##VIDEO ID:9Nds18CQJdQ## I'd like to open the Tuesday January 14th uh planning regular planning board meeting and uh public cares uh it is 602 and first up our administrative items I'd like to introduce our new assistant planner Dia wheeler and we've been out of having an assistant planner for I don't know almost six months now so it's it's nice to have it filled and welcome and the audience should applaud yes okay uh next I'd like a motion uh to allow the assistant planner to endorse appr required plans so move second all those in favor thank you uh next is meow Brook Farms phase two shity release the applicant has uh or the developer has asked for the shity to be released on this the report from SW Cole uh states that the surface course and sidewalks have been installed and the site dra is functioning properly we do need an asil with updates for roadway bound and there are some pipe invert elevations that need to be add to the to the as as well as the grass growth needs to establish so s Cole said that projects 95% complete and recommended assurity reduction to $8,700 how much $8,700 8700 okay how you doing Jim just what he said um and the stuff like the asol and that sort of stuff is pretty close um little weather related issues with the uh grass growing but uh everything's pretty close so we'll have that stuff soon so how long has it been for since since you got approval for met Brook phase two pH three phase three I'm sorry but been a while we put it on the shelf right and then we uh we built it about maybe two years finished it up top coded it get everything done after the houses were done this year so now it's complete okay want a motion I'd like uh the opinion of town planner I concur with the Consulting engineer D that we should release the charity to $8,700 okay I like a motion uh Mr chair I move to release $10,250 plus interest for met Farms phase three retaining $8,700 for remaining work any remaining construction inspection funds will be released after paying final invoice second all those in favor all right thank you gentlemen just so like I guess you're trying to get it wrapped up you want to go to town meeting on that one in this spr so I guess you'll get that in quick to us yeah that's we'll work on yes all right have a good night thank you thank you oh this is probably be crazy okay next up is Westport L Drive uh we have a letter with comments on the 40b proposal to the zoning board of appeals and notice to Blue cat LLC regarding restrictive covenants and outstanding improvements so I'd like a motion from the board to send and both of these letters um one of which is to the zoning board of appeals one is to the current owner of some of the land subject in the 40b Pine Ridge Estates development lat LLC um the first letter to the zoning board of appeals outlines some facts with that situation with the the subdivision having been developed or partially developed in the early 2000s um not much activity has happened since probably 2016 um and so the the letter notes that Westport Lakes Road is partially constructed the last progress report was in 2016 we need to have this report reassessed and we're going to request that um it was tibits engineering which is absorbed by S SW Cole SW Cole is going to get a new contract over to me to um allow their engineer to go out and do site inspection the we also note to them that the board maintains a consultant review account so that's how we're able to pay for these services for the Consulting engineer to go out to that site he'll be investigating the storm water infrastructure the condition of the roadway as well as providing the planning board an updated charity estimate for the remaining work on the roadway and probably Associated maintenance and repairs that are necessary and the planning board um in this letter is saying that we will request from blat LLC that they provide the board an updated Covenant agreement deposit additional shity for the roadway and we'll also ask that they provide the board an implementation plan for completing the outstanding infrastructure and we'll need to have it received in the office within 45 days um the next point in the letter outlines some of those facts with that I had mentioned with the pimer states being involved um or still being under ownership of blue cat LLC there are three Parcels that are currently um involved in that 40b proposal that are subject to a restrictive covenant that the planning board holds the point of the restrictive covenant is to make make sure that the app or that the um developer adequately installs the roadway the drainage infrastructure and no development should occur on these Parcels nor should these Parcels be um sold off to any other owners until the planning board releases that Covenant and then also as was was um requested from the zoning board of appeals we also provided some additional comments um about the 40b Pine Ridge Estates development it's been noted multiple times by this board that the the 40 development is going to create an excess dead or an extra Dead End Road which is connecting off of a dead end Road um the existing Dead End Road of Westport Lakes Road already exceeds the the town's um subdivision standards for a dead end road which is 12200 ft it's already in excess of that and so the 40b development it's going to have this T intersection where there will be a dead end road to the north and a dead end road to the South and that will further increase the nonconformance with the town's subdivision standards um I've also noted that and the concerns that I've noted are more safety related um so the the sidewalk adjacent to Lots 3 through 11 there's a vertical curb located opposite sides of the road of the proposed homes um this is going to be a barrier for folks with Mobility impairments or someone using a wheelchair um will not be able to access That Sidewalk with that vertical curve there um the sidewalks are not separated by a 4-ft buffer strip they're located directly adjacent to the road the 4ft buffer strip is required by the subdivision bylaw and the proposed travel Lane is 12T I think um narrow travel travel Lanes discourage higher rates of motor speed and so they could conform they could reduce the size of the road to 11 ft while still conforming to the subdivision by law the travel Lanes only have to be 11 ft wide and that also will reduce some in perious coverage through the development so that's the letter to the zoning board of appeals the letter to Blue cat LLC outlines some of the same facts that I had um referenced about the the restrictive covenant and the letter to bluecat states that no development shall occur on these part TOS know shall the properties be transferred to a new owner until West part Lakes Road and Gul few Lane and the associated storm water infastructure are installed and are repaired maintained inspected and released by the planning board um Also regarding that road I note that there needs to be a reassessment of the condition of that road noted that in addition to the roadway deteriorating the the drainage basins um have been overgrown they haven't been maintained over the years and so the um Consulting engineer will go out to the site and do an inspection to to detail those conditions as well as um provide that estimate for the shity which we will need an updated shity from the um from the developer so those are the two letters that I would like for the for the chair to sign um and for the planning board to vote on to transmit letters to Blue cat LLC and the zoning Bo of appeals okay so let's do one at a time so you want two motions yes please uh Mr chair I I move that we authorize uh you as the chair to uh send a letter sign and send a letter to the zoning board of appeals as described by the planner second all those in favor I and and uh similarly Mr chair I mooved that we authorize you to sign and send a letter as described by the planner to Blue cat LLC second all those in favor and Mr chairman I I will note that there are some people in the audience who might want to comment on this situation as well um your perview as to whether or not you'd like to take public comment on administrative item like this sure I would be happy to uh but with the stipulation that this is not public hearing and the the applicant for the 40b uh to the zoning board is not present uh nor is uh anybody from bluecat who uh owns most of that so uh with that said U I'd like if somebody wants to make a statement or ask a question they can but we can't have much back and forth good evening would uh my name is Ry Elias 51 hly Lane Westport Ms I'm here as a private citizen not as a member of zoning board of appeals um I have some comments and concerns that uh I've watched enough planning hearings that you you guys have a set of guidelines that you go by and that um the Covenant expired in 2017 there's a lot of stuff that's not been done and a lot of oversight um things fallen through the casss uh I know that you're all professionals and um a professional uh planner I found that the the the report from do has discrepancies in it they left a punch list not done that's 2010 and 11 at the end of that it says that the the project could be null and void because of because of those things there my question is is Can you issue a building permit without having a proper CB C off of 177 the other thing I have as a comment is Gulf Road was never completed and that probably should based on the rules that I've watched hearings go by that probably needs a whole new set of plans was never completed it was part of the original project the next project the next project and now it's its own private road I I think that that should have its own um application um I could go on and on but uh I I'm sure there's other people that want to make some comments um I I did want in May the board of Selectmen approved this thing in June uh the Town Administrator had grave dis concerns that there were uh peer-review things still unfinished that's June 17 2024 December 4th uh again Tom planner number of uh the Covenant has been extended a number of times during a 10-year period it it was uh approved in October of 2010 or excuse me 2016 and expired in 2017 I've seen in front of this board um expirations come up well no well you got to you got to file again well none of that's happened and these are the kind of things that I'm talking about slipping through the Cs I appreciate the fact that you guys uh represent the town and uh your Professionals in the beginning our our first letter from the board of selecting said that we should listen to the professionals but make our own decision from the zoning board um I agree with that I think we need to listen to our professionals that we're paying out of our tax money thank you Bren fera 26 Westport leags Drive I stand before the planning board today to bring to your attention an issue with the construction non-completion in sale of Westport Lakes Drive Westport Lakes Drive was approved for construction after a number of project changes that occurred in 2001 through 2006 from a proposed Golf Course to what is today a 22 lot subdivision only one house was constructed on Westport Lake subdivision from the time of its original construction through 2017 only four other houses have been constructed from 2017 to present Westport Lakes Drive roadway was constructed in 2009 and the road has remained unfinished since then nearly 17 years later the road was under the control of both American links courses in bluecat LLC from 2006 to 2017 the subdivision was sold in the end of 2016 uh the beginning of 2017 to Coastal Harvest LLC of Aon at Massachusetts Coastal Harvest has had control of Westport Lake's drive for the past 7even years now and nothing has been completed since then I have taken great concern with the fact that the roadway has never been finished the current storm War infrastructure has never been maintained since installation the current retention areas have been and are basically reforested there are Basin covers and drainage grates that are above the roadway base grade because the finished top coat of asphalt was never installed there are a number of areas on the roadway that are prone to flooding as the catch Bas and grates are raised and covered with organic materials much of the roadway asphalt surface is cracked and areas have been patched there are also portions of the road base that have some po grade especially on and around the catch basins the entire Road along the edges are overgrown and pushing into the travel portion of the roadway there is currently a 40b subdivision proposal that is under the advisement for permitting approval of the zoning board of appeals there has been much debate regarding who is in control and who was in control of Westport Lake subdivision throughout the years I would suggest that anyone in control of the roadway should be considered negligent in the completion standard laid out by the town the current applicant for the 40b proposal was at some point throughout the history of the roadway responsible for its completion this very same developer is now proposing a 38 home subdivision off Westport Lakes Drive which is currently in disrepair there has been much debate regarding whether Westport Lakes Drive is an adequate roadway regarding its ability to safely handle the traffic that this new proposal of 38 homes would bring it's my understanding that whoever was under the control of the roadway from its Inception never finished the project it is also my understanding that since the original approval for construction of Westport lak Drive subdivision there were no extensions filed from at least 2009 through 2016 in 2016 a covenant restriction was lifted in order for the new owner to continue construction of the house lots of Westport Lake subdivision a second second extension was filed in 2016 bringing the extension validity through 2017 since then no other extensions have been applied for as far as my research can tell via inquiries to offices inquiries through the planning board as well as through the board of conservation reveal that there is no finalized asilt plans for the roadway as well as there are no certificates of completion of performance compliance issued for the subdivision roadway or stormw management system or infrastructure it also appears that upon inquiry through the Mass Department of Transportation the permit for state highway access connection into route 177 was never finalized honor about July 2010 Mass do drafted