Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSteve Robichaud Planning Board Public Comment DetailedTown of Barnstable Planning Board Detailed Recap of Public Comment Meeting #1 Meeting Date: September 22, 2025 Subject: Home Occupation and Commercial Vehicles on Residential Properties Source: Time-stamped meeting transcript cross referenced with official minutes Speaker: Matthew Moynihan, Centerville Matthew introduced himself as a Centerville resident and said he teaches automotive technology at Cape Cod Regional Technical High School in Harwich, where he has taught for fourteen years. He said he was speaking because he was deeply concerned about the proposed bylaw restricting residents from parking trailers over 20 feet, more than one unregistered vehicle, commercial trucks over one ton, and certain campers on their own property. He framed the proposal as more than a simple ordinance, calling it government overreach that would reach directly into the lives of hardworking families in Barnstable. Matthew emphasized that Barnstable is a community of roughly 50,000 residents, not a gated homeowners association, and said the town is diverse, working class, and full of people who rely on the very vehicles and equipment the proposed bylaw would restrict. Drawing on personal experience, he explained that when he was younger his family could not afford two vehicles, and their ability to bring home a work truck, speciflcally an F-550, was what made life possible and helped put food on the table. He added that he had at times brought unregistered vehicles into his driveway to repair them himself, describing that as the practical reality of blue-collar life, where people solve problems with their hands rather than paying others to do everything for them. Matthew also explained that his family owns a 21-foot boat trailer and uses it to spend time together in town, and he argued that the bylaw ignored the way ordinary residents actually live. He said not everyone can afford off-site storage, not everyone can hire out maintenance work, and not everyone believes that making Barnstable “look pretty” should come at the expense of the working families who keep the town running. He tied the issue to larger themes of affordability and retention of young families, arguing that the proposal punished tradespeople, flshermen, mechanics, small business owners, and working families rather than supporting them. Matthew concluded that Barnstable’s character lies in its people, not in an artiflcial image of perfection, and urged the board to reject the bylaw and instead pursue policies that strengthen rather than divide the community. After flnishing, he asked whether written remarks should be left somewhere to be included in the official record, and staff indicated that any written comments could be scanned into the record. Speaker: Larry Morr, Cotuit Larry Morr identifled himself as a Cotuit resident and a former member of several town committees, though he said he is currently “committee free.” He said he had reviewed the zoning items on the agenda and viewed the last item, Town Council Item 2026-012, as the one generating the greatest controversy. Larry argued that the language of that proposed amendment was poorly written and full of opportunities for misinterpretation. He said it was his understanding that the draft was already pending revision and recommended that it be withdrawn entirely so that it could be cleaned up and brought back in a more focused and precise form. In his view, a withdrawn and rewritten version would allow the town manager’s office or whichever proponent was advancing it to produce a cleaner proposal that targeted the real problem without sweeping in areas that were not meant to be covered. He urged the board to approach the item with that same mindset and to support withdrawal and redrafting rather than moving forward with a fiawed proposal. Speaker: Bob Shulte, Centerville Bob Shulte identifled himself as a Centerville resident and former chair of the Ad Hoc Zoning and Regulatory Agreement Committee. He said he had general comments on the ad hoc recommendations and would also offer more speciflc comments when individual zoning items were formally opened later in the meeting. Speaking on behalf of and as former chair of the ad hoc committee, he thanked the Planning Board for scheduling discussion of what he called the four immediate priority recommendations identifled in the committee’s April 7, 2025 memorandum to Town Council. He noted that while the committee’s recommendations had town-wide implications, the four items before the board that night applied speciflcally to Chapter 240 and the Hyannis zoning districts. Bob asked for a little extra time because of his role and then urged board members to thoroughly read the ad hoc memorandum, including Exhibits A and B, which he said were prepared by Planning Director Jim Kupfer and documented both the committee’s discussions and the rationale for its recommendations. He reminded the board that the ad hoc committee was made up of flve sitting town councilors and four members of the public, and that the public members were selected in a public process by the Town Council Appointments Committee from a large fleld of applicants. He emphasized that the group refiected diverse personal and professional backgrounds and a range of opinions, suggesting that its recommendations were the product of substantial debate rather than groupthink. Bob then contrasted the amount of time spent by the Town Council on February 2, 2023, when the downtown Hyannis zoning changes were adopted, with the work of the ad hoc committee. He said the council spent only about two and a half hours that evening reviewing and amending a major zoning package, making seventeen amendments in the process, which he described as a sign that the proposal had not been ready for prime time. By contrast, he said the ad hoc committee held eighteen in-person public meetings over a nine-month period, all available on Zoom and broadcast on public access television, and collectively spent forty to flfty hours reviewing Chapter 168, regulatory agreements, and Chapter 240 zoning, with particular emphasis on downtown Hyannis zoning districts. He said the committee reviewed information from the town and other sources, heard from town employees, subject-matter experts, and members of the public, and took seriously concerns about quality of life and the future needs of residents and business owners. Bob stressed that nearly three years had passed since downtown zoning was enacted and that there had been meaningful concerns and complaints from residents and business owners during that period. He argued that it would be arrogant to claim that the town had learned nothing from those three years or that the 2023 zoning package was perfect as written and needed no adjustment. He noted that seven of eight participating members of the committee voted to agree on the recommendations presented to Town Council and that the eighth member’s comments were included as an appendix to the committee memorandum. He concluded by pointing out that all four town councilors whose constituencies include Hyannis, along with several other councilors, had expressed support for the priority recommendations before the Planning Board that night. He asked the board to seriously consider the ad