The Raynham Channel
Welcome to Raynham Community Access & Media (RAYCAM), where we engage, learn, and create community access media. We are dedicated to providing a platform for all voices to be heard and shared. Join us in creating a vibrant and inclusive media community.
The Raynham Channel
Board of Appeals 06/25/2025
(Episode Description is AI generated and may be errors in accuracy)
The housing market shifts beneath developers' feet like sand, forcing adaptation in real-time. At a recent Raynham Zoning Board meeting, we witnessed this economic reality unfold as Lockwood LLC requested permission to increase their development from 138 to 156 units.
What makes this case remarkable isn't just the numbers—it's the underlying market forces driving change. Developer Lloyd Geisinger delivered a candid assessment: rising interest rates have slashed affordable unit pricing by $50,000 per home while construction costs remain fixed. "As this project stands right now, without some accommodation, it will actually lose money," he admitted. The solution? More units, but with fewer total bedrooms.
The project has unexpectedly attracted primarily senior buyers, with only nine school-aged children among the first 45 homes sold. This demographic shift prompted a design evolution toward "vertical triplexes" featuring ground-floor flats and townhouses with single-level living areas that appeal to active adults. The revised plan would place all new units in Phase 4 near Route 44, minimizing traffic impact through the development.
Neighbors raised valid concerns about future demographic changes, school impacts, and traffic safety, particularly on Christopher's Way where cars often mistakenly turn thinking it's the development entrance. These community perspectives highlighted the broader question: when does adaptation cross the line into substantive change requiring comprehensive review?
After thoughtful consideration, the Board continued the hearing to consult with town counsel on how their decision might impact Raynham's standing regarding comprehensive permits. This measured approach reflects the complex balancing act between economic realities, community needs, and regulatory frameworks that shape our built environment.
Listen in as we explore how housing development adapts when theory meets reality, and discover the careful considerations that go into reshaping communities for current and future residents.
https://www.raynhaminfo.com/
Copyright RAYCAM INC. 2024
The proceedings are being transcribed and recorded to provide full and accurate minutes and allow full participation of the clerk. I'd like to call to meeting of the Rainham Zoning Board of Appeals at 7 pm on Wednesday, june 25th, at Town Hall. Participating members to my right Paul Belay, my left Francis McGuirk, and I am Peter Shondek, the chair, request the clerk to read the petition and other relevant matters.
Speaker 2:THE RELEVANT MATTERS. The NOTICE OF PROJECT CHANGE AT LOCKWOOD LLC COMPREHENSIVE PERMIT CHURCH STREET, route 44. The BRAINHAM ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS WILL HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING ON WEDNESDAY, june 25, 2025 AT 7 PM AT BRAINHAM V Town Hall to consider a request for notice of project change for the comprehensive permit issued to Rainham Riverwalk LLC, now Larkwood LLC. Project location is off Church Street and Route 44, rainham Mass. The notice of project change is submitted with a revised site plan for Phase 4, showing an increase in the project's number of houses from 138 to 156. Divised SITE PLAN FOR PHASE FOUR SHOWING AN INCREASE IN THE PROJECT'S NUMBER OF HOUSES FROM 138 TO 156. Any PERSON WISHING TO BE HEARD OR INTERESTED IN THIS SUBMITTAL SHOULD APPEAR AT THE TIME AND PLACE DESIGNATED.
Speaker 1:ALL WHO INTEND TO GIVE TESTIMONY. Could YOU PLEASE WRITE WHETHER IT'S FOR OR AGAINST. Please rise for the order against. Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give this board shall be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? So help you, God, I do, Thank you.
Speaker 3:So do you want to present your proposal? Thank you, mr Janet. Members of the board, is this on Just a few folks here behind and up there?
Speaker 2:Yeah, it appears to be Okay.
Speaker 3:Thank you for reading the public notice. I'm Peter Freeman, attorney representing the applicant Blackwood LLC, and with me are the principals, lloyd Geisinger and David Eastridge. They will do the bulk of the presentation. I'll just briefly go over what my letter said and emphasize a few things. They've made changes. Yes, it's an increase, but the regulations which I CITED THEY'RE NOT ETCHED IN STONE. There IS DISCRETION WITH THE BOARD AND I'LL GIVE YOU A LITTLE MORE GUIDANCE. So THE 10% FACTOR, in OTHER WORDS, in THE GUIDELINES, as I SAID, straight OUT, JUST FACING IT HEAD ON THE GUIDELINES DO SAY THAT TYPICALLY, there are an increase in the number of units, more than 10 percent, and we're at 18 additional units, 14 market and four affordable, which comes to 13 percent increase over the existing. Those in the guidelines are examples of what could be substantial changes, but you don't have to find that the HAC case law and many other meetings that I've been to with changes over the years.
