30 I'm going to bring this July July 10th meeting of the planning board to order we're going to start with a work session um looking at the proposed update to chumford outdoor lighting bylaw we we were provided with a draft as well as a historical lighting bylaw by Kelly who's taken this and run for the hills um and now in front of us we also have today um a list of the stakeholders that he um provided us with since the last meeting um and then Chris also had some feedback I think it was a couple days ago yeah um so work in progress work in progress right so uh Kelly Bey 117 Park Road um a nice dark end of town actually sure you I go over to Sunny Meadow Farm and use my telescope so uh some night we'll uh collect there um since the J June 26th meeting I have reached out to as many stakeholders as I can on that list uh last night I met with the Conservation Commission and also the clean energy and sustainability committee I have a meeting planned with um uh director cley at the DPW next week I have a meeting planned with uh the president of the C uh CBA the children for Business Association they're clearly going to be impacted by this um I'm hoping to connect with a couple of the uh like the historic commission the historic district commission and I think eventually there's a plan to have me appear at a department head meeting at some future yeah um what I can tell you is that since since then um there was um there exists within the Commonwealth a framework for municipalities to and businesses for that matter to um acquire lighting that is certified as being energy efficient dark sky friendly that's through What's called the design lights Consortium uh which is based in Medford and utilities often look to this group for guidance on what kind of lighting is is the best and there was a a very interesting webinar today that I I listened to um that uh was directly connected to the how can we select lights that are both energy efficient and dark sky friendly it was fascinating and I won't go into the details but the point is there's a lot of impetus going on behind the scenes to create lighting that does what we needed to do in terms of Safety and Security uh wayfinding and so forth and also is dark sky friendly so I'm not alone here I'm not a voice in the wilderness um I don't know what quite what to do tonight I I was talking to EV just beforehand I think an important First Step will be as we discussed last time to determine to what extent if at all the planning board can either support or sponsor or create a general bylaw as distinct from a zoning bylaw because again what I'm proposing to do is to remove the zoning bylaw that exists and replace it with a general bylaw the principal purpose for doing that is so that existing lighting that is bad that wouldn't conform can can be labeled non-conforming it won't be grandfathered there would be a period of time during which we would try to bring that lighting into conformance um the uh the the example I gave was um um you know the the bylaw that we have which was great for its time passed in the year 2000 was before LEDs hit the scene so every LED that you see on the street or home or business in our town was installed after that bylaw was instituted and many of those maybe hundreds of those I haven't counted I haven't attempted to count are not conforming according to the existing bylaw that we have which which has a basic requirement of it has to be pointed down and lots don't do that I'm not going to name names but they're out there there and so you know there were some some who would say well this notion of a grand of of Illuminating the grandfathering and sunset Claws and trying to claw back some of this uh underperforming over or overlit is is not fair well I would submit that that lighting should have been if that lighting had been installed correctly in the first place it would probably be conforming now and so uh that combined with the fact that LEDs although they're fantastic they do have a lifetime our town street lights for example were installed a decade ago and they will start to be not only are they going to start to be at the end of their useful lifetime which might be 20 years we don't know they haven't been up up that long that's the on on paper how long they might last but more importantly the town has more than recouped its return on investment for those lights and so I there are better technology now than what we installed 10 years ago so one of the things I hope to discuss with director Clancy when when we meet next week is is there a NextGen Street lighting plan for chm Street uh and what would that and not only street lights but also the the the whole Municipal lighting package the the parking lot lighting and the library parking lot lighting one of the things that you've probably noticed which I certainly have noticed is that many many businesses Municipal uh facil ities have their parking lot lights on all night why what's the point of that what's the security point of that and so it's a discussion it's not it's I don't think I have the answer for that but it is a discussion um if you next time you drive by the Walgreens late at night uh you'll notice that it's its parking lot is completely dark there are lights inside there are lights over the doorways that's all perfect for security and safety but there's there's really no need and so what I would say to the town to businesses to residences um who residents who are who are saying this is you know this is overreach I'm trying to