Laserfiche WebLink
consult with Town Counsel. Mr. Balzarini inquired whether the matter could be considered by the <br /> Water District and Ms. Waygan inquired whether it should be a consideration for new developments <br /> and suggested it could be beneficial to speak further with Town Counsel. Ms. Waygan added that <br /> review by Cape Cod Commission was likely not triggered until it was a development with 30 units. <br /> Ms. Waygan added that Cape legislative representatives have been concerned with water quality <br /> impacts, noting that Cape wide, ponds had been negatively affected by blue-green algae. Mr. Rowley <br /> inquired whether, without a centralized wastewater treatment plant, relying on multiple individual <br /> treatment facilities, if those facilities were compliant, would they be subject to additional fees. Ms. <br /> Waygan referenced a water quality bylaw and Mr. Lehrer confirmed that any system managing more <br /> than 600 gallons per day required a denitrifying system. Mr. Lehrer suggested contacting the Town <br /> Manager regarding a presentation from Town Counsel about the matter, and the Chair agreed. <br /> Discussion Regarding 950 Falmouth Road-The Chair inquired whether Board members had <br /> reviewed the packet regarding 950 Falmouth Road, to Which members confirmed they had. Mr. <br /> Callahan inquired whether the Chair approved the plans from safety perspective and the Chair <br /> confirmed that changes had been made to ensure compliance. Mr. Rowley confirmed that he had seen <br /> the application and plan set, and inquired whether the Board wished for him to work with them or with <br /> the ZBA. Mr. Lehrer noted that the applicant was seeking a waiver from engineering fees, adding that <br /> the Town wished to support the project but that the fees would be in excess of Mr. Rowley's budget <br /> with the Planning Board, Ms. Waygan inquired whether the Board should be acting upon the fee <br /> waiver request and Mr. Lehrer responded that no action was necessary at this time, adding that if the <br /> Board had further comments relative to the project, comments could be submitted to the ZBA prior to <br /> their Public Hearing for the matter. <br /> Ms. Waygan referenced Section D and the waiver requested for a performance bond for erosion and <br /> street damage. Ms. Waygan expressed concern about waiving the requirement as the street was used <br /> by other residents, and it was likely the road would be impacted by construction. Residents had <br /> already expressed concerns about the project so it was Ms. Waygan's opinion that a bond be posted in <br /> case of damage. The Chair agreed about requiring the bond as there was potential for damage, and Mr. <br /> Rowley added that the cost of a performance bond was relatively inexpensive. Ms. Waygan also <br /> inquired about#10, waiver regarding 1 to 5 ratio landscaping for the parking area. Mr. Rowley <br /> responded that he was not in receipt of a landscaping plan, adding that there was limited parking, <br /> facing the outward portion of the site, and confirming that there were plans to add landscaping on site. <br /> Mr. Rowley noted that he could look into the matter and Ms. Waygan suggested her preference not to <br /> waive the requirement. Ms. Waygan inquired about whether air conditioning was included in the plan, <br /> adding that if not, it was likely that individual window units would be added by residents, causing <br /> potential water damage. Mr. Fulone noted that POAH's development in Dennis had central air. Ms. <br /> Waygan requested more information, inquiring also whether mechanicals would be shielded from site <br /> by landscaping or walls. Mr. Rowley noted that the roof was peaked and Mr. Lehrer confirmed that <br /> POAH typically hid all mechanicals. Finally, Ms. Waygan suggested that it be confirmed that the <br /> development's 39 units was in compliance with Maslipee's Housing Production Plan, with its annual <br /> goal to add 32 units per year, which could create a safe harbor from any unwanted Chapter 40B <br /> projects by fulfilling the State's requirements for the year. <br /> There was discussion as to whether or not Cross Road was private or town owned and who would be <br /> responsible for repairs. Mr. Lehrer stated that it was his understanding that the main road was a private <br /> way. As a result, a covenant would be necessary and the developer would be responsible for repairs to <br /> the road, in case of damage, using the bond security. Mr. Rowley stated that appropriate language <br /> 4 <br />