Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Zoning board finds Southerly project changes insubstantial despite public concerns over height and open basins
Loading...
Summary
The Zoning Board of Appeals unanimously found requested minor changes to the Thelma Southerly comprehensive permit insubstantial — including a switch to pitched roofs (solar‑ready) and open stormwater basins — while residents raised safety, traffic and visual‑impact concerns; engineering sign‑off remains required before building permits.
The Falmouth Zoning Board of Appeals voted unanimously to find a set of proposed changes to the Thelma Southerly comprehensive permit insubstantial, clearing the way for the project team to proceed with updated plans subject to required engineering approvals.
David Calhoun, representing the applicant, said the revisions include modest reductions in unit sizes, a roof change from a flat roof to a pitched roof to accommodate future solar panels, and a redesign of some stormwater elements from underground chambers to shallow, open surface basins. Calhoun stated the highest point of the pitched roofs would be 54 feet, 3½ inches, which the applicant described as within the state’s 10% threshold for insubstantial changes.
Phil Cordero, the project's civil engineer, explained the open basins would be shallow (2 feet deep), sited where soils are highly permeable so they would infiltrate quickly, and would be left unfenced to encourage integration with the landscape. Cordero said the project has completed a stormwater registration with CEI and that the design meets the town and state stormwater standards but still must be reviewed and approved by the town engineer and CEI prior to building permits.
Several residents objected. Kathleen Crowley Bragg raised safety and traffic concerns related to construction trucks on Sandwich Road and asked who would address school‑bus safety near the site. Marjorie Parmenter and other neighbors called out the effective height increase and the prior months of balloon studies and sightline concerns. Wendy Bissler of the Coonemesset River Trust urged the board to consider the cumulative effect of incremental plan changes over time.
Board members asked about timing: the applicant said the groundwater discharge permit was published in the environmental monitor and could be final within 30–90 days, and that engineering sign‑off would be required before a building permit could issue. The applicant said they are pursuing solar readiness but have no power‑purchase agreement in place.
After discussion the board made the required finding that the three changes under review were insubstantial (unit‑size reductions under the 10% rule, roof pitch change resulting in the stated highest point, and stormwater configuration changes) and approved the insubstantial‑change determination; engineering review and any departmental permits remain prerequisites to construction.