save you money if you if you put in dark sky friendly lighting if you put in security lighting that only comes on with a motion sensor instead of being on all night you will save money I can save you money and um and so I'm not sure where to go with next with a discussion um I'm here to answer your questions as much of any as anything I didn't bring my little funky lights tonight so we can just we can just chat I want to thank Chris for his great uh set of questions that he put forward to me um I hope I answered them adequately for you and uh that's the kind of discussion that I'm really embracing I'm I'm reaching out to all these stakeholders not so much to tell them how it's going to be but like what do I need what have I missed where is their Common Ground um I mean a couple things my I have a couple quick thoughts one is I'm certainly not a lighting expert and a lot of this is very technical um but I I agree with Chris in terms of I mean you you add another thought to the idea that that we've recouped the investment and that there's better technology available but I think if we're going to have a transitional period like timeline to achieve Conformity we might want to have two different timelines one for people who are changing from standard lights if there's any of those left and that might be a short timeline and maybe a slightly longer one you know even yet longer than 5 years for the LED people so that if people have spent a significant outlay in the last several years um they would have they too would have a chance to recoup their invest I agree and I I I'm you know I am open I kind of think just in my bones I think the 10 years is long across the board um one of the things that I'm trying to do with this proposed bylaw is to find trigger points where we would naturally capture a conversion to conforming lights uh if you change the Summer Street mall is a really good example of a place that has uh you know 50-year-old lighting technology highpressure sodium which by the way from a light pollution standpoint is pretty good uh it's that orangey colored light but it's relatively inefficient compared to LEDs LEDs can do all kinds of Tricks they can be turned on and off they can be dimmed they can do all kinds of things that High Press sodium cannot and so when those when the owner of that property eventually changes those over I would expect those to be conforming out of the gate right right so I I Can See For example I keep alluding to all of the lights that have been installed the LEDs that are not conforming one of the reasons they don't conform is that they're simply not pointed down right and they're all on gimbals so A A first order you know would be to like all right let's turn those down and then let's talk in 5 years or 10 years or whatever that might be uh one of the one of the components of this is a change to a maximum color temperature like I demonstrated last time even if I point a light down if it's a really high temperature light and it's eventually going to be replaced and maybe there's a natural wording that we can come up with an end of Lifetime kind of thing where there's an agreement that that would happen one of the other things I'm exploring is you you might remember that I um I have proposed the creation of a sort of an outdoor lighting officer or or inspector someone with expertise that might not exist on the you know with the electrical inspector or any of the inspectors in town on a contract basis it has occurred to me and I have a a a close contact in Carlile who is the former president of the illuminating engineering society which sets lighting standards for the whole country happens to be next door in carile um would it be reasonable for those lighting Engineers who are sympathetic to dark sky issues to do pro bono work for a business for a uh you know for the Cher Housing Authority or whoever it might be to to basically design for them or advise them on what lights they can install uh that would bring them into Conformity you know I've got all kinds of of ideas kicking around in my head and I think it's all part of the discussion that I want to have with you and with these other stakeholders right I mean maybe they could get a right a reduction of their taxes if they donated time just I'm just sort of stream of Consciousness here I mentioned this notion of having our next Generation street lights I'm trying to remember what the name of it is for the funding that came to us uh for Co and I think there's something like a million dollars left in it when we replace the street lights the next time when let me back up when we replaced the street lights the last time that was as part of the Johnson energy uh Johnson Controls Energy Services contract they didn't care they replace street light for street light if there was one on the pole they put one back on the pole roughly the same number of lumens I managed to capture the ones that were going to be street lights and got them to do 4,000 Kelvin instead of six 5700 but there were a bunch of I missed especially the ones for area lighting in our in the town hall parking lot and schools and so forth what I would love to see the next time we go to that step and this is one of the things I'm going to talk to DPW about is let's do a lighting audit let's have a professional come in here and tell us be because if you think if you ask anybody who's been around long enough they'll say why is there a street light on Park Road why are there only four street lights and they're down at