Speaker 3:What really you were called upon to address is do you think that there's going to be an adverse impact on the project, the residents and the neighborhood? And for reasons that are cited in the letter and Lloyd and Dave will go over in more detail, we do submit that it actually is an improvement and there's not going to be any adverse impacts. The bedroom count is actually being reduced from 414 to 404 because we're switching to a bunch of a lot of two-bedroom units. Forty percent of the homes now target seniors, which encourages the multi-generational community and is generally less intense. Even with the units that have been sold, there's relatively few school-age children. In the 45 homes that have been sold, there are only nine school-age children and there would also be less impact because of the reduction in the number of bedrooms to the sewer and water.
Speaker 3:So I'm not going to go any further in terms of trying to describe the project. I'm not going to go any further in terms of trying to describe the project. I would simply urge that you ask questions and try to make that judgment as to the fact that this really, in the overall scheme, is not substantial, because there are benefits and, we believe, not detriments, and they'll show you on the plan. But actually the location of these units would be close to 44, so it's not near the residential neighborhoods. So I'll stop there unless you have questions for me now. Okay thanks.
Speaker 5:Thank you, peter Lloyd Geisinger, president of Thorndike Development. David and I are going to kind of split. Our presentation shouldn't be more than 10 or 15 minutes in total. I thought I would start by giving the board an update in general as to where the community is and where we stand. As Peter mentioned, we've been selling well in a very funky, punky market. We are at a little over a third of the community either under contract or conveyed. We've conveyed 25 homes. We have another 20 market rate homes and we've now also gone through our first lottery and we have four of the eight which are the first batch of affordables also under binding contract. Those will be closing shortly. So, all things considered, we feel pretty good about our sales pace.
Speaker 5:As this board will recall, it's hard to believe those almost two years ago we came before you and proposed a modified building style, which is shown on the board there on my right. It is a three unit building in which, rather than having three townhouses side by side by side, there's a ground level flat and then two townhouses that sit on top of it. One of those two townhouses has all of its primary living spaces on its primary floor. So you go up a flight of stairs to get into the home, but once you're in your, your master bedroom, your living room, your diner is all on the same floor and, frankly, it's just been a huge success. From the very beginning, we have been seeing what I would consider to be a disproportionate number of seniors that have been coming to the site, certainly more than we anticipated when we started out. As you know, the original plan called for all three-bedroom townhomes 138 three-bedroom townhomes very much targeting a a family orientation. We're all for families, but right now the market is telling us that the baby boomers of which I am a part, several of you are a part, is where the market is, and so we, being a market-driven company, have gone with that flow and it hasnít changed. We continue to see substantially more seniors than young people.
Speaker 5:The footprint of this triplex we call it a vertical triplex just to distinguish it from our townhouse triplex is smaller, it takes up less room, not surprising you're putting three homes in the essentially the length that otherwise you would have had two. Remember, we have one unit on the ground floor, two sit on top of it, and we have been consistently selling the ground-level units to older seniors and selling the townhouse that sits on top of it but has all of the primary living spaces on one floor, to a little bit younger, senior, someone a little more spry, or at least not having had their knees replaced quite yet, so, or hips or whatever. That's all the good news. In addition, I will tell you that, a third of the way into this project, we know what our costs are. We've done this. I've done this for more than 40 years. We have a site contract that is locked in for the entire property and we're deep enough into that construction that any surprises have been uncovered. We know what those prices are. We know how much it costs to build every one of our units, because we've built them completely and sold them. Those costs are locked in. The variable here are the sale prices, and we've been really knocked around pretty badly on two fronts. First, the one that's actually ironically hit the hardest is the sale price on the affordable homes, because those are driven by interest rates. The way the affordable pricing is set is consumers the potential customer is not allowed to have a mortgage that is greater than 30%. Is it 30%, peter? How? So the cost of mortgage real estate taxes 30% of their gross income. So when an interest rate goes up and therefore the cost of money goes up, the amount that they can pay goes down. And so, from when we started to where we are now, each one of those affordable units is selling for almost $50,000 less, even though the cost is exactly the same. So, across 30 units, that's a million and a half dollars 's very, very hard to make economic sense of that. The second thing that's happened is that we as a company have always chosen pace over price. We we feel as though if we're not moving aggressively, other costs catch up with us. These homes are selling for between 550 and, excuse me, six hundred fifty thousand dollars. These are published prices. They're on our website. That's a lot of money, I mean, to me it's a lot of money, you know, but it but when we look at the cost, it's not. It's not enough, and so I'm embarrassed that we're before you this evening. Sincerely, we, as this project stands right now, without some accommodation, it will actually lose money. I'm not talking about making a small profit, I'm talking about losing money, and that's very challenging for us to maintain the momentum and the quality and keep everyone focused. This change that we're suggesting is only possible because of the smaller footprint of this triplex. The infrastructure that Dave will go over is virtually identical, so the roadways are the same in the same place, of the same length, but because this footprints is a little bit smaller, we're able to goose the the unit count a little bit. And of course, we're seeing a lot of seniors. That's just a fact. And um, and since we're seeing a lot of seniors, it's a different traffic distribution. I know there was a lot of concern when we came in here a couple of years ago with a proposal that was going to put two big buildings down at this end of the site. Um, but this is not that the seniors have a different travel pattern. They're not necessarily going out during rush hour. There are less of them per home and that's evidenced by the fact that we legitimately only have nine school-age children across the first 45 sales. So I sincerely believe that this modification overall is less impactful than the original 138 unit plan. It has two bedroom units as opposed to three bedroom units. It's attracting more seniors rather than younger professionals, therefore less school-aged children. It has the same infrastructure and I think it's very, very important and this is the last thing I'll say before I turn it over to Dave to point out that while, yes, we are asking for 18 more units, all of those units are in Phase 4. They're all next to Route 44. If I lived in one of those homes next to Route 44, I'm coming and going on Route 44. I'm not driving all the way through this community down at Church Street up and around to a stoplight. That I could get to in a minute if I turned onto Route 44. Turning is a little challenging when you're trying to make a left-hand turn coming out. The turn is a little challenging when you're trying to make a left-hand turn coming out, but three out of the four movements are not, and so that's something to consider as well. That, to the extent that people are worried about traffic, I think we've addressed that also. So with that, I'll turn it over to Dave and we'll both be available to answer questions.
