##VIDEO ID:avDt7OTziF8## that's that okay there it being uh roughly 6:30 on December 11th I'm going to start the zoning board of appeals offer with the Pledge of Allegiance Pledge of Allegiance to the flag the United States of America indice in accordance with Mass General Law chapter 38 section 20f this meeting is being recorded first order of business is 88a hillquest Acres applicant of the McDonald Construction LLC applicant and uh Kathy Joe Martin and James R milky owners for a finding that demolishing the existing single family home and constructing a single family home on the same footprint with rear deck will not be substantially more Dental than the existing non-conforming use to the neighborhood as mandated by zonian bylaw Article 5 Section 5.2.3 Andor variance from side yard setback requirement the measurement on the original footprint being 3.2 ft from the property line is mandated by zoning bylaw article 7 section 7.7.2 subject property is located at 88 8 88a Hillcrest Acres Westport Mass and as shown on the cessor map 72 watch 15 and 16 voting on this will be Jerry coutino Ry Elias myself Raj manard conen ski and Cynthia CET uh will the applicant uh please come forward and sit here um the way the me this hearing will be will be run is the applicant will provide whatever uh information is appropriate the board will ask uh questions and then uh after the board has finished asking questions I'll open it up to the public so uh name and address and the floor is yours yes uh good evening uh Brandon McDonald uh 743 drift Road Westport Mass and this is my uh daughter uh Reagan McDonald good evening how are you um so I don't know if there's any information that hasn't been provided already uh I believe uh does everyone have a a site plan uh the actual construction drawings just want to sort of just go uh give us a quick overview what you plan on doing uh we we we're pretty much just looking for um to wave um um one of the setbacks I mean obviously it's a pre-existing non-conforming law we're not we don't believe we're going to substantially uh impact uh uh the existing neighborhood any detrimentally uh and we're just looking for actually that one waiver but uh we plan uh demolishing existing structure um and obviously bringing up the code uh we just we want to keep the existing footprint of the house and uh uh we're just basically looking for a waiver on that uh pre-existing non-conforming uh structure okay I'm going to uh read a letter from uh the zoning enforcement officer that probably prompted this in the first place uh Dear Miss Martin after review of the building permit application to demolish and reconstruct the dwelling at 88a Hillcrest Acres the applicant has application has been denied as per the Westbard zoning bylaws article 5.2.3 pre-existing non-conforming structures uses may be altered provided there is a finding by the board of appeals that such alteration should not be substantially more detrimental than the existing non-conforming use to the neighborhood also the proposed setbacks are not indicated on the application or the submitted site plan the existing uh dwelling appears not to comply with required setbacks the property in question is located in a flood zone and will need to meet requirements of flood zone Zone Construction yeah and we're prepared to meet all those requirements uh obviously with the any of the flood zone requirements any FEMA any of those issues uh um the architect has uh actually demonstrated that in the plan and uh we're not looking for any waivers or that obviously we want to meet any of the current uh regulations obviously through FEMA or any like I said the flood zone requirements and uh now was this um like an originally is a a cottage uh yeah I believe so uh yes I mean I drove down there today I mean it's you know it's a well it's right in the river so it's you know it's obviously got a very Scenic spot uh it's the red one atot of the yes yes yeah and obviously we're going to have uh we did a Title Five inspection which passed but um the Board of Health requested we uh do a denitrification system we've got Lenny Potter he's going to obviously address that and design as the appropriate system I just want to make one uh uh one note before I continue on is um because it's confusing to a lot of people part of uh of the bylaw says that the operation shall be not substantially more detrimental than the existing non-conforming use what that refers to uh is are things like safety and traffic and things like that it is not has to do with the architectural style we we don't regulate the style of a house we do regulate though things you know like uh how does it affect the park and is there safety issues is there is there a traffic issues you know things that affect the neighborhood I just want to make that clear before we go forward it looks really great excuse me I said it looks really good yeah I mean hope y go ahead the building that you're going to take down yes sir it's the same footprint that you're putting back up and this 3.2 ft side uh thing that you're worried about yes it's already non-conforming and it's already there you're not extending it or decreasing it no sir he's tearing the whole L down though he has to cuz that's what I'm still right but um but you're not changing the pro the um uh the setback no what was there already no sir okay is the reason that you're not moving it over just a little bit because that's where the drainage is is and um I mean since you're built you could actually move it away from the other property line a little bit and not have to deal with this but it's gets too close to the water right yeah and plus we've already got the the septic systems installed um I mean obviously I mean um we respect your opinion and obviously uh I'm just asking I mean you know yeah no that the only reason why we just thought that uh um through the bylaws and things the nature of you know what we had read in terms of you know our ability to keep the structure where it was we just thought we're in our means be able to do and obviously we were just looking um obviously um for your opinion uh um um and the the design was based on um verbage of what we read and we thought we within our means to do it but um we like I said we don't want to have any uh detrimental impact on the property or the neighbors and um really um that's the only reason behind it be honest with you yeah well I mean one of the one of the positive Parts about keeping the same squ the layout is U you don't really need a variance it's already there yeah yeah we're not looking for if if you if you if you you made any significant changes then uh then we would have to investigate you know is a you know it's not a waiver it would be a variance uh yeah and that was the last Resort really I mean we understand we could apply for variance for a lot of things and we really we just want to keep within the footprint and we didn't want to create any other issues with the with the property right variances are a lot harder to to approve than than findings and finding by the way is a majority vote uh and a variance you need to you need to describe um what hardship you are you are trying to you know that forced you into this into the variance so staying away from that is a you know makes it makes it a lot easier so even if they were trying to be U make the non-existing um the non-conforming property more conforming by yes I mean if they went closer if they if they moved it away if they moved it away then it's probably yes like no harm no foul yeah right right but I'm not saying they should I'm just right it would be now the time are using the existing same footprint right right you you indicate uh building on the same footprint does that include any decks overhangs roof overhangs or whatever that you're going to be putting in yeah but that wouldn't infringe upon the setbacks I mean there are there is a deck on the um on the back side on but not West Side do not conform yes sir you got a lot of distance uh between there and the water you're not you're not you're not coming close to the property line no sir would they even let CU you're it's only looks like it's only 100 ft from the water you had to be 200 ft now I mean I guess they have to leave the bill because it's a lot but I got the ru 200 ft back off the water but I'm not conservation so what is this uh 7 and2 ft that's been written in in red nine and a half is it nine it looks like a seven on mine yeah nine 9.5 okay uh what is that what is it going to is that a deck that's in that corner uh no that just just in indicating there was um this is this was a footprint of the existing structure and that it is showing the existing footprint that's showing it's 9.5 ft from the property line okay the existing structure is 9 and A2 yeah that's going to get get uh that's going to be part of the the demo that's not part of the uh design so the uh that um wall of the of the new house uh is it going to be right in that same line with uh where you have the uh the little scratch marks all the way across no if if you would continue the blue line from that the existing Foundation if you ran that blue line South it would be parallel with the um um the East boundary line right but that's indicating um a porch That's existing when I when it's it's identifying that 9.5 that's coming off that existing porch that okay what I'm getting at is that the uh I'm trying to see here where your new wall is going to be is it going to be right on that same line you're making this a rectangular yes exactly continuing that line straight back right so the the the the wall that would be the furthest East just continues South until you until you until it matches the that South Corner yeah that South uh east corner yes sir but what I'm getting at is that you will now be uh uh exceeding the setback requirement with that no they'll be actually making it they'll be actually making it closer to 10 well okay what I'm seeing here is 9 and2 for a part that he said is going to be demolished mhm right and he's not replacing what he's demolishing there it's coming up don't mind me he's bringing this line down to here and he's bringing it to here but he's getting rid of this so if this is only 9 and a half then it's going to be like 10 it's going to be more than that's what I'm getting yeah so it's going to be within the yeah it's going to be about 11 seven I mean it's going to be parall maybe that angle actually on the uh um the east side that boundary that actually yeah so that's a side boundary it's not a front boundary correct yes so you are now going to be right now it's non-conforming and you're going to take a yeah you're going to take that part away so you will now be conforming on that side yes sir so the only place you're non-conforming is the three and a half the three .2 ft yes that which is already existing that's the pre-existing yeah that's the north side is there any change to uh parking or uh erress to the to the property um let just double check we're going to have there's going to be parking under um the structure due to the fact they're going to have the uh the peers so there'll be parking uh we actually have one designated parking spot it just indicated on the uh the uh Southeast Corner okay we've even got a little car par yeah well technically the be in that spot that just that we just talking about yes sir yeah I would argue that technically the west side is actually the frontage so actually they're still non-conforming cuz their driveway comes in behind it on the west and that I would assume you pick the driveway as the I'm looking at actually I'm looking at the aerial oh okay oh yeah it's the overall heke from grade 4410 yes sir that isn't this really the East side this is the house right there that's North that's South that's East isn't this really the east side not the west side is the bigger part in front of the house is the the river which is which would be the West oh yeah great right that is weird yes so isn't isn't what you marked what I assume the W in a circle is not denoting West but I really think that's East what this is North this is South that's East not West maybe that's not what that that's a whale the well okay I'm the saying you know I looked at it the same yeah no that's the well yeah so I would say tell me where's the road it's actually by the wellside is this the road this is the road that's horse hor Road yep so in reality they're not going to be what's this coming in no I don't know where he's coming in so they're nonconforming on the east side as well even though they're making it bigger this property is nowhere near horse NE Road no so where's the where's the street the street goes this way on the right it's really a funny street because it branches off all over the place but Street aiv here it is go straight straight down yes also Cur off as well this is technically their front CU there's houses to the north comes in it's all the way down the river and Hill Crest comes uh In from from horse NE that's where I hit the oh really right and then you know it just goes straight in where is that on here his hor making it but I don't see a road going there is uh oh um isn't that that's not well it it may be it uh it goes straight down where's the river doesn't matter River doesn't show the river doesn't it the river is here okay how do we know that oh no the river's here I'm sorry the I can't see I my glasses my ring the river here yeah so yeah it's it's a odd yeah but there you go okay um you know I one of the things we we do look at is you know you know we look at the neighborhood that's the reason why we usually do a driveby you know because we want to see how to fix the neighborhood and you know and obviously in that area there are a lot of houses that are being built up uh which is relatively common in Westport you have a lot of uh you know things that either summer homes or Cottages or whatever that that now you know are becoming full-time residences is is that what you're planning on this to be a full-time residence yes sir yes yeah so I mean there is a variety of housing in in uh in your area uh you know some fairly large you know some um uh more modest but uh uh you know it uh converting certainly it isn't going you know it's uh uh it isn't going to be uh uh sore thumb kind of of issue I don't think it seems pretty straightforward yeah yes popping on the footprint that's already there flopping on the footprint that's already there right yes I mean we see that I mean there's a there's we get a lot of this kind of thing because there's like I said there's a lot of property in Westport that's old property that was either just a summer Cottage or you know you know or just you know use in temporar and uh and now with the with the land the way it is you know people are converting it into you know full-time residences and that's and that's you know that's a that's a positive thing for the town um I I have no problem with this but I think for the record we we really need to designate what is the frontage and what is not the frontage property so is is the frontage where the W is where the well is well where the road is that's really I mean I drove down that road technically Hill Crest goes straight down to the water almost but it also branches off right so um is this a branch off of here or is this the one that comes from hor neck yeah it runs East to to West uh it runs East yes I know so that's the road that's coming into the house so yeah but it comes this way Hill Crest yeah Hill Crest but that's their that's their that's another road you don't it's just because Hill Crest is is a is a road doesn't mean there's another road coming off the Hill Crest yeah see if you actually look here it goes that way too yeah this is all Hill Crest the Hill Crest down to here that is well either way that's the frontage they're still non-conforming because that's right here yes right or it's that's the front edge and they got a three four four for front they usually go by where the front door is on the east side not the front door it's it's the road no no I'm asking front door yes sir is on the is like the W is yes sir yeah okay generally that's so that's not a 10- foot SI setb that's supposed to be a 25 foot set back not that it makes any difference because it hasn't we were just talking about that a little while ago and we're saying it was a 10 foot said until we realized the road was there yeah and that's why I'm being trying to be clear about it but that's the frontage is is on the long side of the house but this is a preexisting but he just we're just trying to clarify just think we need to be clear in the record where where the frontage is on this property Hill Crest does it's not like a lot of roads that it's it's a point to point it actually branches off so whatever part of Hill Crest you're on is is is the in his case you have Hill crust you essentially have a road on on on the north side of you and on the east side of you right yes sir that's right and and both of those are Hill crests yeah correct but isn't there another property directly north of you before it hits there's a few before it hits before it hits Hill Crest Road yeah there are other homes to the north yes it again it doesn't really matter it Jerry wants it to be clear that the frontage is on the east side okay uh yeah and since your house since the the front door is on the east side then essentially we got to assume that the part the road oh it's on the west side this is the the W is on the east side right and the front is on the west this is the front here the road that goes in front of you on the uh on the east side of the house is is Hill Crest and and because that's where your front door is that's where we consider to be uh uh your Frontage so the door is on the West Side look at West is over here the front door is right here yeah the West is the river the the front door is is is is on the river side no it's on the the front door is on the east side on which where the porches which is not going to be there anymore no it's going to be there the the door two there two points of which I guess we need and one is off that little balcony right okay yep so okay so we're okay uh other questions from the board yes yes so again you're leaving in the same footprint part of it was because of the septic system which is right over here but you're going to have to change the septic system to a dite system do you think you're going to have to relocate the septic from where it is now no they told us we don't okay yeah I don't want you to come get to say you can do it here and then all of a sudden Health says have just come up to the microphone and and announce who you are oh okay sorry just for the record is it want us to approve the plan yeah I'm Kathy Martin with my husband we own the property and we did go