the proctor Road end of it where I live instead of at the beginning where the act and road is it's because they've happened accident somebody has said at one point in time I I'd sure like to have a street light outside my house and bang it happened there was no plan and so a lighting audit would get somebody in here to say where do you need them where do you don't the the the and you'll appreciate the common sense of this the speed limits in our town are slow enough in most cases for headlights on a car especially modern headlights which are much brighter than on my 19 uh 99 Jetta to to illuminate the road so that you don't outrun your headlights that is you can stop safely within about 40 miles an hour and there aren't that many places in town that have speed limits above that and so consequently a focus for an audit might be where are the conflict zones where are their crossworks uh crosswalks where are their pedestrians and and cars mingling where do you where do you want to have illumination uh so that somebody doesn't go off the road around a curve or something like that that's what an audit might do I would love to see that happen irrespective of what happens with this bylaw right okay yeah um does anyone else have any thoughts or questions yeah I I I have a couple of comments the last time around in 2000 I think I remember that I think I was it was me and Bob Morse yeah you and yeah um they came up with something it was pretty good for its time uh as you've pointed out though the problem was not so much that the those rules are outdated although to some degree they are but rather we just never had an enforcement mechanism I'm not sure we ever really had a very good mechanism of of letting people know no just nobody was looking at this stuff um you've mentioned the idea of some person or some group having the Authority or responsibility to look after enforcement of whatever we might pass but I think that deserves a whole lot more conversation because it didn't work the last time and uh I got to make sure it works this time yeah if I can address that um it what we have is a complaint PL driven bylaw right and that's and and even let's face it there are there are bigger fish in the in the building inspector's office in terms of enforcement Y and I have I have once or twice only called attention to certain lights that I thought were um egregiously bad and and you know eventually those were addressed and fixed to its credit for example the CVS in town when the new one that was built it had what are called wall packs which are slapped on the side of a building to try to illuminate an entire parking lot uh were were not shielded and and um and they were fixed when Walmart came in they abided by the bylaw and the the lighting around the Walmart uh uh they've added one or two cents but if you look at the lighting around the the the perimeter of Walmart those are fully shielded fixtures that was the premise of the but a complaint driven bylaw has needs somebody to complain and so as you point out if people don't know if a homeowner changes out you know a homeowner will go to a Home Depot and buy a $30 LED security light slap it up on the side of the house and and they think it it's great because it's doing the job and it's not conforming um I would not propose by the way just to be clear here I would not propose that this professional or professionals that we engage become the lighting police and go around town looking for things that are that are are are not conforming it would continue to be a in large part a complaint driven system with the exception that we would have certain Gates certain triggers that would require conformance if a property is sold for example changes ownership just like you need to have your your fire detectors checked your sewer needs to be in order this would become one of the things that would need to have a check off that somebody con affirms or confirms uh that your lighting is conforming before it can change hands or if you do construction or if you replace the number of Lights in your parking lot I'm not sure I mentioned this last time but that's exactly what happened under the existing bylaw with the chelsford mall uh when the chelsford uh when Kohl's came into the chord Mall the owners of the property uh re redid the the the um the parking lot lighting around Kohl's and that triggered a provision in the existing BW that if you've done more than 25% and Chris this is one of those just count the poles kind of thing if you if you replace more than 25% you got to replace them all and they did and they put and they put what are called houseside Shields if you look next time you go buy on the parking lot lights that are along chelsford Street and you know there are houses across the street there are little Shields at the bottoms of those that keep the light from shining on those properties directly that was doing the right thing that was but that was kind of a rare exception was that I know you I'm sorry I know you brought that point up um Kelly but one of the things that we may need to do is I think someone mentioned it earlier is separate out the commercial versus residential um it's easy enough to count the pools in a commercial space but it's not so easy to determine that percentage in residential areas um so it may we may need to separate out commercial triggers and uh thresholds versus residential if if this needs to go forward right I I I don't disagree at all um I mean if you think about a typ typical residential house