight line requirements they didn't they didn't raise any concerns about that if we had the required layout width radius the road would look no different it would just be that the layout was a little bigger this road the paved Road fully complies with all of the board's requirements the only thing it doesn't have is the layout radius which the board's regulations don't require you do anything with uh and again as Matt said this uh waiver also has been granted uh routinely by the board I assume because it doesn't change the actual Road from any safety standpoint because it's not what you're building it's what is shown on a line on paper which doesn't change uh the safety of the road and there's literally no option I mean if the board denies that waiver then this land is rendered unbuildable and that's obviously a very different situation so that's also Where the Sidewalk comes out in that same area too right yeah the sidewalk will terminate scale of my plans kind the the sidewalk will terminate at the pavement and that existing tree is not in the line of sight as you saying the you said I think if there's an existing tree there it wasn't it's outside of the layout outside of what layout outside of our property layout it must be on the other side of the property I mean the layout supposed to be uh I think it's so many feet down L A Sight down drift road coming out of that access I'm not following so when when you come out of the when you come out of the out of the roadway on the drift road on the drift Road layout yeah so the drift Road layout the line site supposed to go for this exit into this into drift Road and I think it's I'm not sure but I think it might be 1,00 ft so if you if you taken a left so you talking about taking a left out of there so you're actually on the right side of the road so that left radius wouldn't affect it in any way you're supposed to be having the line of sight down the layer of the drift Road and so if there's a tree in that location I don't think we're in control of clearing the town's [Applause] layout the town layout be on beond the property lines the other thing is to I've had a consultant a town consultant um do that on the project in town many years before I was on the board and we had to clear 1,000 ft down Road 177 so if if the tree is in the town's public way layout and the town gives us permission to cut that tree down we're happy to do it so if you want to make that a condition um obviously if the tree is on private property of someone else we can't touch it if it's in the town's layout and the town gives us permission we're happy to accept uh that as a condition I would note that not only is the um the radius of our road fully compliant but the actual paved portion of drift RADS is some distance in from the property line so when you're if a car is sitting here at the intersection it's on the north side of the intersection which gives it more um sight distance and it's further forward beyond the property line which gives it more sight distance and I guess the question is there's no fire department police department engineer opinion that this is anything other than a perfectly safe roadway configuration so denying it based on conjecture I I would argue is is not so on the Perimeter Road part too I mean one of the things when you say the boards granted this waiver before one of the one of the I do remember the abutter on that property in planing board meeting expressing his concern of the roadway against this property um I don't I did not visit the site myself and hopefully that abut is here and can express because from what I'm hearing from the engineer now that there's several hundred feet of Woodland in that back guy I just well I just I just want to also say the so uh based on the peer review's comments uh under streets one he stated the proposed Street will confer safe vehicular travel and I believe the the plan and board uh comments state of the same um and as to the test can't be if if one a butter objects to a subdivision because then nothing would ever get built a Butters always object to having the lane next to them developed as in the um recent subdivision the board just approved Council for the de for the abutter gave a detailed Written Letter objecting to exactly the same Perimeter Road configuration which the board approved so it can't be if if an abutter objects the waiver gets denied and there my memory is that the abutting houses were actually closer to the subdivision road than in this instance and I I just add to that as well so if if there's any concern with screening now there's an additional 5 Fe but we can gladly place a role of OB diesel on that that row that would or fencing I meaning additional screening we're happy to accept any reasonable conditions the board might impose but what we can't do is say well the lot's un the unbuildable because we have a road that has to be close to the boundary otherwise we've lost all of the buildable land there's no way to get buildable Lots on this property without a road that is close to the perimeter well the reduction of lots the reduction of lot would create lot well maybe two maybe three so I guess the question is on the subdivision that you just approved which is four Lots on less than half of the aage should we take fewer than that on more than double the land based upon what compelling interest I guess is the question why why is this proposal the one that gets denied when your peer reviewer set it safe when the road is further than the other from Ab budding houses what is the distinguishing factor that causes this applicant to have to bear that Financial harm I I had uh had the serious criticism about the drainage the drainage was revised um and this is an example that we see all the time um this is a another example of good land planning so we have nice neighborhoods in the future this is an example of treating the subdivision rules and regulations as a geometry quiz what is the shape of this land how many Lots can I maximize on it and what do the lot Lots end up looking like and they end up looking like this long narrow the road is configured to maximize the number of Lots now that's not a reason for turning this down the