Speaker 6:Thank you. We'll BOTH BE AVAILABLE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS. Thank YOU, david Estridge, thorndike Development. So I wanted to kind of focus on this comparison plan that's included within your packet to help describe the changes that we are proposing, and there's a few things that are changing, but the vast majority of the the elements, key elements of the planner are remaining the same. So there are additional 18 units. There are only five additional buildings shown on this plan. These buildings here, although they show, is taking up kind of a new area relative to our previous approval. If you go back the version before that, there were actually four units that were here as well so we're kind of had them there, remove them.
Speaker 6:They're going back in that same foot.
Speaker 6:So even though it shows as kind of a increase in development there, at one point it was it was anticipated to be developed so so really, besides the number of units, the number of buildings, in terms of the layout of the layout of the roads, as you can tell, substantially the same. This one falls in the same place. This road was actually shifted a little bit to the west, which opens up this green space a little bit wider than what was there previously. We thought that that would be an improvement. Just setting those homes a little bit farther back from the main entrance also had a nice feeling just going in and out of the entrance to route 44.
Speaker 6:Those are really the key changes to between the plan and what we're proposing today. There's no increase in the limit of work. There's no new impact on wetlands, as I mentioned, the road circulation is essentially the same. We are maintaining the same parking ratios of two parking spaces exterior per unit that we've had to date. As Lloyd mentioned, we're continuing on with the same architecture that we built plenty of at this point and has also been previously presented and approved, and we have the same package of amenities In this area where we're changing, you can see, the park itself remains identical from what was previously approved and, as Lloyd mentioned, the additional units occur in this area at the overall site plan. Common sense dictates that folks living here are going to take a lot of going to try really hard to get in and out of here before they drive throughout the entire site and exit on Church Street.
Speaker 1:Also this area of the site.
Speaker 6:There's no residential waters where we're proposing the entries. This is land that we currently own. We have car dealerships and other commercial development across the street which I've never visited. The bedroom count is being slightly reduced and so that the bedroom count is something that's used to calculate sewer demand, water demand and, to some extent, traffic count. So, again, with that being reduced, net impacts to town services will also go down slightly.
Speaker 6:I think Lloyd mentioned head on all kind of the economic aspects of this. But I'm someone who recently downsized and I'm one of the few people who can. Actually, someone who has downsized is one of the few people who can kind of easily make a transition and make a purchase at this time because you are able to accept a smaller, no mortgage. You know when you downsize. But folks who are trying to move horizontally, they're going to be giving up a 3% or less mortgage and then taking on a 6.5% mortgage. So that's one of the reasons why we're seeing that active adult, which I just entered into, rather than more of a, let's say, typical family or young family buying these homes, these homes, and also I'll skip that part, but yep, so that's, that's really the presentation and description of the, let's say, specific elements comparing the plans. So at this point I'd like to open it up for questions enough questions.
Speaker 6:I think all those homes for the exit 244, I think all the people that are going to go left just as soon, go right through the project can get down to the light. It's what, it's what it's quite possible. But if you want to go this direction, yeah, these people.
Speaker 2:So yeah, I find 44 on that particular part of 44. I think you can get out there and go left as hard as it tends to be crossing. The hard part is when, in the right, wrong or wrong time of day going, I mean you can get out and you're going to get out and sit heading towards one. Yeah, because that's where the traffic is. Yeah, it's not absolute I'm not saying that.
Speaker 6:All you know, 18 uh new homeowners are going to be going that way, but um but uh, more will be going that way than uh through church, that's where they're going, or we'll be going that way, then through church.