there are there's really only two kinds of well maybe three if they've got landscape lighting or lighting strings or something like that but there's there's only two kinds of lighting it's what's on their porches and around their entryways and it's what they might have as a security light shining out to protect their property now now research has shown that believe it or not all night security lighting does nothing to improve your safety all it does is show the bad guys to be generic here what you've got in your yard much better from the from much better from the standpoint of security is a is a security light that's triggered by a motion sensor and so there's a case where if you look at the at the at the the Watts expended and the dollars expended on electricity for that fixture converting it to a a motion sensor pays for itself very rapidly sometimes only months and so you're right that we need I want to be very careful to preserve a person's right to protect their property with security lighting but there are ways to do it that are better than maybe the way they're doing it now and if that requires a two-tiered system one for commercial and one for residential I'm that's fine let's do that I think whatever bylaw adjustment we make I think we should do do a timeline that this gets reviewed by the groups that the stakeholders here at least every five years ah for for for reup because technology changes yeah right so in the next 5 years we're right now we're looking at LEDs right now what's going to happen in 5 years from now the change right so then we're going to be playing catchup again so I think we should mandate if if the board agrees and we go to the town that we do put something in there that the planning board will review it with the stakeholders in the town every 5 years Y and see if it if needs to continue or any adjustments need to be made that that sounds wonderful is are there bylaws on the books that have that kind of uh recurrent revision I don't think there are but we can put them in there you put them in I mean whether it's uh regulatory or simply suggestive suggestive is an open question but putting it in there can't hurt you right five years might be quick maybe eight or something technolog is changing pick a number so we're going to make a bylaw right now on technology that's already outdated and then by the time it gets through town meeting there's going to be different types already happening yeah interestingly if I could give just give you a page from this webinar I mentioned last time this notion of uh color temperature and the lower the color temperature it's a proxy for how much blue light is in a fixture the higher that number the more blue light the Bluer the light looks the lower that number the less blue light it has and in in the information that I sent to Chris there were a series of Spectra that you can see sort of see how the blue light component diminishes as you lower the color temperature even so what I learned today was that even if you go rock bottom it next time you are driving through the town of peppol at night that they are the they took a a great leap they have installed street lights that have a color temperature of 2200 Kelvin it's essentially the same as what a high press sodium bulb is it has a those LEDs have a peachy color and yet because the LEDs are still broadspectrum they actually emit and create more light pollution more light scatter the blue is is in the LEDs than their high pressure sodium equivalent that's why I was saying those those HPS bulbs are are great from the standpoint of light pollution horrible from the standpoint of Energy Efficiency so um the to so to your point about revisiting you know five years ago there was no such thing as a 2200 Kelvin street light now they're common the bar is moving down and down and down and so uh I I think that's a wise thing to suggest that we revisit it or maybe it's just something that you do internally here you know you have me come back in five years and say what's the state of the science with outdoor lighting and we we can talk about it yeah happy to do that let me get my calendar up anyone else have anything else for Kelly or thoughts for us so so going forward you're going to have a meeting with the department heads we're going to have you're going to talk to the it seems like you're we're throwing everything on you but um we're going to have like an organized meeting of the stakeholders some someplace to kind of go over this draft or um I'm I'm what I'm doing what I have done so far is reaching out to the stakeholders one at a time I think a key one will be the chelor Business Association which is next week they've all gone away on vacation many of the people who are officers were on the parade committee and they're wiped so they all took off on vacation uh and they're and they're gone now but I'm hoping to have something substantive for the next time we meet uh on on that front whether we have we gather all these stakeholders in a room um you know and hash it out that might be less productive than say encouraging those stakeholders as you might with any any uh El that you have to weigh in by letter or by appearing here to say this is what we think about this and then maybe have a subset of planning board members to sit around a table and let's work out the wording that that we want to have going forward okay and what kind of a timeline do you think would be appropriate to have that well please there was a time if I'm recalling this correctly