applicant if the lots are in fact compliant with our rules and regulations the law that governs us says plans that comply with the rules and regulations shall be approved so I I don't I don't know whether this eight lot plan complies but we will check to to see if it does but this the prior n lot subdivision um was was so egregious in how they took our rules and regulations and shaped these Lots um that we proposed an article at town meeting to change the shape factor of our lots and to require them to be more regular town meeting turned that down planning board is overstepping its bound it's controlling people's lands it's it's taking those those kinds of steps that's not the planning boards intent we we almost never ever turn down people who compl comply with our rules and regulations but we are trying to have the development fit in the town that we all love so uh this may get approved but it's it it is again you know it is driven by a single Factor Lots now bring a lot of money the developers believe that the way to maximize their return is to maximize the number of loans they're entitled to do that as long as it complies with our regulations it's and it's our job to make sure that this thing does comply with their regulations so I I'll look again at the drainage we do have a peer review that says it's all right um we are equipped to look at these things and we will give this a good review right okay so um I'm going to open it to the public so if you would like to speak please raise your hand and come up here to the corner and speak loudly [Music] and before you start we need your name and your [Applause] address Michael Beria 24 am way uh I see these uh well I have two concerns basically the road concern the entrance on and off the road uh there's not enough straight away on both sides to start off with and now we want to narrow the road to come in and out so that's one of my concerns I don't see the drainage plan on the new plan and that that concerns me because it affects me the most because it goes right according to the old plan they have a easement and the drainage goes right for Bullseye for my house so we have enough what is your address 24 a way and and I will be W most of this whole thing and that's my two concerns in and out of that road because there's not enough area enough view on both sides because it's on you got a curve on one side and you got to have curve on the other side that's my my biggest concerns okay thank you next uh T Ryden 34 Fallon Drive um I understand the planning board's constraints um and the lot may be the plan may be compliant um also concerned about the safety on drift Road um what I would and um I think the attorney was revealing when he stopped himself he said that to change to an lot subdivision to maximize and then he changed Direction I think you're right it's maximizing profit um the I would ask the developer the um gentleman who purchased the property spent $330,000 on it um that if they combined the first two lots and the second two lots um they would reduce the density allow more um space between the pro projects or the houses and still make a really good profit um and that that would help um and and the question I so that would be one request is is to consider the you have a big audience here people are really concerned about what's being proposed is there a balance that you can come to where you reduce the number of lots a little bit more and still make a decent profit um the second question I have is I don't I would turn to the planning board at the last full hearing there had been a suggestion if you changed it to a four lot subdivision you could have a um a rural residential a rural residential Road does that um alleviate the some of the um radius concerns if it's a smaller road so that would help um so I again I think there are some options for the developer to consider to um stay more in character of what drift Road in the town is like um still get a decent profit but address a lot of the concerns that are here today and um you know be more compatible with what the intent of the unfortunately not passed zoning bylaw is and um and I it looks like there's a lot of wetlands sort of intersecting those property lines to make it challenging to put in the septics and Wells and all that so if you had bigger Lots you can sell them for more so you might not lose that much profit because it's a much more appealing subdivision the comment from the engineer about how the density compared to fall and drive those are all houses on one side of the road as opposed to the developments on either side where the houses are more spread out because they're on both sides of the road you can't do that here so um again those are my concerns and thoughts thank you thank you uh at that February meeting I was the one that suggested that they could do a rural residential Lane with four or five Lots uh the requirements for the road are much simpler uh you don't have to pave the road uh you still have to put Utilities in the road uh and if you had four Lots uh you wouldn't have to go so far wouldn't be such a big thing you wouldn't have as much U storm water to deal with and um Tanya is right it would they would sell for more money um and I think that that is a viable alternative that would be more keeping with the with the area um we can't require it but I think it would be a much better sub and I'm not sure that it would net you much less money and it would give you a lot less headaches to construct anyway next yes sir I'm David dorski I I'm at 11 Fon Drive I want to show you I'm in the butter to the road this is me right here um I gave you there I think I will um let me set my CL clock's running now okay so uh on February 6th I gave a v a video presentation uh and I want to uh I didn't prepare to give it again sparing you but uh I want to make two preliminary comments the first is that um we've been discussing a revised proposal that I found out about yesterday the eight lot proposal was submitted late for the consideration of this committee and I believe that it's a violation of the rules for cons consideration of proposals so we're discussing a revision that the community has not had a chance to uh look