Speaker 1:That's where they're going.
Speaker 2:I get gas I have a couple questions about so the new units that are now two bedrooms versus three.
Speaker 6:Does the overall floor area of those units stay the same or are they smaller floor area of those units?
Speaker 2:um they're a little smaller.
Speaker 6:Yeah, so they are a little smaller, so it's not like they went from a three bedroom to a two bedroom with a bunch of extra rooms, correct, yeah, it's not like we went from a three bedroom to a two bedroom and then that type of stuff and maintained the same footprint. We are looking to build more smaller homes. So affordable not just in the technical affordable sense that Peter spoke of in the beginning, but of the market rate homes we need to sell them for less. That's where the market is. We need to meet that market and therefore, in in order to make this work, we need to sell a few more homes and these are the same floor plans that you when you first went to this model.
Speaker 2:Yes, in the first revision yes, so this.
Speaker 6:So last time we were here, we modified an area, phase three, and we replaced duplexes with triplexes. So the triplexes that we put here is that building right there, so that you see.
Speaker 6:So this has a ground floor unit, so one level living that also appeals to active adults, and then two townhouses on top of it. So these are two floors, but they are on the second floor, third floor, that's. That's the way that they stack. So all of all of these units, all of these buildings and these buildings are identical to that. The ones that are shown here are identical to this type of profile. So the vast majority of the new ones are that building when you talk about being on the ground floor.
Speaker 3:Is that the same ground floor? Is that the same?
Speaker 6:like the same height as the garages. Yes, yes, so this, this ground floor unit, so the entrance to this one is actually it's see these two little risers right here that goes into this unit. That's green, so this is the lowest level, so their limbs are right here. Their dedicated garage is here, when they have one bedroom here and one bedroom here um kitchen etc. So it's a one car garage yeah, exactly, so they're color coded.
Speaker 6:So this one, this unit, has a one car garage, so that goes up, and then the two floors above these, and then the main ray doesn't have it, doesn't have a garage, so they have. We've again provided two outdoor spaces, so there's still two spaces per unit ratio. And then this is their, let's say, uh, primary living area, but that's one story up, and then this is their top floor here.
Speaker 5:If I could just add, he does all the architecture. So we actually first got involved in building one floor living that's one floor up at Marina Bay in Quincy almost 25 years ago, a long time ago. It was a real eye opener for me. What we found is that there are some people who want to be on the first floor because they can't deal with stairs. They don't want to deal with stairs. Usually it's more that they're worried about their health in the future rather than their health today. You know they're worried that what if I have this issue or that issue. But there are also quite a few seniors who are nervous about being on the ground floor. There's a perceived not quite as safe. Someone could come through a sliding glass door or whatever the case may be, so they don't mind going up a flight of stairs one time. But once they're in the home they want all that primary living on the same floor, and so it really has. It has been very well received because we're able to zero in on a slightly different market within that senior group.
Speaker 1:Those new vertical? Is that the vertical tripleplex?
Speaker 3:Yes, yes.
Speaker 1:So all the new buildings you're proposing, do they have garages also? It's that building.
Speaker 3:Yeah, okay, it's that building, yes, Mr Chairman, if I may, just one additional point which I didn't mention, but I think this is another factor which would make it indeed reasonable to have you folks make a determination that this is insubstantial, and that is the large size of the site 30-plus acres. So density isn't necessarily the only determining factor, that's for sure. It's really the impacts themselves which we believe are totally not adverse. But it's so spread out and the actual increase in density is really de minimis, it's very little with just 18 units being added to a project of this size with such a large site. And so if it was a smaller site with comparable units and much denser, and then you're adding 18, even though the percentage increase might be the same, but it being if it were a smaller site, I could see that that would perhaps justify finding that it's a more substantial impact.
Speaker 3:But here, I think it would be very reasonable to say that that's a factor that would allow you to determine the insubstantiality. So just wanted to add that.
Speaker 2:Thank, you okay. Well, just, I think this is a legal question. So cuz again, not the end of the turn again. You know my understanding with this being a 40b project that is linked to, while on the one hand, there's the teeth of that, which is you have to abide by those numbers that you were quoting about how the cost of the unit has to go down, because the affordable I mean the median maximum income of a low-income person is this and their maximum amount they can pay is that, and at six percent that's different than three. Right, okay, but now my other question is say, we found that this was, you know, we wanted to be sticks in the mud, tom, this was really a line we were not across. Am I correct that we're not the final arbiter on that, because then the state ultimately could say we're incorrect in our determination on that.
Speaker 3:That would be the ultimate arbiter. The last thing we want is to have to appeal to a housing appeals committee.
