One of a notable topics was the board’s handling of a subdivision proposal that had previously been denied. The applicant had appealed the decision to the Land Court, revealing that the Planning Board had missed a deadline, inadvertently resulting in a constructive approval of the nine-lot subdivision plan. This plan, which included six waivers, was subsequently recorded with the registry of deeds. The board convened to discuss rescinding this constructive approval, with Jeffrey Blake from the Town Council elaborating on the intricacies of the situation. He remarked, “The reason for our denial was the safety issue entering Drift Road,” emphasizing concerns about traffic safety and sight lines. Despite the posted speed limit of 30 miles per hour, it was acknowledged that vehicles often exceed this, complicating the board’s position in court.

A major point of concern was a traffic study submitted by the applicant, which had sparked debate over its findings and the methodologies used. Abutters raised issues about the accuracy of the data, pointing out discrepancies in vehicle speed assumptions and the potential impact of large trucks accessing the town pit. One resident, David Dorski, criticized the report as misleading and highlighted safety risks at the intersection, urging the board to reconsider the proposal. He stressed that the traffic volume, particularly during peak hours, could exacerbate existing safety issues. Another resident, Jim, shared personal experiences of traffic hazards, referencing past accidents to underscore the dangers posed by inadequate sight distances.

The applicant’s counsel, Jonathan Silverstein, proposed several conditions for the board’s approval, including improvements to sight lines through vegetation trimming and a reduction in the number of lots from nine to seven. Silverstein emphasized that the applicant had already exceeded typical requirements for similar projects, expressing frustration at the board’s demand for a peer-reviewed full traffic study. He argued, “I have never seen any board in my 30 years of experience demand a peer-reviewed full traffic study for a seven-lot subdivision,” highlighting the potential delays and costs associated with this request.

The board discussed the qualifications of the peer reviewers for the traffic study, questioning whether Field Engineering, typically used for such reviews, was suitable given the ongoing litigation. Suggestions were made to consider alternative reviewers like Cole and MBL Land Development to ensure impartiality. The discussion also touched on the inclusion of sidewalks in the revised plan, addressing previous concerns about pedestrian safety.

The board ultimately decided to continue the hearing to March 25th to allow time for further review of the traffic study results, with a motion made to approve the subdivision contingent upon these findings and the inclusion of discussed conditions.

Beyond the subdivision discussion, the meeting covered updates on various infrastructure and community projects. The board received information on the barrier beach management planning efforts, which are being coordinated with the Woods Hole Group. Fieldwork and data analysis are underway, with public engagement opportunities anticipated in the future.

An update was also provided on the cold water stream culverts engineering project, with a $69,000 grant application submitted in collaboration with the Buzzards Bay Coalition. This funding aims to support engineering work on culverts at Cornell Road and Drift Road, with the planning board acknowledging the need to piece together various funding sources to advance these designs.

The meeting marked a milestone for the town’s online permitting system, set to go live shortly, with future integration planned for the Board of Health and the fire department. The planning department’s implementation timeline is yet to be determined.

Additionally, the board discussed the housing production plan, incorporating feedback to enhance clarity and accessibility. Concerns about the residential tax exemption and the need to reduce jargon in the document were raised, alongside suggestions for improving the visual presentation of data.

The board also deliberated on a bill concerning wastewater management, filed by Senator Mark Montigny and Representative Chris Markey, aimed at establishing a commission to identify funding sources for wastewater infrastructure. The importance of appointing knowledgeable representatives from Westport to this commission was highlighted, given the potential political implications of taxes associated with such infrastructure improvements.