at and uh it has not been properly vetted by the planning board so I don't think we should even be talking about the so-called revision that takes the periphery road back 5 ft and I think that uh the right phrase would be they're skirting the issue what they're doing is complying with within the letter of the law but not within the spirit of the law amen okay then I I want to go on with my the rest of my time um this intersection where the uh marot Lane intersects with drift Road I I've lived in this I've lived here seven years I jog and walk here almost every day nearly every day of the week the sight distance here is treacherously short there is a reason why there are signs and mirrors on either side of this entryway so that trucks don't cause accidents if we add the truck traffic to the traffic of eight nine or eight residences with children shopping service Vehicles there going to be accidents here people the speed limit on drift road is 30 mph but it's rare when someone complies with that Ste I I don't know if anyone was here for my video but I actually took videos of the traffic going by in both directions the site distance is short and the speeds are in excess of 40 m an hour there will be accidents here there will be serious accidents here and it will involve children these children are going to go to school school there going to be school buses there's going to be all kinds of pedestrian traffic here and this is going to create a dangerous situation as of now it's not dangerous because there are mirrors and signs and the truck drivers are very experienced over the town and we haven't seen any trouble with the trucks okay that's the first point the second point is this peripheral Road I I am the person who will be primarily affected by this I'm concerned that the storm water runoff onto my property which is below the grade of this road by about 18 in will create a Swale such that I will not be able to use as part of the property there was a misrepresentation during Mr Silverstein's presentation of this being a heavily vegetated lot my sight my line of sight to this road is unobstructed by vegetation that was a misrepresentation in the presentation um Janette Cole's lot is heavily wooded but she is not affected she's off the off the road here this is me here so I will be infected directly my lot will be flooded I don't care what mitigation uh the drainage is is set to provide um the last okay uh okay those are the only points I want to make I believe in in summary that this waiver if granted will lead to dangerous accidents and is a fatal flaw in The Proposal I don't care if they can't develop this land if it results in serious accidents the so-called reduction of the or the uh offset of this peripheral Road by 5 feet is again complying maybe maybe complying with the letter of the law but it's not complying with the spirit of the law because it's still going to be a peripheral Road it will still spill storm water to the north and it will result in my property being adversely affected and it it uh okay and um I think those are my only points and my time is up thank you um my name is Steve Fletcher I live at 42 drift Road and um I walk by that piece of land every day early in the morning because later in the morning it's dangerous drift Road's history goes back to before any anyone settled here goes back to Native Americans uh it was established that path by them I think that it was a cow Trail farmer Trail has a very early history it was declared by the state of Massachusetts as a Heritage landscape and these Landscapes convey aspects of our shared history that Forge our cultural identity lovely words um they said one of the major threats to such a designated landscape is pressure from presidential subdivision so we've already seen some of that okay but we have we have control over what's going to happen in the future drift road is narrow it's windy it's hilly it's dangerous it's used by Walkers Runners women the strollers U me walking early in the morning um I would I would agree with the previous speaker that uh people R I would say 80% of the people ignore the speed limit um we've been here 10 years we're newbies but I've started walking on that road to 333 drift road is right down the street um that became it took me 4 and 1/2 years to buy that property there's 252 acres of land um the developer I believe of this property um talked to somebody from the land Court the commissioner who told him uh he told him we can put four houses here this land is environmentally very sensitive and finds its way through Wetlands into Kirby Brook was which is a per cold water stream anyway to make a long story short because it was designated a possibility or probability of putting four house Lots there the price of the property went up but we bit the bullet and we bought it and we put all but 2 Acres of the property in conservation it's protected forever we subdivided one piece 2 Acres associated with an unlivable house there that's it we we're trying to do what we can do to preserve the beauty of drift Road I really we can't get everything we want but I the hidden driveway issue has been discussed at nauseum but it's a big issue all right and I've seen in recent history two accidents on drift Road one right near the Buzzards Bay land that Jeff and Wendy Henderson worked with those organizations uh there was an accident there they hit a telephone po this about two months ago split it in half and and the stone wall in front of the property that we bought at 333 drift Road very near this um somebody demolished a whole section of a stone wall because they're going very fast all right never mind dead birds possums deer no people yet but it'll happen sooner or later um I've seen it all so I find it uh very worrisome what can I say and also was the timing was off with this interest in farming this land um um in fact I think some of it is rented so it can be farmed by the butter um what a wonderful thing to see this land farm the woman who has this Farm is immensely talented and she told me several months ago we planted onions I said how many plants 40,000 she's serious isn't Westport all about farming I think there would be an opportunity for