Speaker 3:But there is an interim step. It's important in the determination Tonight's determination which is simply whether or not it's insubstantial or substantial, and the factors that we've described are important because, as I said, the basic premise in the limited case law is take a look and see what you think about adverse impacts or benefits of the changes. But what happens if you were to determine that these changes are substantial? What would happen is you would have to schedule a public hearing to have us make a formal presentation and, obviously, public testimony. If anybody wanted to do that, there would be notice to it. But there's a regular notice public hearing.
Speaker 4:So there's, an interim step before.
Speaker 3:Yeah, that's right. The town has a problem with 40Bs. Now there's one I believe just went across the street from you guys. That was pending or it's not, I don't really know. Whatever, have we been sued by them?
Speaker 5:so what effect?
Speaker 3:in your opinion would have on their case if we were to approve to it in imagia project after the day that they applied and we we already had 10 affordable, and therefore we didn't need to entertain that project now we would be adding to the inventory on one end and they would be upset on the other hand. Two responses candidly, the time for determining whether you're at the 10% and to have claimed the same power possibility by the board would be when they applied, when they filed their application. So that wouldn't come into play in that sense. Now, on the other hand's, for warning for more units that will help either get you to or sustain, but the 10%, and this is much more crazy. So we want to be very careful.
Speaker 3:I, you know, no way would I mislead, but you know, sometimes a consideration on appeal is that the town will serve, is that you have continued to make an effort and indeed have granted this project was large to begin with, which, with the number 34, 38 affordable units, and you even increase that recently. And you know again, that's not likely to be the dispositive factor in your favor. I don't know anything about that case, but that is something that sometimes comes into play which could be in your favor in case. But that is something that sometimes comes into play.
Speaker 5:I think I understand exactly the question you're asking, but my understanding from having been in this business for more than 40 years we all know you guys have been doing this long enough to know that projects twist and turn.
Speaker 5:That's life. Things happen, things change and I think it's our job as developers and I would suggest the town's job as well to be responsive to that change in an intelligent and thoughtful way, and that's what we're asking here. No one is ever going to criticize you for being thoughtful and understanding that we are in a very different circumstance today than we were when this project was first approved.
Speaker 5:We are midstream in this. We're in a very different place. We're trying ultimately we want our reputation as a company is to build the highest quality product the market will sustain. I just drove through before I came here. If you haven't been through recently, I would encourage you to do so. Our landscaping is starting to take shape. The whole concept is really coming together. I'm very excited about this. This is a somewhat new approach for us and I think the town is going to be very proud that you were a part of this when it's all done. But we need some help here we need some help here.
Speaker 1:I actually have a couple of questions. I mean, I know they use formulas, bedrooms, things like that, but I'm kind of a common sense guy and if you're adding 19 more units, so that's probably 19 more units, it's actually 18. 18, sorry, there was a mistake.
Speaker 5:No you're correct.
Speaker 1:There was a mistake in the document. Okay, 18. So that's 18 more dishwashers, 18 more washers and dryers, probably 36 more bathrooms, probably because they all have two bathrooms, just one, and I just I don't understand how that's going to reduce the amount of sewer and water.
Speaker 3:I'll just get my own, is it? There's a? Formula calculation for better boys knowledge and that the builders knowledge, and that is common sense. I can't deny that. But what the DEP regulations is that everybody's bound to follow, bases the water flow and sewer flow based on the number of bedrooms. Title V yeah.
Speaker 2:As an engineer it is. It uses everything.
Speaker 5:Well, I can answer the question legitimately. So, starting with Title V, the DEP recognizes that a senior housing unit is. The number of gallons it assigns to a senior housing unit is based on the unit as opposed to the number of bedrooms, and it's 150 gallons for a two-bedroom unit. If that same home was not for seniors, it would be 220 gallons, and the logic behind that is that seniors don't run the dishwasher as often, don't flush the toilets as often. I have four children, you know when they were growing up. Compared to what my wife and I use today is dramatically different. So yes, there are more dishwashers, but the question is how often are you running them? And DEP, at least, is determined that you're running them less. And so a senior is less, will use less water per day than a family of four. That's the logic behind it.
Speaker 1:I get that, but it just just doesn't. It doesn't jive. You know what I mean. When you're adding more units, you're adding more bathrooms dreadful on people, it's, it's I. I know there's a formula they use, but I just don't see how it's going to reduce it.
Speaker 5:Well, I do think the nice school-age children as a fact well, across 50 units is hard to ignore. Yeah, I mean that that's a reality. We're a third of the way through the project. We pivoted, with your help, and went to a senior oriented mix and and it's paying dividends. So nine school-aged children across 45 mark per units. That's documented. I can't say it won't change in the future, right?
Speaker 1:and then I'm trying to remember. So is it, is this the third time that you've come with, or before? I'm trying to remember so maybe five, I don't know.
Speaker 6:This is the fourth one, but so maybe this is the fourth one for, for, for, for that. Okay, that's the applicant. Our first one was a lot of the previous but it is.
Speaker 1:The fourth was yep seven and you want to read the correspondence? Well, I'm just checking to see if they're the type that we need to read or whether it's just. But I can't morning. That's what we're here to have in the minute.
