The Plymouth Planning Board continued a site plan review from 3 Lakes Properties LLC for expansion of retail landscape material sales and greenhouse space on Hamilton Way to its March 20 meeting so staff and the applicant can reconcile plan sets and resolve outstanding questions about setbacks, storage bays and easements.

Mario Folcaretto of Brown Engineering, representing the applicant Colby Lenentine, said the applicant submitted a stormwater report and additional materials; the board had asked for more detail after an earlier review. Board members, however, flagged multiple outstanding items: (1) apparent encroachments of parking and storage bays into the front/parking setback; (2) a line of concrete block material storage bays (three‑sided cells) that may function as retaining walls and are shown inside the setback line on the current site plan; and (3) a pergola and a proposed woodshed that also appear to intrude into setback or easement areas.

Colby Lenentine told the board much of the storage configuration is portable and has operated in place for several years. "They're portable — they can all be moved off the property the next day," Lenentine said about the bins and freestanding structures; he also noted operational constraints for deliveries if the bins were moved. Board members asked the applicant to consider shifting structures slightly to avoid requiring variances and to confirm whether the features qualify as accessory structures (which would require special exceptions in setbacks) or are simply retaining walls and outdoor display (which the site plan review evaluates).

The board also reviewed the stormwater modeling files. Joseph (planning staff) said a full stormwater backup (HydroCAD outputs) had been provided but that some of the scanned submittal material created multiple plan versions in the packet; he asked the applicant to reconcile the site plan set with the stormwater model so the board can confirm impervious totals used in the drainage analysis.

Because the status of the storage bays and pergola affects whether the board must require Zoning Board of Adjustment action (special exception or variance), members elected to continue the public hearing. The board asked the applicant to work with staff to produce a single reconciled plan set, clarify the nature of the storage bays and accessory structures, and provide any legal information about the private road/right‑of‑way that bisects the property — including whether extinguishing or consolidating the private road would change setback calculations.

The meeting record shows the board accepted the application as complete for hearing purposes before continuing the hearing to March 20; the board also asked the applicant to coordinate with planning staff regarding the clarifications requested.