through the title five Greg Nicholas help handled that for us because you've been talking we we need to make sure that we have on record any other questions from the board if not I'll open up to the public any anyone in the public uh I assume you're all May be here for uh for the the second petition okay we do have a letter of support oh yes yes yes should be read to the record yes for the record uh I do have a letter from let me make sure this the right one yeah H okay uh Jeffrey Swope uh we own the property at 393 horse Neck Road Road C's map 72 lot 32A that abuts the south side of the lot that is the subject of this petition we are writing and supportive your approval of this petition it will have no adverse effect on our property and we believe only a minle of any adverse effect on any other AB budding and the other properties in the area at the same time the Redevelopment of this property so near the east branch of the Westport River with an upto-date nitrogen reducing septic system conjunction with the new construction would be a significant contributor to the health through this important Waterway if we can provide any information please let us know uh that's uh and again now we're going to have to make sure that we U we list this in the uh in the meeting minutes so any other uh any other if not then I'll entertain a motion to close the hearing I'll make a motion to close the hearing second second all in favor say I I I I'll oppose now all that means is now we won't take any more information from the public we will uh render decision uh I don't see any any issues with this we're essentially upgrading the property uh with the same footprint so you know uh for a finding it sort of meets all the qualifications it's not impacting it's not really changing anything other than um really improving the property right yeah that's nice design thank you okay my house motion make a motion I'll make a motion to approve the finding that demolishing the existing single family home and constructing a single family home on the same footprint with rear deck will not be substantially more detrimental than the existing non-conforming use to the neighborhood as mandated by zoning bylaw Article 5 Section 523 for the applicants uh Kathy Joe Martin and James R milky second that uh the and made use of the plans from dated today that were presented today in Accords with the plans from today so we I'll make I'll you have a motion I make a second I'll second the motion any com any uh any comment before we vote if not all in favor of of granting the petition say I I I all oppose no that's a record show it's unanimous there is a 20-day waiting period so uh you know 20 days you can start uh making your dream home thank you excellent thank you very much thank you thank you so thank you okay the second is a continuation uh zero Westport Lake Road continue hearing on application of uh pinebridge States LLC and Bradford Dean for a comprehensive permit pursuing through Mass General Law chapter 40b for development off Westport Lakes Drive consisting of three 38 single family homes on individual watch which are to contain two or three bedrooms with 10 of those homes being designated as affordable deed restricted homes Subic property is located at zero Westport Lake Road and is shown on sor map Lots uh 31 Lots uh map 31 Lots 3B 3C and 3G voting on this will be Jared gtino Ry Elias myself Raj manard kiny and cynthy K kazt uh this is a continuation so uh the petition will come up with it will be the same process uh we'll ask board will uh uh the petitioner can provide information uh and then the board will ask questions uh the first order of business though is we do need to vote on u a consultant we have two um uh candidates for Consulting Services um uh I've reviewed both of them I think uh and my personally uh the the one we got from field engineering uh I uh I'm not terribly satisfied with they don't do on uh the uh traffic study and they they to me it's a it's a it's They Don't Really describe exactly what it is they plan on doing so uh I I I find it almost to be non-responsive in my my opinion anybody else I agree with I agree with those comments anybody else have have a different opinion no okay uh I therefore uh Mr chairman make a motion to are there any conflicts with these no it's been determined that there is no conflict make that determination well we've we have I'm not sure if the board is aware there's an apparent conflict um my understanding is that the other firm that you're considering is a firm owned by Brian Dunn um and Brian's a great engineer and his firm's a great firm they represent us in a couple of other developments so I don't I mean he doesn't work directly for doic but we're on the same team as he is on two developments in A1 so I I just want to bring that to the board's attention um okay that it could be U the appearance of a of Interest I just want to make the record straight that's all okay and I I also understand that field engineering um is a consultant to the and has been a consultant to the planning board and ton of us Bo that's that's that's that's true and uh uh we had to actually almost twist our arm to provide a a proposal and a proposal is extremely weak could we clarify is field ever had any dealings with you at all no okay I don't I don't know field other than by name uh and reputation we have never or none of my clients we do a lot of housing affordable housing and none of my clients have ever used field engineering so I have no you know whatever the board wants to do but it seems to make sense to me that the uh fuel engineering has also been the consultant to the the Conservation Commission and the plan that we're proposing um and I don't think we really got into this very much from the last couple of meetings was the plan that we're proposing um is almost identical to the plan that was already reviewed by the con well and that's that's one of the reasons actually that uh I would really rather have a quick uh a uh a fresh look at things and they don't do traffic studies Brian doesn't either so Brian doesn't do traffic studies either they have identified that they are they may sub it out but they are but they are going to respond to it that's fine I just want to bring to the board's attention the potential so that yes okay you I just want to make the record clear y okay I want to be clear uh the they've not worked directly for you but for some of your clients is that correct yes I have recommended them to some of my clients who have hired them and we've been a team like we are with Christian with Fallen engineering we're a team and we're sort of one going through the different boards so we've done that uh with Brian and his group on two developments and okay given that clarification I would like to uh ask our uh Town Council uh as to whether that would appear to be any type of conflict that should prevent us from can I ask are the jobs completed no one one is one is partially completed and the other one is substantially under construction good evening Mr chair members of the board I'm George poochie from KP law um I I just I made my own desk here if you don't mind just want be falling off the corner um you know it would typically be something for the peer reviewer himself to flag to you so I don't know if he addressed that in his proposal I did see the proposal but I frankly don't remember if he had made any comment about a potential conflict or not um if he feels that he can act that that he understands that he's acting as the board's peer review consultant not for the applicant you know I don't I don't see a legal issue with the board going ahead and appr I don't know if he did address that at all he didn't in the presentation but I know I read in all the paperwork here somewhere that uh uh that they did not believe that there was a uh it was an issue I'm not sure he was what there again I haven't talked to Brian uh at all about this at all so I don't know whether he was even aware that we were involved okay um any I have okay say that again you could always vote a subject Maria following up you know where the you know whatever that relationship was yes the the other point I want to make is that from an engineering point of view we are after next meeting uh we are ready to submit plans for pay review okay good okay that's so Brian was aware that it was loose farling Corp doing the engineering right you Del it really only do we we lead 40b bidding not only we lead the entire team okay well our expertise is in the area of 40b we also have expertise in the area of planning a lot of other issues but yeah we're we're our firm is considered you know Pioneers in affordable housing and we do a lot of affordable housing and the application has been submitted under the 40b so I mean I don't have any problem I'm just saying it's I'm just putting on the record well I make a motion then to U uh to uh contract with the MBL Land Development permit as per their uh proposal for as a as a consultant on this project P um pending notification from them that they that there is no conflict of interest I'll second thing if you just make them where that DOI is the cons and they may decide to declin the job okay we have a motion you second any discussion all in favor say I I I I'll oppos okay uh so you can before we get into that uh here's a check for $5,000 to be put into a 53g account um so my understanding is that really can't enter into contract until that's been f attorney usually good to get the check at the beginning but did did he request the what did they request in there to well this is to be put into the 53g account how you how you write the checks it's up to the town no I'm saying the peer reviewer they need to F the peer riewer the peer Reviewer is for 13,500 right so we put typically we put a deposit an amount as this as as his bills go down we don't put the whole 13,000 in in in account up front uh attorney yeah I would read The Proposal typically they'll tell you what it is and they get refunded the developer gets refunded anything that isn't used I would assume he has that in his engagement you know all it says is it's on an hourly basis not to exceed 13,500 with the task specified and and they'll be billing month monthly payable within 15 days we we did we did a development in in Westport Briggs Landing 100 houses and that's the way it was handled in Briggs Landing as well yeah we no as and as the over the course of years the once the account gets down to a certain amount then we're requested to replenish it I that's pretty typical in almost every division every development we're involved in I I have no problem with that but I let's be clear you know I've had it come up many times you later on then you're looking for funding and then the developer says oh that exceeded the scope and you know I I like to try to avoid those things you put the amount in as a retainer and they draw up it they get paid every month but a retainer is not for I'm sorry I'm talking the I'm sorry so I I prefer to deposit a 13 what I yes and this is when we did this before when we did the the cell tower you put in the full amount if we don't use it we send it back to you so uh if you you can give us that check and and and provide a uh a subsequent let's open up let's open up the account anyhow and I'll check with my client to see what he wants to do but in the meantime take the five and I'll see if we can get the balance get the balance in because I prefer to have the money there to draw on and then if we don't if well we did this we've done this before okay if any unused funds would be sent back by the way L of years ago long time ago if we if it overextend if for some reason it goes further than that then we're going to ask you for more money of course right but the but unfort I mean it's it says it will not go over they're it's in their contract they're not going over 135 right and and I don't care how many times something's done I'm telling you what can come up which I think you already recognize yes is later you know just like attorneys get rainers and all that get it it's on Deposit they bill monthly there's no issue okay Mar can you I know I don't think we have a copy do we have a copy of the of the proposal we don't have a copy of The Proposal from I yeah this I don't think we do you can have it was it was emailed to it was okay it could have been I don't I just don't recall reading it could be do you need appr no I don't think so yeah no no I have all okay I I believe um we did receive I I uh from something from the uh Conservation Commission on um on November 21st which would have been after the last meeting right yes okay so I'll read that into the record um on behalf of the Westport Conservation Commission I am hoping to provide some clarity with some of the outstanding issues raised for the Westport Lakes subdivision the Westport Lakes development began as a multi-use development the proposal for a for a nine-hole golf course Associated water sources and residential development all part of the original review the scale of the project and the property being located in natural heritage and endangered species program habitat triggered the applicant to to apply for an mea approval project went through four project changes during the final issuance of a final environmental impact report in 2008 in the process of obtaining the meepa approvals Westport conservation issued an order of conditions the order was appealed to M during the same year nhp removed habitat designation on the property mad issued a sueding order and they took over review of the project the original approval Wetland alteration would occur in two locations the first area 220 Square ft was on Westport Lakes Road at station 7 plus 0 and the other was at station 25 plus 0 at the second cues act 3,080 s ft the total Wetland alteration for the full Road layout was 3,300 square ft a total replication amount of 5,000 ft was proposed along the Easter Le West uh Wetland area reviewing the files I could not determine if the replication was ever completed the full extent of what mad permitted was not completed as the second Wetland Crossing was never constructed application of only 220 Square ft would be required with the current Construction the current overgrown vegetation within the basins are another concern the storm water system require removal of Woody vegetation so it function as designed these basins are in need of significant maintenance it is recommended that the owner and a representative of Westport lak Road be required to obtain a certificate certificate of compliance for the current development before any further Road extensions are allowed sincerely for the commission Christopher K can I make a about that uh on I did a site visit on November 20th I visited uh the conservation agent on the 19th and I commend uh constant because she did something similar not at the same time as me but she did it also um I went there to find out about the certificate of compliance I asked that's what I asked him for specifically I went through the entire site uh some of my comments are the road's in pretty good shape uh the drainage basin seem to be working the retention Pond needs some work there's no maintenance to it it's overgrown uh the outlet pipe that heads towards 177 and possibly towards Mount m road which has planning board issues right now they've had three or four meetings in the area um I'm concerned with the water coming from where where your guys are going to put houses all the way down through there and across to 177 um the L the wildlife Crossing uh needs to be maintained that there's growth under there that would stop the crossings uh the sides of the roads for safety reasons need to be mowed back um uh the land uh proposed for the um 40 BS I walked all the way through the septic area all the way up where the track machine's gone all the way up to where the site is I spent 2 and a half hours there looking around um I'm 440b housing I think that it should happen in town uh but I just want to make sure that it's done right and that's why I visited the planning board and the Conservation Commission which probably prompted both of those letters you got another one to redo anything Mr Mr one question for uh attorney BCI um how much of the maintenance of the existing road is really significant to this project the access road that brings to the yes project entrance yes we can show it to in a plan if that helps you yeah I mean that there were a lot of issues concerning the road I mean that you know the main thing in the Fords Province the town at some point has got to figure out what's going on with that road you know I I got information from the town planner I haven't R an opinion on that that'll have to go before the planning board it's a it's a private road but the if if it has to do with non-compliance and subdivision conditions and something for the permitting Authority that granted it you're going to have to get that on their agenda have to look at it and open to them aside from you know um those issues the adequacy of the roadway to serve this development is definitely within your Province within your jurisdiction you got to start to look at that issue I I wouldn't get bogged down in in the issue of you know the uncompleted subdivision roadway and what the obligations are there but you certainly have the ability to condition your permit on an a safe and adequate roadway in accordance with does does that include uh uh drainage and Retention Ponds that are not part of this project you're going to need to rely on some technical expertise about it presumably that's going to be within the's scope okay and he'll op on that to you I don't know if anybody engineer anybody like that they wait in ony of the well the the time is it's an adequate road but it's obviously not maintained right well I asked I I actually asked the the an engineer that I know and the town uh administrator who who was was an engineer Jim hard uh what's this what's the what's the the pond supposed to look like he said both of them said same thing should look like when it was installed yeah you can't even see some of a rip wrap if I may Mr chairman thank you that's all the the condition of uh Westport Lakes Road is very important and it's of great concern to some of the people that live there it is the total respon there is a homeowners which I have included in the book that I'd like to put into be sure it's put into the record I'd like to actually go sort of go through that I'm kind of maybe doing that a little bit now if that's okay so so the the the the um the road um is in the maintenance of the road there's a homeowners association that has been established and I've included that in the package it is the responsibility of the HOA to um be responsible for the maintenance of the road the