that one didn't dare put a a uh zoning or general bylaw on the on the docket for a Springtown meeting but I think that's not as rigorous as it used to be so I think we're especially given that some like the cba's board is not meeting at all in July and August so I think the notion of doing a careful and good and and um collaborative job on this in time for fall town meeting is probably not possible and I would love to have this continue over the course of the winter and have a a really solid one that not only that represents the best thinking of all of these of stakeholders but that they could all support so maybe we could shoot for some kind of a meeting like that in October and a draft for January I it's fine with me I mean I one of the things I'm going to continue doing in the background in addition talking to them is talk to my the people that I deal with in terms of lighting lighting industry people and say is this is this well grounded now I will say this draft has been in conjunction qu written by a lighting professional so it's not something I just made up but but it's it's a template it's imperfect I've tried to tailor it to chumford as best I can uh and it's probably an imperfect job but I would like to see it you know there are some there are some hard asks in here I recognize that this notion of having uh no grandfathering in a sunset Clause that's rare the notion of having an external professional do the uh ascertainment for whoever needs it that's rare um then and so um I I would like to still see those components in it uh and but let's have the discussion and see if it's viable have we heard any um ERS on whether the planning board can sponsor a general bylaw I have not asked councel yet I will do that um probably tomorrow okay yeah because from my point of view um as when I sit behind that microphone as moderator for ctm I see a lot of Citizen petitions that sort of have two strikes against them by the time you know when they're brought forward uh I will bring this forward as a citiz petition but I think it would be much more robust and fairly judged I guess if it were brought forward by the planning board if you and I think if we sponsored it in I mean from the vantage point that it's replacing a zoning um I don't think there's any limitation at all yeah none I would be be surprised if there were anyway I don't think there is so thank you very much okay my pleasure thank you again for your attention and uh thank you keep those questions coming thank you okay so it being 7:00 we're going to start with the regular meeting which I just wanted to clarify that is being recorded by tele media and um if anyone is going to speak when the time comes um you should say your state your name and your um address um we are I just want to before we get too far in I just wanted to mention that um we are discussing not quite yet um 150 North Road but the um developer has requested a continuation for the plan and the only aspect of that that we're going to be discussing this evening is the anr um the request for anr so if people um wanted to speak about the general plan that there won't be an opportunity to do that this evening so we won't be opening the public hearing on that regard um so I don't know if that leads anyone to not want to stay but I just wanted to put that out there um we also have several members on Zoom um Anita I believe as well as Joel as well as Chris is that correct so we'll be any voting that we do we will be um doing by a roll call and if anyone would please remind me if I forget um okay first up we have um public input and public input will be limited to statements relating to issues that are within the jurisdiction of the planning board but are not currently the subject of a pending public hearing um so I don't know if there's anyone who wants to speak about such matters is there anyone on Zoom not at this time okay uh next up we have um new administrative review of which there's none and the um administrative review um for 150 North Road hi uh for the record my name is Chris fazendin I'm the applicant with the gardener School uh address is 302 Innovation Drive Franklin Tennessee 37067 uh when we were here a couple weeks ago we decided to continue uh the review of the anr plan for 150 North Road um here tonight to continue that discussion uh with the objective of maining your endorsement on the plan I put together a brief uh presentation here just kind of highlighting a few things we'll go through existing lot layout in the history I'll touch on our proposed layout and configuration and then uh I'll give you a couple bullet points on why we feel we meet the criteria and and our requesting your endorsement so uh first slide here it shows the lot configuration prior to the 2022 anr that we discussed last time the reason I'm showing this to you is this is what the town GIS map currently shows it hasn't been updated just yet with the 2022 approval so I know there was some confusion last time I just wanted to identify kind of the the area that was originally uh subdivided that's slots 2 and three there U moving down you then look at the 2022 anr plan that's been approved and recorded since this is where it took those lots previously two and three and subdivided them into eight Lots all of of about about the same size give or take what I've done here is in red I've highlighted the three lots of this eight lot subdivision that will be impacted by our proposed subdivision um that's Lots one two and three so if we go one more this is