hoc committee’s recommendations and recommend that the Town Council approve them as soon as reasonably possible. Speaker: Dave Hegarty, Centerville Dave Hegarty introduced himself as a Centerville resident and began by saying he was glad the board had cleared up the confusion about boats, noting that the issue had become a “hot topic” online. He said he personally did not care much about boats and had no interest in restricting ordinary boat or jet ski ownership, especially in a place like Cape Cod. What concerned him more was commercial activity being run out of residential neighborhoods at a scale that exceeded what most people would consider reasonable. He said he did not object to one, two, or even perhaps three work vehicles at a home, but he did object when the number grew to four or beyond. Dave described a speciflc house on Old Stage Road where he regularly sees seven or eight working vans lined up and said that, in his view, that constitutes a business being run out of a house rather than a modest home occupation. He warned that if the town failed to set clear policies and parameters, more people would point to those examples and ask why they could not do the same thing. He said he did not want to live next to seven or eight vans coming and going at all hours depending on the business and felt that this sort of use was not fair to surrounding neighbors. At the same time, he made clear that he had no problem with people supporting themselves and understood that many people are self-employed. He expressly said he had no issue with a couple of landscaping trailers or one or two work vans at a residence. He explained that his own road contains a very high concentration of trades and small businesses, including two landscapers, a general contractor, a cabinetmaker, a seamstress, and formerly a daycare, all on a road with only thirteen houses. He said his landscaping neighbors were respectful and that two trucks and one trailer seemed manageable. Even in the case of the general contractor, he said two vans felt more appropriate than three. Dave ended by urging the board, when cleaning up the bylaw, to come up with a number that it believed was fair, because in his view some limit had to exist even if modest home-based work activity should still be allowed. Speaker: Jeanne Freeman, Hyannis Jeanne Freeman identifled herself as a Hyannis resident and said she too was relieved to hear that revisions were coming to the proposed language because she had attended in response to the controversy surrounding it. She explained that she does not personally own a boat, trailer, or camper, but she nevertheless feels strongly that people should have the right to own such things. Jeanne emphasized that the issue affects both workers and business owners in what she described as a working-class area and said the town needed to strike a balance rather than simply impose restrictions. Her principal concern, however, was on-street parking in her neighborhood. She said there is already extensive parking on the street by trailers, business vehicles, and commercial vehicles. She observed that some residents may move commercial vehicles onto their private property while pushing their personal vehicles out onto the street, and she worried that without rules addressing that dynamic, the town could simply shift the problem from yards into public rights-of-way. Jeanne asked the board to consider whether any future regulation needed to address the possibility that restrictions on residential lots could unintentionally increase on-street congestion and create a different but equally frustrating neighborhood problem. Speaker: William Potter, Cotuit William Potter, identifled in the transcript as a speaker from Cotuit said he was looking primarily for clariflcation about the statement made earlier in the meeting concerning Section 240 and trailers. He understood from the opening explanation that recreational boats would not be included in the amendment and that the focus was on commercial vehicles. His question, however, was how the town intended to treat boats that are used for commercial purposes, such as flshing vessels or boats used for charters or tours. He suggested that a boat used commercially might not flt neatly into the distinction the board had just drawn between recreational boat storage and commercial vehicle regulation. In his view, the town needed to do further homework and clarify how it would distinguish between commercial and noncommercial boating uses and how those distinctions would interact with any associated truck-and-trailer combinations on residential property. Speaker: DJ Crook, Chair, Shellfish Committee DJ Crook introduced himself as the “email guy,” then explained that he serves as chair of the Shellflsh Committee. He said his initial purpose in sending email alerts had not been to “start a riot,” but rather to inform members of the local flshery that the issue was coming before the board because many of them maintain multiple boats and vehicles for both personal and business purposes. DJ described his own situation in practical terms: he has two vessels, three vehicles, and rents three additional spaces for his business because he does not have enough room at home to store one thousand cages, two boats, three trucks, and the rest of the gear he needs. He explained that his original concern centered on informing flshermen, but that the issue reaches much more broadly than the flshing community. He urged the board to “leave the tape measures in the truck,” arguing that property owners should not be subjected to officials measuring trailers on private property when the ordinance is already limited in other ways. He questioned why there was a need to measure trailer length if the bylaw was already restricting the number of trailers. DJ placed the issue in the broader economic context of post-COVID Cape Cod, saying that many more people became independent workers after the pandemic while housing costs and commercial property costs rose dramatically. He said that for many residents, especially people in the flshing trade, operating from home is a necessity rather than a preference because a single bad winter can wipe out a business. In his view, the town should be cautious about adding a new regulation that may not seem urgent now but could end up hurting residents and working people in the future. He also emphasized that his permit is issued by the town and that, as a town-permitted flsherman, he believes he has a right to operate from his domicile subject to the extensive and largely unseen regulations already imposed by the state, the town, and the FDA. DJ concluded by saying that his flrst email was intended as a warning to flshermen, but that he had come to believe the issue affects many more residents than just members of the flshery. Speaker: Michael Moynahan Michael Moynahan identifled himself as a flfty-six-year resident of Barnstable and said plainly that he loves his town and appreciates the hard work of board members. He said that about every ten years, in his view, a new group of concerned volunteers gets assigned to a committee with the goal of improving his lifestyle without having taken the time to get to know him, his neighbors, his workers, or his friends. He stressed that many people he knows use their property to store practical equipment for