original developer the developer is not my client my client has no interest in Westport Lakes Road ownership has never had any ownership in in that Pro so when it was approved by the planning board the developer who's been sitting on this property for many many many years has not done anything he never completed the road he never all the issues that have been raised are all legitimate issues not doubting that one one bit it is overgrown I mean if if if it would help I mean we don't own the property if it would help and we'd be glad to go there and trim back some of the pro some of the overgrown trees and so forth up to our property I'm not sure we have the legal right to do that as it's owned by someone else um my understanding is that one of the boards I'm not sure if it's the planning board has recently lack of it another the term put pressure on the developer to do something he has no intention we've we've asked him to buy the property so we could fix it on my client has there he just that puts us in in a I understand but it's not my it's the planning I'm sorry go ahead go ahead we have to make sure that this 40b is safe is and doesn't affect the health and safety of the residents and having a road that we all know and admit to is being inferior for not the road itself but perhaps the maintenance of affects the health and safety safety of the residents of the proposed 40b development and that is my concern and we can address those through the process the the issue of safe we have a we have a letter from the fire department there's been discussions with the fire department the plans that you have not yet seen okay have address all the issues raised by the by the fire department the turnaround the dead head the uh sisters that he wants and that's on your development I'm talking but great I but but you can't get to your development without using that we know is not up to par I.E on its maintenance standards that's up to the town to enforce those Provisions that the planning board approved we're glad to help out and we're glad to do things wherever we can to help wherever we can that is not a an a reason I shouldn't say that that's not a uh a reason to deny okay the dev V we're going to have access we're going to have we have the right to pass and repass in the book that I presented to you in in the sale of the property to this I I I understand that okay so they return the they they reserve the right to pass and repass right we have the legal right we have standing before the zoning board of appeals with our application and its development Mass housing has issued so so I understand the concerns and we're willing to work with the with the board but you can't tell me we can't do our development because somebody else didn't do what they were supposed to do I think and and I think say we're not going to say okay so we can work together and try and I'm just saying that my my concern and I'm not even sure it's the whole board's concern my concern is that that road and its maintenance is a problem because it's eventually not I mean yes eventually if that road is never maintained then that it is going to greatly affect your 40b there's no issues with the fire department there's no we have a letter from the DPW we have a letter from the from uh a couple of boards that they understand it's the maintenance the roadway itself it may be fine now there's also when we develop our plans and I have a I've had a long conversation with the Cons with the uh Chris Capone of the Conservation Commission when we produce all of our plans there's some of that drainage that goes into one of the one of the C we we have to prove all of that meets all Engineering St and we're we're not trying we we're we're going to do that listen I did a 90 it was a while ago we did a night lot subdivision I ask you and that subdivision that we did and with my reputation there's not one complaint from any I'm just telling you there's not one complaint from any dep let me finish please there's not one complaint from any Department in the town change the tone of your voice please go ahead thanks I will but I'm just telling you that that it is we we did that development um and did everything that we were supposed to do that's my reputation with the town now and my reputation and we want to work with the town we want to work with the neighbors I've given all of the information to the town that support I've given you copies of Deeds that supports the sale of the different properties my client does not own any of those we understand so so how do we get to we have not we have we the board has never questioned that part and you're harping on that okay okay my question question is when that West West P Lake Road is not maintained a tree falls in the middle of it and no everybody looks at each other and says not my responsibility that's what I'm worried about it's a it's it's a legitimate worry how do we address that issue how do how does that we're here how does it get resolved I mean we're here to work with you how does it get resolved I don't have the answers other than it's it's sort of someone else's problem that he's making a problem for you and for us so that is all I'm was saying and you're very getting very no I'm you're attacking us no I just I just want to be very very clear that our client the we know your client no way involved in the property there we got that thank you okay I'm going to just uh break off because I I have uh one other uh correspondence that I should read it's from Coastal Harvest LLC 4th 2024 addressed at the Westbard zoning board of appeals I'm writing to address and clarify several statements made by Mr Pereira during the zba meeting on November 6 2024 it's important to correct the record for accuracy Bradford Dean has never been a manager or owner of coastal Harvest LLC he has not had any input control or involvement with Coastal Harvest LSC at any time Coastal Harvest LSC did not construct the garage located at 26 Westport Lake Drive there is a homeowners association placed with the property despite multiple invitations Mr bur has chosen not to join the HOA currently there are four active members with Coastal Harvest holding the remaining membership until the time of sale thank you for your attention in this matter again this is just a letter from Coastal harvor office okay Mr chairman could I also add another thing here because uh this booklet uh has a lot of comments that submitted and uh and I just want to be clear that uh I and I assume the rest of you have not had an opportunity to look through this at all we only got it yesterday looked it so I mean i' I've gone through part of it but I didn't get through all of it with this I assume is in response to all the neighbors comments my intent here was not just want to make sure no my intent was not for the board because I only submitted this a few days ago so my intent was not for the board to to respond my intent was for for us tonight to go over together as a submission and and and address the issues and the concerns I know there were a lot of uh I just want to be clear that we have not sure I understand a lot of comments from the you know from the uh of course Butters and I would like to hear your response to u to those comments I assume that's what that's in here that's what whole book about I mean the the the major the major concerns as I understand it with the abuts is what we're talking about the condition maintenance of that road that's it hasn't been done the Conservation Commission hasn't issued a certificate of compliance all of those things that that's that's their legitimate concern and so what I was trying to do in this booklet is to uh indicate that those concerns were were were valid concerns and and that as I said previously that the U that it's not my client's responsibility so I just want to make that clear so that we could go on and talk about our proposed development and what we want to do for our proposed development but in in in uh tab five uh of of this booklet there's also a letter uh from uh Brad Dean uh indicating you know it's it sort of goes back this property goes back to almost the year 2000 actually it's not there I'm sorry got next page is that it there yeah yeah okay so what what what what we do is is that she added uh uh two pages and then a summary so the so the property goes back to about year year 2000 and um and there again Brad is just trying to show to the board what his involvement was with with the property the property was originally uh as the conservation letter also indicates originally there was going to be a uh a proposed golf course with with many houses and an included the substantial amount of the property and uh so Brad is just outlining here what his involvement was in in different years and and it was it was not till um 200 17 I believe that it was that that um that blue cat um that the the original developer American links um was Greg and his wife last name is santine Mt um who are actually their parents and as rad as as the development was going through the process Brad was uh you know he was in high school in school at the time in the beginning stages so it wasn't until um and his father called all all the shots they were going to propose the golf course with many houses there was a file that had to be completed with natural heritage uh with Environmental impact report and all of those reports have been submitted uh but that development is not going forward so all of that information is dead and so we're not proposing our 38 units we're not proposing on the same piece of line it's a totally different piece of line so um and then we have copies then we have copies of each of each of the Deeds going from American links you know sold after after the father passed away um the mother ended up with the rest of the property and she sold it um to to Blue cat now blue cat is um Brad and his two sisters who own blue cat they are managers of bluecat and then a bluecat sold it to Coastal Harvest and that's that's where the separation became and there's a shareholders income that shows that uh in a K1 that the property was 100% but 100 50% owned by the wife and 50% owned by the husband no ownership position at all uh by by Brad and um so what I'd like to do is answer so in one of the one of the um comments that were made also was that there were deed restrictions on the property and and that sort of thing there are no deed restrictions on a property there was a covenant plac on record when a when a subdivision was approved uh but there's no I think the person had submitted to you a plan that showed let me see if I have that plan yeah that that showed that part of the property was deed restricted and made reference to a booking page that book and Page was the f f i don't if you're familiar with the form F Covenant which is what a planning board requires when a subdivision is approved so that they don't and hopefully I have this right that they don't sell Lots because it's a covenant unless the road is completed or or the balance bonded so that's that's the that's the reference that he made and he shows all of this land be indeed restricted that's not the case and we have a copy of we have a copy of the plan and so forth so with that I'd like the opportunity to present to the board have uh Christian Fallen who is our engineer and John marant who is an engineer with Fallen to take you through what we're proposing and how he plans on handling the drainage and and how that does or doesn't affect uh Westport Lakes Road we can we can we can talk about that as well any questions you got to read that no no okay okay so with that I'd like to turn it over to Christian Fallin so he can give you Jo to give you a presentation and also it's it's important to I think it's important to note that what we're proposing is the exact location of what was being proposed um to the the planning board for 56 units the exact same almost almost identical in location so we brought along the 56 unit plan so we could show you what that looks like and we also brought along we also have the engineering for the 38 unit PL so you can compare both and see in fact and of course the the engineering uh would have to be reviewed by your by your peer review and um we're also um before get into that um a traffic report is being prepared um and uh any idea uh when do we expect that um I'm hoping before the the January meeting I assume going to be in January uh they're working on it now have been working it's it's uh vaness uh Engineering Associates Jeffrey Durk I don't know if you're familiar with him he's I think he's done some stuff highly recommended uh many times use him we've been using Jeff for a number of our developments and does a complete report so that'll be available soon soon it's available we'll send it to you and hopefully Brian um will send it to his pay review guy that he CU Brian doesn't do uh traffic but he'll send it out to somebody yeah that that I I got I got this from uh from the meeting of of the last meeting that was I got the form up thato I'm sorry Roger I just the univers of documents this finder is like the stuff about the Covenant and all that but there's no plans in it no what is that plan this is a plan that one of the natives made reference to the last meeting oh that was that was an exhibit that he gave do we have that what apparently what he did he took the plan we have it I'm not sure if it matters and was can I ask for some clarification here from the letter from bradan it says from 2015 to 2017 my sister was in uh yes my sisters and I purchased land from America links I'm looking at the one thing you did you failed to include here was the uh corporate filings of American links and who those corporate officers are that's just yes and the president is Brad Dean and that was and he's saying that he had nothing to do with American links but he was President he was an officer of American links but had no ownership position which is not unusual right but um if you have any i' I'd like to to see proofed of that what would you what would you corporate documents what documents the corporate documents say you had no norip issue I just get sent you a copy of the K1 that's included in the yeah that's in this book K K1 the K1 is up Tab four we just first time I've seen this yeah I understand I just that's why we're going through it together I did see it but it may not the K1 2014 what you're thinking about or looking at yeah you want the K1 for every year I mean what what would you like I I don't know and you also blocked stuff out so how do I know that because those are those are that's private information of addresses and that sort of thing it's got the name the names are not blocked out and if you want I could give if we could get you one that's not blocked out but those up to is the point of that finder just to prove that thre Dean is not involved in the development yes which really really isn't the big it might be the biggest issue for the neighbors but I don't think it's a it's a relevant issue for us and it doesn't address what you were saying about because really the scope of the these are issues that have to be figured out yes you know but it will also involve planning board because they granted the subdivision uh but but just to clarify the issues that Cynthia was talking about are those are sort of the things in your province that you want to figure out well how would we condition this project if where we will approve it and those could include conditions relating to the access of you know the the adequacy of the roadway and you could tie of a building permit so whoever the responsibility of it is you're going to have conditions in your permit based on technical recommendations about what's required for a safe and adequate access to this development and then it's going to somebody's going to have to figure it out because they won't get a building permit so okay I I don't think we have a problem with that I mean the issue of safe and adequate can can be addressed the issues of you know not not doing what the concom said other kinds of things is not safety related exactly wor about sa I understand so so cleaning up the roadway so that the I why you be able to sell those damn things and if it looks like crap going in who wants to buy it there there's some beautiful houses in there yeah I'm just saying your development right we want to see oh yeah yeah fully occupied we would we at at the appropriate price we like the and I'm just saying that that road even though it isn't your problem is your problem because if I was driving up that road to a nice new development I might turn around it's certainly issue with marketing and so forth whether it's a legal question and so forth I'm not so sure but we can certainly address the issue of safety and all of Road access and the legal access and so forth and willing to work with the concom and all other people on on the rest of the development and then just one other point of clarification the plans that we're looking at tonight were those do we have those yes well no you you have you have we submitted with the application the 38 unit plan oh so I thought we were doing rev updated PL but now but now what we're showing tonight is updated drainage pl we don't have so we don't have that we don't have a copy in this set yet no we going to send this out for the we have that finalized along with theam report yeah let me clarify to Mr chair you know my recommendation you do it how you want there there are no submissions directly from the applicant to the care riewer all the submissions have to go through the administrator yes and so really I I don't mean to be a pain in the neck but it would have been nice to have the plan set before tonight because the plan set is the plan set is you let me do the presentation I'll let you know where we're at the plan's not 100% done yet so that's all the purpose of tonight's Mee was to show you where we're at and that because a peer review firm had not yet been submitted in the meantime following Chris has been completing the plans so that a peer review plan a person is picked we can now submit those plans for their review so just bringing the board up to date and in the meantime if the board has any questions about anything that's being happening then then we can go out to answer those you know it's hard to I mean I'm sorry look I'm slow maybe but a plan like that I need time to look at it and I'm sure you do too you look at it yourself you digest it you look at the scale you look at all the things on it and then and then you sort of Orient yourself so that you can listen to the presentation from the engineer like you don't hear from the engineer before you had a chance to sit with it and and so I I don't love this process you know you know and I understand if if they weren't