Speaker 2:Here we go. Okay, for the record, we have correspondence from the sewer commissioners and the water district To the Rainham Zone Board of Appeals from the Rainham Superintended With regards to Lockwood LLC comprehensive permit 40B. It has come to my attention that the Lockwood comprehensive permit, following known as Rainham Riverwalk, will be in front of the Zone and Board of Appeals on June 25, 2025, requesting a plan change for Phase 4, showing an increase in the number of buildings. The original agreed-upon fee structure for the sewer connection permits for this development is based on the original number of 103 market rate units, while waiving the fees on 35 affordable units within the development. Please be aware that the developer has yet to approach the Board of Sewer Commission to discuss any change to the count of additional units to this project, if there is to be any.
Speaker 2:The second piece of correspondence is from the rain him Center water district and that says dear mr Rana and board members, I have reviewed the proposed modification to this project. While I don't have any input from the Board of Water Commissioners at this time, based on the proposed reduction of water demand, approximately 880 gallons per day, I don't believe the board will have any concerns. The only other item is the fee Based on the proposed reduction of water demand approximately 880 gallons per day, I don't believe the board will have any concerns. The only other item is the fee structure. I am assuming the proponent is willing to apply for the additional 14 market rate units. If there is a concern with fees or any other issues, I will have to consult with the Board of Water Commissioners for their input. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. John, our chase superintendent, you guys have any comment about those?
Speaker 6:Let's say the fee structure to these additional units that we have applied for. It would just be pro rata. So we would pay. We would expect to pay the fees for the market rates, not for the affordables from the sewer side. And again, the water superintendent has acknowledged that, given the slightly less demand, it should be, let's say, not an adverse impact on town services and we would pay the same, let's say proportional fees that we are for the rest of the project.
Speaker 1:Thank you, because, as opposed to it, it's not an open meeting or it is a Okay, any other, anybody, any pushing to make the statements for or against.
Speaker 4:Opposed to it Opposed Thomas Gamp, 525 Jarrett Street on the floor of Christopher's Way and a few concerns that we have. We were here about two years ago, similar scenario and I think my neighbor Matt would agree that very clear explanation of the development. I appreciate that and I'm not opposed to developments. I know it is good for the town at times.
Speaker 4:But the biggest concern that we have is the number of kids, it being a third done with only nine children at the moment. But we don't know how many more kids will be coming into the town and the schools, quite frankly, are overrun as they are now. As we said two years ago, pick up and drop off for the kids is tough. It's very, very tough with the override not passing. Last night's there was talks of 35 to 45 kids per classroom now. So we're very concerned about that. Along with that, the traffic. We've had a lot of very, very big increase in traffic coming down Christopher's way, people thinking that it's the entrance to the development and it isn't. I've got three small kids that play outside in the yard. People fly down the road. They do so. Another point is as far as trees for privacy. Would there be any type of animals talked about at one point that they would be a row of trees put up for some privacy along the edge of the development?
Speaker 2:I know the plan that was approved with and I know it's early in the project, of course, but yeah, that's that is really it.
Speaker 4:it's really just the. The amount of traffic on Church Street, as everybody knows, is insane. People are flying down Church Street 55, 60 miles per hour, and now they're flying down Christopher's Way and turning around back and forth. When is enough enough? I understand fully the economics of it and how things work, but at some point we just have to say when is it enough? Are we going to be here in a year and a half, two years from now, asking for another 18 or 19 units because of some economic problem? That's it, thank you.
Speaker 7:Matthew, Andrew, 50 Christopher's Way. I am out here near this field over here right where they just clear-cutted this whole corner this week. So I share a lot of the same concerns as Tom. You know, with the applicants coming up and having like vast knowledge of this 40 years of experience and for them to come up here and say cost you know I said it in the last time we were up here talking about the apartment buildings up here. I understand interest rates change 40 years in the business. You know interest rates change, they go up, they go down. Phase four, where they're planning on adding these additional units, Are we in phase one? Still phase two? One to two, One to two.
Speaker 7:So one to two so two years pass, interest rates drop to 3%, 4% and we've already approved this. I'm assuming they're not going to give those units back up because now cost is now increase. You know their cost is now decreased, now they're making more money. It's like a sliding scale and with being in the business of development knowing this, things change like elements change, economics change on the fly. I mean I understand that. But to say that it's the town's responsibility to make up the difference by allowing them to add, I just don't see the hardship. I mean, if you were to come in and get a subdivision approved one acre lots, you gave him 10 lots. The developer doesn't come in because his road costs spiked and say, hey, I want to put you know three houses on a lot now, just because it costs more money so now the one thing I would like to maybe educate the audience a little bit about 40 b's unlike a regular development.