recreation and work, including four-wheel-drive vehicles needed for Sandy Neck, trailers for races, snowmobiles brought to New Hampshire, and other equipment beyond just boats. He argued that there are many legitimate reasons residents of Barnstable choose to keep trailers in their yards and that many of them have no desire to rent storage space from a third party. Michael said he was especially upset that he had not had an opportunity to weigh in on a prior rule change that now prevents him from using a trailer he has owned for ten years to bring trash to the town dump. He said he had come determined to tell the board that what it was now proposing was “not a good thing” and urged members to think hard and fast about what they were trying to do. Michael framed the proposal as an attempt to subject private property to arbitrary homeowners- association-style rules that he never agreed to and under which he felt he had no real say. He emphasized that he bought his property without restrictions and does not believe the town has the right to later add new restrictions simply because someone on a planning committee decides that what he does on his own property is no longer acceptable. He said that anyone who wants to live in a neighborhood where the majority dictates what is proper should buy into an HOA and run for president, but otherwise should let him decide what is appropriate on his own land. In a particularly pointed comment, he said that if someone does not want to live next to “hillbilly” conditions, then they should not move into the Mills. He ended by urging the board to let market forces dictate what should be done and to remember the people whose daily lives would be affected by the bylaw. Speaker: Town Councilor Matt Levesque Town Councilor Matt Levesque then addressed the board and flrst thanked members for serving in their capacity. He noted that before joining the Town Council, he had served for three years on the Zoning Board of Appeals and was therefore familiar with the kind of regulatory work the Planning Board was undertaking. He explained that he wanted to provide clariflcation and context in response to comments that had already been made, even though he was speaking somewhat off the cuff rather than from prepared remarks. Responding to the suggestion that the proposal had been poorly prepared by the town manager’s office, he said the process was in fact rushed and subject to immense pressure from certain councilors who repeatedly wanted enforcement-related regulations advanced quickly. He explained that Andy Clyburn had been tasked with assembling a committee of town department heads and that those directors, including legal and planning personnel, were pushed to put together language quickly based in part on what some town councilors wanted to see. In his account, there was not a robust public process behind that initial drafting effort, and he distinguished himself from those councilors who had been pushing for the regulations. He also described being named to the ad hoc committee but not attending its meetings because they were held Fridays at 3:30 p.m., a time he said was unrealistic for working people and impossible for his schedule. He stated that he had been accused of boycotting the committee, but said his absence was due to the meeting time rather than a refusal to engage. The councilor made an important procedural point: the original charge of the ad hoc committee, as she understood it, was not enforcement. She said the then-council president had wanted enforcement, downtown zoning, and regulatory agreements discussed together, but the town attorney determined that enforcement was not in Town Council’s lane and instead belonged to inspection services and the Building Commissioner. He claimed that despite that limitation, enforcement concerns kept surfacing and were effectively redirected to the Building Commissioner, putting him in the position of being asked to solve matters that had not been properly routed through the right channel. In his telling, the current proposals grew partly out of that enforcement frustration and from pressure on staff to deliver something quickly. He then responded to Bob Shulte’s characterization of the 2023 downtown zoning adoption as rushed, arguing that while the flnal council meeting on the subject may have lasted roughly two and a half hours, the form-based code work had in fact been years in the making and had gone through many meetings, workshops, and public conversations before the flnal vote. He said most of the seventeen amendments made that night were cleanup items rather than major substantive changes about heights or parking, and he argued that it was inaccurate to say the whole downtown zoning effort had been hastily thrown together at the last minute. Although most of her remarks focused on downtown zoning and committee process rather than only home occupation and commercial vehicles, her comments were important because they provided context for how the current proposed amendments had been assembled and why they were before the Planning Board in the form they were. Speaker: John Julius, Hyannis John Julius thanked the board for the opportunity to speak and opened with humor, saying the best T-shirt slogan to come out of the controversy was either “leave the boaters alone” or “leave the tape measures in the truck.” He then shifted quickly into a more serious argument that residents should not be restricted from keeping boats on property they own and pay taxes on. Even after being reminded that the pending amendment was not actually directed at recreational boats, he said he was trying to stay ahead of the curve because he believed the town was paying attention to the wrong things. In his view, the Planning Board should be focused on much larger problems than what people keep in their yards. Julius then redirected his comments to what he sees as the real crisis in Hyannis: overbuilding, overdevelopment, oversized apartment projects, worsening traffic, and a mounting strain on public infrastructure. He speciflcally criticized four-story development in Hyannis, including the project at the old 7-Eleven site near Burger King, and called the pace and scale of growth sickening and putrid. He tied that criticism to water capacity and said Hyannis was already facing a more than two -million- gallon-per-day water shortage, arguing that the town’s time and energy should be spent on those systemic land-use decisions rather than on speculative concerns about boats and trailers. He also challenged repeated claims about affordable housing and 40B, saying the statute promotes affordable housing but does not guarantee that building more units will actually solve the affordability problem in the way people claim. He ended by urging the board to refocus on its core zoning responsibilities and the larger development trajectory in Hyannis. Speaker: Eric Schwaab, Hyannis Eric Schwaab introduced himself as a Hyannis resident and spoke in blunt terms, saying that form-based zoning is “crap” and that it is ruining Hyannis. He urged everyone in the room to drive down Main Street and look at the scale and placement of recent projects, especially the old motel area and new four-story buildings close to the sidewalk, and ask whether that is really the type of place they want to live next to. He rejected the idea that the