completed so that they could submit them to you beforehand okay don't waste the hearing session you do want to hear but I just want to know let's try to have some type of order to the proceedings which you've been trying to pursue Mr chair but so from now on let's have the submission in advance of the hearing you do you do you do have the submission of of the application no no and the plan and the plan let last hearing session and the the engineer said he's in the process of updating the plans going to submit them to the board and that's why they pick tonight right and then we're hearing about the plans now so I don't have to beat a dead horse but it would have been nice to have them I'm going to beat another dead horse is because on the first meeting you wanted us to pick a peer review firm right then because you were ready to go to submit and now we're two months into this and you're still not ready to submit and I you were pushing us so hard on the first meeting yes I I went I I actually went through the tapes before tonight okay you pushed hard for us that first night to give you a name of a peer reviewer and we said we weren't ready because you were ready to give plans you said the next meeting we were going to have the traffic study done we didn't have the traffic study done and now and and and we won't and now we still don't have it done and we're we're against the timeline here and you were setting a very fastpaced tone in the beginning and now it seems to have gone completely the other way the brakes are on and we're going backwards we we we we indicated that we wanted to proceed as quickly as possible peer review firm was was not picked granted the engineering we we would have possibly submitted a partial set of plans which is not unusual for a peer review to look at that's that's the way it's done some plans but you don't even have that I'm sorry and we have we have a peerreview thing because you hadn't picked a peer review plan yet person yet there was nobody for for us to send it to now we will sir we had a peer review plan picked out last last last meeting it was MLB it was your it was your not your firm Farland said why don't we try field engineering so what I ask you why did you not when the first meeting here and you were pushing us for a peer review that night why didn't you say oh by the way field engine ing had done the other plans and maybe you want to look into them you're wasting our time wait a minute the town knew that you're telling me the town didn't know that the town Conservation Commission we're not we're not of you are fine let's call Peace we are not the conservation committee but you are a town you are a town so you're going to tell me that the planning board doesn't talk to the Conservation Commission or that you and other people don't have the right to go to those commissions that wasn't our responsibility on your first meeting the only I the thing that fathers about is that you have said from the beginning that the plans will be ready plans are not ready and you just said the traffic plan won be completed until until the end of next month no I didn't say the end of next month I said we're hoping to have it ready for the next for the January meeting which is sometime next month and then we would have to then send it to our consultant he's going to have to have time to review it so we may not be able to talk about it at the next meeting that's correct okay Not Unusual and that's you know so I mean what we there's not a whole lot we can do until you provide us with actual plans not these these plans will be submitted within a few days from me to you to the board okay and the board then would need and if directed by the board we can send the plans to the Consulting engineer no we send them to Maria well we're going to do that right so she'll get so she will usually the engineer will want an electronic version so with your permission we would then send Maria electric verion if she wants however you want me to do it we will do it okay but it will go through the board we're not going to submit directly same thing with the traffic report once we get that traffic report we will we will send it now you may want to have the traffic engineer in to discuss the traffic report before it goes to the peer review or you may want to send it to the PE it's up to you however you want to handle that okay so you just want to give us a quick update and what we typically like to do if we can from meeting meeting is is try to resolve each meeting one particular issue whe whether it be drainage whether it be traffic whe so we can get through that so want don't you just give us a quick update Where You Think You Are name and address you got to speak into a microphone there I have one question did you say that this was a 52 unit plan or I think 56 I think is what I said okay 56 okay but I thought the plan was for 388 yeah so let me let me explain again so what had happened the the there was an application submitted to the planning board right for a plan um and they went through an extensive review they uh quite a number of months and that was for 52 and that was I think it's 56 but let's call it 52 okay and and that plan uh had a lot of engineering done on it the drainage system location of catch basins location of septic system and so forth so what Fallen has done they've taken that plan which was 9 % engineered maybe more and have used that same road same location of detention basins and so forth and instead of 52 56 units whatever it was it's 38 units okay and and my understanding is that on that 56 unit plan those were all uh duplexes right these are all single family homes so therefore it's only it's only 38 so that's okay I hopefully I didn't see okay thank you good evening Mr chairman for the record Christian Fallen principal engineer and president of Fallen Corp um the plan you have here um which is part of the application that we did um submit to the to the board shows the the by right use plan which was presented to the planning board and also submitted to the Conservation Commission as well I do want to let the board know that the roadway is almost identical um to what we have proposed not only the layout of the roadway but the utility storm water soar um fire protection septic areas everything's almost exactly the same so this plan as I said has been presented to conservation Conservation Commission was sent it out to peer review which was fielded engineering fielded engineering went back and forth with um CC who was a design engineer at that point so this plan has been thoroughly reviewed multiple times by two Engineers um that's the 52 or 56 year plan you Yep this is the 56 I just want to show you so you can see the layout compared to what we have um and it's exactly the same I'm going to I'm going to show you I'm going to show you the differences and again um we were hoping to submit these last week last week um was a a short week with with the holidays so so but there are the these plans are about 90 95% complete we just got got to do a thorough review of them um and finalize our our storm water report um which we plan on having done either by Friday or early next week um so you will have a complete set of plans um submitted um I will ask this plan sets very large so if you can't handle it I don't know if the town has something to digitally drop box um whatever you have to be able to handle a large file if you don't um we might be able to set something up um because most most towns can't handle a large file like this um so I'm just going to walk you through again the plans this is the roadway exactly the same the only thing we added to this was when I talked to the fire chief at the end of the at the end of this year he wanted to put a um a turnaround which we which we provided basically his um his design standards were exactly what what we did there um so that was the only change on this entire roadway entire layout as far as the roadway goes we also changed the roadway which was originally designed with a cter saac in this area here we didn't see a need for that cter saac um so we reduced the impervious area which is a win-win for everybody um so that that has been as far as the drainage goes the drainage is exactly the same um with the stone water basin which which we did show on the on the layout plan which the town has the record plans of um this plan here is in more detail all the plans that we're presenting now are going to be more technical with utilities with sore you know all the utilities the grading and the storm water um this is something really the I'm not sure the expertise of the board but this is something most likely the pair of view is going to be commented on um so I do want to let the board know the layout that we had provided you hasn't changed um the only other thing that has changed obviously the number of units um we have less number of number of units obviously the driveways are different because the the number of units are different um and as far as the utilities we you will have Pia package um these are the plant here which I said are pretty much you know 90 95% complete this is a large PL set so there's four sheets to every every every grading plan every utility plan every layout plan has four sheets to match because it's so big you can't have a plan like this because it's it's unreadable um this is just like an overview of of the whole set so when you do get the plans you will see that each section has um four different versions and it's more of a blow up so you can actually see what's going on here um again the drainage has been has been reviewed designed by one engineer reviewed by another now we're looking at it again just to check to make sure that everything meets our standards at the end of the day my stamp's going on this plan so I want to make sure it's all all correct so you're going to have a third engineer and now you're going to have MD look at it which is a fourth engineer if this isn't the best designed roadway um the town should be very satisfied at the end of the day um as we're going to have four Engineers take a look at this thing um so if we can't get it right there there is going to be another engineer that that could um I've been doing engineering since 2008 almost 20 years and I can honestly tell you as far as stor water gos I've never had an issue with any of the the stone water basins I've I've designed any of Visions I've designed um never had any issues with them um when it comes to storm water CS a lot of these CS are very very conservative when it comes to storm water um the only issues you would ever ever come across is if the contractor didn't install it right or put in some bad material so it's not infiltrating um certainly something this will we will be overlooking when it comes time to construction the um I can walk you through these plans again I know you haven't you don't have a copy of them um but I expect to comment on them but the layout we talked about that before the layout if you had any concerns with the layout um it doesn't seem like anybody had any concerns with the layout we know you know as the engineer my my responsibility is number one is Public Safety um we need to make sure that the roadway is designed properly for any emergency vehicles um any pedestrian traffic this entire site has um sidewalks around the around the entire development um so it's going to be a great Walkin path for for residents um and to be able to walk safely as well that's required by the state now isn't it not necessarily enough there many we to the subdivision in Middle with no sidewalks no curbing just natural drain um Chris have sidewalks on both sides um they our sidewalks on I believe just one side one side that's what I thought just briefly just tell about the road width and all that so the um as far as the storm water goes the the original application um along Westport Lakes Drive was designed to handle a portion of this roadway um so it's going to be roughly a high point right right in this area here um and then this water goes into two sets of catch Basin and then ties into the drainage system in Lakes Lakes Drive um it was designed to handle that and also now it's going to be actually a little bit less because we took out that uh CAC um area here the uh were were it were it mates up with uh West Lake uh what what the visibility looking left and right if you're coming out of there's no issues with sight distance yeah we can we'll demonstrate that you go okay it's a straight it's a straight line so there's no obstruction so the as far as the utility plans go um portion of the of the shore is going to be gravity um and then a portion of it is going to be a force mean to get it back to the the septic area just because it's not enough um depth to to do the whole thing in gravity so each each unit um we're going to try to have a well for each individual individual house so this is something you don't know yet well we you don't know until until you drill um what how what what the flow is going to be um if the if the if the rate is going to be high enough we can have a shared well for two or three houses um but certainly the goal would be to try to have one per per unit um doesn't mean we can't do that um that's something really that's something need told us last the first time you did going through it that everybody was going to have their own well and it was going to be acept so now it's just the first time we're hearing that that may not be possible don't put right on yeah that's not what he said I did not say that no the first time I said I said we're proposing first time we did I did yeah each house is that's that's what I said the first time that's not changed what he's saying you raised the question we don't know until until you go through the process and you actually so actually drill to see how much you have to get a certain rate of water and all that business so we don't know what's going to happen until we go for the go for a a permit and we actually start drilling so the intent is and that has not changed one well and one sub and and uh one well for each property each each house if if if that changes then would have to advise the board the board we will comply with all Board of Health be board Health regulation that oversees that um it's going to be a sh septic for the entire development right each each house will have again I mean these are all border of Health jurisdiction stuff but each house will have its own septic tank as well um and as far as you know other other utilities um most likely these houses be on uh propane propane tanks um or or they may just be all electric um these are things that really AR we don't have to provide right now it's something more construction specifications we would do um later on what you will have is a plan that shows a public safety um addresses all public safety issues um adequate width of roadways um which we have here is 4 foot width roadway um within a 40t l um all the required turning radiuses um and so forth we've also will be providing um Street trees along the entire entire development which will be part of the plan set um the Landscaping plan we do also plan on um re Char in the rooftops for each individual house so each house will have its own individual um recharge system which the the do STS will be tied into which will minimize the runoff to the to the storm water uh basins at the end of the day in regards to storm water um the engineer is responsible to make sure that the post development runoff off site is last time the predevelopment um again you're going toine at this so I can guarantee you that the runoff is going to be um an improvement to what currently exists now I'm not sure if the butters have Trin problems now but after the end of this development although you're seeing a lot of impervious area here it's going to be an improvement to what currently resist um and we and we do that by these storm water detention patients which stores the water infiltrates it into the ground and it has overflows for l larger storm events again we talked about the Shar septic system that's going to be in the in the front of the on front of the site here um this is going to be a Presby septic system which we will be um submitting that to the Board of Health um most likely next month um while we're ongoing here um with the zoning board we're also going to be submitting um to the Conservation Commission the Conservation Commission kept the hearing open um which was the last case it's been open for almost a year um they have asked us to refile a notice of intent so we're going to do that um submit the new set with the storm water report and the ABS will get notified um Everybody within 100t of the site will will get a new notification so we plan on doing that um same time fining with with with the fining going on here so we can hope to have that their approval probably before before zoning um as I said there's not really many changes um any of the changes have been actually a reduction in the prvious area so we feel conservation um could probably approve this pretty pretty quickly um I'm pretty sure they're going to have field engineering do the view it just makes sense since the development really didn't change um and then and their field Engineers seen this design so as an engineer it just it seems to make sense to do the review again um certainly if MBL has any questions or comments into the in regards to the storm water we we'll address their concerns as well but typically I mean F also this PA reviews um and most of the time Engineers you know we're all reviewing the same thing some peer reviewers may have different ideas in regards to engineering than others but at the end of the day I think it all comes all equal out to to the design and so as I said we we H to have these plans to you last week but unfortunately we didn't wrap them up we don't want anything that's not fully complete um as I said these got to be stamp engineered plans we need to make sure this is a large project um we want to make sure that uh we can fully review everything and and double check da RIS and cross it on the engineering that was previously done um so as I said we hope to have this um hopefully by either Friday or early early next week I have I just have a question I'm I'm uh sort of fascinated by the well issue is it common to have this dense of uh development with individual Wells so close together so as I mentioned that that development map poisa each each lot has its own its own lot um and those some of those lots are 10,000 ft and and these lots are how much these lcks are I think they range from about about 13 14,000 15,000 and that's not proven to be any problem at all and how many units are in that development in that appit oh we did we did 90 in Westport all individual wall Brigs Landing is