Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the 85 Brookhill Project topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
ZBA continues 85 Brookhill LLC site plan after abutter concerns and peer‑review items
Summary
Hearing for a proposed 4.3‑acre, multi‑building project at 85 Brookhill LLC was continued to Dec. 19 after discussion of outstanding peer‑review items including nitrogen loading, drainage/swale design, fire‑hydrant needs, lighting photometrics, and an adverse‑possession claim by an abutter.
The Falmouth Zoning Board of Appeals continued the hearing for 85 Brookhill LLC on Nov. 21, asking the applicant to return Dec. 19 with additional information and responses to peer‑review comments.
Applicant representative Nick Marione and engineer Tim Santos presented updates: a photometric lighting plan and nitrogen‑loading calculations were included with the submission. Santos told the board the total site is 4.3 acres, the design flow is 6,820 gallons per day and the spreadsheet computed the total nitrogen load at 349 kilograms per year, with an estimated concentration of about 20.2 milligrams per liter at the property line. He said a denitrification system could be added if required.
Board members repeatedly requested technical confirmation from the town’s peer reviewer (Beals & Thomas) and input from the Board of Health before the board could consider waivers or finalize findings related to the Coastal Pond Overlay District and nitrogen impacts. Several members said the peer review engineer should address a modeling inconsistency the applicant acknowledged and confirm groundwater elevations used in infiltration design.
Abutters and neighbors described concerns about drainage, flooding risk, privacy and lighting. One resident, who identified himself as living at 77 Brick Hill, said the proposal would “take 3 plus acres of drainage and park it right next to my property,” and asked what recourse would be available if their yard begins to flood after construction. Another abutter said she had filed court paperwork alleging adverse possession of a small parcel; the applicant said he’d been contacted by counsel and that, if upheld, the claim could affect the footprint or eliminate a building.
Residents also raised questions about the number and placement of fire hydrants; the applicant said a flow test had been conducted earlier in the year and will provide those results to the board. Neighbors asked the applicant to show a final landscape plan with buffer plantings and to mark trees to be saved prior to clearing. Several commenters urged the developer to relocate a proposed dumpster and garage to reduce visual impact.
The board directed staff to ask Beals & Thomas and the Board of Health to evaluate the submitted nitrogen and drainage materials and to clarify any modeling inconsistencies. The applicant agreed to supply the requested details and to meet with abutters. The board voted to continue the hearing to Dec. 19, 2024.