zoning changes had been carefully and adequately developed, saying he personally made the effort to leave work early on Fridays to attend the ad hoc zoning meetings and that many Hyannis residents did the same. According to him, those meetings were not poorly attended; rather, they refiected signiflcant concern from people who took time off from work speciflcally to object to the zoning direction the town had taken. Schwaab urged the board to seriously consider the four recommendations that came out of the ad hoc process, because in his view they were aimed at slowing down the building surge that has altered the character of Hyannis. He made clear that, for him, the larger zoning problem and the commercial-vehicle issue are connected because both concern whether residents still have any control over neighborhood conditions. Turning directly to the commercial-vehicle amendment, he said it is not about boats, it is about white vans. He described living next to a three-bedroom house where, for six years, a dozen white vans with ladders were parked in the yard while numerous people appeared to be living in the house. He said the problem in Hyannis is not a family keeping a boat or one work truck, but neighborhoods on small 10,000-square-foot lots being overrun by unlicensed, unregulated, and uninsured home occupations. He argued that some contractors present themselves as licensed and insured but are not actually paying proper taxes, workers’ compensation, or insurance, leaving nearby residents to absorb the quality-of-life consequences while the town fails to act clearly and effectively. Schwaab concluded that if the town cannot flx the commercial-truck issue through this amendment without causing other problems, then it needs to go back to the drawing board and produce something better, because the underlying neighborhood problem in Hyannis is real and needs to be addressed. Speaker: Malcolm Miller Malcolm Miller explained that he had started a business about three and a half years earlier and, as part of getting established, initially kept one commercial vehicle and two trailers at his house. He acknowledged that he was probably pushing the edge of what should be allowed, but said his experience exposed a deeper problem with how the town handles enforcement. He said he repeatedly came home to flnd orange enforcement stickers on his door and, when he spoke with an inspector, pointed out that nearby properties had much larger and more obvious commercial setups that had gone untouched for years. He described houses with four box trucks in the backyard, a tractor trailer across the fence, and a tri-axle truck nearby, while his own relatively smaller setup was the one being cited. For Miller, that demonstrated selective or inconsistent enforcement. He argued that if inspectors are going to issue violations, they need to do so across the board rather than targeting one resident while ignoring far larger or longer-standing violations in the same area. He also used the meeting itself as an analogy, noting that some speakers appeared to be allowed to go over time while others were cut off right at the three-minute mark. In his view, the town’s handling of both meetings and code enforcement refiects the same fairness problem: the rules are not being applied evenly. Miller urged the board to draft the bylaw in a much more detailed and precise way. He emphasized that trailers can serve many purposes and that something which appears to be a landscaping trailer may actually contain a race car or be used for another recreational purpose, so the ordinance needs to be written carefully enough to account for real-world situations rather than superflcial appearances. Speaker: Susan Rome, West Hyannis Port Susan Rome said she has lived in West Hyannis Port for forty-four years and described her street as a short, tightly conflgured road with only about a dozen houses and only one way in and one way out. She framed her comments as coming from long personal experience watching the same neighborhood conditions deteriorate over time. She said that what had been a recurring problem became much worse in the previous year, to the point that she began repeatedly calling both the inspector and the health department. She described one investor-owned rental house where occupants regularly changed, cars accumulated in rows, and vehicles were parked on gravel, grass, and anywhere else they would flt. According to Rome, the health department came out but the occupants did not answer the door, and the matter was never meaningfully followed up. She then described a second property directly across the street, which she said was owned by an off-Cape LLC and associated with large white commercial vans linked to Nantucket Stone. She explained that, at the end of the day, several large vans would return and park overnight, with workers gathering there and vehicles spilling beyond the driveway. At one point, she said, there were so many vans and so much congestion that she could not even get to her own house. Rome said the inspector who responded was courteous and told her he was the only inspector for all of Barnstable, but that the result still felt like non-enforcement. She said the vans were eventually painted white to remove the Nantucket Stone logo, after which the town claimed there was essentially nothing more it could do. She broadened the issue beyond just business signs and vehicle counts, saying the town already has rules about the percentage of a front yard that can be paved or used as driveway area, yet those rules are not being enforced. In her neighborhood, she said, trucks and vans are routinely parked on lawns and grassy areas on small lots, creating visual blight and undermining the upkeep of the surrounding homes. Rome ended by saying that the issue is not abstract to the people who built and maintain their homes. In her view, unchecked commercial-style parking and bad landscaping practices are making some streets disheveled and turning them into eyesores for longtime residents who have invested in their neighborhoods. Speaker: Thomas Long, Centerville Thomas Long introduced himself as a Centerville resident of more than twenty-four years and a retired flreflghter with more than twenty-one years of service. He said he came speciflcally to oppose the proposed restriction on trailers over twenty feet on residential property. Long said he deliberately chose to live in a neighborhood that was not governed like an HOA because he wanted the freedom to use his property in a practical way. He explained that he runs a small remodeling business and currently keeps trailers, so the proposal would directly affect how he supports himself. He argued that the amendment would not just affect him, but many self-employed residents trying to make a living in Barnstable. He also widened the point beyond work trailers, noting that many people work hard to buy RV trailers and similar equipment so they can take their families on trips and enjoy life. His message was simple and direct: people who chose a traditional neighborhood rather than an HOA- style development should not be subjected to that kind of restriction after the fact, and the board should not adopt the proposal. Speaker: Rod Tavano Rod Tavano said he grew up in Barnstable, went to Cape Tech, and knows many local one-man-band tradespeople, including