all yeah but they're bigger Lots aren't they yeah but it's the soil is soil's here pretty good but we never know to get down to yeah most you're drilling pretty deep 18,000 19,000 11 11 11 10 12 very similar like there might be a couple of smaller Lots overall yeah the smallest lot I see here is 10,000 largest lot is 8,000 these side these are a little biger 15 17 some were 30,000 yeah 20,000 what while we're if I may good while we're on the subject of of plans um the regulations uh basically what we're supposed to be submitting is something similar to what would normally be submitted to a planning board in a planning board you would submit a set of plans which are preliminary plans planning board then would approve a preliminary set of plans subject to the final set of plans um so it's sort of unusual to have at this stage to have plans developed to this extent the regulations say that we only have to submit preliminary plans adequate enough for the board to make a decision on what's being proposed so we're going above and beyond that and we're submitting what I would call almost a definitive set of plans which which is highly unusual in a in a 40b now even though what I just said of the regulations more and more towns boards want you know as much detail as as we possibly so we're submitting u a fair amount so I just want to make it clear okay that preliminary file so even though once the board makes a final decision and they'll have conditions in that in that permit we still have to come back with the final set to comply with the permit so even though we have a pre preliminary set of plans that that's almost a definitive stage um and the board has certain conditions those have to come in the final set of plans to be approved by the board and and your pay review person again be sure that we've complied any comment on that I mean that's a standard plan set there that any board would get it's not any more detailed or L it's more detailed than than what the regulations called for it's certainly not I mean you I I don't want to cross-examine the engineer but those are certainly not final plans construction plan so that's a normal plan set that would typically be submitted your reviewer will comment on it you'll condition that and then it's true later on you'll have conditions in your permit if they come back they seek their building permit they've got the you know their fin construction plans have to comply with your conditions of approval they have to seek a modification but you're not getting anything super fantastic there's nothing inadequate about it but that's typically the type of detail that you would get in the comprehensive hearing process good thank you uh also the the house designs have not changed same Footprints of the houses that we right um is there any other comment I'd like to open up to the public unless unless there's anything else you want to present no that was that was it I just have one question um the the town has a a bylaw or a building uh excuse me a subdivision rule uh on the length maximum length of a oneway type uh Ro does that sound familiar to you sure how long would that be I don't know what the toine 1 1200 ft 12 it's usually 12 to 1600 so uh they did change it I was just curious how this Stacks up to that uh what's the footage from from um 177 uh along the existing roadway and then the two roadways that you have going to the house as one we at we're at 490 ft from from the beginning from what do you mean by the beginning 177 no no no no from Westport Westport Lakes Ro Westport Lake Road right that's right so from Westport Lakes Road from here is 490 okay and then from here you come appr to either end to either end 500 roughly that's about 750 ft close um so uh but then you have to add uh the distance from uh the U the road that you started with all the way out to 177 there's no other intersecting roads correct it's all one way correct so I just wondering how safe that is I I don't know anything about that part why they have that bylaw but I just want to know how far off we are yeah I can get that number for you the next meeting yeah be helpful you don't have the most important thing it's safe Manny's on the planning it's safe for fire apparatus yeah to turn around which is the most well I know they need to turn around so so that's one of the wavers we've asked for too from we we've submitted a list of preliminary list of waivers in our application and that's that would be in it but I just wonder how how much of variance we talking about and I believe the fire chief man Manny's trying to talk well if he does he has to come to the microphone you want to say something yeah can you can you uh before you excuse me microphone and name and address anual Source 316 GED Road um I'm also one of the plan board members the plan that you submitted prior saying engineer and peer review that was a plan that came before us that I believe was denied um it didn't meet zoning it was withdrawn it was not yes withdrawn okay so that plan was withdrawn um and we there are comments on file on what stage it was at with the planning board so I mean we could that stuff could be reviewed but that's that's neither here no there you have a new plan before us um I just I kind of have a question on on the peer review on the board of health on the title 5 stuff on you know you said you're going to submit it you know you submitting the conservation you submitting to the Board of Health I think that all of that stuff the wells the septics all of that should be submitted to the peer riew for the 40p that's that's not what we're going to do the and I'll explain why uh typically this is all post permit once a permit is issued we then have to comply with Title 5 m we have to comply with the Board of Health right those things so that's done not in advance because if we if we did that and the board changes change you know then we'd have to go back so and so all of that is post permit the permitting for the well and the permitting for the uh for the for the septic system and we would submit a detailed and Christian has some of that already done but detailed um SE system design for review by the Board of Health and that's a dite seic system I'm not sure about that you have to ask CH CHR yeah the the septic system will meet all the all the state standards if you have local requirements so that you have to act on those or they get wav so we're going to have to figure that out I mean the engineer said he's submitting them for coming up not post permit you should get copies of those at least and then decide what they are in other words your more restrictive regulations you stand in the shoes of both Board of Health and Conservation Commission so they have jur you don't have jurisdiction over the state part of it they will have to act on that in accordance with their application but somebody has to make sure that somebody either comments to you or or imposes conditions relating to the more restrictive local you need to monitor that the aant really needs to keep you a prize what's going on with that because if if one hand doesn't know what the other is doing you could potentially wave those requirements annoying just to be clear we have a dentification requirement we will comply with Title Five I don't know what title five says that's not Title Five well then we we may not have we may ask for a waiver you may deny you may approve it then we go from there to see what happen I make sure you're aware that we have a more strict requirement and that was basically the I think that was the planning board members point right you know you have just Cynthia said you have you have these con more restrictive regulation they need waivers you have the so jurisdiction to act on that and you can't rely on the board of health or the conservation Comm new for the more restrictive regulation okay but just to be clear we don't we don't go to the Board of Health in advance we in advance on every single house well we don't go to them in advance to to the final per yeah septic talking okay same same thing with septic system but it's only one septic system yeah so you could say it's only going once so you could say so you could say say in in your decision that we do not wave the request for denitrification you could say that so then we then would have to comply with that decision or appeal that decision so we would most likely comply with it yeah and this is a lip agreement so we're trying to we're trying to come together with it yeah and I just yes and and you we try to comply with as many local bylaws as possible and and the wells the wells in the septic that that will be a Title Five and you you you you know you won't be able to get a waiver from the town possibly you'll be able to get a waiver from the town for the D night um not that I'm sure with the density here that you're going to get that but and the proximity to the resource areas um but my other concern is so Westport Lakes is a approved subdivision for construction in the town it's it's never been not it was never to be accepted was to remain a private road however it's never been completed correct and there's still a shy left there for completion 123,000 so and and we don't we have no idea we have no as builts we have no idea that any of this stuff is is constructed correctly and I I think they they've probably Fallen between the cracks cuz the last time anybody looked at anything was in 2017 so that would be my my concerns on that but that would be there again okay thanks Manny uh since we open it up there was a couple questions that I had asked for clarification for at last meeting that hasn't been addressed okay uh one was the fact that your named attorney is Brian Cory who's dispar he's not dispar that's totally wrong uh that's wrong it's wrong suspended he suspended suspended he decided right if you have a problem with Brian Cory call Brian Cory no but I would like to know who your attorney is we don't have one right now and we don't need one we don't have to have one just again if if if we it was a question I had asked the last time which our attorney said was under my purview to ask for a response sure that is all I'm asking for you don't have to get argumentative okay second the second question I had was about a statement that was in uh Bradford Dean's biyo and it says from 2010 to 2016 Brad spearheaded the development construction and successful sale of the Westport Lakes Drive corre a premier subdivision in your response which you did respond to that I would like this is from the letter from Bradford deine I would like to emphasize that aside from 2015 and to 2017 I had no ownership or decision-making Authority so what is it is if between only had decision making between 2015 and 2017 or did he spearhead it from 2010 to 2016 he did not then he the doc documents speak for themselves they do they're in they don't they're they're not in Conflict yes they are no they're not yes they are read what he he says I'm not going to get I'm not going to get into a argument or I'm not going to get into I like an answer and I think I have my answer is that doist stand for themselves you have a right to ask for clarification yeah okay from 2010 to 2016 Brad Brad spearheaded the development construction and successful sale how is that having no decision-making Authority except for 2015 to 2017 that was after blue after the property was sold to bluecap that's when he made the decision for the sale him and his sisters made the decision for the sale to um I'm going to ask my question well that's it that's my answer well you're not answering my question I just did no you didn't you don't like the answer but that's my answer he was not involved if fine then read this sir I'm not reading it that's my decision you don't like you I'm sorry that's my answer we're the board here we're giving you a permit so I think you better answer I just did he you're you're indicating that he he from your from your tone and what you're saying from your my tone how about your tone sir from 2010 to 2016 Brad spearheaded the development construction of West perks Lake Drive here he said he had no decision- making authority of West Port Lakes Drive except for 2015 to right he had no decision regarding Westport Lakes Road his decision no Drive Westport Lakes Drive whatever you want to call it he had no decision Westport Lakes the whole development that's what he's saying no you're wrong yeah I'm wrong great I'm going to love it when you get our decision then I'm wrong fine I'll appeal go to the house of appeals committee all right all right you know this is you're putting words into what he's right if you have a problem call I'll bring Brad to the next meeting okay he I'm telling you right now he had no he has certified he he has no uh decision making capacity uh regarding West what regarding what you're referring to I think is the American links property which was the entire property they at at one point in time they after the father passed blue cat so there were no decision I'm satisfied with your answer thank you open it up to the public uh and please uh if you've uh if you've uh addressed the board in a previous meeting please don't reiterate what you've already said we already have it on record so anything that you have that's new you're welcome to come up dianela 171 M Mill Road in the past when they presented this a year or so ago we received a notice we did not receive a notice about this meeting or any other meetings someone put on the door a flyer to talk about this meeting so I'm asking why did we not receive notices what do you mean by this meeting you talk you talking about tonight's meeting yes what it was a continuance we don't we don't do that notices of continuances send notices to Leal AB butters for the first hearing which we did that's why we had so many people here okay well whoever put that notice on our door thank you yeah okay anyone else no okay again uh anything that you didn't discuss last time so I respect I respect what you say however it was brought up again today and it needs to be it definitely needs to be clarified the packet I have not seen it I'll wait to see it I'll ask for a copy of that however the continuation of Mr cusson to to deny the fact that that Brad Dean has anything to do with this or Westport Lakes Drive is is really it's there's no base for that documentation I have it too I I supplied the documents to the board last meeting okay and I I have I have I have to reiterate those documents because he again from the first meeting he said five distinct separate times that the current applicant Mr Dean has nothing to do with the current development to which they are looking to build this off of which is complete sir sir I was not I was not allowed to interrupt you so I would appreciate if you allow me to speak I'll wait to you done because you've been doing that all night and it's disrespectful I have the floor I would like to speak go ahead without interruption can I just interrupt for a second yes attorney uh P how re relevant is all this discussion about Dean about Dean well I mean we're spending an awful lot of time discussing one person's uh background uh it's very how important is that forc you what it is in your Prov I agree it's a little far field because again you're you're focus on conditions about how to condition the project but I me there's misrepresent I'm not saying there are if there are misrepresentations in the application or that the application of a project eligibility letter you know those are issues that certainly are okay to go into to a certain extent I wouldn't spend all of your hearing you know it's a little confusing at best and it also goes to you know what I'm the elepant in the room is V but what's going on with this roadway and if somebody really does have more involvement in the project than it's being on to you know that would be in everybody's interest to try to figure that out in a matter of Are We dealing with someone that we can trust in good faith well well that that's and that's the my that's that's really the question that I have is is uh how much uh can we put on what what some person did years ago versus what difficult so to your point it would be difficult to deny the Project based on those types of issues to do conditions based on those types of issues but it's certainly something within the realm of reasonableness to inquire to a certain degree MH so we sort of want to understand it yeah and I you know somebody has a problem with what was represented it's nice to give them a chance to go into that to a certain extent but again not you know take all night on it on the you know the whole hearing time that wouldn't be worthwhile doing right it would be nice if people could just make their presentations and not be interrupted and then you can take all that information under advis point I don't I don't like to stop any inquiry or subject in a 40 he they're quite wide ranging and often times there is a give and take that are sort of on issues not technically within jurisdiction but the process encourages a give and take exchange of information Creative Solutions that type of thing so you know you're not limited to a certain you know letter of the law what you can acquire into okay but I I would tend to maybe think about exhausting the discussion on these topics just Mr chairman just just one quick question so if there are specific questions so the whole intent of this book was to try to prove and maybe there's confusion about what is Westport Lakes Row the Westport lakes roow that I am referring to is 2022 to 23 yeah I understand talk about development so if there subdivision so if there us a particular concern and and that's what I tried to do is prove that Brad that was was was not involved in the West in in coastal harest LLC who is the owner and the buyer and the approve and was approved by the planning board Brad was not involved so I tried to I tried to so if there's a particular question that that someone has if you could please put that in to me I'll be glad to further look okay can you I'm sorry Brent perea 26 Westport Lakes Drive go ahead so here here's why I think it's important there's so much back and forth about who's in control of the road now and who's responsible to finish what was left unfinished moreover did they not finish it they have no as builts for the road there's no certificate of compliances there's nothing the current infrastructure has never been maintained Okay the reason why this is important to myself is that Brad Dean controlled the development up until a certain point okay my argument is that he still has a hand in the mix of coastal Harvest and to prove that the documents that I provided last meeting it clearly shows clearly shows that Brad Dean along with his sister who I if you can refer to the documents