the gentleman who owns this property to sell it for such purposes and not lose money um so I know U this is this is um uh maybe more philosophical presentation than anything but that entrance is uh one of the biggest issues this should be argued with and that's it yes sir I live at 167 just broke could you speak a little louder at 167 drift Road and your name my name is Emanuel F I've been here 4 years I just came out of for River to come here because I wanted to get out of the city and I I I love drift Road it's quiet I watch a lot of these people walk when I'm going to work they right I live coming down there's a green house on the right side I see cars coming down that hill and one of these days I'm going to see it in my yach in my house cuz they do fly they fly down that road I it's no tomorrow and I'm just waiting for a snowy day and it's going to come and they're going to slip and they're going to go right into my garage and crash right through I don't want to see any more traffic there I I really don't I see the bike rides they do do through there in the summertime I see jogging th uh people jogging running T tournaments for jogging walk walk thing things I see a lot of good things up and down that road and then you have the canoe place down at the end and you're just going to destroy it if you put all these Eight houses they want to build that's fine they can build but I just don't think it should be eight houses that's my my thing thank you is Sir in the back with a hand up oh Ma'am I'm sorry just saw the hand just the hand I was hiding [Applause] hi everyone Nicole plant uh 803 Main Road uh owner of even kill realy I grew up on drift Road I am in my mid 50s um so a lot of these faces know me um and I was born and raised here there was more cows than houses back when I was raised on drift Road um I loved when the summer people came in but I want some facts to be cleared up about this I own a real estate company this property was on the market for a little while I would like to ask the planning board was this property not in 60 1 a before and the town had the right to purchase this property yes it was not and I also had gone to conservation myself to ask conservation to buy this property they did not buy this property farmers were also asked to buy this property at market value they did not so there are a lot of misconceptions with this property with all of that vetted at the time no one purchased this property so I do want some of the misconceptions that happened that there was a ton of people that tried to get the town who denied it they have the right to sign off and buy it they did not conservation did not purchase this property Farmers could not afford or get loans for it at the time so there is a misconception about this specific piece of property I was not involved in any of these transactions but no one came forward and Steve has done a wonderful job as like buying a person a person buying land and conserving it himself people are doing that in this town and doing a wonderful job but nobody here bought the land and conserved it that gives a right for a developer to develop it in my opinion because again no one stepped forward and that is exactly what that is rights of personal property rights and I'm sorry that I'm going to say that because I drew up on drift Road and I worked with the land trust to try to save this so please that's just what I want some things to be cleared up but this was in 61 and the town did have the right to purchase this property Nicole I'm going to ask you a question I don't remember it coming before the planning board for our opinion about the 161a it had to have been signed off it's over four years ago she had it in 61a on the side on the side I don't think so I remember going to the land trust and I remember talking to the listing agent and it had to be signed off on I'm a member of West Conservation Commission and it never came before as a 61a never came before it never came before us which which smells fishy to me so I I have paperwork but again I was told it was 61a because I had a buyer that could not get it out of 61a so I'm just letting you know what I've been had and I had paperwork you know was not the listing agent but there was process and it was on the market for over almost 6 months this property well then the process fell down because it never and that's why I that's why I'm here because I'm trying to figure out where this loophole came at up also because at 61a if it's such a concern that's why from I'm from dff well it there seems to be some dispute but regardless of that the town cannot buy every property correct comes up under 61a anyway so just again that's what I have been I had reared it and farmer and brought it to Farmers attention so thank you Mr CH can I just make one point of clarification just to the I don't know that this matters uh that it's relevant to the board's deliberations but I just quickly Googled it in July 12th 2022 this came before the board and the board uh took a vote to um recommend that the land be released from chapter 61a on a motion by Mr dor I I don't think it was 61a I think that to sub all right anybody else yes sir I'm Dana Ferrero from 313 drift Road and also 311 drift Road two pieces of property right across the street from that opening over there and um oh so far I like I agree but everyone said here pretty much and uh I am concerned about getting out of that uh laneway there taking a left heading south especially school buses is coming out of there be pretty bad big trucks they were talking about sidewalks who's going to maintain the sidewalks there the town would that be on the town cuz they can't even maintain the ones we got you know the ones on read road in front of the cemetery are a mess so I was wondering about the sidewalks that's a big concern and is there going to be any light poles on the sidewalks that going to be lit up you know so that's another concern of mine and the main thing is this is personally I do have a right away to the river using that lane to get down to the river and I'm concerned about that right losing that or whatever or being compensated for it or something but I don't want to do that go the Town trucks