plumbers, electricians, and carpenters who still operate in the traditional Cape Cod way. He said he understood that there are legitimate complaints when too many vehicles accumulate at one property, but he warned against using those outliers to justify broad restrictions on everyone. He explained that he owns a small HVAC company and now has commercial property where he can legally park his own fieet, but he stressed that he is fortunate to be in that position and knows many others are not. In his words, there is simply no place for many residents to put boats, trailers, or work equipment, and friends of his have struggled even to flnd or permit small pieces of land for storage. Tavano said that on his own property he has a dump trailer and a snowmobile trailer, while his son, a commercial flsherman, keeps three boats and a pulpit for his boat in his yard. He described that as normal Cape Cod life rather than a nuisance, and argued that people who choose to live on Cape Cod should expect to see boats, trailers, and practical equipment as part of the landscape. He then connected the issue to the town’s larger development patterns, criticizing the push for more high-density housing while parking and storage needs remain unresolved. He suggested that instead of banning equipment from residential lots, the town should consider creating an inexpensive municipal lot where residents could store trailers, campers, and similar equipment. Tavano also warned that the town is heading toward a situation where new housing is added without enough parking, affordability is not truly solved, and ordinary working residents lose the ability to live in the community. He argued that the town needs to address those broader pressures before imposing new restrictions on residents’ yards. Speaker: Demetrius Arvanitrios Demetrius Arvanitrios said he had found out about the matter late and had not come fully prepared, but felt compelled to speak because the comments before him had identifled a much larger problem than the speciflc amendment on the table. He said the town should be looking at the issue through a broader commercial-parking lens rather than trying to solve it piecemeal at the residential level. He emphasized that many people cannot afford commercial property and that the growth of the population and of local businesses has outpaced the town’s planning for where those businesses and their vehicles can actually go. In his view, the town failed to address that growth early enough, and now residents are being pitted against one another over the symptoms. Arvanitrios said some people have been operating businesses for years under one set of expectations, and newer operators naturally question why some long-standing setups were tolerated while they are now being scrutinized. He argued that this is exactly why the town needs to step back and look at the issue at a macro level rather than passing a narrow new law with unintended consequences. He suggested that the town should explore making land or rental areas available for storage and vehicle parking rather than simply telling residents they can no longer keep necessary equipment at home. He warned that if local tradespeople, landscapers, and plumbers cannot keep their tools and trucks somewhere affordable, the town will lose the very people needed to service homes and businesses on Cape Cod. He also pointed out that the confiict is creating resentment among residents and business owners, with people starting to turn against one another instead of focusing on the real planning failure underneath. His central argument was that the town should flx the root problem flrst and avoid adopting legislation that may intensify the confiict without solving it. Speaker: Ryan Cabol, West Barnstable Ryan Cabol of West Barnstable said he had heard a great deal of discussion about small business owners and understood the hardships they face, particularly the difficulty of flnding affordable commercial parking or storage. At the same time, he urged the board to be very careful about how it deflnes what exactly it is trying to regulate. He argued that the town needs to clearly distinguish between true commercial activity and ordinary residential behavior that may involve large amounts of material or equipment. To make that point, he described his own experience having substantial amounts of stone and flll delivered to his residential property for personal use, saying that sheer volume alone does not automatically make something a business operation. Cabol also stressed that lot size and neighborhood context matter. What might be unreasonable on a quarter-acre lot in a denser village could be much less problematic on several acres in West Barnstable, so he warned against one-size-flts-all drafting. He expressed frustration that the town’s answer to long-standing enforcement problems seems to be to write additional regulation even while acknowledging that existing rules are already difficult to enforce. In his view, that is backward and risks layering more unenforceable restrictions onto residents instead of solving the underlying issue. He concluded by saying that if the town is going to act, it must deflne its terms carefully, distinguish private use from commercial-for-hire operations, and avoid writing a bylaw so broad that it catches ordinary residential conduct that should not be the town’s concern. Speaker: Charlie Rolf, Marstons Mills Charlie Rolf of Marstons Mills spoke as a young business owner and said that although he was not especially prepared, he felt it was important to explain how these rules affect people who are still building their businesses and trying to get established. He said he owns Rolf Excavation and has put much of his life savings and time since high school into getting to where he is. Rolf explained that he used to park a lot of his equipment at home and, while he is now fortunate enough to know people in the community who let him keep some equipment elsewhere, not being able to keep things at the house still hurts. It means extra travel, more inconvenience, and less fiexibility in running a small operation. He was candid in saying he is not the quietest neighbor in the neighborhood, but insisted that he tries to be respectful. His point was not that every possible use should be allowed without limits, but that practical equipment storage at home can be the difference between making a small business work and not making it work. Rolf’s comments captured the perspective of young local contractors who are trying to establish themselves on the Cape and who may not yet have the resources to rent or buy dedicated commercial space. For people in that position, the inability to park equipment at home is not a minor inconvenience; it is a real business burden. Speaker: Matthew Prescott Matthew Prescott said he is a small business owner and a twenty-two-year Barnstable resident in Marstons Mills, and he argued that the proposed commercial parking restrictions amount to a broad sweep of town overreach. He said the language would drastically affect exactly the kind of very small local businesses that working families rely on. Speaking from his own circumstances, he said he has three well-kept pickup trucks, along with trailers for snowmobiles and boats, and that all of these could be swept into the proposed restrictions even though