I I supplied them last so the manager certificate that was that was issued in 2016 clearly shows that Shannon Corey Lisa estein and Bradford Thomas Deen are the managers for for that roadway or that development okay I'll skip over some stuff but as recent as recent of 2022 okay there was a lot release okay from Coastal har two Coast two Coastal Harvest basically LLC bluecat LLC right Coastal Harvest LLC to bluecat LLC right releas is onto the said Coastal Harvest LLC okay Shannon Corey is still signing documents up until up until 2022 which I believe that Mr Dean submitted his started the submission process for the last for the last project to which they keep trying to show which it has no bearing to this one currently so as far as responsibility for what's going on now I have good reason to believe that Brad deine still maintains some of that responsibility because he's part of coastal Harvest even though there's a clear denial of that okay this clearly shows and we have some documents we have other documents to show that um he he along with bluecat LLC to which he still I feel is a member of yes they're still signing lot releases up until this day which clearly shows that he is still he still has a hand in that project the the talk that he's he's absolved of everything that he didn't do in the past is is is a problem for me he's still involved because of the fact that he still controls lot releases he still should be considered potentially partially responsible for what has not been finished beyond that as far as the the scope of the roadway Westport Lakes dries as it stands or Road however you want to refer to okay the adequacy of the road clearly is an issue everybody argues that the road surface is great it's not it's 17 years old there's no Adit as builts there's no certificate of compliances for the storm water infrastructure there's no certificate of compliance for any of the retention fields that have not been maintained not one single bit in 17 years plus there part of the peer review there should be this all should be looked at and I can't stand here for three meetings now with Mr cusson saying that Brad Dean we have nothing to do with this it's crazy there's been a I'll move to my next point that I didn't talk about last meeting I agree that there has been a significant misrepresentation for this entire project I intend to submit some type of appeal to Mass housing simply based on the fact that the app the application filed by Brad Dean is flawed I pointed some of those things out in some submissions that I gave last week last meeting I will be glad to to point the other issues but I believe that's going to be something that I'm going to have to take up or somebody should take up with Mass housing as far as the actual application Mr Dean left information off of the application that I feel should have been on it to include prior previous applications you didn't you didn't submit any of that information okay I I have I have sir if you keep talking in the background I'm not to answer when you're done yeah I would appreciate if you didn't keep saying yes no that's not true I agree with you on the road okay uh so I submit that the application in and of itself to include Brad Dean's bio which has been conflicted today by Mr cussin by by him writing a second one that doesn't match the first one the I have the application the board has them all all inside your your booklet you can you can see right right from the first page and I don't know if I'm wasting my time because this is something that needs to be taken up with Mass housing but I think it's pertinent for the board to know that everything wasn't devolved in the application to 40b Mass housing okay they misrepresent the acreage as far as the lot they list Brian Corey as the representing attorney at the time of application which clearly he was in some type of suspension at that time which I think is a conflict alth tell you that why I think that in a moment on page 26 of 23 of the application to Mass housing it specifically asks you to to uh mention previous development efforts it's blank he literally proposed an almost identical plan last year and withdrew because the board was going to deny it we you can you can check the the meetings you'll see they would true because they knew the board was going to deny it the planning board I have I have that application number if uh if anyone would like to reference it it's 23-36 sp-- sp- ID he failed to mention the previous application I think that's pretty important to know that despite the fact that he withdrew I think Mass housing should have known that he applied was running into some conflicts and then for whatever reason withdrew I happen to think those reasons are clear and concise if you watch the other meetings for the planning board they have significant issues with a plan they were brought up and it it appears like before they were going to get denied they were Drew I understand why because they wouldn't have been able to apply for this 40b within one year's time because of the cool down period there's some questions about vernal pools being on the site May or not be applicable so as far as the confliction from from what I previously stated on page 17 is basically an affid an affidavit that says everything that I provided in this document is true to my knowledge right basically he signs it there's no date on it but he signs it is there any pending litigation with respect to any of the applicants entities they say no maybe this is not important but one of the entities was a suspended attorney that that's allegedly representing them at the time of application it's a problem okay the current anrad for the project that was filed for the previous application to which he's using again which I understand that's allowed as far as the wetlands delineation I'm not sure if I spoke to this last meeting but they filed with the application and it's insired anrad I bent the conf conservation I've confirmed that they have not requested an extension for this I stand before you to to say that I believe that they should have filed for the for the extension and because they didn't they need to refile besides besides the the notice of intent they need to refile the orad or the the uh well they need to refile for the enrad which is the abbreviated Wetlands delineation it's expired they're proposing expired documents with regards to Mr Mr farin's comment earlier regarding the storm water and its effects on to Westport leaks Drive Mr cussen well I'm sorry Mr Farland brought to your attention the last meeting of the last peer review he brought it up for whatever reason he didn't bring it up in the first meeting for for some reason why why would you hide this until you were notified until they were notified of the peer review or the potential peer reviewer if they knew in their pocket that they were going to pull this out and go well did you know that a peer review was done for almost The Identical project a year ago and it's right here can we use this company apparently they can't because they represent the town and I think they shouldn't have known that I think they would just they were delaying the process you could have picked a peer review last last meeting except for for this he confessed it is there any objections yes there is he objected to the peer riew you only had one they bring this in with I believe the knowledge that he said it today can't even use it can't even use this because they represent the town Mr custon said it today why would you bring this if not to drag the process out we have a window of 6 months for the 40b there's been one extension I would propose that based on the fact that nothing of significance has been given to the board yet for peer review which should have already started considering the time frame nothing of of of substance has been submitted yet for a peer review to even take place how does the time clock keep running when they refuse to submit documentation that's pertinent to the peer review which is probably the most important thing of this whole project to have somebody else look at it and say whether it makes sense or these changes need to be made as a matter of fact they did suggest changes of nearly the same exact project one of them specifically which I think is the most important because I stand here to argue that Westport leags Drive is not an adequate Road and the infrastructure on Westport leak's Drive is not adequate currently on the second page or third page sheet three number 10 no drainage information has been provided for this area near westpal Lakes Drive reduction of flow in TSS does not seem to be have considered will the existing drainage system on westw Lake Drive be adequate to handle these additional flows Mr uh Chris Fallin Mr Fallin brought this to your attention not me he brought your attention and in this document spe specifically talks about things that was problematic for last application which is nearly identical they keep saying it there's a there's a there's a drawing here of the last application why why are we making a comparison why is there a comparison to the last application to this one and then you bring this in I didn't bring it in you open the box Pandora's Box was open on this now the plan the board can look at this and make reference to it even though it doesn't apply to this project I guarantee there's going to be similar issues with this one when if they ever submit the documents so that appear view can be conducted there's been no consideration so far by any of the applicants Representatives on how this is going to affect the current infrastructure on Westport Lakes Drive two and include to include the storm water drainage the current Retention Ponds the current retention basins the current retention areas they're completely overgrown you about ready to wrap this up I could digress for today but I guarantee you I'm going to have more okay or potentially even after somebody else might speak Mr chair I I need to respond to just a couple of things and I can understand why why there's some confusion when um blue cat sold the property to Coastal Harvest they took back a mortgage they're acting as a bank so when somebody goes to sell a lot you have to get a release of that mortgage a partial release and that is signed by Brad and or Sharon as bluecat so they have to sign a release so the buyer of that lack can go forward and get a mortgage that's pretty standard banking procedures so yes Shannon Shannon and or brat are signing that partial release and they have the right to do that doesn't mean they're involved in coastal Harvest they got financial interest I'm sorry don't they have financial interest if they're holding mortgages if they're holding mortgages no they they have they have a financial interest and just like a bank so so they're acting as a bank so the bank is responsible for doing I'm not I'm not talking about you keep harping on the responsibility of the road and that's not well that's what he's saying but that's not he's saying that Brad is still involved in Westport lakes in in coastal Harvest he is not involved in coastal Harvest he is acting as an officer of bluecat in releasing in granting a partial release from the mortgage so that's that that may you may not be I don't consider that a financial interest from the point of view of uh the developer is developing their property and makes a million dollars that half some of that goes to brat no I don't dispute the ownership in the fact that Brad has nothing to do with Coastal Harvest but I think Brad has a financial interest in Co Harvest he does not he holds his mortgages if he don't that's not if I I'll admit he holds the more that does not give him a financial interest in the development no more than a bank would have there anything else that you comments that's not what I said you're that's not okay fine um we we did advise Mass housing of his previous development efforts and the reason it was with that you want to know are you maybe the board wants to know as to why the application before the planning board was withdrawn do you want to I so I think the representative of planning board can no it was no he he said it was denied he was wrong I corrected him he said it was withdrawn the reason it was withdrawn as they were going through the process almost to the end of the process the interpretation of the bylaw by the planning board uh and and maybe the act and did not understand it further was that there had to be a congregate for 55 and overa bylaw there had to be a congregate component MH and the developer had no intention of providing a congregate facility there was and and we have talked about that at at the last meeting I I was at so there was also there's no waiting period there was also a component of that development for a certain percentage of affordable unit in that development under the 55 andova bylaw that's the reason it was withdrawn not because they were going to get a denial just the opposite they would have gotten approval and they couldn't live without approval yeah but that's not really of our purview anyway just answering the question Roger can I ask a question sure who's responsible for maintaining those retention fonds that I've I've heard a lot about that have been neglected Coastal har the the the uh his name I can give you his name it's yeah it's Coastal Harvest it's two guys yeah so they they own Coastal Harvest they're responsible for complying with the terms and conditions of the planning board the planning board and and the Conservation Commission so the Conservation Commission ordered issued an order of conditions so so the so the developer tells the port what they want to do the board conservation says okay will it isue an A A an order of conditions by which you have to comply with when you comply with all of those things you have to go back to the Conservation Commission to get a certificate of compliance they never did that and and Mr per is absolutely correct on on on the issues that he's raised about Westport Lake Road it's Coastal Harvest is responsible for the for for that now it gets into a little issue that I'm not really clear about but when you look at the homeowners association which I've given you a copy of it clearly says the purpose of the homeowners association is to maintain and snow removal Etc of Westport Lakes Road that's the responsibility of the owners of the HOA that which includes Coastal Harvest they own many of those lots as well most so to answer your question is Coastal har responsibility so to make the to to to cuz overgrown that may and as M PR raised and others that may or may not affect some issues there was never there was a det there was some Wetland replication that had to be done which was never done there's a whole bunch of things that never done and the town didn't do anything about trying to get it done so you're telling me if I'm understanding you correctly Coastal Harvest has been negligent in the way they've been doing this I agree with that yes yeah they and I think the town possibly nobody ever forced them in the developments that I'm in if I haven't done something by a particular date I get a call from the planning board I get a call from the conservation what the hell's going on apparently that that's just recently happened there's something that that's just recently happened so yes so so I think the neighbors and the town should have been pushing a little bit as well but so nobody was bothering him so he didn't do anything he has no he's he if I was a the developer I would be trying to do that work and sell those lots to get money he's he's been sitting on these lots for 10 years I think he's only sold five four five [Music] yeah now is there a reason why you said the answer to jud's question uh why you said Coastal hav and not initially say the homeowners association and Coastal Harvest I think it's Coastal harvest in my opinion it's Coastal Harvest responsibility to bring that Road up to where it should be and then the in my opinion HOA would kick in yeah so when it's so when it's and the HOA there's an attachment to the HOA to say what maintenance they're responsible for and they're responsible for only they're only supposed to plow that road when there's 3 Ines of snow I I would think they'd be responsible for sanding and different but but that's but but that's what it says right so who's been doing that snow remove I assume it's it's it's Coastal Harvest I don't think the homeowners maybe they have I don't know who's been doing it but yeah it's Coastal Harvest responsibility so in my opinion once that road is is done and completed then the HOA should take over but the HOA documents have been on record for a long time right Mr perea is not part of the ho documents but the rest of the rest of the lots are yeah how does one become a a member of the H it's it's on record when you buy the lot no well that's what I'm saying uh uh why does he have a choice of whether he belongs or doesn't he doesn't have a choice but my understanding is that the HOA documents coal hav did not put on the HOA documents until after Mr Pereira purchased the house I think he believe he purchased the house from from Brad yeah hello is he allowed to ask me questions at this point yes I'll explain with complete Clarity on that okay if if I may good Brad Dean Brad Dean when they formed Westport Lakes Drive subdivision he was finally permitted after a number of changes he very he very keenly Exempted himself along with other Lots in the family from any HOA and any Covan is on Westport Lakes Drive that's my property I bought her from Brad right the coven is didn't convey on the deed because okay because he Exempted himself because because they were put on after the closing can can we stop this can we stop this Interruption I stood back there and well you keep giving wrong information so I'm not going to stand by hey that's enough information it's 100% correct that's enough you can see it in every document okay they have to they have to divulge this information to any potential new home buyers in LA my neighbors all know that I'm exempt because Brad Dean Exempted himself not only did he exempt himself from the lot that I bought offer him the house the only house that he built on the entire Road for for seven for 17 years where arguing who has responsibility over the road do do are we really standing here and takeing consideration that Brad Dean assumes none of that for for for 14 years he never upgraded any of theu any of any anything and then all of a sudden he sells it that magically absolves him from the responsibility that he had in the past to which he agreed to when he got approved through the planning board for this subdivision are we really there we're saying that he has no responsibility no culpability because he no