our proposed plan uh what we're proposing is to create a single lot comprised of uh the previous Lots one and two and a portion of lot three that's shown there in the red outlined area lot area is 3.12 Acres roughly 13 6,000 sare ft provides 366 ft of Frontage on North Road and then I've just provided up there some of the dimensional criteria for the zoning uh 40 foot front setb back 25t side setback 30 rear setback so with that based on kind of the history and what we're proposing uh if you want to go to the last one we evaluated the a our handbook we looked at our plan and we developed a list of uh bullet points that we feel uh show we meet the criteria and why we're require ing our endorsement um all the proposed Lots shown on our plan front a public way with the municipal clerk certifying is maintained and used as a public way we meet the minimum Frontage requirement identified in the local bylaw can access the appropriate public way from each Lots designated Frontage are providing adequate access to from a recently paved public way of sufficient width and condition to accommodate motor vehicle travel and we're providing practical access access where the buildable portion of each lot is connected by a strip of land no narrower than the required Frontage those are all criteria in the handbook that designate what allows an anr plan to be endorsed um with that I know I ran through it pretty quickly happy to answer any questions I appreciate your time um I know that we had had a question specifically um about the procedural ability of having the eight lot subdivision single family subdivision now changed into five lots and merge the remaining three for the daycare um I mean it sounds like this three lot bit meets the anr criteria so it doesn't seem now as I think about it that there's a question but is that a correct understanding uh that's certainly my understanding um with us tonight um is um attorney Jonathan Aman from culman and Page uh he was originally uh asked to join in on the site plan but he is here um to answer any questions on the uh anr for the for the board um I think it's fairly straightforward um the applicants um assessment and I think many board members are aware of of the assessment there was some question uh I believe at the last meeting related to to um whether any of the legal proceedings and discussions uh that took place prior to an at town meeting that um resulted in the town um voting to take um Charles way uh whether any of those um legal documents prohibited um a modification to the eight lot um single family anr subdivision M there was nothing there's no legal Provisions restrictions covenants uh as part of that um that town meeting process but as I said Town Council is here uh to uh assist in any way I guess I I would just like for him to um if it would if it wouldn't be too much to I mean the applicant has done it to some extent but if Town Council could just reiterate um for the it's my understanding that the requirements for the anr are met therefore um the request for the anr need to needs to be granted is that correct Jonathan you want to welcome yourself to chumford to the planning board um I I'll let the planning board welcome me but Madam chair my name is Jonathan ikeman um I'm coming I'm attending at your request to assist um to your question um I believe your understanding is correct if um what the applicant says is correct and I've reviewed the plan I believe it is there is no proposed division of land what the applicant is proposing is to remove lot lines so this plan would qualify for endorsement and once it qualifies then the planning board is required to endorse it what if we don't we won't have a legal standing how do we know unless we go to court that's how you'd find out it would be it sounds to me like from what Jonathan said it would be a pretty quick court case worth a try um I mean I mean the problem here isn't the an anr the problem is the other pieces of this and we're not the other pieces no they're going to happen anyway I don't know I'm reading some other stuff here so why are they here if it requires us to approve it and we can't give us our opinion why do they come to this process because that's what our zoning why law requires we should change it because this is wasting a lot of people's time I think some of it some of it is based upon state law Jonathan do you want to provide some context yes I can um again Madam chair to you yes it is completely based on state law uh in fact the reason they're requiring they're asking for your endorsement is because they need your endorsement to record the plan with the registry of deeds and again the purposes I understand it based on what's shown on on the plan is that they are simply asserting or confirming their intent to use the three lots shown on the plan on the original sub Vision plan as one lot and they're going to record a plan that says as much and the state law requires that if you want to record a plan showing land there only two ways to get it recorded one you either have a certificate of a land surveyor saying that there are no new lot lines or um streets shown in the plan or that in this case um if there is any uh new lot lines that it's not a plan that requires approval under the subdivision control law and those plans are only those plans where the land the plan shows a division of land into two or more Lots this plan does not show a division it shows a removal of lot lot so according to state law it's going to require endorsement okay um