his property is among the best maintained in the area. He stressed that many small business owners are responsible neighbors who take care of their properties and do not create the kinds of nuisance conditions the town appears worried about. Prescott then gave the example of people like a local flreflghter who also runs a small landscaping business on the side. He said that person is not going to go out and rent commercial space for one six- wheel dump truck, one one-ton pickup, and a few small trailers, so a broad new rule would effectively put that person out of business. He tied that concern to the larger affordability problem on Cape Cod. In his view, once the town makes it harder for small operators to live and work locally, it becomes even harder for ordinary families to remain on Cape because outside companies take over and the cost of services rises. Prescott also connected the issue to investor ownership and neighborhood change, warning that while the town squeezes local working people, more houses are being bought by shell entities and large institutional investors, changing the character of neighborhoods in a very different and more harmful way. He acknowledged there may be some line somewhere when a property becomes too intensive, but insisted the current proposal is far too broad and would capture many ordinary, well-kept properties that are not the real problem. Speaker: Jack Riki, Hyannis Jack Riki said he owns a business trailer and spoke from the perspective of someone who believes many residents are using their property responsibly even when they keep work-related equipment at home. He argued that the town should not assume that the presence of a trailer automatically means a property is being misused. He emphasized that many people keep their yards clean, maintain their property, and still rely on a trailer in connection with their livelihood. In his view, the town should be targeting genuinely problematic situations rather than imposing a blanket restriction that sweeps in responsible residents. His comments reinforced the broader theme that appearance, upkeep, and actual neighborhood impact matter more than simply counting the existence of a trailer or declaring that all such storage is inherently inappropriate. Speaker: Sean Roycroft, Centerville Sean Roycroft said he owns his own building business and approached the issue as someone who understands both the practical needs of contractors and the concerns residents may have when equipment begins to accumulate. He acknowledged that there is a point at which too many commercial vehicles at one house can become a legitimate neighborhood issue. At the same time, he said the proposal as drafted goes too far, especially in the way it treats trailers and similar equipment. He argued that RV trailers should be allowed and that if a trailer physically flts on a person’s property, that should matter more than arbitrary blanket prohibitions. Roycroft tied the issue to the broader affordability and local-workforce problem, saying people are increasingly struggling just to live and operate in town. From his perspective, the board should be careful not to adopt rules that make it even harder for local builders and small operators to stay in Barnstable. Speaker: Clifford Carroll Clifford Carroll said the town needs to strike a balance rather than treating the issue as though the only options are total prohibition or no regulation at all. He questioned why Barnstable has not more seriously considered designating appropriate areas, including town-related areas such as around Thornton Drive, for the storage of trailers and work vehicles. He argued that the issue cannot be separated from wider planning failures involving overdevelopment, infrastructure stress, and the lack of a coherent master plan. In his view, the town has land and planning tools available but is not using them strategically enough. Carroll linked the debate over vehicles and trailers to broader concerns about water shortages and cumulative growth impacts, suggesting that the town should be planning more comprehensively instead of reacting piecemeal to each symptom as it arises. Speaker: Josiah Bartley Josiah Bartley explained that he keeps unregistered vehicles on his property as part of his race-car hobby, and his comments highlighted a recurring concern that not every unregistered or stored vehicle is commercial in nature. He used his own situation to show that some residents keep vehicles at home for hobby, specialty, or seasonal purposes that have nothing to do with running a business out of a neighborhood. His remarks underscored one of the drafting problems repeatedly raised that night: a bylaw written too broadly could capture hobbyists, mechanics, racers, and other residents whose stored vehicles may look similar to commercial equipment from a distance but serve completely different purposes. Speaker: Brian Croaker, Marstons Mills Brian Croaker said he was speaking from the perspective of the trades and emphasized the importance of allowing service trucks to be taken home, especially for workers who need to respond quickly to jobs or emergencies. He warned that if trucks have to be stored far away, travel time and operating costs go up immediately. He explained that for businesses such as plumbing and similar service trades, taking a truck home is not just a convenience. It is often what allows a worker to respond efficiently to an after-hours or emergency call without wasted travel and delay. Croaker’s remarks reinforced one of the central themes of the evening: many of the vehicles targeted by the amendment are not ornamental or optional, but are the practical tools that allow local tradespeople to keep a business running and serve Barnstable residents in real time. Meeting #2 Meeting Date: November 10, 2025 Subject: Home Occupation and Commercial Vehicles on Residential Properties Source: Time-stamped meeting transcript cross referenced with official minutes Speaker: Mike Ferrill, Mariners Circle, Cotuit Mike states that the state and town collect excise tax and registration fees on his multiple trailers, but the town now proposes to regulate where those trailers can be parked on his property. He questions why new rules are being created for trailers when, in his view, existing rules about on-street congestion and other issues are not being enforced. He argues that if the concern is blocked streets and emergency access, the town should focus on speciflc problem neighborhoods and enforce existing parking and traffic rules—posting signs, stationing officers, issuing tickets, and towing vehicles—rather than imposing broad new restrictions on everyone. Mike compares registration costs in Barnstable and Maine, saying he pays much more to register his 14,000-lb double-axle trailer locally; he resents being told where he can park equipment he already “overpays” for. He warns that the combination of high fees and new parking limits could lead him to register and base equipment in Maine, which he views as unreasonable and “ridiculous.” He emphasizes that his boat trailer is used to take his family to local waters; he feels the proposal treats different trailer types inconsistently, including a carve-out for boats but heavier regulation of other trailers. Mike notes that similar language has been on the books since the 1980s and that there