longer owns it and we show definitively that he still has stake in the matter he has Financial stake in the matter he's still he's not a bank he's not a fin ins you know can we move on to something that you haven't already said what was the other question okay the HOA look at the document M yes you want to argue who's who's in charge of the road at the moment it's Coastal Harvest MH but my argument if if we want to get past who's responsible for the road let's get past it admit what actually happened or what's still occurring he's continually making misstatements about Brad Dean's responsibility and his interactions with coal Harvest and his culpability of potentially the subdivision that exists that he started that now he wants permission to do this as far as adequacy of the road like I'll just touch it real quick I've already spoken about this so I think I think my position is pretty clear on the adequacy of the road whoever whoever is responsible to fix it before this happens I don't care who that is but until that's done the town cannot allow this project to to to resume by any manner as a matter of fact I believe that the whole 40b application and the process is flawed because of this problem also because because of the the non-compliance of the board's requests for information that's very significant to the application process again three months in three months in we have almost nothing you've already said all this they're arguing that the plans don't really need to show the important stuff I argue that it 100% has to show the important stuff how does the peer review take this on otherwise thank you how you doing uh Matt wall 20 Westport Lakes Drive um two things um my concern regarding the homeowners association as a potential part of the association once it reaches that 75% of the lots declarant to the homeowners who if we're to take that responsibility why are we responsible for Access that more houses which it doesn't look like we're ever going to meet a responsibility because it's never been developed so where then does the responsibility lie you know we can say it's Coastal Harvest but we all know that Coastal Harvest is just Mia right I mean I think everybody's in agreeance in that well they're just non-responsive whatever it be so we can say it's Coastal Harvest but who's going to hold someone responsible to that because at the end of the day if I'm responsible for the road why am I responsible for a road that in the in the American links trust which we all signed as tenants of properties in there why are we then responsible for more Road traffic than what we have on our road now when more of the road traffic is going to cause more of the damage to the road and we're responsible for the upkeep so it's kind of twofold so it's like okay if we get someone to finish the road and the road's all good that's great why am I responsible as a homeowner of that road I I understand my responsibility because I travel on that road but if 38 50 homes whatever it is how many cars are going to be go up down up and down that road versus the original plan because the original covenants represent in reference the original plan not this not another road being cut through so I think it's something that should be brought up that the town needs to take into a fact that we can say it's Coastal harvest's responsibility but who's going to take the responsibility in the event that Coastal Harvest doesn't do anything what do we do just throw our hands up in the air I mean I don't think we should approved this until we have that kind of figured out I have a quick answer okay thank you I have a quick as as as Mr Cino raised raised the question um I don't think it's their responsibility at all to finish the road I think the road has got to be finished and that a the intent of that HOA is for the maintenance of the road once it's all done right and and including snow removal and and all those kinds of things um and and there are only there are I don't know 20 22 lots and there are five homeowners for members of of the HOA so I don't think it's their responsibility at all yeah well I I actually brought up at the previous hearing why uh the new HOA uh couldn't be merged with their existing ho and and we feel it's not legal to do so but their HOA is going to take the brunt of of all this additional traffic and I don't think that that's right either we're going to be providing a traffic report that talks about the traffic and and and those kinds of things and you can't merge the two because it's not fair to both of them right we have somebody else who want to talk just good afternoon good evening my name is Manuel depart um I live at 53 Grand I'm sorry 53 Grand Pineway okay I mean you talk about neighbors I agree with everybody here and I don't want to sound like the Grinch but if I spent 32 years in the military but if I was this body of people with all these issues I would stop and start all over again you might be better off but my question to you you talk about neighbors well first of all I think this last one that you had up I'm Manuel deun I live on the left hand side of Grand Pine Way Mah's ameral my neighbor lives on the right side so this is not doesn't show the right names on not that it makes any difference but at this point I want to have a whole lot of neighbors that I'm not asking for and you folks talk about HOAs and so on and so forth now is this a condo are these cond are their homes what are they I don't even know they're all single family houses what's the HOA what's said four someone has to be in charge of them right so once they buy him the town's going to be responsible for plowing snow and so on and so forth no white okay so my question to you in the engineer here inter yeah that whitebody has a white here packed over here I know sorry the very first so my biggest issue would be as a neighbor it seems that there about 30 ft M for instance his well is only about maybe 203 ft away from the property line and there's going to be a total of 38 38 Wells drilled is that what it says yes and from the engineer standpoint is it possible that a well can collapse my well messiah's well can collapse but all those Wells being drilled because whether we like it or not we're going to be the aors all of them it's an naian well so anything's possible anything's possible so who's going to be responsible to fix my well if it collapses mine too no all of yours I'm talking about everybody on grandpine way but myself and Mr Mr ameral are the two closest neighbors to this issue and the second thing is one leing field I mean this thing has to go into the ground what if it contaminates my wealth who's going to fix that who's responsible for that are those questions that can be asked I don't know are they or aren't they asking you asked the question that that doesn't mean we have the answer right now well right please like I said I spent 32 years in the military and you guys have a hard job to do real hard job I won not want to be in your shoes but there's got to be a better way to communicate young lady I hate let me just say I love you I love you the way you acted sir hold are cool but man this is not the way we should be operating not in this town and I apologize for those that can't or won't you guys got to slow down a little bit This concerns we talk about these neighbors that have lived there for 17 years with kids and they worried about coming out into the street and then the the overgrown retaining uh fields and so on and so forth I am going to have a whole lot of neighbors that I'm not asking for everybody deserves to live everybody deserves to have a house but just don't throw it on me all of me and my neighbors because some of them I think for the first time this is the most we've ever gotten here 1 two 3 four five of us but I can get everybody else down here to justify what I believe is going to be a hell to deal with if my n if my well collapses or if my like my well gets contaminated who's going to buy my house what's going to be worth once that happens thanks for listening I appreciate your help thank thank you anyone else so sir the way I'm understanding this the road is not adequate which which Road Westport Lakes Road Westport Lakes Road is overgrown the the the the road itself we have not gotten any indication well that's that's up to the planning board to determine what needs to finish to be done they issued the permit for that road that road never got finished okay so so that is the responsibility of of coastal Harvest but they're Mia they not Mia they just have well indirectly I guess they are but so why doesn't the Board of Health I'm sorry why doesn't the planning board and I think they just recently sent a letter to Coastal Harvest find out what the hell going on they just that just happened within the last two or three weeks they the planning board now is starting to push the issue when you going to finish it when you going to do this when you going to do the the replication when you going they're asking those questions now in my opinion they should have been asked a long time ago but they weren't so so so that makes the road it's it's uh there's things to be finished but doesn't mean that there isn't safe access the road is plenty wide enough and I I I don't think the fire chief or the police chief we've gotten letters from both of them have indicated that it's a safety issue so you're if I'm understanding or correctly what you're telling me is the road is it exists it's overgrown it's been neglected but it will um stand the traffic this added traffic that you're talking about adding that would be for the peer review people to determine but my my my opinion from a traffic Point yes but it's still drain there's catch basins that haven't been cleaned there's catch Bas haven't been done there's the detention basins that haven't been finished there's the Wetland that hasn't so they haven't finished it that doesn't mean that the that you can't pass cars over the road okay so I understand all that so if all that has not been done what are you going to do if it doesn't get done because you want to go here and that's a problem here so you can't get from A to B because because a is messed up I think we I understand what you're saying and I think we can go from a we can go from rout 177 to the entrance of our development right I think we can and and the issue that was raised previously are we going to make that road with all the construction activity and so forth are we going to make that road worse yes so so that's a possibility so what we had said was that if and when we get all our approvals okay we will be resp we will have an inspection done of the condition of that road and we can't make it any worse so we would be responsible if if all of a sudden pile that road had to be replaced for whatever reason that would be our responsibility because we damaged it and you would repair it yes and that I don't have a problem putting that in a decision we I've said that right from the beginning but we're not going to go and fix the detention base and we're not going to go do the wetlands we're not going to do all the other things that they were supposed to do so yeah so our so we're going over the part of that road that that um the planning board may or may not make a decision on how much of that road presently has to be fixed or replaced okay the town is holding 123,000 here's the here's the issue the town is holding $123,000 in a cash Bond mhm mhm I don't think anybody thinks 123,000 is enough money to fix right right so it's still it's still Coastal Harv's responsibility now if if they abandon that responsibility it's a legal thing I don't know what what would happen in a case like that if they if they all of a sudden said hey we're done well okay now retention fonds we got to have those right they've got to be functioning right for for Westport Lakes Road yes but he's only responsible for his development but to get B you got to have it yeah but the fact that there's a drainage issue so forth does not stop the safety access of the roadway of of of Westport Lakes Road through our development and it's been operating that way for seven I don't know s 16 17 years so obviously I I don't know I assume I assume some of that is I don't know that's for the planning board and and whoever in town to figure out okay all right I'm done okay it's getting late so what we need to do is schedule the next uh next meeting Stacy perir 26 Westport Lakes Drive so I want to um I want to do an overview of our meeting so far so meeting number one Mr kusten had had I think we've agreed that he had asked for the peer reviews on who the Consultants they wanted to know who it was but pretty adamantly that he not he mentioned it more than once number two he was he was pretty repetitive on the fact about Brad Dean having nothing to do with the road number three what I wanted to tell talk about was Public Safety Mr F furland had has meeting number one meeting number two even tonight has explained about Public Safety so my thing with Public Safety is and the fact of Mr furland he's talking about Public Safety in his eyes with this plan how I look at Public Safety with this plan is the accessibility so if you're going to have families 3 families with potential children how are you going to tell me that this is publicly safed for these children is that I'm not yeah in what capacity as far as accessing to go to school because this road the roadway that they want to use does not have sidewalks so the the the school buses aren't going to pick up these children that was a concern of yours in the first meeting um also you know as it is right now we have two cars that wait on the top of Westport Lakes Drive for the school bus so add let's say half of these families have children that's 15 cars that you're going to have on the top of Westport Lakes is that a public safety concern for anybody that's I hate to say it but that's not terribly unusual to have 15 cars on top of a street waiting for all the time okay and as far as the mailbox situation I spoke to the postal office you're going to have 15 mail they will not deliver a note they will not so we going to have we have five mailboxes as it is right now on the top of the street are we going to have 20 I mean 30 meal okay that's not unusual either all right so I also have another question he keeps refer Mr custen keeps referring to Coastal Havis as they can I have an explanation about I'm just curious on who like he wanted to mention a name before when somebody had asked but it's it's it's uh Andrew d g d i capital g i a m m o is so is that a b like is that more than one person Harvest and and there's also another person cuz multiple times you referred to Coastal hav as they so I'm just curious there were two people involved there oh there is two people okay I'm sorry um I have multiple things I have um pictures of what the road is with water but like you said it's getting late I'm sure we'll have more meetings I'm just very concerned in the fact that this is the third oh another thing I wanted to mention was the planning board the last meeting you had right off on what they had discussed they wanted in May the the f the in it asked for the traffic study it asked for the storm water so in May the first meeting they said they were going to give us to give it to us we didn't get it the second meeting we didn't get it we we were asking for I think and even when you talk to the other boards and see if they've applied for anything or whatever they can't do anything without these plans so I'm not sure why we're dragging our fee with this time structure that's all thank you thank you next meeting could I ask a question please no I would just like to clarification um it's been said a number of times that uh Mr Pereira does not belong to the HOA that's my understanding okay and I believe he just indicated it but I was always given the impression that there was a choice and in this letter from Coastal Harvest it says here Mr Pereira has chosen not to join the HOA but seems to me that I just heard him say that it wasn't he who chose not to that that the person he bought the property from Exempted himself from so what's the story on that if I be my my understanding is that the HOA was put on record on January 5th 2019 so the HOA the Declaration of trust which is which is in tab one of the book that you have so that HOA was put on record at that point in time my understanding is is is that the sale to Mr Perera happened prior to that date so therefore my opinion it would Mak I'm not a lawyer but in my opinion he may not be required to be part of that HOA because when he bought his house the HOA was not on record so anyway subsequent to that buying automatically is a member of the H everybody else is yes because it's on record is that with Mr respect is that is that correct respectfully C to answer that question honestly I I spoke of it earlier well it made a difference to me in my mind whether you chose to or or or so the covenants in the HOA that stuff was conveyed or not conveyed through the home sale okay from which Brad Dean conveniently absolved himself from it's not fault it's not my fault that that's the way the property transferred I'm standing here with more concern about this than anybody I'll speak for myself but I feel like I have the most concern about this project than anyone despite the fact that I may or may not join the HOA when the time comes when the time comes I have not been given an opportunity to do that because it hasn't been transferred to the homeowners it's that simple and I I believe you say that he also exemp some of his family members from some of the other Lots yeah no that's that's that's those are that's where the subdivision is going except for the sub the golf cart way was never constructed as part of the subdivision correct those permits have expired so you should be you should be going at this project with the proposal that golf cart way also has to be constructed and connected to Westport Lakes Drive because it was never done and it is now forever lost because all of those permits are expired and nobody ex nobody applied for extensions thank you attorney P this is another one of those issues that's that we're spending a lot of time on and I'm having a hard time understanding how the HOA for previous development has any effect on the on on the one that we're talking about now is there any relevance to a previous HOA not really not really irrelevance to me as far as who it who runs it whatever relevance to me is the fact that according to Mr Farland typically an HOA is formed prior to any development that didn't happen with the Westport Lakes subdivision right and I think what our uh residents are saying is that Mr Dean at some point had some say in Westport lak's subdivision and the fact