come in and out of there and so the cars and town trucks and that's going to be a mess that's going to be pretty crazy I think school buses I don't know so I say keep it small don't even develop it if you can two houses one house would be good with me but uh and uh across my 311 drift Road right right where that opening is you know there about 30 Acres over there and ain't figured out what's going to happen with that yet you know want to keep that conserve that if we can but it's getting out of hand and you say the houses are going to bring in tax money our taxes never go down so they can put up mansions still going to pay taxes it ain't going to make no difference just getting crazy so I guess that's all I got to say you know okay anybody else chair whiton thank you for the opportunity to speak my name is Jake MCG from 202 and also 397 drift Road um it's kind of telling that we're here tonight again with the turnout like this uh by the community I think it's got to be a concern I think people are concerned with the resources as many of you have discussed in the past with water there's only a finite amount of water under this ground in town and as we continue to build and continue to put houses on there it becomes more and more difficult to find that water just two years ago we've had uh three Wells uh on drift Road that went dry during that drought and now we do have that farm in that location um that is obviously drawing some water as well cluster nine houses or eight houses you're also going to have that problem again outside the purview of the planning board but you guys have addressed that in previous meetings um secondly I'm a member of the westbo Conservation Commission I sit in your seat uh on the other side of that table many times and we do have controversial topics as well so you have to make a very difficult decision at times and and I've made many difficult decisions and been basically the only one opposed to many things in town like solar Fields let's clear cut 40 acres to put in a solar field my opinion that's not environmental and that's not a conservation but I think from your standpoint you have something that you can and cannot approve with the radius I think there is a safety concern I look through this crowd and I can probably say 25 to 30% of the people in this crowd are Walkers I see them every morning they see me every morning my redneck truck where I have to pull off to the side of the side of the lane so I don't hit him and I think you're going to have a very similar situation um at that entrance uh coming out there the farmers that do farm that Community they actually put mirrors up on both telephone poles in order to walk as pedestrians this is not for vehicle traffic this is for them to actually safely walk from those fields onto drift Road uh so I think that needs to be a very big concern um for the safety standpoint you know of the of that development again I Echo the sentiments of David dorski or Dr dorski uh Mr Steven Fletcher and and M M rodden as well they've laid it out very succinctly they've all been me they've all been Neighbors on drift Road I'm actually at 202 drift road which is a little bit further down Fallon Drive so when I leave I bet you a few people have seen me I've popped out and then realize oh no let me back up let that Co car go by pull forward again back up again I believe that you are going to have serious issues with the safety um and traffic on that road right there especially with 9 well nine eight house Lots let's assume there's two an average of two cars per house that's 16 to 18 cars a day essentially add Amazon add oil delivery because we're not there's not going to be natural gas down there you're going to have uh you know heating oil trucks going in and out ups and various other things so um from a standpoint of the neighborhood and the benefit of the neighborhood I think we really need do need to look at how that's going to impact that neighborhood and then secondly we continue to talk about this lot and how it went for 330,000 or 300,000 this lot was basically told to many people in the neighborhood and throughout that it was an unbuildable lot it was not a buildable lot now I I appreciate the ability of the developer to find a way to develop that that's in his ability uh to do that but that is one of the major reasons why even if it was in 61a that many people did not look at it because it was told it was unbuildable and that's why it went for 300,000 if you would have told me I could have got it for 300,000 I probably could have grabbed two or three people here and we all could have purchased it um but that again that is history and uh that's kind of why we're here today but again I think the process from from where this started to where it's become with the rumors going out there about affordable housing about the town getting Frontage and using that land I think that is what has created this kind of uproar here and it's it's it's unfortunate because hey that it's not possible to do it there right and we all know that but that's what has created this fervor and I think the issue is now we do have in deference to to the developers I do believe it's it is a high density looking at how close these houses are um how many people in town do you hear from now about Sodom Road they're appalled by driving up and down Sodom Road this is a very similar development it will be off the road it may not be visible to that extent but uh I think those are some of the concerns so I do believe that the safety issue needs to be addressed the resources outside of your perview but I think that is a concern with all the neighbors um with all the developments and houses that back up to it so I appreciate it shair whiten I appreciate it members of the committee so thank you thank you anybody else okay's a hand down there sorry good evening I'm Sean Le France uh I live at 36 Amy way I've lived there for 20 plus years and I I grew up on Fallon Drive I Al I lived there uh over 20 years and I know you you said don't come reiterate what people say um but I think the traffic safety and the public safety on the turning onto drift road and in that area with the sight lines is is very dangerous