Speaker 2:So say they come to it for a regular development, got 10 lots, acre lots, the interest rates goes to 20 or goes to 2, they're on your own. You guys get to build or choose what you want on those lots. For the 40 B, they're slotted. So if they say they get a windfall, interest rate goes to 1%, people will pay $900,000 those are the affordable units?
Speaker 2:no, no, their maximum profit is capped period. Yeah, on the entire development. Okay, so it's not just the affordable units, they're regular market price ones. They would have to then come back and change this if they were going to start making too much money, because then they would not be in compliance with state regs.
Speaker 7:So, while what you're saying is true, there is some so to approve this now and then have interest rates change, then they'd be back here again to give up those units in theory.
Speaker 2:There's a potential where they would be forced to give up those units, just like if we deny this, so let's say we deny this. Just like if we deny this, so let's say we deny this. If that puts them in a position where the math becomes unprofitable, as was, you think you hit a winner and then you gotta throw it back. So what happens is they go to the state and say, hey, the zoning board and rainham hasn't played ball with us to get within this slot. And then they say you know what? We overrule rainham, because we're in charge, not them yeah, I mean 40 B as a whole.
Speaker 7:Is is in charge. I understand nobody. It's. It's beyond the scope of the town's approval, or you?
Speaker 4:know to that effect.
Speaker 7:But again, if this board is up here to say in, solidify it and say if interest rates change, in economics change, we will physically retract those units. Then we're just guessing that that could happen. I mean, unless you want to point.
Speaker 2:No, there is a chance, right?
Speaker 7:I'm just looking for a solid answer. I mean, we're all just guessing to a degree Fair point. So I mean I'm only here to try and say to give up. You know, housing in Phase 4 that they claim is going to be closest to 44, that's at the tail end of this. I mean you know again like it's a 30, you know, as they described, it's a large site. I mean all of these in Phase 1, right here, building 17, 18, 19, 20, 11, 12, 13, 14.
Speaker 7:Those garages in there are unusable, they're sheds, because if you pull a car in and you park you can't even park sideways with your neighbor across, because then the rest is impassable. I'm assuming that you know you guys drove through and saw, you know these are three-story buildings here overlooking the field, and then they do all the roots on those and all the shingle paper just blows in the field and it's just. You know you have a large site. I don't disagree with that. Maybe you know they could have spread it out, I don't know. But I mean to just say that the cost, you know they came in and they asked for the buildings at the exit and they said cost then. And now you know they came in and they asked for the buildings at the exit and they said cost then. And now they're saying cost again. I understand things change, but to just say you have to just work with us because cost.
Speaker 2:No, I mean we agree and we agreed that. That what do you want to call it? Apartment building? Style was not in the town's best interest, correct, and I mean there's other state things like the ADUs, everything else.
Speaker 7:All that stuff was forced down upon us. I mean there's going to be plenty more housing that's developed by force of the state. I mean to give up more on a site, it just you know. I don't see the advantage now for the town to say, yeah, do it when they're talking about adding it to phase four. I mean we're at phase one rolling into phase two. It's just you know.
Speaker 7:And to say, I understand nine kids now, but that's just a nearsighted estimate. I mean these units are going to turn over by the time they finish phase four. I can assure you phases one and two will probably have some units turn over. I mean nine kids now could be, you know, ninety kids ten years from now, because the units become, you know, entry-level houses and people are starting families. I mean there's no deed restriction saying that it's elderly. You know they. They talk about elderly, but it's a community with no deed restriction. It's not a 55 plus. There's no type of regulation that says, like a family of three can go move into a two bedroom because it's affordable. I mean there's nothing there that says, you know, I understand a flat for elderly is a good idea, but I mean there's no restriction that says, you know, I understand a flat for elderly is a good idea, but I mean there's no restriction that says you know someone can't live there.
Speaker 2:Oh, no yeah.
Speaker 7:So I mean that's my concern. I just don't understand the town giving up a yes, you know for really no hardship when they're talking phase four.
Speaker 2:That's really my two cents, but thank you well, I have a question that I think you might respond to her. So, echo, I would say Matt's concern is it would be nice if you guys explained to us Phase four is a little ways away, right, we're not going to start breaking ground on phase four for some time. I know you guys build pretty quickly and because I've been, I do go into the development rather frequently because I Find it interesting progress.
Speaker 5:I can ask the question why? Why are you asking now when a couple of a couple of different parts to answer? First, we have 50 units under under contract or conveyed at the moment. We have 13 more that are under construction but are not sold. That's a combination of affordable units and market rate units. So, as we sit here right now, we're at 63 units that are under construction or have conveyed, which is almost half of the hundred and thirty eight.