are only a few enforcement officers; rather than rewriting the code, he believes the town should enforce existing rules where problems actually occur. He cites Capeway Towing as an example of a legitimate commercial yard that is heavily used and an asset to the town; he contrasts this with apparent concern about tow trucks parked at or near homes when drivers are on call. He expresses frustration with the hearing’s timing and notice, saying he rearranged his schedule and arrived on the wrong day after hearing late about the issue. He references other controversial local issues as part of a pattern where the town restricts property use despite what residents already pay in taxes and fees. He concludes that the proposal is upsetting, urges the board to rethink it, and asks members to think carefully about planning. Speaker: Jake Angelo, West Barnstable Jake thanks the board for their service, noting that he also serves on committees and understands the time and thought required. He identifles himself as a commercial flsherman, shellflsherman, and aquaculturist living in West Barnstable, and explains that both his work and hobbies involve signiflcant materials stored at home. Outside of flshing, he grows fruit trees and mushrooms, which requires large volumes of wood chips and equipment such as a skid steer to move material around his orchard. He explains that what counts as a reasonable amount of supplies varies by person and use: he stores more wood chips and materials than most people but keeps his yard fairly neat and free of weeds and brush, even though they sometimes park on grass. Jake notes that he uses 400 to 500 traps to catch flsh and that, rather than building a barn, he lines them neatly along the side of his driveway; he asks the board to consider that materials, supplies, and gear for commercial flshing and aquaculture may need to be stored outdoors. He questions whether commercial flshing properly falls under agriculture or aquaculture for regulatory purposes and urges the board to keep this in mind when writing limits on outdoor storage. Regarding numbers of vehicles and trailers, he agrees there should be a limit and says he likes the idea of a special permit, but he believes that two commercial trucks and two commercial trailers can be reasonable almost anywhere if kept neatly. He feels that a hard cap of one boat, one trailer, one truck is too restrictive and does not refiect how many working households operate. Jake raises concerns about proposed size and weight thresholds for vehicles, pointing out that common work trucks like Isuzu NPRs, widely used in landscaping and seafood, flt in a normal parking space but may exceed the weight limits being proposed. He emphasizes that the physical footprint of those trucks is similar to, or not much larger than, a three - quarter-ton pickup, and urges the board to consider actual size and appearance, not just weight ratings, when setting limits. Speaker: Ryan Cohlan, Church Street, West Barnstable Ryan says he originally came to speak on a different agenda item that may not be reached that evening, but after listening to the home occupation and commercial vehicle discussion he feels compelled to comment. He urges the board to carefully distinguish personal use from for-hire commercial use, especially given some of the numerical thresholds being discussed. He gives examples of his own personal projects, including having 70 yards of stone delivered to his driveway and, on another occasion, 2,200 yards of flll in his front yard, to show that large quantities of materials can still be personal residential use. Ryan notes that what counts as reasonable personal use will differ greatly between a quarter-acre lot and a three-acre lot in West Barnstable; he urges the board to factor lot size and context into their deflnitions. He stresses that personal use versus for-hire are very different concepts and that the regulations should clearly separate private residential projects from commercial activity. He then expresses strong frustration as a long-time taxpayer that the town’s response to a lack of enforcement capacity is to create more regulation that, by the board’s own statements, will also not be adequately enforced. He calls it bizarre and disappointing that the solution to enforcement problems is to add rules that are acknowledged in advance as unenforceable. Ryan reiterates that, as a taxpayer, he flnds it discouraging that the town would stack additional regulation on top of existing ones without the staffing to enforce what is already in place. Speaker: Michael Moynahan Michael identifles himself as a 56-year year-round resident, joking that this still makes him a wash- ashore, but says he is happy to live in Barnstable. He explains that he spoke at a prior meeting and has learned a lot that night; he acknowledges that the board may not have written this code themselves but notes that they are responsible for recommending its value or voting it down. He says he has tried to flnd the greater good in repealing Section 240-45 and replacing it with amended language, but concludes that the replacement is another example of government overreach. In his view, the main effect will be to make good law-abiding citizens into law-breakers by restricting common practices like parking on one’s own lawn. Michael states that he parks on his lawn by choice and does not think the town should be able to tell him where to park. He describes Barnstable as having a history of hardworking people who may not always look perfect but value independence; he says he would rather tolerate rough edges than live under HOA-style rules. He argues that many residents who complain about what neighbors are doing on their own property need to stop trying to control others’ yards. Michael also raises a related grievance: he is very upset that he can no longer bring demolition debris and trash from his own projects to the town transfer station in his personal dump trailer because it is now considered too big, forcing him to haul it elsewhere. He predicts that this kind of restriction could lead to more illegal dumping, recalling earlier periods when residents dumped materials after being restricted from using local facilities. He says he would rather pay more at the transfer station than be barred from using his trailer. Michael opposes another fee on hardworking residents and licensing people trying to work out of their homes, arguing that there is already enough existing law for the town to enforce without adding new restrictions. He reiterates his objection to anyone telling him where he can park on his own grass and notes that the existing language has been in place for decades. He urges the board to vote the amendments down. Speaker: Matthew Moynahan, Centerville Matthew introduces himself, notes with some humor that he has a hard act to follow, and says he did not bring prepared written comments this time. He recalls that at the September meeting he understood the board would present different language at this hearing and asks whether he misunderstood, because the text appears unchanged. Matthew acknowledges the explanation and thanks board members for volunteering their time, but expresses frustration that he and others have repeatedly come to speak on items that are not fully reached. He suggests that while the board may be trying to