and I think having more congestion and more cars I think um I I oppose the development thank you anybody else yes ma'am I'm Mary zapus I'm at 11 Fon Drive I've lived here seven years and I just want to say what Mr Silverstein mentioned the dense vegetative growth that's really only true four months of the year um from about uh late September till late may we do have a wonderful view of that field and living on Fallon Drive looking around I see a house here a house there but I don't see five homes facing my backyard possibly with lights on and uh no tree cover so it's right now a refuge for wildlife it's wonderfully dark at night and I think that that um much of the reason we moved here will be lost if the development goes in as planned thank you anybody else yeah one more thing you know I hear everyone saying about how long they lived in Westport well I've been here 70 years on drift road too on drift Road seen a lot of good and a lot of bad a lot of upside downs and uh I used to walk just next door one of two addresses up to go check on my mother every day and I went through the back fields all down the woods I didn't want to walk on drift Road it was so bad just to walk to go see my mother every morning make sure was all right but anyways that's it 70 years so you know that's Frank neighbor I remember that yeah well yeah I guess that's how they drive on under that's 500 ft from the entrance to that road look at that car I did want to mention too that as you're aware drift Road the vast majority of Road there's no shoulder right so there are people going by on vehicles and they want they want me to like jump off the road the briers and poison ivy so much of their Road there is nowhere to go nowhere see you're at the mercy of these drivers and anybody else going by um and um they why didn't the road 50 ft anybody else yes sir just a basically a question uh Tony m s Piper So currently the town has a RightWay to that Gravel Pit you know which is that current the the proposed Road would the town lose that right of way with this subdivision the the town uh has has I guess you could call it a prescriptive easement uh to do what they do which is Drive gravel trucks cuz there was uh there was uh if you guys don't know there was hundreds of thousands of dollars of clean fill from the high school project that was put there for future use so the town owns 29 Acres over there it's a lot of trash down there too Y and so apparently it was used also for shooting range by the police uh the highway department still uses it to bring stumps and brush and all kinds of stuff uh the town has no immediate design on what to do with that but it is 29 acres and it'll be something someday I don't know what but I don't think it'll be housing but maybe it would be Recreation maybe it would be a a spot to get to the river for people I don't know but I don't think the town loses their easement once the subdivision goes the question of how strong an easement it is if they could do anything down there I don't know they would have to fight it out with a landowner and if it becomes a public road who knows so does the town another spot where they can burn brush if we have a wind storm and all the branches break down because that's what they do that's that's the area where they do it I don't think they do so what's going to happen when all the trees fall down next time we have a storm and we don't have a place for it they still have the right they still have a use for that for the town you know what I mean it's it's not like it's just sitting there right anybody else yes sir in the back uh pauler 19 HS way uh I think if we're down to one variance it sounds like to me that is the most important variance it's that line of sight uh looking South coming in and out of that road so as someone that lives on Ames way travels the road as many of my previous speakers have mentioned if we can't do it for Public Safety I don't know what we do it for because uh I don't think there's anything more important you know I've heard lighting and vegetation but we all know that stuff uh unfortunately we can't control all of it but uh I think when it comes out to Public Safety the safety of our children our family members our community members I think that speaks for itself thank you I have a comment I'm from R first of all safety is ridiculous in the past month I know two people that have been hit on the bicycle right in that area two there are two cemeteries down there one the town knows about the other they do not what's going to happen to those two cemeteries they're like 200 years old they're mocked with stone okay no one has looked into that and it's just that other pot that the town owns where they dump all their brush over 50 years that was used as the rifle range for the police department the lead the shells that are in there how are you getting clean water there it's all the lead the shells they're there that's been usedful over 50 years like Dana I've lived on drift Road I'm 58 I've been born and raised there my family's been there forever I'm just it's a point this is I mean you're all talking about the ground you got three lots that only have 36,000 sare ft of buildable the rest is wetland how are where's the sector going to go and then everybody's going to say the farm is a pollute in the river where's the last Farm on drift Road they're all gone ma' that was kud we need your name your name and address 418 D than I'm David LMA I live with my wife at 418 D drift Road and I've lived owned here for about 38 years and lived here for the last 10 years and been involved with um Garden rails and old bridges and new bridges on drift Road and I'm very familiar with all the ins and outs and aspects of safety around um what's happened and with all due respect to the attorney I'm an attorney myself and uh the fact is that this is a unique parcel you can't refer to all the other Parcels that we're talking about what they there because we're talking about this parcel in this piece of land and this piece of land is on drift road which has been overdeveloped already to a point where it's almost dangerous to be walking bicycling anything you do over there my wife want to let me drive on that