a letter to the developer notifying that the permit had not been signed off and that the letter was and that letter was ignored there was a wetland replication requirement to the roadway construction that was also not completed it is my position that because no as build plans exist no certificate of completions exist and no extensions to the original construction permit were filed that no further construction should be allowed I further suggest that because the original application of issuance has long expired and and no extensions have been filed the current developer should be required to refile an application for subdivision with new engineering documentation for the roadway storm water design and retention design I also submit that considering the length of time of non-completion that the new potential permit be filed in accordance with the current town of Westport subdivision rules and regulations I further submit that the Westport planning board in 2016 acted inappropriately by allowing an extension of Covenant in the released to the new developer based on the fact that there were no extensions filed from 2008 to 2016 and no certificates of completion no certificate of performances were issued the partial release form o issued on December 13 2016 should not have been drafted because there was no evidence the roadway was built a standard besides the stormw water infrastructure had no certificate of performance and appropriate extensions were not filed I would like to refer to the town Westport planning board rules and regulations governing the subdivision of land on page 17 subsection three asille plan to further argument that the form o issuance was inappropriately issued in the subdivision plan rules and regulations according to W board on uh page 17 subsection 3 as plan before the board release the shity bond or deposit or in the case of a covenant issue a certificate of completion form o the applicant shall provide at no cost of the Town an asilt plan showing the following list a through S just name off a couple street lines and grades street names and wids location of items located within the RightWay driveways property horizontal and vertical location of storm driving system sanitary water electrical telephone gas cable and all of the utilities this shall include service connections from the main to the street line or the limit of easements if applicable any sewer connections sizeing material of pipe location material and size of fire Subs water tanks location identification of all signs uh Club division name and file number book and Page records just just to name a few before the board will relase a referencing further information from the rules and regulations governing the subdivision of land on page 22 streets and roadways subsection 3 all roadways shall be brought to a finished grade as shown on the profiles of the definitive CL and shall be constructed and provided with a surface in accordance with the then current standard specifications of the planning board on page 22 subsection seven subsection 7 there are five when there are five or more Lots in any subdivision sidewalk shall be constructed on one side of the street the sidewalk shall be constructed in accordance with the then current standard spe specifications of the planning board on page 26 of the subdivision rules and regulations subsection e inspection and maintenance it reads after the SMS the storm water management system has been constructed and before the performance guarantee the development has been released the applicant shall submit an asbill plan detailing the actual SMS as installed the Consulting engineer for the board child inspector SMS to confirm its asil features this engineer shall also evaluate the SMS in an actual storm if the system is found to be inadequate by virtual physical evidence of operational failure even though it was built as called for in the plan it shall be corrected before the performance guarantee is released referencing page 31 of the subdivision rules and regulations subsection e adherence to regulations it reads the board will revoke a subdivision approval and or not Grant any further subdivision approval to any developer who violates any state or town law during the development of a subdivision until a written notice has been received from the agency whose law has been violated in the Town Council that the violation has been corrected in the matter legally settled in a written statement is received from the developer that he will comply with the law during the course of further development considering this subsection is labeled adherence to regulations in regards to the 40b application the town must determine whether the roadway of Westport Lake's Drive is currently adequate according to page 19 of the subdivision rules and regulations subsection one in paragraph J streets in the subdivision shall connect to be inacessible from a public way or an existing private way both of which must be deemed adequate in the opinion of the planning board to provide access I was suggest that the board consider Westport lak's Drive is not an adequate roadway at this time based on the proceeding information I would also propose that the board determine the substance of the original application and permit that was issued in 2008 and considerate null and void at this time and should determine what course of action to be taken to reduce or stop the possibility that any work be done to Westport Lake Shri roadway storm water infrastructure and retention areas until proper re-engineering subdivision plan submission and approval from the town despite the fact that that that extensions to the Covenant were filed upon the sale of Westport Lake shrive subdivision I further argue that it has been another 8 years that has passed with no real development efforts besides the sale of four Lots out of a potential of 22 lots available so I I would like to add a little bit to what you're saying um the the extension from 2016 stated explicitly in there that if they didn't finish that they were going to extend it for one year and if it wasn't finished that the subdivision would be no and void and we've had a meeting with our Town Council uh to try to straighten out does that mean that it is null and void or does that mean that we have to take definitive action to make it know the void and then what do we do with folks like yourself who won't property that would be on a non approved subdivision road so we're trying to straighten out what we need to do legally and also to do it in such a way that we don't make you all of a sudden on a road that doesn't exist so I think is that a paropsis of what we're after so I understand all these issues uh I wouldn't say I know all exactly the same detail that you have in your book there but I know that it's a mess and I don't see myself how they can approve a 40b with access off of this road so I think that that's kind of the way that Our Town Council is is heading so anyway thank you for your thank you was there another one okay so next up get this thing to stop going away next up is Coastal healing LLC file number 19-15 spba SW Cole asilt report close out charity and release consultant reviews the consultant's report has indicated that the mass doot permit has been signed off here as well as the work is uh complete Mass doot was um on site to witness the the Milling Paving um that has been done at the entrance of the subject site and the Consulting engineer recommends a full release of the shity funds and essentially this would then become closed out good it's nice to get things closed up so I make a motion Mr chair I move to close out and release theity of $25,000 plus interest to Coastal healing LLC and release the balance of construction inspection funds contingent upon the settlement of any outstanding invoices second all those in favor can we just have a little bit of discussion on um well we already voted before we finish the vote uh just I'm just I'm just wondering because the the contractor has reached out that did the paving and was I guess yeah haven't paid paid him yet has he been paid yet uh he's been getting paid $5,000 a month so he's okay because he kind of said that wasn't his agreement but how about uh are there anything else go to the town from Coastal healings okay thank you uh next is um I guess anr what is I don't believe we have anyone here from melow lane or Division Road solar um we've run over on time a little bit I know there a lot of folks here from the 630 hearing so I I would suggest we move to item G which is the approval not required um then address 1180 americ Legion Highway and the zoning by amendments and then return back to the admin items okay so next is approval not required anr for Katherine M Barnum trust file number 24- 042a request by applicant for reconfiguration plan of land located at 681 River Road assessors map 89 L 123 and 123a thank you Mr chairman good evening everyone for the record my name is Mark bé with bu Associates land surveyors and Consultants uh and I'm here this evening on behalf of my client that would be the older plan that it's not the current plan that's being addressed um that was actually a plan that we did of the same property in 2017 and the current plan that's before you is a slight modification of that plan here we go so this plan shows a slight reconfigured basically um we created the two lots that you just saw briefly uh back in 2017 and the properties um at that time the owner was attending to convey the smaller lot uh she retains ownership of the house and the remaining land at 681 um that didn't happen but she did recently um get an interested buyer who was looking to add that small 12 by 108 foot strip to the northwest corner of what's now shown as being lot three um that's basically the only change from the previous anr plan back in 2017 the frontages did not change and and they both uh both Lots the the new lot and the lot that maintains their house um contain sufficient Frontage and Upland area and overall lot area to conform with uh current Zing requirements so we're asking this evening that the town vote to endorse this plan as an approval not required lers I concur with the the U applicants explanation it's essentially just a property Swap and so we would make a finding that it's not a subdivision and therefore entitled to endorsement under the subdivision control OBS approval not required good any comments questions I have a question U for the engineer just out of what is the purpose of the 40ft rideway along the southern border property line that was an existing r way that was um for the benefit of the property that's occupied by the aoit golf course Club um I'm not sure how far back it dates but it's it's an old right away that was retained um for that property it was not created by this plan or the previous plans it was just um of record and what was the purpose of this extra little narrow strip the 12T wide strip that was added the new buyer uh had a different footprint of the house that he was looking at doing and that would allow him to maintain the setbacks the portion of what you see as lot three is um in a flood zone so the Northerly portion of the lot where the building is going to take place in the septic system was out of the flood zone and he desired to have this little extra width uh to get more room around the house the proposed house and where is the driveway to the existing house at 681 uh it comes in just north of the lot line where you see the um plot three the norly line of lot three yeah okay I entertain a motion Mr chair move to approve the endorsement of the plan entitled approval not required plan of land prepared for Katherine M Barnum trust 2004 and Top of the Rock limited partnership because the plan complies with the provisions of Mass general laws chapter 41 section 81p second all those in favor I you next is the 615 public hearing for 1180 American Legion Highway file number 24-33 spaid continued from November 19th 2024 the applicant is proposing to construct three storage buildings located at 11 e American Legion Highway map 28 lot 32f 32 J and 32h good evening to the board Mr chair attorney M long here on behalf of the applicant KD LLC along with our engineer sha leech and our drainage engineer Ed pesy um so as mentioned this is a continuance from the meeting we was held back in November uh to address some of the issues that both the uh planner and the third party consultant had um brought up we have since addressed those issues um and feel that the plan is in a position to be hopefully approved tonight um and would like to you know present the plan as such I don't know Michael if you want to kind of go through the comments that you had and then talk on that to get us started so a lot of the the previous comments I had um had to do with just tightening up some of the details in the the site plan so for example they needed to have um the soil types delineated on the site plan and they needed to have individual tree plantings or landscape plantings indicated on the site plan um and so they've they've met those sub or site plan rules and regulation submission standards there are a couple of different um handful of items that I can go over that could need to be added to the plan prior or following any sort of approval um they're small items so I don't think they would necessarily warrant a continuance um and these are that the total area of the Wetland resource area should be on an existing conditions plan um building elevations build building elevation drawings are required the applicant did provide a series of images as building precedence that was something that was submitted to the planning board in in a previous um public hearing if that those building precedents are an acceptable alternative to the planning board they would just need to have a waiver from that standard of the site plan rules and regulations and that waiver would need to be added to this plan um the applicant also needs to indicate building entrances on their site plan and we also need to know whether or not um you all have contacted the EPA to determine the applicability of the nip permit um just to know if that that's required and needs to be provided to the town and then there are just a couple of things I'll I'll note here the site still needs a variance for the number of parking spaces that was something that was disced with the planning board previously and I think the board was um inclined to be supportive of that