address problems related to home occupations and commercial vehicles on unsightly properties, the second amendment goes much further and directly affects what residents may do with their own property. He points out that unregistered vehicles and larger trailers can be owned for reasons unrelated to any home occupation and that the broader proposal would regulate those as well. He acknowledges the attempt to carve out an exemption for boats but argues that many other personal situations remain affected and that this is what has upset residents and generated substantial feedback. Matthew raises the issue of pre-existing nonconforming uses, asking whether residents will be allowed to keep long-owned trailers or equipment if new rules are adopted; he argues that it is unfair to change established patterns and then pull the carpet out from under people. He stresses that this is not an abstract zoning question about hypothetical buildings; it concerns what people are doing with their property now. He notes that Barnstable is a large and varied town and that places like Marstons Mills look very different from downtown Hyannis; he suggests the town may need differentiated zoning or approaches for dense areas versus more rural ones. He references board discussion about carve-outs for larger lots and suggests that deeper structural zoning changes might be more appropriate than a one-size-flts-all rule on trailers and vehicles. Matthew again thanks the board and encourages them to think carefully about whether this is really the direction the town should go. Speaker: Eric Schwabb Eric explains that the existing code for home occupations and related matters was originally written for Hyannis, because Hyannis was the only area that allowed certain kinds of home occupations by right. He notes that home occupation allowances were later extended to the entire town, which, in his view, made the Hyannis-centric code obsolete when applied to villages such as Marstons Mills. He describes the current situation as a pig in a poke for places like Marstons Mills: if tradespeople cannot make a living because of this code, that is an overreach, but at the same time residents should not be forced to live surrounded by high-impact commercial operations in residential neighborhoods. Eric says he has been raising concerns about home occupations with the town since before the current building commissioner was hired and credits the commissioner with working through an obsolete framework. He warns that if the board is not prepared to accept what the commissioner has written more or less as written, then they must take on the responsibility of rewriting everything instead of trying to patch a broken structure. He argues that the key zoning concept is the Resource Protection Overlay District, which differentiates places like Marstons Mills from Hyannis by having larger lots. He explains that larger-lot areas have room for activities and hobbies, including trades equipment and materials, that denser neighborhoods do not; regulations must recognize such differences instead of treating all areas identically. To illustrate potential impacts, he asks board members to imagine a business with 14 tow trucks moving next door on a residentially zoned lot. Eric notes there is no law protecting trees, so they can be removed; he asks what would stop someone from parking 14 tow trucks in a backyard, with vehicles towering above a six-foot fence. He describes how such a business would shine bright security lights on its equipment all night; in commercial districts there are standards for light trespass, but there are no corresponding protections for home occupations. He points out that there are no clear requirements for fencing or screening in the current framework and argues that residents in residential communities should not have to live next to fioodlights and work vehicles piled with equipment. Eric identifles C11 as a major problem: a scenario where so much equipment is on a property that personal vehicles are pushed into the street, fllling cul-de-sacs and making it hard for delivery trucks to maneuver. He calls it unrealistic to think these businesses do not need storage yards; tradespeople inevitably accumulate and store leftover materials. He argues that any realistic approach must assume some level of on-site storage, then use fencing and vegetative buffers to mitigate impacts. Eric references his own experience installing an eight-foot fence with vines as a practical solution that resolved a long-running neighbor issue. As his time limit approaches, he notes that there are many gaps in the documentation and that this is the flrst time the board has listened at this length to public comment after hearing from staff, ad hoc committees, and Town Council. Speaker: DJ (Doug) Crook, Chair, Shellfish Committee DJ introduces himself as Doug “DJ” Crook, chair of the Shellflsh Committee, and thanks the board for the effort they are putting into ensuring residents are heard and options carefully considered. Speaking in his official capacity, he states that he is not in favor of any of the proposed amendments unless aquaculture and wild shellflshing are clearly deflned and excluded from their scope. He explains that if shellflsh operations are forced into an agricultural classiflcation to gain protection, that would effectively allow them to operate around the clock and leave them strongly protected in ways the town might not intend. DJ notes that many aquaculturists lease several acres of submerged land from the town, so even if their house lots are small, they may have four or more acres in the water associated with their operation. He indicates that, if necessary, he would advise aquaculturists to seek agricultural protections to safeguard the flshery on Cape Cod. On a personal note, DJ states that he owns heavy-duty pickups and holds a CDL that allows him to operate very large vehicles; he is considering getting into aggregate hauling with 18-wheelers. He notes that for larger trucks, the typical overnight parking arrangement is a tractor and trailer parked between shifts; he asks the board to consider the reality that many people legitimately park large work vehicles at home overnight while working long daily shifts. He references not-for-hire rules under which a tractor can be non-commercially plated and not technically for hire, and questions how such vehicles will be classifled under the proposed language. DJ says that if the core problem is primarily in a speciflc area such as Hyannis, that should shape how the regulations are written, rather than applying broad rules affecting the entire town. He expresses frustration at the layering of regulations and fees, noting that he already pays signiflcant parking costs just to go to work. DJ warns against designing rules around a small number of bad actors, arguing that the town should not penalize thousands of other businesses operating from non-commercial lots. He cites a flgure of roughly 2,900 businesses not located on commercial lots and says those home-based or small operations provide substantial economic activity for the town. He urges the board to consider the cumulative impact on those businesses when evaluating new regulations and reiterates his opposition to the amendments as currently proposed unless aquaculture and shellflshing are clearly protected.