that he did not act in a customary way in which you would normally set up an HOA prior to any development and the fact that Mr Dean dis sold his interest in the the rest of the development to kosa harvest because he was unable to complete the development is why our residents are having a problem with now allowing Mr Dean to do another development and they're worried and if I think this and correct me if I this is not your worry that the same thing will happen unfortunately to this develop because he has previously shown that he cannot successfully complete a development and I think that is the issue that is I think the issue that our residents are all having and I think that's to me is a concern and I think I don't again not relevant to unfortunately not relevant to this subdivision I think we're all looking for somehow to say okay if somebody has has a history of not doing something completely or correctly why are we allowing him a second kick at the can and again assuming that it doesn't matter if he did have any responsibility to the West Sports Lake subdivision or he didn't the fact is a matter of our residents feel he did and that's the pro that's the problem that's what is causing all this contention here because that they feel that he's the one who slided them and now they're going to have another eyesore behind him I would and I and again when you you were not here last time M right Chris Farland did say is interested in actually acquiring the would love to acquire the whole rights to this and I think if that happened I think a lot of this would go away I I said the same thing I I feel very confident in Chris Mr Carlin I feel very confident in in you thank you but I think the issue is the history of Mr Dean is where we were but there's no there's there's no I understand that concerns but there's no evidence that Mr Dean was involved D in coastal hars no I'm not talking coal but they are the ones who are responsible for complying with the planning board rules and regulations regarding that subdivision today but it was Mr Dean who no he was never never not close the Harvest never he was I know I know he was it was he was never part So Co so I know but the coastal Harvest didn't develop Westport leges they most certainly did no they didn't yes they did no they didn't yes they did American leges did they they took over the respons they took over the responsibility but they were not the ones who put the plan into action it was Mr Dean's father Yes who put the plan into and and that's not that's Harvest and that's not Brad and it's not Brad Dean that's American link so American links when they were proposing the the golf course and all the Lots around the golf course they originally put down part of the road then again let's let's take the road out of it it really isn't the road isal it's about what the what I think of Mr Dean and I think of what our residents think of Mr Dean it has nothing to do with the road we all admit well that's why they don't that's why that's why they don't have any confidence in Mr Dean because they think he was responsible for building the road well he was he admits in the is in this paperwork that he was responsible for the Westport legs subdivision selling of it no not the selling of it not the selling of it the blue c no which was Mr Dean blue cat is Mr Dean and his sisters they sold beheaded they s yes they sold they were the seller no yes they were bearhead there's a de there's a deed on record that shows clearly late night we're going to have to agree to disagree on those issues and and and the legal evidence shows that that's the case Okay so let's schedule the next meeting well what is it that we're trying to accomplish up the next mon well by that time we will have the uh our our consultant yep you will have provided us with um uh with reports the water the uh Retention Ponds and you know whatever whatever report you're going to have available you're not going to have the traffic study probably until sometime in January right yeah I'm hoping but so yes so so Christian will so um and I agree with with your concept of let's do one yep major Topic at a time so and what um what would you be ready fully to discuss at the next meet next meeting you can ask your engineer if you want well we would be ready to Christian St Water Management what're we're gonna be we're going to be submitting plans sub early week problem be wants toet you're going to send them you're going to send it to Maria Maria's going to send them to the consultant so do you com no you want to wait then what I would do I would ask I was we have to actually assign a date today we can't I'm gonna I'm going to suggest we do this end of January because let's face it not a whole lot going to be mostly engineering issues so hopefully by that time so if you're thinking about the end of January that's fine so what I'm saying is is that uh that would give hopefully the opportunity for for the peer review to make comments and maybe even Christian time to comment on the comments which is UN um so so but again and and I go back to what you would recommend it and and I agree with what is the the plans that you're going to be submitting soon you is Stone Water Management what so so so so the purpose of that meeting would be to review in details the plans and the the plans that were submitted and the comments made by the peer review now they're going to be looking at all of the plans which includes primarily storm water man Water Management so why don't we make that as the focus for next that's fine so it's a review of the plans including not excluding but including storm water management yes primarily storm water management because that's going to be hopefully that's going to be the first have the road details yes it's not going to be a traffic study probably because you're probably not going to get in time the traffic study should be ready by then but let's take one thing at a time right I agree so about so last week in July in January 299 29th we're going to do this on uh oops is there any way this traffic study could be done before that and have I think so I think so but that' be too much maybe to take up in one night right no I'm saying two meetings have one meeting doing the before we get the comments back from just to get this thing moving because I'm kind of getting all worried that we're running out of time if if if if if everything is going in the in in the right amount you know right course so to speak and you need an extend ention we're we're not here to say okay you haven't acted by a certain date and and and it's and it's granted so we'll work with you in that regard sort of like bricks Landing yeah we did the same thing in bricks so so I would I would say uh so we so if you want to do set up another meeting for traffic no we'll do that that be I think she's suggesting I was just saying if we could get traffic in before we had the the consultant's review of the site plan we could at least get uh a a preview of the traffic so then they then we could send that off to review as well but well here's my suggestion in that regard uh I'd like to set up a meeting to discuss traffic to fall for the traffic see the problem is if we get a tra you're not do you we would like to have present our traffic report have our consultant discuss with you the traffic report then send it to peer review if if you don't want to do it that way and you want to send it to peer rreview first then we should hold then it would be after the January 29th meeting well I and I think what we can do is we'll do we'll schedule for the 20 29th if that's okay with everybody uh primarily for the storm water management which would be then a thorough review because by then our consultant would have had time to review it hopefully uh and and whatever other plans you've had submitted either we do a you know at least a an overview if not a you know I I think Brian I think Brian will will review everything including the St Water Management gone so I think he would have an opportunity to review the entire plans right so we'll do that on January 29th and soon as we get the traffic report we will submit that to you and and you would be able sorry potentially then we could have a meeting a couple of weeks later about so at that time you'll also send it out for per to Brian for his traffic per riew so it'll be a couple of weeks maybe two or three weeks after the January 29th meeting that um before is are you available on that day I am you are good okay um what about everybody else on the board we're talking about the 29th we're talking about yeah Lunar New Year's yes that's I just going to say lun that's always a good time to have moon is going to be yours yeah good you're good I'm good I think I'm is there is like tonight like we really didn't need because we didn't we thought we were going to get our plan tonight like is there a way that if things go Ary and our consultant doesn't have his report back by the 29th that they can request the continuance hold the hearing okay okay when we schedule it we have to be here now we can be here and continue but we have to be here as long as long as three of us are here to vote for continuance right so with respect to the board um respectfully as far as the process is concerned it seems imminent that we would need an extension today because of the the the we we made an extension last week because the applicant didn't have proper information no we did it because because of the uh the peer review was an isue the time involved in getting so the over overall time frame of the of this PE of of this 40b process I think is clearly sensitive and if you if you if you're already talking about potential longevity of it without an actual extension like you did last month I I don't see how that's possible because we're not at the point now where we we deem that we need an extension when we when we need it we will we will ask for it right now our we have until late May sometime in May okay right it this sort of goes back to what the uh lady spoke about earlier that she didn't get a notice of this meeting you're not going to get a notice of these meetings because we assume if you're interested you're here you're getting it if not you can call Maria right give you the information you're not going to get a written notice of it will be posted but we don't send out a letter to everybody every time we that that we uh we have a continuation so uh I would like to uh make a motion to continue this hearing until 6:30 on the 29th of January second all in favor I oppos no so we will see everybody probably will see anybody agenda excuse me is that the only thing that we have on the agenda right now right now but we never yes we don't have anything else yet we don't usually put any of significant anything but if there's a small something sure do we just slide it in so everybody have a happy uh happy holidays everybody yes we got something about um about his mic about Jerry's mic and it has a big Echo what is a problem with that Wonder it's interference from his uh exactly interfering with it it's that just always happened with somebody else who had what what are you saying I think no I think it's your hearing a is interfering with the mic that's happened before I can't go without the hearing because I'm not going to hear anything okay but we can't even hear it's like when you're talking it's like for real then that's something that they have to handle I know so it isort eching I know it's like God is talking to us well well that's what I said I mean what do you expect you're the zoning board chair emirus you know I mean I had no idea that was happening so no yeah because he's only here coming through his because you have it right how about now what happened is that still happening little I just moved I just okay at meeting minutes for November can uh can you guys take it outside guys meeting minutes from November 6th Maria has put together the meeting minutes they've been reviewed by everybody and she provided comments it's like seven pages long they perfect I I make a motion to approve meeting minutes from November 6 2024 I made a motion yeah I second the motion all in favor I I'll oppose no the um the other thing I have is um we've been having um meetings of the um short-term rental committee has uh finished their work and we sent a uh draft bylaw change for both zoning and for the general bylaws to to go to the select board who will then turn around and send it back to the planning board for for open hearings uh the the concept is that the uh the that the zoning B laws would be very straightforward you got to comply with uh Mass general laws and and whatever and you have to have it will then go to the select board for approval the the general bylaw will then also State some requirements but the major aspect of this is that there will be an application form simol are what they do for trailers and what they do for for uh alcohol what they do for a bunch of them there's a there's a an application for that everybody would have to fill out on a yearly basis and and it would be self- administered they would just say I have a sepic that is approved I have fire you know carbon monoxide detector you know all the things that um that the that the fire department says they need that the health department says they need that the zoning Enforcement Officers says They Se would go on the application for and then that would go in front of the select board on on the and uh as a public notice and they would on on a yearly basis then uh either approve or reject the the short-term rental U there's also does this have to go to town meeting oh those the changes yeah yeah the zoning board has to be approved by two-thirds and and the general one has to be approved by the majority um there's also going to be a a change to the zoning bylaw because of the Ada law of Massachusetts U right now it's uh essentially we're taking what the Ada law says and put essentially it which are leading a bunch of sections out of the current uh accessory apartment uh to comply with the mass J law like you don't really have to live there there's you don't have to you know there's there's no special permit it's um it's by right but there's some things you have to comply with you know you have to have the septic you have to have parking you know there are those things but you but it's not a special permit so is there anything we'll be out of the special permit business is there anything being addressed about selling them separately conding them you know we had that selling them separately well by right they can make the these buildings now okay yes so by right can can I sell this one here as a condo unit I don't um have you discussed it I haven't seen that and I don't I think that should be addressed because we already have one well can you do board doing that Amendment we haven't touched it in thisal M right we really haven't we haven't we haven't touched up and I did see something no but he reporting so I thought maybe they discuss no we haven't because it was just it was imp passing that we found out that Mike burus already had made the zoning changes in the made the changes for the to comply to the new regulations and had already passed it off to the attorney like we were it was just sort of a passing that he said that yes and I sent I I actually sent a copy of it to Jeff just for for his review the to help last meeting discussed having a an attached and a detached and they were talking about the septic systems for either one and if you had three bedrooms this they brought this up they had three bedrooms you could take away one and make an attached one right which you wouldn't have to upgrade your systems and everything else but if you were building a brand new one you had to have a d system but then they started then they started discussing the thing and it it kind of like said you know I said wow this is going to open up and then one of the members actually said well there's going to be a lot of these there there's going to be a lot of that's not part of anybody's byw no I know well listen to me it's going to be part like it's going to be part of the thing that says well you have to have an approved septic system that's it that's all it says when they go to the health department they'll tell you I just happen to watch it and I go wow EXC me you talking right now about Adu or short-term no no no adus okay access so to me it's wide open y uh for a developer that just come in buy a lot y make two uh building sell sell one sell another one and and I think that violates a different part of the bylaw it does it does it says you cannot have multiple but the state says you can well in fact no it doesn't it just says you can have another Adu that doesn't mean it has to be a separate property no yeah you can have no it doesn't have to be a s well anyway that's that's what I'm saying as a matter of fact the one I can't figure out is a state says you can have one or more adus on a property yes start his mic off y okay I thought you said it worked oh no what about the planning board oh yeah yeah we need to do that we need to do that 48 hour notice I thought we're going to discuss that at next we can't because they need it by they wanted it by January 3rd and it's not a big deal we're not going to have anything to say about that okay uh oh here it is okay um I'll read this off planning board J we got one we do have one more thing from the planning board did not okay I was just okay definitive residential subdivision Francis Estates located uh map 68 lot 7 Z Charlotte White Road with 40,000 foot square foot of ground disturbance a nine lot subdivision with individual septic systems on each lot and existing on-site cemet cemetery is shown on the plans the applicant is requesting a waiver to eliminate sidewalks generally we don't get involved in subdivisions so but they ask me for comments and and I suggested we have comment unless we had something we potentially could involve us right I think we don't that's already a subvision I guess they just extend anybody have any problem with it's on the corner of Main Road in in Shallow yeah the ones yeah the ones building quite a few so anyway I would make a motion that we uh notify them that we have no F oh when I what's that got a shovel like we don't get hit but I mean from a zoning board point of view we don't have any issues right or you made made a motion yeah I made a motion but I I haven't heard anybody say we do or don't all in favor don't by the way you have to announce it that's under the 48 hour uh notice we we just got notified the thing we just voted on we just got notified we just got notified so and we don't have another meeting coming up before 48 hour rule that's reason so I make a motion to adjourn the meeting finally I'll second that okay