however it's not the planning board as you know that approve the zoning variance it has to go to the zoning board of appeals and the applicant stated that they're intending to do so the site also includes outdoor storage adjacent to the Western Property boundaries that is a new addition on this iteration of the plan um they proposed some additional Landscaping over here some spr in some American holly as screening from some of those adjacent residences the addition of outdoor storage um while I don't have any immediate concerns from the planning board's perspective in terms of access and circulation on the site it does require that the applicant attend a or go back to the zoning board of appeals and receive an a modified special permit because they are in the aquafer Protection District and outdoor storage was not um indicated as a use in their prior application and they've also told me that they're going to bridge the zoning board of appeals um to get that um get that that required modification to their special current I I was under the impression that the zoning board has already seen this they have in approved outdoor storage so yeah I just to that point Michael the the plan that was submitted initially did not lay out the parking spaces exactly but we did approach the subject of outdoor storage they approved outdoor storage with no vehicle motor vehicle storage we're allowed to store RVs that have Motors trailers campers boats those sorts of things but no you know cars that was the condition um we have to go back before the zba anyway because we had removed as I mentioned at the last meeting the drainage Pond to the Northeast and because of that there was a significant change to the so we have to go back through the zba anyway at which time we will discuss the uh waiver for parking spaces but I mean we'll they're going to want to go over everything again in detail so I'm sure the outside storage will be uh touched upon but they had already approved that at the prior meeting as well okay sorry to interrup that's all right and then the the last comment um well the fire department since they have switched over the entire circulation of the site from there was a mixture of asphalt and gravel and now it's all going to be asphalt um the the fire department has signed off on this um conservation has said that they now have an order of conditions to construct the storage buildings as well as the uh storm water basin and the Consulting engineer noted that the um um that the change of gravel to Asphalt may need a a second look um due to the change in in materials however compacted gravel tends to perform similarly to um asphalt and would be treated that way in the town's storm water standards um Mr peshy is on the call and I'm sure he can explain that a little bit more uh explain to the board in more detail um what he he and I have have spoken about everybody can you hear me all right sure okay engineering with the app team working on the drain anding what Michael said was correct it appears I'm not entirely sure why but appears that riew consultant didn't get a copy of the revised Umar management plan and so more management report so we did revise a report just so happens that as most of you know we're required by zoning uh zoning regulation to analyze to actually model gravel roads almost as this they were asphalt so the curve number of 96 so 96% less you know non- turus um is almost as asphalt asphalt is commonly used as 98 so less than 2% % difference so we had already designed the storm water management system the the swes the catch facin the the um detention Basin an outfall structure to handle the the gravel roads when we change from as from gravel to Asal we went from a curve number of 96 to 98 it was a infinite simal change it did change the runoff numbers for the 10 25 and 100e storm but a very small amount I can read them you it's only by a couple of hundreds of a CFS but they were different I did revise the report on November 26 and I did submit that report apparently it did get to your records but it didn't get to the FW call engineer for some reason he saw the stormw waterer onm plan which went at the same time so I'm not quite sure why he missed that but you know everybody nobody's perfect it is there and we have properly designed and I want it on the record uh really that's the reason I want wanted to come before you tonight to make sure you knew on the record that the system did De look at asphalt versus gravel did size the Basin appropriately and correctly and we did provide a revised report that shows all that so in my professional opinion it is it is certainly capable of handling the run off it already was so the numbers the calculations the math is slightly different but the actual size of the basement didn't change so already was big enough but again the revive report says all this changes gravel as changes curve number from 96 to 98 all of that was done but the system that you see before you with the revised design plans does handle that okay than thank you anything more I don't have really any additional comments I think the last time this was here there were some additional Landscaping that we had requested up at the front end of the site there were some concerns about headlight intrusion across to the at the nooke Village Development and that's been addressed with some additional Landscaping up here along the property Frontage as well as preserving the existing um Pedro or trees that already on the site um it's aside from you know tightening up couple of these uh last comments I you know I think that these are things that could be a condition of approval do we have a an acceptable photometric plan I don't have a photometric plan we overlay over on the photo is that you're looking for or or on the on the site in terms of the lighting are you speaking regarding the lighting or regarding the lighting because we do have a lot of residents across the street just in up and behind into the West so so we do have and we show with the lighting is on each one of these buildings and how it's related uh to the down lighting and the lighting cut sheet report I don't know if you have that on EDF that was the separate attachment and that demonstrated that any it's all down lighting all downlighting down lighting at the always and whatnot and it was on the uh was submitted with a report uh showing the per say the Lumin Contours around that that don't go off site it's it's all downward cast it so these are the lighting standards it's downward cast it's fully shielded um they're proposing LED lighting site plan rules and regulations require energy efficient lighting um and then their light coloring index meets the the site plan rules and regulations so um I don't know photometric plan is necessary but that's you know that's up to you all if you're concerned about some additional light intrusion from the the new structures it's what I would be concerned about is uh outside lighting that is uh on the street side okay so there's three lights total on the street side this is 177 American Legion Highway uh which are down lightings just scon lightings on the side of the building itself okay all all pointed down and we have a roll robber byes heaters and American Hol planted behind the existing tree line help there's no lights on poles no no there's one Jim and I took care of across the street there was one actually shining right in the one of the the neighbors windows and it was actually utility yeah nothing on the property though okay Mr chair is this before us tonight or is this just more comments we've had back and forth quite a a few times on this is this for decision tonight yes yes I mean there are eight pages of Staff comments are all of those now uh resolved well all these pages in the in the staff review are spelling out how they meet a particular standard and if they don't There's a summary at the end yeah which were those seven comments that I read off earlier okay yeah most of those coms comments carried from the prior meeting in November and we had addressed them with Michael some of the things like um had a concern about the distance from 177 to what is going to be security gate it's going to be 90 ft so we' labeled those it was uh offet concerns from building to the property line which are all labeled Building height put on uh the layout size buildings and again the Landscaping plan which has been expanded we moov the sign signed this year Mr deor woned the move sign it was a neighbor that had mentioned that on the other side of the thing with a little landscaping around the sign and the outside parking spaces was one of the concerns as well so the try to remember my other concern here um it'll come to me but so is there going to be shity for this or is it not required we don't require shity for this okay so if if we approve it contention upon getting the things the few little things that are missing I'm not sure what those are I I just saw the report from the consultant today they seem to be duplicate of what the original one was lot of issues so on the existing conditions plan and the one of the detail blocks you just need to say what the total area of wetland resource area is the board will need to vote on a waiver to um wave the building elevation drawings building entrances just add those to the proposed buildings um and then we'll need to know if the nip permit is applicable I think we can we can speak on that I didn't realize we didn't touch on that uh it is applicable and and we'll be working on a nip plan you know to get that through okay I don't I think don't think it's uh you know conditioned upon but it is going to be done and it's required and then when permitted and approved we would give that to the board so do you need a permit from um M Highway no it's an existing curve cut and we're not we're not altering the curve cut or intensifying the use we frankly we're severely changing the use isn't that required if you change the use changing use it yeah is more intense and the entrance was built for a school which obviously was a more intense use than a storage facility and I think as we stated at the last meeting the use is approved as a storage facility from prior right from when it was first purchased and I think uh Ralph sua had commented on that when he was here and the building elevations the reason you don't have them they're on the well you talk about the architectural correct uh they were submitted with this plant I believe the uh pictures of building they looking for yeah there's pretty I mean they're not elevations it's like a series of images that are like sample building precedents which are used at one of your other storage facility sites but it's not an actual build do you have an architect or is it just the building come yeah it's like an Erector Set it's 10 and2 ft so that's why they don't have yeah we didn't have a formal architectural design okay questions comments um I I had a chance to go through the drainage and found it the revisions all were fine the drainage design is fine I only had a single question and that is um we the Wetland directly is is directly the the the margin of the river and and there's no flood plane elevation on this Upstream of that uh the 177 c um at the cul you you're saying you's the what's the flood plane elevation there that's a good question because I don't know the answer to that question I believe it's l 12 but I think it's it's subjective because the shingal island river which is really flood plan for this particular thing it's controlled by the nooke dam the actual lake nooke is the flood plane for the shingle Island River and that has control it controls this flood plane through here there's no title words no title no no I I I understand I understand that but I don't still don't know I mean you're asking is the is the C that goes underneath for the right I mean I've seen that I've seen that flowing pretty full there is a concern in fact fishan Wildlife has addressed that just recently I don't know if you went to the talk that was a couple weeks ago because they have a concern about the Cs actually under route six being not compant with blood Lane but it's a control flow from the sh from the nooke Lake nooke Dam yeah I just when I when I went through the drainage then I I thought is this all backed in the 100y year flood I don't I don't know it's it's interesting I've done a lot of work on the uh Lake noop flood plane over there and that is a 100-year flood plane is Lake do in other words it rises minimally in 100 year storm because of the control of the dam in other words if that Dam weren't there what is Lake no control would be the flood and it would also flood this section of what is they call the Westport River I'm I'm sure of that yeah but because it's controlled by a dam Upstream there's very little influence from The Watershed going into here at the flood so a dam Upstream of nooke Village or nooke lake well the at the route six you get the rout six is that controls that's basically a control for this particular part of the riv there's no title influence it's all and what's the grade of that D you mean grade how is it is it is it really old is it fairly new is it real they're looking they're looking the city F wanted to pull it out and drain the late nooke and that they met with uh town government didn't like that and the residents didn't like that it needs repair and there's a concern about who's going to f that right so is it it's adequate for now it's not an imminent threat if that's deci the question is if it failed what would happen here oh it be a significant flood it would be a significant flood Downstream depending on how much go like including not only this but no Village but yeah but also for and and the head of Westport and the head of Westport yeah there would be significant problem so are you going to get it fixed there was there was a price and they I haven't to go to one of the earrings the city of follower I'm uh full disclosure and fish commissioner and there a real uh push to save this particular section because it's a extremely important habitat area do the fish get above the damp no they didn't get above that one though they're going to what went in though they replac the fish it cost about $4 million for fishal out of it $4 million okay so what we have on the table is these folks would like approval the town plan we're looking we think we've addressed all the concerns there a couple other uh Town plan Mr bur that mentioned