road on a bicycle because it's so dangerous now you take that intersection that we're talking about and it's virtually impossible to see the whole road if you just get on any kind of Transportation bicycle walking anything on drift Road the traffic is brutal it's way too fast we're now negotiating about building a bridge over there we're having conversations about what size bridge how big bridge what we're going to do with uh bicycles and Walkers and we diminish the road now with the guardrails that are there this just compounds the problem and I agreed with some of the members here Aesthetics matter we don't need nine more houses on that road we don't need any on that road the the rural nature of this town is getting diminished by the minute somewhere I know it may be legal to put them there but I think with all due respect uh I think we could use arguably we could use safety as the reason why not to allow this happen because that is one dangerous turn when you are going south it doesn't exist on Fon drive it doesn't exist on am way it definitely exists there it definitely exists there it is a safety issue that I could hang my hat on in a courtroom thank you so are we winding down or is anybody else [Applause] Delian 256 drip Road um I reviewed some of the packets from the engineer that reviewed the plans and it depicts the South that there's no curve from the south which is inaccurate there is a curve there's a curve to the north but 192 ft there's a cur to the South about equal distance you can look at itle Earth you can take Dimensions you can take views from the road I ride my bike on there the road's dangerous people drive too fast and um that exit of the proposed development is hidden from both the North Direction and from the south Direction you come around two corners and you're on top of that that dirt road you can miss it if you're coming up and um they just wanted to you know Public Safety I think is U main reason to look at that waiver request on the southwest side um if all the Lots conform they do but it's a if you can't put a road there then you can't have any houses so if um you know the board would consider the safety of that waiver um to the South Southwest in the fact that the engineers report um depicts that Southwest view as no curve of this inacurate as a curve so that's all thank you so sir are you the one that sent the pictures by email yes and that's part of the record you have those right so uh anybody else okay so want a motion Mr chair close the uh I I think we should discuss whether we want to close the hearing or continue it to be able to look at this new proposal so what is the feeling of the board I I was of the opinion before we got here tonight uh before I knew that we had another proposal uh that we would close the hearing and have a vote um now I'm a little unsure whether we should close the hearing or should we we haven't had uh time or the resources to review the new submission that came on Sunday so what is the opinion of the board should we I have a I have a lot of concern with the new submission again the first time I saw it as when was sitting here and I was actually looking at the plane and they couldn't tell the difference um so I think I think all in fness to the public and the applicant I think if he wants to um use this as a as a reason saying he doesn't need a waiver we all need more time to look at it I mean this new proposal does not change the condition at the intersection of drift Road and uh marot Drive uh it does move the Perimeter Road as it's called 5T off the adjacent property line but and and reduces it down by one lot but uh we if this or any subdivision plan is brought before us and it does comply with our reg rules and regulations we have to approve it when a waiver is requested that is not something we have to Grant we can or we may not and uh that condition they've stated they cannot do anything about they cannot change that and uh so I don't know what would be changed between now and continuing the hearing to review this new submission so Mark I I think that um they're going to argue that if we deny that waiver that we're preventing them from using their land and that is not correct so if we Deni this waiver if they did a rural residential Lane the requirements are 40 foot right away not a 50 foot right away and they would have room I believe for the radius they just move the road over a little bit and you would have a radius um and you could do four lots and that would allow them to use their land so there a 40 foot RightWay that's required for this uh subdivision as well so uh nothing would change between this or a two lot or a three lot or a four lot that that condition would still exist Mr chairman can I just yep and now sorry I'll give John a chance he's been um uncharacteristically silent but uh but just to continue my thought is that uh I I also feel that were this to be reduced to three or four Lots um I would be far far more disposed to granting a waiver um the fact is that when you talk about values um you know there's an old saying sometimes less is more and uh many of you might or some of you might be old enough to remember but most of you are too young anyway we had a a wonderful land appraiser in this town working in this area named Jim Zina and Jim was always of that opinion that when he looked at property here in Westport and he counseled families as to whether they should divide their property between let's say 10 Lots or three lots he would always say that less is more that in fact he he would sometimes argue sell it as one piece he had this saying a kingdom lot he said a kingdom lot is what people want because this this is unique landscape in this region and uh people there are some people with the means and the uh and and the desire to have a large piece of land which they can conserve that they can Farm they can have horses uh any number of reasons rather than a group of smaller Lots in which you're constrained uh as to locations of your or the ability to even have garages so um smaller sorry fewer larger Lots particularly as I saw this piece of property um it is part of what was I think the orig one of the first if not the first Farm in West for