Speaker 5:When we phase our infrastructure, we are very conscious of the time of year. So and as you know, the spring is historically the best time to sell homes. So we're looking ahead now to the infrastructure that we need to install so that we're in a position next spring to be able to build homes. And the the phase one, phase two description isn't entirely accurate. What is accurate is that there are 65 homes that are either 100% complete or under construction. By the time we reach the end of this calendar year, there will have been another 20 to 25 homes that have been built. So at that point we will need to be moving forward with the infrastructure. At that point we will need to be moving forward with the infrastructure. Our expectation is that we would be completing this spine road, starting late fall and completing in the early spring. So it's it. We're always looking ahead as to the why we need it. Now, when we, when we put our pro formas together and we set prices, we're setting prices based on what we're able to do today and what we hope to be able to do tomorrow. We're again, as I said, a very pace-driven company If we're going to build this out in a timely way. We're setting our prices today and we're projecting what our prices need to be for phase four. Now, if we only have 138 homes as opposed to the propo, the new proposal, then that changes our pricing dynamic and and and we're forced to try and get more money for the homes that we're selling today rather than being able to keep our pricing more modest in order to be able to complete the project.
Speaker 5:I understand the comments made and and they're legitimate. There's no guarantee that ten years from now there won't be a different mix of people living here. But I will say this this project is originally approved, called for 138 three-bedroom townhomes, extremely family oriented and targeted. When we came back to this board, we didn't just come back and say we need more units, we came back with a revised program that I feel that common sense and, in fact, customers have demonstrated are resulting in a different mix of people, I think, a much healthier mix. We're very much about multi-generational communities. I think it's a very healthy situation when you have people of all ages interacting and living together and that very much has a direct effect on the, on the impacts of the town. So, while, yes, we are asking for 18 more units, I think that we have also tried to offer something to the town, namely a different mix of homes, different styles, and we've been marketing it long enough that we have actual data that we've been able to share with you.
Speaker 1:Any other comments, I want to declare that public hearing is going to be closed. All may remain while the board deliberates, but no one may speak.
Speaker 6:I would like to give the top council a point that those two towns in position on other point.
Speaker 2:So it's much more than that case. Yeah, because I. That would be the only.
Speaker 3:That would be one of the major, that would be the. I mean, I don't.
Speaker 2:It's good to hear that would be the only.
Speaker 1:That would be one of the major. That would be the.
Speaker 2:I mean I don't Basically the rest of the stuff. I mean I think with the reduction of bedrooms for you that would be more Covered the bases on the.
Speaker 1:It would still be Final buildings 13% increase, yeah, in buildings, yeah.
Speaker 2:But that's me. If I put, if I give it all those buildings that put one Trump Tower, then I've got a thousand times more people.
Speaker 3:That's way worse, even though I've reduced building in my opinion that's just more buildings, but I think if you add up all the footprint of the buildings the new buildings being not as big as the older ones I'm not sure if it's a wash there.
Speaker 2:Yeah, I don't think that's as big a deal. I think the big thing is if it ties our hands at the top and then opens the gate to 500 other units that we think we're not gonna have to. So, in essence, would you just propose to continue this pending review with town council. Sure See if the applicant would be open to not getting a vote today.
Speaker 3:So motion to. Well, we want to come out of session, Do we make a motion to second.
Speaker 1:Mr Leo, we need a 7.56. Would you be opposed to continuing this to refer to town council, because this is the work comes over the next time.
Speaker 5:We appreciate your consideration. We're totally fine with that.
Speaker 2:Yeah, obviously, next week it's the holiday I'm going gonna be yeah, sometime in July.
Speaker 5:I can't do the 60 move on 23rd so the 23rd, 23rd of July that works for us 23rd of July, so, uh, I'm sorry I'm not going to be here on the 23rd okay, it's my birthday, though, if you're going gonna bring me a present a chance of moving it up a week from the 23rd no for the 9th.
Speaker 2:We can't, we can't. Uh, we can try to get town council, but I mean all right.
Speaker 1:Well, how about?
Speaker 2:this how about this we'll we'll tenderly schedule for the 9th, sure if, in the event, knowing that we're waiting on town council. If he's unable to respond, that's I don't we'll have to continue well, you can't be the night oh yeah, no, so I move to continue the hearing till the night. And opinion from town council with regards to this decision's impact on the town standing With regard to comprehensive permits. I second All in favor. Aye outstanding Next meeting I know you guys have a plan. If you could bring it, I think sure.
Speaker 7:I was just gonna ask.
Speaker 6:I was gonna say I think it did like sorry, no, I got it okay, well, we'll take care of it.
Speaker 2:I mean, I just off my memory. I don't remember what the landscape plan looked like.
Speaker 7:Oh sure, I'll take a motion that we approve the minutes for meetings Second, second, second, second, second, second, second, second, second, second, second, second, second, second Second.
Speaker 1:Second, second, second, second, second, second, second, second, second, second, second Second.
Speaker 6:Second, do we need to do anything? Show me exactly where you are. I was just.
Speaker 1:I know you mentioned screening and that sort of thing.
Speaker 6:It's not shown on here but so our Well, I was a little perplexed because we have a fence that goes some distance here and then it stops, and then it stops about.