the are he wants the area of the wetlands he did request that before and they did leave that out so that's on me that's easy to do the amount of weap area and up area on the lot okay Mr chairman I have a series of sample conditions well I think we need to open it up to the public yeah I just want this is a public hearing so anybody is welcome to ask a question or make a comment so come up to the podium please and please State who you are where you live from uh my name is k Oliver I live at 64 Union so I'm the north west of butter the one in the corner um myself and carolan the resident right below we're the ones that are most affected by uh where the storage is and the lights for everything so I felt it was only appropriate for me to come um I'm spoken to Michael and a lot of the concerns that he had raised were concerns that we had as neighbors um and they've been extremely responsive to addressing the things that are going on um it's a complicated plan so there's going to be things in motion um I know you guys are discussing a conditional approval and I don't have any reason to believe that that's not an appropriate Road forward um the one topic that is still being discussed are um the trees on that side where the the boundary line is um the ones in the original plan were not enough and I believe there was a concern they would grow Too Tall and into the power lines um so Michael had asked for some changes which they've put in now with these spruces and Holly um in full disclosure we were joking because I'm not sure how much screen a holly is going to ca it grows like an inch of here and it it's not going to hide campers um it stays green and right but it's got a very sparse foliage and those campers you can see them um but I've already raised the concerns with Jim I've spoken to Mac um and they've actually agreed to instead of using that potentially put a full wall of abides if necessary so we could follow along we could use different trees um they basically had made the same comments that you gentlemen have which is that this is going to need to be addressed the ground is frozen Sean can't even come out and see where we're going to put them um so they've been very transparent and said when the weather warms up we're going to go we're going to walk the boundary line and we're going to put trees exactly wherever we need trees to block the lights um which I think is probably the only response they could give right now um so rather than focusing on exactly what there is on that boundary line um the only thing that I would suggest is to put the placement of trees as one of the uh conditional Provisions to be noted in the ASU and then when uh the spring comes and we can actually get some trees and get that fencing in we will figure it out and we will have them built um but other than that the lighting concerns um have been addressed there's one that's wonky and I think again that's because we don't have um the screen and the trees in place um Jim piped up before there was one actually across the way that he was able to get fixed for us it's not on their property it was actually part of NOA choke um but it was contributing to the problem and they just tried to be good neighbors and get it fixed so considering all of the trouble I just wanted to make it clear that even though that one element is outstanding they've made it um very a good effort to try and find the ways to make it work with us as the neighbors and I think that that's important for the play forel thank you so just as a comment I have lots of Holly trees and they are a good screen once they get once they grow American Hol are a hybrid they grow a lot faster not like the Holly trees that you're used to seeing but they they're not fast growing but they are faster than M was talking about like layering them so we would have one I think he's on the money but really depends on what kind of Hol yeah and and a problem for springtime when we can fill them in and and see vid ice tend to be like this because of the deer if the light's going to come through the bottom it's going to come through the bottom we were requested we had leand slice BR which are F fast BR we ever green and we were requested because de in my history there's no such thing as de resistant for plants no matter what you want uh and we thought that was appropriate for quick screening The Holly And the spruce are tend to be a little less yeah deer problem but they will eat them if if they're hungry enough yeah they don't eat anything it's anyway thank you thank you anybody else okay so if you can go through the the variances not variances conditions one the applicant must request parking variants from the zoning board of appeals any resulting plan revisions must be submitted before the planning board for site plan Amendment two the applicant must request aquifer addiction aquifer Protection District special permit modification for outdoor storage again any resulting plan revisions must be submitted before the planning board for site plan Amendment three proposed Landscaping that does not establish or dies must be replaced within the same growing season for existing hedge rows and Landscaping that provide and on on-site screening shall remain undisturbed five any other material changes to the approved site plan as determined by the building inspector shall require planning board approval all construction activities shall occur between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday prior to commencement of work the applicant shall prepare a final plan with all plan revisions to the approval of the Town planner or their design the applicant must also provide documentation providing the applicability of the nip permit the plan shall include the following revisions a on the cover sheet list the applicable waivers and variances indicate that further approval before the zoning board of appeals is necessary for a parking variance and special permit modification B indicate on the existing conditions plan the total area of wetland resources on the site C demonstrate building entrances on the proposed plan and d add zoning flood plane delineation to the existing conditions plan eight the site shall be developed in accord with the notes and details including but not limited to the storm water report operations and maintenance plan Etc on the final accepted plan nine all installed lighting shall conform to the requirements of section 20.9 rules and regulations of the Westport planning board for site plan approval and the approved plans after Landscaping installation the applicant shall provide the planning board uh shall provide the planning board certification that the plantings were installed in accordance with the approved plan that should be number 10 I apologize um 11 Landscaping shall be installed in accordance with the approved Landscaping plan and details after Landscaping installation the applicant shall provide the planning board certification that the plantings were installed in accordance with the approved plan 12 the applicant shall be responsible for reasonable costs associated with construction observation and inspection services during the construction phase 13 storm water improvements shall be designed operated and maintained in accordance with the approved plans and drainage report 14 prior to issuance of the occupancy permit the town planner their designes shall conduct a field inspection of the screening around the proposed structure to identify areas that may need additional plantings the owner shall install the plantings as directed and 15 as buil plans shall be submitted and approved by the building inspector and planning board prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy okay uh you want a motion please uh Mr chair I move to approve the site plan and low impact development proposal for the multi-unit storage facility uh located at assessor plat 28 lots 32j 32f and H at uh 1180 American Le Highway in Westport um for the town planner's 15 recommended conditions of approval second is there any discussion there none all those in favor I opposed not thank you the board okay now we have what was supposed to be at 6:45 the public hearing for short-term rental and Adu bylaws for town meeting these are zoning bylaws so Micha I'll let you do the presentation all right so these are the zoning the we have two zoning amendments potential zoning amendments for 10 meeting this year um and this is I just want to outline the process that we've gone through to get up to this point so on December 2nd the short-term rental committee submitted short-term rental zoning amendments to the select board um they recommended that the planning board consider those um zoning amendments and then the next day the planning board submitted their own bylaw amendments the accessory dwelling unit um bylaw and the select board on December 16th return these seure rental and U amendments to the planning board um then that leads us to the public public hearing tonight and then the next steps are that the planning board decides to move forward with these zoning amendments they will refer the amendments to the select board for the annual town meeting warrant the select board will choose to accept or deny um the addition of those articles to the warrant and then if accepted these amendments would show up on the meeting 2025 so some background on the short-term rentals the the Zoning liit for short-term rentals so the town's bylaw prohibits shortterm rentals um there's a footnote in the um table uses that restricts uses that are not expressly called out in the table of uses as prohibited and so the select board and planning board recognizing that short-term rentals are important part of the local tourist economy decided that these really really ought to be accommodated in some way in the the town's regulations and so we proposed a bylaw last year at town meeting and that failed we did some surveying to regroup over the summer and the community preferences have shown that um the the town as as a majority would prefer a less restricted bylaw than what was proposed at town meeting 2024 so in the interim between Sumer and now we've held five public meetings with the short-term rental committee and this results in a zoning bylaw that will have a limited set of criteria which I'll just read all these verba on for the record short the definition for a short-term rental is a dwelling that is not a hotel motel lodging house or Bed and Breakfast where at least one room or unit is rented not to exceed 31 consecutive days a short-term rental includes an apartment house cottage and condominium it does does not include property that is rented out through tencies at will or month-to-month leases it also does not include time share property or Bed and Breakfast C definition of bed and breakfast this definition is taken from the state's definition for short-term rentals the change that needs to occur in the table of uses to enable these as a buite is just to um add in that there a byri iess I guess I should back up the planning board is now proposing as as opposed to last year where there may be a special permit applicable um it would be a byright process so there'd be no special permit straightforward process um and straightforward Amendment to the table of uses the section for short-term rentals will be 9.10 and so the purpose of this section will be the short-term rental zoning bylaw provides for administration and enforcement of Westport shortterm rental businesses in order to protect the health safety and Welfare of both the occupants of those rental units and the general public and to maintain the quality of life in residential neighborhoods this bylaw provides for the orderly operation of short-term rental businesses recognizing their historic role in westport's economy 9.1.2 permit the owner of a short-term rental business must annually have a short-term rental permit granted for the bylaws and regulations of the town of Westport Massachusetts General requirements the short-term rental is permitted in accordance with Section 5.1 table of use regulations and subject to the following requirements a guest rooms must be provided within a legal dwelling Unit B the owner shall adhere to applicable rules regulations and codes of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and town of Westport including but not limited to registering with the Massachusetts Department of Revenue and C short-term rentals and the residential agricultural District are for residential uses Only commercial uses including but not limited to event spaces or beverage promotion are not permitted in the residential agricultural district and that's it for the general requirements and the bylaw the last section of the bylaw is 9.1.4 violation Provisions this is a a boiler plate that's taken from um the the violation portion of the zoning bylaw early on in the vi I think it's section two violations of section 9.8 of this bylaw will be subject to the provisions of mgl chapter 40 section 21d regarding non-criminal disposition as adopted by the town of Westport any owner fails to comply with any provision of the section shall be subject to the actions identified in section 2.1 for each off where each day of noncompliance is considered a separate offense thank you so uh this is a public hearing and uh I welcome any and all comments or questions uh after uh the public hearing the planning board can decide to amend the the uh Provisions that you can read here uh based on public input or not um and so I would welcome your input uh to help us get this to a point where it is uh a good bylaw Amendment um just to be clear uh the reason behind this as Michael was saying is that today because there short-term rentals were not a definition that anybody knew about or cared about before airbnbs and stuff like that came along but the case law in Massachusetts has opined that any rental that is for less than 31 days is a short-term rental and because that is not in our table of use currently it's currently illegal so that means that anybody that has been renting a cottage for a week or two even from the same people for 30 years that's still a short-term rental has nothing to do with with what you consider Airbnb or RB R whatever it is so uh that's the reasoning uh what this article does also is it gives the permitting authority to the select board and the select board uh issues permits today for like trailers on East Beach or wherever uh and they do them sort of once a year