Richard Sison in 1671 moved here taking 9900 Acres from basically from the head of Westport down including this property and uh so this is part of the the oldest Farm in Westport and it has some beautiful old walls stone walls it has pasture it's has been mentioned is a habitat uh Refuge there are many many reasons that I think that the value and I'm I don't know who the owners are if they're here but I would certainly encourage them to reconsider that you could that they could sell fewer lots and get just as much as they can with more restricted Lots uh Mr chair I I uh I'm ready to uh vote on on the proposal that's before us uh with what I think is two waivers I mean our town planner can't be here uh thinks that it still the road still requires a waiver so I I think we have two waivers and I think if they don't agree then they're going to Duke it up out but I think our staff thinks we have two waivers before us even though they've moved the road 5 ft so I I think we'd be voting on two waivers now I uh have learned an awful lot uh from uh the audience and uh as Mark said uh they're a lot more succinct than I am and I appreciate very much that and whether it is um you know the availability of water in this neighborhood and what an additional uh eight house Lots does to that or the shell casings and Lead uh uh the safety issue that's been raised and so many other issues uh that are at play here uh that all of you have and I congratulate you briefly uh but succinctly added to our concern uh I appreciate the way you have done that um uh and I thank you for turning out uh I want to mention a couple of things one uh what our chairman said at the outset uh we we are here to take the laws that we operate under and try and serve uh the public interest we do this every other Tuesday roughly you're welcome to come every other Tuesday we would love to see you I know there are a lot of people in the audience who also serve on Town boards and uh you know what that's like Jake mentioned you know making controversial decisions and I'm missing conservation for this you're missing excused absence uh and uh and that brings me to something that Bob daylor said uh which is that the the laws that we operate under can always be improved uh if something complies with with our laws we have to approve it whether you like it or not we have to approve it but that doesn't mean we don't want to change it and we tried to change it I said at one of the first times we reviewed this proposal that this looked like a piece of land that went through a fet aini machine and that's not the way land should be developed if we want to do what our chairman said and act in the public interest so we tried to change it but what I learned when I was mayor of New Bedford everybody wants progress nobody wants change and so we weren't allowed to change the zoning laws that allow F aini Lots right and that's why you're here and so all of you now I hope would say you know when the planning board comes before town meeting trying to improve our zoning laws maybe town meeting members should listen to them so we don't have to spend another Tuesday night having these kind of discussions s because these kind of lot They don't serve the public interest they don't protect the character of Westport right we learn we try and move forward and learn from things like that and make our laws evolve based on what we learn in meetings like tonight with the collected wisdom here so please join us any Tuesday would love to have you now I think uh that uh as Mark said um this this would I appreciate you know when this started it was nine waivers whatever it was and the applicant is down to two the applicant has shown a willingness to hear uh suggestions and react and change and I appreciate that I I don't think it's changed anywhere near enough but I it's like when the billiard balls on the table are moving it's easier for them to keep moving than it is to start them moving and so uh I think Mark's suggestion about uh which has been made before that uh you know two or three or four Lots solves a lot of problems as the chairman suggested in terms of what the road looks like in terms of that 25 foot radius and uh as Tanya said uh you know doesn't necessarily affect the bottom line in an adverse way and so I I would uh wish they would uh come back to us with that but in if they're not I I see two waivers that I'm not at all uh uh disposed to support but uh that's where I'd like to go whenever we're ready Mr chair to close the public meeting and move on to wa so I guess the question is I would entertain a motion to close the public hearing and if we have the votes if not we continue want me to make sure I move to uh close public uh hear second okay any discussion all those in favor I I I okay the public hearing is closed and I would entertain a motion for uh the waivers so individually if you want all right uh we don't need to hear from staff or do you want to hear no okay so uh on the uh uh motion the first wer request on are you voting on the nine lot subdivision or the eight lot we have before us the nine lot subdivision they have proposed changes which we haven't had time to look at yet but they've talked about so I uh move move now uh I'm going to uh make motions to approve so that a uh so that a yes vote is a yes and a no vote is a disapproval my motion to approve does not mean I'm necessarily in support it's just that approve means approve and no means no is that that clear clear to me okay I move I move to uh approve the waiver on uh uh waiver number one on the uh proposed Perimeter Road second okay is there any discussion heing none all those in favor all those opposed no no okay next one I I I move uh approval of the second waiver on the uh uh uh 25 foot um radius where marot Drive intersect strip row second any discussion on this all those in favor all those opposed no okay so I need a motion on the oh you got got them both up oh uh application yeah so uh I'm I I'll do this it the same way I I move to uh approve uh the uh subdivision uh 23 uh- 031 uh C marot drive second is there any discussion all those in favor all those opposed n okay think we're done so I would entertain a motion to [Music]