on mass and this is how we would anticipate that the select board will handle these permits they will not be a special permit they won't be something that if there's one next to you you're going to get a notice of a hearing uh if you're concerned then you should go to the select Board office and ask to be put on their their agenda to discuss a a problem uh with a shortterm nearby or or whatever so uh so with that being said I'd like to open it up see what people think have any comments or suggestions and uh when you come up to the podium just give us your name and address please all right good evening I'm Dorothy Paul over at 2048 main Ro um I applaud the committee done a great job I think getting this succinctly put together but I do have a couple quick questions you answered one of them the permitting issuing authorities going to be the selectman um have is there any fee Associated do we know what the fee fees are going to be yet it's annual I understand that's a very good question and CU we're not the select board that's for the select that's for them to determine okay um the other question that jumps out at me um is a lot of properties do month to month or tendency at will during the winter and then they do shortterm in the summer because of the ocean the water front so forth it sounds to me like your definition of a proper that qualifies for this excludes that and I don't think that's going to work here in Westport so I really would like you does not excluded so anything that is rented for uh less than 31 days right that's case law in Massachusetts so that's the definition for short-term rental is case law it's not ours we right but my my question is by the bylaw where it says As of right it's excluding if I rent for 6 months in the winter M hopefully maybe nine months that'd be nice and then in the summer week to week or something I can do that even though it's the same property because that's what I want to make sure you can use yeah all right thank you so so wait a minute though I think if you're renting for month to month or six months or nine months in the winter right you're not a short-term rental that's I that's what I understand it doesn't qualify but if I'm going to the selectman and saying I want a permit for sh ter rental for June July and August yeah but in right now I'm doing month to month is that going to be a problem so you can do both that's what I want to hear that I can do both so you're only a shortterm rental in the summer when you're renting for two weeks or anything less Dy than uh one month in the winter when you're renting for a month or six months you're not a shortterm so as long as it doesn't disqualify me from doing that you can be two things great thank you in the winter you're one thing the summer you're another thank you very much and lots of people do that right and have done well I think a lot of a lot of that's what we do a lot of people do that thank you we're not trying to change what's happened in Westport for a long time and which characterized what we're just trying to make it legal right so the other part of this uh and people are still welcome to come up and speak is there's going hopefully be a town bylaw that would be uh in conjunction with this one it'll be a separate bylaw at town meeting zoning this is a zoning article requires 2/3 majority the town bylaw which would set up the ability of the select board to administer this uh is just a town bylaw it only requires a simple majority to pass the town meeting uh and the select board has asked us if we could help them generate an application form uh and we we met last night with a short-term rental committee and came up with one and voted to send it to the select Court do you have a copy of that that you can project or I I didn't bring it because we're having a public hearing for the the zium right but I'm sure everybody would like to know what those requirements are going to be but basically it's structural is the place structually sound uh are there two egresses um is there heat if it's going to be a short-term rental in the in the beyond the summer months is there portable water do you have a functioning uh septic tank septic system uh and then smoke detect smoke detectors carbon monoxide detectors uh did you register with the registry with the registry of Department of Revenue Department of Revenue um and things things of that nature nothing really odorous but just basic things that are going to be your requirement to self-certify under perjury of law that you comply with all these things we're not going to try to have somebody come and inspect we're not going to try to uh have you go before different boards to get approvals for this this is self-certification that you comply so hopefully that'll work Mr chairman the the reason where it's it's not up in the slides is that we don't hold a public hearing on the town bylaws the S board correct and the select board don't public they don't want to they don't have to they can put it on town meeting whatever they want so we we'd love to get two things one your comments or questions just like you Dorthy had questions I some we can answer some like will there be a fee we can't answer because that's up to the select board but we'd also love to get your help in town meeting because under the rules of town meeting you know you get to speak once so our chairman gets to speak once and everyone who's got any kind of misinformation can speak once and he's already spoken so we can't answer any questions uh what we're afraid of is if you have uh what as has been explained in shorelines for Anyone who reads shorelines is you get this perverse situation where somebody pays a fee to the Massachusetts Department of Revenue whatever it is so you're paying something to the state and we the town of Westport collects a piece of that and uh there's no registration that uh you have a legal uh short-term rental even though you're paying a fee to the state and then what happens if uh there's a bad actor has got all the publicity bad publicity for parties and everything else and then some neighbor says well I'm going to get some kind of enforcement and then uh you cause an enforcement action and uh well they're paying a fee but it's illegal and you know you can see how that can go down a rabbit hole pretty quickly uh and so and what's Westport doing about this where they're condoning something that's illegal and taking money for it oh my God this is craziness so we're trying to say uh with participation I don't know how many dozens of meetings we've had like this with people who've been doing this for decades we're not opposed to this this is what happens in Westport it's a good thing we're trying to say let's make it legal and let's not have situations where people are paying the state because they do it and yet it's technically illegal that's like craziness but so let's put a a bylaw here that's uh crafted by the people who actually do it and uh so we're not putting people in a situation where what they're doing and what we support is not legal so so if uh if you say hey this is as minimal a regulation as you know we started with something that was this long now it's this long you know we've gotten it down to the Bare Bones uh and less is more uh that we'd love you uh when it comes to town meeting to say hey look this went down the first time but this is a lot better and we we need this cuz we don't want to be operating an illegal short-term rental we want to be operating a legal short-term rental they're good for Westport they are good for Westport and this makes it legal and good for Westport we'd love you to say something like that at town meeting uh because I I think uh uh why have uh why put people at whatever risk it is at any kind of a risk if you don't have to I I think there could be some risk joh because say you have a shortterm rental in your in your house you're not there something terrible happens somebody's injured or killed or falls down the stairs and breaks their back your insurance company is going to say well who are these people in your house and well they're my short-term rentals and they look up the kind of Westport laws and they find well that's the illegal use are they going to pay I'm not a lawyer I'm not an insurance person but I think you want to give them an opportunity not to that's a good point so anybody else hi my name is Amy Chitwood I'm at 1507 drift Road um I have a couple of questions and I realize this is probably going to be for the select board but I wanted to make sure to get them on the record um what is I understand that there's an annual permit uh process I am I did really hear some of the people at town meeting last year talk about their quality of life uh with uh a partner part every weekend a party every day when you have a short-term rental everyone comes to the beach they want to party you know we're not here to regulate you know people's enjoyment but um I I can imagine that's going to be that's that's that's probably really hard what is what will be the process by which to report violations um uh for for this is there a separate process that's connected to the annual permitting so again we're not the select board we can't decide but I can Envision a process that if you have a neighborhood problem that's continuing problem you go get on the agenda for a select board meeting they can call the permit te in uh and if they don't straighten enough they can withdraw the permit and if they're still doing it without the permit then the zoning enforcement officer because then it's a zoning problem can issue a cease and desist okay I expect this is going to be a question that's going to come up at the next town meeting so I just figured I'd you know prepare it you know so that people if not in this room other rooms will have the answer um the second thing is more of a comment I definitely hear about the risks but one of the things that I'm listening to are all the uh self- certifications I also think that there's a selling point to you know we we would want people to you know uh you know be a safer environment for everybody um and it's not about you know um increasing cost for anyone it's making sure that everyone is protected and we're all operating under the same thing so my main thing is about how to report violations so thank you thank you so just a just a comment on why self-certification as opposed to have a process where somebody from the town goes and inspects the house and does all this there's no Department in town that has time to do this nor do we have people to keep track of that um and we're hoping that with self-certification process that people are forthright and if they can't meet one of the 16 different things that they say so on the application and then the select board can decide whether or not to give them a permit if they can't do one of these things so and it also gives the select board who should be the the right people to address a problem because they're they're in charge uh this gives them the the ability to question somebody about the use that the select board is permitting and to draw the permission to do that if it is appropriate to do so anybody else anybody think it's a stupid thing want ENT one last public here so do we need a uh motion on this to close the public hearing uh Mr chair I move that we close the public second all those in favor I and then we need a motion back to the uh Mr chair I uh move that we based on uh the public hearing and this uh um and the support we've uh and the comments we received at the public hearing that we uh uh send the uh short-term rental uh zoning amendments uh to the board of uh the select board uh unchange second all those in favor I well thank you very much and we have another one if you don't if you're not if you're not uh to forward we have another one accessory dwelling see you at the town meeting I hope accessory dwelling [Music] number one you're going to get all the complaints people ask okay this next uh next one is a change to our existing accessory dwelling unit bylaw U amendments and this is to comply with the new Massachusetts law that we have to allow them and we have to allow them by right as opposed to special permit so Michael could you that's correct um the 2024 affordable homes act introduced standards for accessory dwelling units which in our bylaw we call um accessory departments but we'll rename them to accessory dwelling units and that state law does prevent local zoning and so that actually takes it back to February 2nd and the state regulations will be in place at that time so we will have a period between February 2nd and town meeting where we'll just have to rely on the state regul by default for anyone who brings in an accessory dwelling unit um application to the the building inspector and so the for those unfamiliar the affordable homes Act created standards for and to encourage the development of accessory doelling units um and adus are are useful in that they provide housing at different price points folks can downsize you know and and still live in their neighborhood and they can downsize and still live on their lot so you can live in the accessory dwelling unit and run out the front house you know your kids have moved out but you still want to live in your neighborhood um it provides an option for care of for family members or even friends who might need um some additional assistance and it's an opportunity for rental income um that's one thing that will change in our bylaw per state law is that you have to allow folks to rent out the the principal unit the which will typically be a single family home in Westport and the accessor dwelling unit you can't place restrictions on one or the other um so that's where this is this is coming from we again as I said we had to rename accessory Apartments to accessory dwelling units um that is what this the state defines them as and so we will adopt the state definition as well for accessory dwelling units that will replace the accessory apartment definition edus are now by whether they're attached or detached previously a special permit was required for a detached accessory dwelling unit and now that's a bu rate process we also can't restrict occupancy through zoning so as I said you can't restrict who is living in which unit on the property so if they're a renter or homeowner or the homeowner or both being rented we're not allowed to weigh in on that through zoning accessory dwelling units will now have a maximum of 900 sare ft or 50% the gross floor area of the principal dwelling whichever smaller so if you have a 900 square fot single family home your accessory dwelling unit could be a maximum of 450 ft so is this going with the state law this is with the state law previously the the accessory Department bylaw allowed a range between 500 to 900 square ft and a parking space one parking space is required per accessory is that is is that mandated by state law parking space parking space yes it is uh you can eliminate it you can eliminate yeah you don't have to have one parking space but so we're choosing to require one spark parking space for Adu that's I tried to pull over the rags as we tried tried to keep the spirit of what was already on the books when I pulled it over so yes um for a single family dwelling it would actually be I think 1.5 part spaces so we would in the town would actually require more hard spaces now if that actually plays out on the ground I'm not sure because we don't we're not the permitting Authority for them so Michael the the 900 square ft as the maximum mhm but it's also the maximum of 50% of the regular house mhm it seems to be exclusionary to do that so if I have a 2,000 ft² house I can do 900 ft but my neighbor who has 1,500 can only do 750 he's got a bigger lot you can read into it that way this is just what the the state law requires the state law requires that yes c i i i want to get back to the parking space if you're trying to keep an aging parent in your house as opposed to a nursing home you've got to provide a parking space for someone who doesn't necessarily have a car right I think you can go to the zoning board and get a a variance okay it is up to the board to to remove the parking requirement that is an option okay all right of course I'm that aging parent so they try to take my car away I'm going to fight so this is the definition copy and pasted straight from the state's definition so an accessory dwelling unit is a self-contained housing unit inclusive of sleeping cooking and sanitary facilities on the same lot as a principal dwelling subject to otherwise applicable dimensional and requirements that one maintains a separate entrance either directly from outside or through an entry hall or Corridor shared through the principal dwelling sufficient to meet the requirements of the State Building Code for safe eess two is not larger in Gross floor area than one half the gross floor area of the principal dwelling or 900 sare ft whichever is smaller and three is subject to such additional restrictions as may be imposed by municipality including but not limited to additional size restrictions and restrictions or prohibitions on short-term rental as defined in section one of chapter 64g provided however that no municipality shall unreasonably restrict the creation of a rental or an accessory dwelling unit that is not a short-term rental Michael So currently our uh accessory apartment um bylaw requires or defines it as um a space for it has a living slash kitchen area a bathroom one bedroom this doesn't have any of those limitations in it that's correct so you could have if you can get two bedrooms in 900 square ft that's what the the state law requires okay the change to the table uses is straightforward both are by right in both of the Town zoning districts the parking board does have the discretion to change this but um we do require parking with single family homes so I put in more parking space again that can be subject to discussion the purpose and intent section of the the Adu bylaw will now read that the intent of Permitting an accessory dwelling unit is to enable the production of more types of housing that accommodate a variety of Ages incomes and abilities two provide homeowners with a means of obtaining companionship Security Services and income thereby enabling them to stay more comfortably in homes and neighborhoods they might otherwise be forced to leave three develop housing units and neighborhoods that are appropriate for households at a variety of stages in their life cycle four provide housing units for persons with disabilities and five protect stability property values and the residential character of a [Applause] neighborhood there are two slides here for requirements um this first one kind of restates what an accessory dwelling unit is it's a self-contained housing unit on the same lot as a principal dwelling an Adu shall not seed 900 square ft or 1 half the most FL area of the principal dwelling whichever is smaller and then there's a definition that just applies in here that was recommended that we um from Town Council that we Define what gross floor area is and so we've defined it as the total area within the perimeter of an adu's external walls including all floors of the building one accessory dwelling unit shall be allowed by right providing the following criteria are met um and I'll read off those criteria I will note that the accessory that the the planning board can allow more than one accessory dwelling unit by special permit that it's an option that is allowed in the state law that you can allow a second unit by special per um the accessory apartment by law did not allow a second accessory apartment at all and so that's why I carried that over um but again that's an that's an item that the board can discuss requirement a approval from the Board of Health for adequate was water disposal requirement B building Plumbing electrical and any other required permits are obtained these were pulled over from the previous accessory apartment bylaw I I would recommend that both of these are struck from the bylaw um because the planning board doesn't have anything to do with the Board of Health regulations or doing issuing any permitting um for building Plumbing or electrical those even that if that's not in the zoning that's still going to be applicable um and I think the the zoning regulation should really just be purely for zoning so Town Council recommended that it was also struck just because you don't want the the the regulatory structure to be construed potentially as a means to try to prevent accessory dwelling units from being constructed um see if an external staircase is needed to reach an accessory apartment the staircases must to the extent possible be enclosed and not change the general appearance of a single family house D an accessory dwelling unit must conform to the height and setback requirements for the district in which it is located um this is something the law allows planning boards to regulate and it was regulated previously in the accessory apartment by law e to maintain the single family character of the neighborhood the entrance to the accessory drawing unit Taps to a principal drawing should be on the side or rear if possible but may be through the front door if there is a veget this is the same sort of concept as as D the state law does allow this regulation um f there shall be no more than one accessory dwelling unit on one lot again this could be a discussion item g off street parking spaces shall meet the requirements of section 8.3 of these bylaws h the zoning board of appeals may allow zoning relief from dimensional requirements to reasonably accommodate accessory dwelling units for persons with disabilities and limited Mobility this was pulled over and somewhat the language was somewhat simplified from the accessory apartment by law the the purpose of this is to allow dimensional relief in an instance where an accessory dwelling unit may need to have um a ramp or something installed and you would encroach upon the setbacks the side yard setbacks or rear yard setbacks whatever might be applicable and and recognition that you know this could make a difference for someone to remain housed and and be able to get Care on you know from their loved ones um I U7 accessory dwelling unit as a short-term rental is prohibited this was a discuss this was a discussion item when this was first sent to the select board um the planning board um fell on uh with the position that the accessory dwelling unit bylaw as was originally intended um when the town first pass accessory Department by law was to create housing and it was to create housing for um you know for folks to AG in AG in place or to care for loved ones who um you know may need may be able to live somewhat independently but also you know need need to have some care of someone on site so that's where that comes from again that's a that's a discretionary item for the planning board so it's not restricted by the state law and those are the requirements um yeah so this is this has all been reviewed by Town Council um theyve given the the sign off on this language so um open the floor for the board for discussion on what's the action needed here Michael it has to be reped to the um to the select board for placement on the warrant for so I would like to U go back to 9.5.1 which is purpose and intent and number two there is provide homeowners with a means of obtaining companionship Security Services and income thereby enabling them to stay more comfortably at home neighborhoods they might otherwise be forced to leave um I think uh having an Adu you could in the summer rent out uh a short-term rental would certainly help provide income to that person uh and provide winter housing for somebody else I mean I I don't know that we should be in the business of prohibiting uh adus from becoming short-term rent but I don't know well I was imagining sort of along the same lines that say if we did restrict and said no that the Adu cannot be uh used as short-term rental someone might have a large I say rambling summer house with six or eight bedrooms or something and they move into the Adu and then they shortterm rental a six or eight bedroom house you know which for weddings and you know it's going to be party time I mean that's could to be I can imagine you know there it can be adverse impact here uh whereas we rather encourage the people to rent a smaller uh unit but you know I don't know you can't control that really I guess they have the option to do either one so mark under your um example uh the owner will be staying in the short ter in the Adu and not not the short-term renters no well right so that would be legal under this no no you could you could rent out you could do a short-term rental in the principal dwelling and the owner could live in the accessory dwelling unit the the owner could also um not reside in either right that that would be an option as well so they could rent out both one could be a the principal of dwelling could be a short-term rental just under this as proposed the accessory dwelling unit would have to remain a rental housing unit I I think the first purpose is enable the production of more type of housing I really am against adus as short-term rentals because everyone is going to create adus just to do short-term RS that's all they're going to be created for and uh I I think that is a perversion of what adus are about they're about the first purpose production of more types of housing that accommodate variety of Ages incomes and abilities they're not about how do we uh make money on short-term rentals and if you allow it that's what they're going to be used for and I I just think that's not the purpose of adus and if you allow it that's what they're going to be used for everyone's going to be that's what they're going to be used for okay my concern that I have is too is what what the assessed values are going to be of these houses um you know senior citizens trying to you know uh fixed incomes going to move in there to save money and he's just raised the taxes on his all of his property and anything that he's making it's going to you know we've we've got some houses and I've I've gotten recently gotten some calls from people that just had their houses went up again and and one person calls me and he says you know my house was up to 500,000 now like how big's your house 1,00 Square ft and you know it's not less than a conforming law now it's 500,000 it's kind of pushing you know the 70 and 80 year old residents out and being able to afford to live there I don't know what the assess value of these things would be I think they already exist all over the place um so you could probably work some up and see what it is so any comments questions from the audience Ray 51 hollye I'm a member of the Z board of appeals so this was one of our big things we did accessory apartments on a regular basis my comment is uh the 900 square ft uh that used to come in front of us you know handicapped accessibility takes more space and sometimes when it was 750 square ft we adjusted it up to 900 sare ft well even 900 squ ft sometimes it would come in front of us and they'd say Well we'd have to make the bathroom handicapped accessible and we have to widen the doorways so now a dwelling that was 900 ft sometime was 1120 or 1,000 or is there a provision in this that says you can get a variance or you can how does that going to work I know they bu right now too so right can't they always get a variance from this I'm assuming that but it doesn't say anything about that it doesn't it says 900 square ft like you said hey you know maybe this isn't going to work it might not work I think when we went from 750 to 900 we had Less Problems But even at 900 we still had issues I think Ray I agree with you and that's you know was my concern on the parking space but our chairman said well if that's an issue you get a variance and I think the same I'm glad to hear you say that when you went from 750 900 got fewer and if someone comes and says is you know because I need handicap accessibility I need 1,00 you know that's a variance issue uh you want variances to be needed and rare uh so I think that's the way you'd handle something like that I think also also when you convert uh say the upstairs of a garage big garage it almost most invariably comes out to more than 900 ft right because you convert the top of a three car garage or barn or something like that well no there's there's no control over that now it can be upstairs downstairs now yeah right but I'm saying that that's what a lot of people do they convert the second floor to a pool house to a garage to Bar um I I want to say that I hear you on the size issue I think that the definition is a little bit inflexible um but it's what we have to hold into the the bylaw so you the bylaw or the state law won't pre the zon we on a regular variances so you might a little more if it was necessary to be handicapped excessively yeah that's my only point Thank you presid only res have a comment or is this res Grant Buchanan it's for property off drift Road 1530 and could you give us your address where I live I live in Ram Massachusetts um I think the spirit of the rule to get an Adu on every property is merited I I think aging parents I have one myself that's somewhat why I'm here and she's not um but I have the same fear that uh is it John you brought up that it will start off as something simple and then in 5 years after the aging parent is no longer there it's going to be a rental income or it's going to be every lot's going to have two buildings on it now so I think the fact that you allow it to be rented maybe I I can see why the intent is is that it's providing income for someone that's struggling to pay the taxes and affordability to live in town still but I think it opens a door down the road that every lot is going to have two buildings on it both of them possibly rented and I don't think that's the spirit of what you're trying to do here I think what you're trying to do is accommodate people that can't afford to live here and if it's a by right proposition that everyone has the right to do it I'm also curious of how it's affected by undersized lots that don't meet requirements now I wouldn't have a right if I don't have a size lot even if I meet setbacks possibly what if my house on the primary house is only 800 square ft is a 400 ft Adu even reasonable to live in because I have issues where I have aging houses that I'd like to maybe move someone out into a brand new Adu while the original primary house is fixed up and if I have to do that in a 400 square foot house of someone that's barely getting by in the 800 foot house I think that's odd but I I I want to go on record that I agree and I think it's a need opportunity but I'm fearful that I'll drive up and down every Road in Westport and see two houses on every lot and in 15 years I'll see all of them used for rental and none of them used to accommodate what the original purposes thank you well I I appreciate your comments but I think it's state law that we we have to do this then why do you work so hard to protect the town if it's not that control if the state's going to dictate what we're allowed to do the the the the town and the quality and the character you might as well stop trying to protect it and preserve it because you're not going to be able to it's going to change and if all you do is say the state's forcing us the state's forcing us then you're wasting your time here trying to keep the town it's simple beautiful place it is so if we if we submit our our zoning bylaws uh have to go to the attorney general I'm not arguing I'm just saying it seems like I'm just trying to explain so they have to go to the attorney general and we could say we don't like that state law we're going to change it we're going to keep it the way we had it already um attorney general would write us a letter and say you're not in compliance it's not enforceable you have to go by welcome to the new America I don't know what to say anybody else you want a motion to close the public he please I move that we close the public hearing second all those in favor I I you want a motion to send this to the select uh I would move that we uh send the uh uh accessory dwelling unit zoning amendments and short-term rentals to uh the select board as presented by the planner second all those in favor I thank you so back to administrative items yeah first I'm going to send down decision page for 1180 American Legion Highway for you all have your and while you're doing that um let's move on to admin item e y okay so s SW Cole did a site visit at the property that was uh involved in a corrective low impact development um the applicant had clear cut before they had um applied to the planning board for low impact development and they were going to do an independent living facility there they withdrew they still needed to do the low impact development because they cleared over 40,000 square ft so this was an app of the fact permit to do some drainage improvements because they're clearing and reting um caus drainage issues on adjacent properties so the Consulting Engineers report states that it appears that the um they have adequately made the improvements to the required improvements to the property for the planning board's approval um they do recommend that this remains open until the spring when there's typically more groundwater to assess whether the drainage is performing adequately um but that's up to the to the board I to decide on whether or not you'd like to leave this open for another three months four months down for keeping it open until spring there's no no I mean there's maybe a downside for the property owner but as far as protecting the um protecting the adjacent neighborhood from a potential drainage issue um that the the the town would then have to pursue corrective action against the property owner again and restart this process uh I think it could be left open another couple of months in order for S cold to go out there and do a proper assessment when there are wet conditions um fortunately like the week after he sent us this report we did get a fair amount of brain um that's just how it goes sometimes so you don't know what happen right so I I would be more comfortable with leaving it open so that we can have a proper assessment done do you need a motion um I don't need a motion for because we're not really making a decision on releasing anything so I think one com I I think that's a good idea um especially with this is this is a um a year that we haven't had in a long time where we actually have Frost in the ground so it could give us a good indication of what's going on up there next is sorry sir com there was a um this the item app division Ro tree survey for division Ro solar file number 22.1 SPS the there was a tree survey that was performed as a condition of approval for this special permit there was in the special permit there's no recommended action for the board to take sending it to the Consulting engineer or the board providing any sort of additional recommendations I I will note that um electrical permits have been pulled at this site um and building permits have been pulled so they're working on completing the installation we do still need as belts um updated and have the site inspection from the Consulting engineer before they can be gred an occupancy permit so have they installed the panels I'm not sure uh we haven't had anyone out on site recently so I I don't know the status of the panels themselves I know they've pulled permits for it though okay but they're done with clearing done with clearing I would I would assume so they they've had to do a lot of wetlands Crossing in order to get and and wetlands replication in order to get back into that so you need anything that we did the approval not required so planners reports yeah I have an update on the coastal zone management Grant and the municipal vulnerability preparedness Grant we awarded the RFP well take step back we reviewed the proposals that we had received for this RFP for Beach management plans at East Beach at Avenue Beach Avenue and we reviewed these proposals with Rebecca Haney and Sam haes from czm um and Chris Capone from conservation is also on the project team and he helped out with the with their views and so we ended up selecting The Proposal from wood whole group to award the contract um they've done similar sort of activities in similarly situated areas like um as East Beach like surf drive and fit dve um and we like their approach to to public engagement and more generally I think they they understood the intent behind the the RFP which was to come up with a range of potential um project recommendations for slowing the rate of erosion in these different areas as well as producing the framework for a beach management plan we won't take it all the way through permitting we have uh about at this point it's going to be five and a half months to get this completed so um that's going to give us the framework to move forward with permitting on the beach management plans which will be something that conservation will have to do later on um but we won't be able to get through the actual permitting process just because it's a it's a very short timeline who's the client the client yeah planning board Beach committee planning planning is is the client yeah okay um we're doing it in consultation with the Conservation Commission but we were the ones who applied for the Grant application um as well as the MVP application um and yeah so we're planning as or as client but we're working Clos is it the same people at Woods group that have worked with us before do you know um I don't have a list of their project team here you you have the in your package the principles are the same principles okay in what whole group is one of the primary people doing cler State yeah play they they have a lot of experience in this this spot yeah so they're going to be partnering with sured as well ced's environmental division is going to help out with the public engagement piece of this Grant and so we met with we had like kind of a pre- kickoff meeting to work out the scoping that they'll prepare for their contract working to get that soon as possible because again short timeline um so there'll be more updates and probably big flurry of activity over the next five months on this okay the next next is an update on our onetop grant this is a $992,000 grant we applied for and received um it was probably like five or six months it was a while ago but we we should be i' been in contact with the state they said that we should be receiving your contracts this week probably next week at the latest and so this is another one we're going to contract with shpid with it's going to be a um kind of medium range planning study um for the route 6 area and the purpose of this plan is to develop um data and what community preferences are for things like starter homes incremental housing and to see what kind of necessary or desired changes there are for um the route 6 business district so that'll be a a two-year Grant process looking to kick that off as soon as we get get the contract I have an update on the um aquatic organism passage grants this is the the project that we're working on with Buzz's Bay Coalition this is for the cold water brook trout um Wildlife passage Calvert redesigns at um Angeline Brook and Cornell Road we're advancing that through preliminary engineering plans and it was only going to be conceptual for Lions Brook and Snell Creek but they've secured additional resources in order to push that through a preliminary design process um so we'll have that in hand and should we receive the $3.4 million that we had requested from the federal highways Administration which go a long way um to Advance full engineering and actually um if we are awarded that also anticipating on the the construction piece as well um so to to be determined on that Grant application but we're at least going to have a full set of um plans at least full preliminary plans for the three locations which is next on the plannner report is BOS Bank financial support for the climate resilience committee Jeff Canton who is the subcommittee chair of the Outreach and engagement subcommittee on the climate resilience committee applied to B coast bank's Community Assistance Program and um was awarded $7,500 to assist the climate resilience committee with developing the climate resilience plan and I think the thought when when he had applied was to um excuse me use those funds to help with document design and lay out to make it you know the the the make sure that the the report was a nice finished product that was uh nice looking um plan um but I John I understand that you're working on potentially getting some assistance from UMass art yeah we have a meeting one is a Friday or uh Thursday next week Thursday of next week with about three or four faculty members uh at UMass dmouth uh Michael Jeff and I are going to go over and I don't know whether um we can uh what kind of help I met with them once just by myself uh and they have a big Grant uh that they got from Eda um through URI and uh to help various communities we're the only community so far that's reached out to them and uh so we want to see uh and I've said hey we're the only Community outside of New Bedford I think that has a resilience plan and if you guys work with us on this you know our resilience plan would be very helpful to Dartmouth to Kush you know any other community in the service area of you m arth so it would behoove you to help us uh and so uh I don't know whether they have their own people and students and faculty and the grant or whether the bay Coast thing would be helpful too but we'll just uh talk with them and and see what happens obviously there's a lot of resources University and I think they're located on Old Westport Road uh so we'll see what we can do yeah so maybe that 7,500 you know the help from students can go somewhere else point I'm bringing that up is that you know uh with that additional help potentially maybe we can put it into some other uh you know some public engagement or um you know some some other function that that would support the development of the climate resing but Jeff did a great job and Michael also helped with it and it's really good that b uh stepped up thank Nick Chris and all right an update on Bikeway so e letter of support for South Coast Bikeway Alliance Mass Trails application um I have Jim I think you should have one over there if you don't have one this is for your signature um I'd like for the the planning board to make a motion to support the South Coast Bikeway alliance's application to the mass Trails Grant this is in support of the work that the town has already been doing um with building out the or designing the town's connection to the quian River Rail Trail and Fall River oh sorry I was just going to say they're what they're applying for is to design out uh get a conceptual design that will run all the way across Westport Dartmouth and New Bedford to design it up so go up Sanford Road and then go across Old Bedford Road on through Westport so that would be our portion and then they do subsequent portions in the next two municipalities so would go all the way through the Bedford at that level above six and yep sort of in the woods yeah and it would be a bit of a lower stress alternative to Route Six which um you know Route Six will be more of a transportation um Corridor or be more Transportation oriented just given that there's the the bus stops there businesses homes this would be more of a a recreational um that you could use to get from Community to community um but yeah it would be an alternative to that good move second all those in fav hiim you second that can't I know so first I know history's made and then last is in our house housing production plan which has been in progress for um for some time but this is a final draft I guess so the uh sered their housing division is helping us prepare the this updates the housing production plan so um the purpose of the housing production plan is to give a comprehensive housing needs assessment for the town town as well as to set some goals in the plan some housing oriented goals for the town and then develop some implementation strategies um the actually the housing production plan also helps provide guidance on where 40b projects could be located in the town um that Mass housing would take into consideration so um it's a good document to have and I you know we're going to push forward on implementing the the recommendations here but we would like all of you to review this and perhaps by our meeting in February provide comments um I started my own indepth review of it and um I'll send you a reminder sometime in February that get comments over so I think when you're I think one of the things that she asked for when she sent this to you is a couple of more Town R lands that could be used for for some kind of housing yep it's on page 47 I was looking at that earlier today um on yeah so that that and that is a specific follow-up item that's a good point Jim thanks for calling that out they would like us to identify one to two Town own properties for potential 40b developments they've um shown one listed as uh list one as the town Annex site I think another one actually um right off the that could be uh the former police station area but at the Town Hall property um and then one private site for housing production so if you have any any areas in general just let me know um that would be helpful there included the report is your house in the country almost I thought this was our this is Bridge Street and those are all the updates I have okay thank you so next up are minutes of December 3rd so I I have a question on the minutes uh December 17th mous Mill Road there was a motion to close the public hearing uh and release the C uh consultant review balance but we didn't uh we didn't do anything I thought uh is that all we did at that uh on mous road so there you wanted to and and then it's uh and then we just go on to the next uh he wanted a continuance and or is this that particular meeting where there was the public hearing I think there were the planning board had to do two things when the there was a motion to deny the application uh we had forgotten to also close that public hearing so then at the next public meeting the the hearing was closed so so that might be so we just closed the public and he wanted oh all right so there was a meeting where uh he wanted or we wanted it suggested to continue and he didn't want it continue right that's that's correct we was that that that meeting on December 17th or was that a different meeting because it seems like all we're doing here is closing the public hearing I think it was the third that was a different meeting yeah I think that was a different meeting that's a different meeting okay all right I'll check quick and then December 3rd was the the mouse smell denial meeting subsequent one was when the uh hearing was okay all right it's on page three five of the third right and Michael's right we didn't close the public hearing we so we have to close the public hearing of the next meeting all right then I would move that we approve the minutes of December 17th 2024 second all those in favor I now December 3rd we just have one set of minutes in front of us it's in the iPad oh it's in the iPad so page 259 for this I move that we approve uh December 3 I second that second you saying something El um I was just going to say that the minutes really a a very good they're very little different format and their they really are very you know and since these become public records you can really get a sense of what was going on in the meeting well done n yes thank you na um matters not reasonably anticipated within 48 Hours sir is there there a possibility that I make one short statement regarding West lak Drive and just ask one question uh if you make it really short my again Bren forer 26 West Bo Lakes tribe I understand procedurally that the that the town may not have a choice on whether to revolt or or not revoke the the subdivision plan for West W Lake Drive however I would submit that whoever is deemed responsible at whichever point this becomes uh to finish uh the roadway and the subdivision I I would submit that whether whichever way it goes I would submit that because of all of the the length of time and the expiration of of all of the covenants and permits that I would submit that U I don't know if I said it before that I think that they should be required to follow the current subdivision rules and regulations which may be different than what was back in 200 5 six seven8 to include to include sidewalks fire suppression systemns which we do not have I would submit that that they would again they would be required to follow the current subdivision rules and regulations second I just have one question about U on on the actual subdivision rules and regulations on page 31 where it says uh heading c one dwelling par lot I guess my question is is how does this how would this if is there any substance to this where it says no more than one building designed or available for use for dwelling purposes shall be erected or placed or converted to use as such on any lot in a subdivision or elsewhere in the town of West Bo understanding that this this new Adu thing is a little different like I guess it it may not be different where um question is this may not have been pertaining back in 2005 678 when this the subdivision plan was approved uh the one dwelling for lot would would that include those other lots that they're now trying to put 38 sub subdivided Lots onto that one big parcel if if that was included in the original subdivision plan then I would argue that that if following the if following the rules and regulations they would not be able to sub further subdivide that lot that already is part of the original subdivision plan so I I appreciate the question and I'm not sure I have a complete answer yet uh I'd have to go back uh and weigh through all the paper on this thing uh is that big parcel a parcel or is it a lot there a difference so if it were a parcel wouldn't be considered a lot and I don't think it would be considered a lot subject to that requir so I just gra I think out of the 206 Acres 33 Acres was that one lot but was it a lot or a parcel so in in 206 Acres was imp possible the 33 Acres was a lot I think to put one house on I I don't know without going through them in the letter addressed to bluecat LLC from from the planner it says it does it does essentially ID them as parcel parcel IDs 31 31 C 31b and then it goes on to read uh are the subject possible of P 40b application currently under consideration of the zoning board of appeals the planning board holds the Covenant as well as assurity to ensure that the subdivision infrastructure is installed adequately so it it seems like that they would be included in that subdivision according to this letter furthermore it says um accordingly the planning board finds that no development shall occur on these Parcels nor shall the properties be transferred to a new owner until the Westport Lakes Ren go gie Lane which was never constructed and Associated storm water infrastructure are installed hand repaired maintained inspected and released by the plan board it seems conflicting um basically because it seems like that um this should have been done in 2015 when the property was transferred to Coastal Harvest well in the interim you're missing the the part where they came with uh money shity to say this is and at that time it was enough to complete the road so the the Restriction not to sell anything was removed from most of the most of the lots and Parcels except I think the ones in question they not part of that release so they still had the Covenant on them as far as I understand correct that's correct yeah that's that's so they still have the Covenant so if they were transferred from one to the other it was done illegally well I don't think that but it's just okay thank you I I just wanted to say Mr chair they they um I don't know if it's the same developers or not but they came before the planning board last year or maybe was before then to sort of have a discussion about a potential subdivision and and we went through a list of problems with if they tried to do it as a subdivision and and and I think I don't think they could do it as a subdivision I mean they would have to come back and do all all kinds of things that they didn't want to do so then they went and and filed that there a 40 B to avoid our our review essentially um but um they you know we'll we'll try to at least for the road we we have some sort of jurisdiction U but I think once they convey Lots out it's very difficult to reive the subdivision without harming you you so um so we we we probably can't do that but we could we can enforce that the subdivision meet you know the the standards that at least we'll try to do is is there a potential that that lawfully and by procedure according to the town or that that this that you would not have a choice but to revoke the subdivision plan um we we talked about this with the Town Council and he's going to be coming back to us so we gave him a lot of background on this as well as the the knowledge that in the 2016 extension the extension says explicitly if it isn't finished in a year then the subis is rescinded yes and so the question for him was was that sufficient to resend it is it resented or would the planning board have had to take a direct action to have a re hearing a public hearing a public hearing and do it and we're still waiting to hear back from him is that through Jeff B yes is is there concern is there concern of the board with the with the new knowledge of uh the state highway access permit that uh was was indeed not followed through with where that could be potentially some portion of uh of an issue with the subdivision itself that would have an issue with the subdivision we didn't discuss that particular issue with the with the Town Council but we can when he comes back to us that information was just was was just recently alined from from asdot from an informational request it definitively the letter definiely identifies the fact that there were sent a letter that that stated hey you haven't finished this yet by the way your permier expires in 201 on July or so and they essentially ignored it so I I don't know I'm not sure we have that letter in the file so if you have a copy of that could you give it to Michael I have it oh you have it thank you thank you Jim that is not anticipated could we talk about that mass Highway thing that so we also just had that situation where we have another applicant claiming that he doesn't need to apply for that so I think Michael should probably let that applicant know that he needs to apply for that anyway um in addition we have some we might want to you know this new online permitting coming up um and the commission that we have now we might want to make sure we get that procedure up on site access and utility access CU we had two outs in here that we've had problems over numerous years that that's the case um we also have a we have some Town own property that has a subdivision on it that's not been built and um a nonprofit I believe runs the ball fields that our children are at and it's also not had a mass high C cup event um and the select uh the select board last year made a call out the highway to clean up the areas out there and um I actually went out at that time and I'm like hey you don't even have a stop sign here they're coming out of here nobody realizes that there's 177s here and somebody's going to drive right out theide there so I think that might be something we need to look into too on how we can fix that it's a town own subdivision um it's probably in the same situation as this and it was around the same area that same timeline that it was done it's never been built and hundreds of our kids are using the facility now there well there's two facilities there's one on sord roads the soccer fields and then there's the ballfields on 177 the ball fields are the ones that I'm saying with mass Highway CB cut that one's kind of sord Ro would be that that's a local street but but the that procedure it's it's pretty simple and and it and it actually will help the town and the applicant and it's not made to they want they want the design before you apply so any those changes that are on on these projects when they when they they come up there's a whole Mass Highway tells you when you need to do this basically if you're going to cut trees you need to do it anything that you need to do so just and it's not that once the plan's done it's a matter of on shops I might cost 150 bucks it's not really major that's why I asked them about and they oh we don't do that well they they we've had since they' been on the board we've had most applicants say we don't we have an existing but that's not the case and it's it's been changed a little bit with mass highway now too and and it's called site access and then you have the utility access so we've actually just had um an issue with um the gas company um went in their utility access to Route 6 and didn't get a permit from Mass Highway being the utility they were required to and and mass Highway came after the tunnel actually Highway and then we we had another situation today where the Board of Health went by another property on Route Six and and they were actually tying a a drain into Mass Highway and and called up Highway and Highway it's not in my jurisdiction it's so basically that would be probably the building inspector's jurisdiction okay so I would entertain a motion move to ajour all those in favor