does anyone have any further questions for the applicant I just have a question for Evan Jonathan I have a question for Evan try to help you maybe um I remember this plan coming forward with us to put all those uh single family homes on that street and um I just find it the plan of the drawing is dated 11:15 21 and then there's a a written date a year later the it files a year later than that and then there's no date next to the signatures of the planning board members that signed it so do you know when that plan was in front of us I mean I'm just trying to figure out some dates here cuz I it happened after I know it was after 2020 but I don't recall it being 2022 I I don't recall when if the anr was signed prior to town meeting or after town meeting I mean I don't think it it it it it has anything to do with approving and not approving it just seems inconsistent on that plan because usually when we do sign the the plots these plans we have a date next to our signatures and there's no date on this one yeah I see what you're saying if you have the actual submitted plan it looks like it was revised somewhere in November of 21 and then it looks like at the top right it was recorded in say February of 22 he's referring to the signature planning board signature block has to have a date I was just trying to find out when this came forward to us because this this is I've been waiting for this development to happen the actual residents that we went through a big big discussion on and it just hasn't happened just giving you the dates that I saw yeah that's fine no it's in the plan it's on this official plan that you submitted yeah I think the only update I have on the this the single family Charles Way is I believe the all of the utilities have been uh stubbed okay and that obviously logistically is taking taking place prior to the town going in and upgrading the road okay thanks so at this point I think we're looking for uh a motion from the board just as a reminder the applicant did Grant uh an uh an extension to the board on the a statutory time to act and that is uh I think through this evening or expires tomorrow tomorrow tomorrow well beyond the uh 21 days so at this point I would make a motion to endorse the anr as presented with no determination as to zoning perhaps correct I will second condition motion by Chris second by Mike risbeck um we'll take a vote with a roll call Mike rck I I uh Paul no reluctantly I say I Chris hi Anita hi and that's it Joel on anrs you I'm an i good 6 to one thank you appreciate your time this open to comment by chance no no it's not public okay well that was fun on to Nancy ch Garrison Place oh first planning board we're not going to do any um take a motion to continue that to your August 28th meeting for the site plan yeah rules and regulations move 28th correct um take a motion I'm I will move that okay do I have a second second all in favor roll call hi hi John Mike Paul hi Mike wall Nita hi uh Chris hi and I'm an i okay next up we have um board's special permit rules and site plan rules and regulations and policies which we will again continue um as we have a quite full agenda um next up we have um Nancy Chen G of Garrison Place for the property at 313 Littleton Road for the purpose of creating three new residential Apartments the applicant request approval under article 21 Community enhancement and investment overlay District in subsections 195 -111 C and any other permit relief as may be required under the chord zoning byw to allow the proposed use the site is in the CB roadside commercial zoning district and is shown as personal ID map 99 block 403 Lot 19 and consists of approximately 2.17 Acres we have before us the applicant Nancy yeah my name is Nancy Chan from 313 littleon Road transfer and uh last time you um want the whole um floor plan second floor plan for the whole property so I just do you have one we have it up on the screen oh okay and then also you want me to uh give you the uh parking space calculation which I just gave that that just went around the table hard copy n he brought that to the meeting tonight oh I don't think I saw that did it go around which one uh I have seven C sorry so there's three there's three members on Zoom Nancy okay so they're not be going to be able to see this you'll have to walk the board through it St diing sorry that's okay if you could summarize yeah I need a copy because you want me to explain this parking uh calculation parking space calculation no um yes yeah cuz there there's three members on Zoom the the Mexican chili is a a basically is a Take Out restaurant so um they usually have take three parking space and the tie jasine is a uh Tha restaurant and um they used to have three units now they just cut down to two so they only need a 10 parking space and the the liquor store cast and the bottle um they have five parking space people in and out in 5 minutes or 10 minutes M and then the Indian restaurant Masala Cafe is a 16 parking space and then the upstairs the dancing Center has 20 because some of the teenager they drive and a lot of parents they just go the loop they drop the kids and then they leave M and then the signature architect they only have two employees so two cars and the replay Avenue only have one actually they usually not showed up because the the owner is legally blind so he has to have someone drive him here he usually is not there okay so total added up is a 57 parking space and I have 57 parking space so have 100 extras you you can drive by anytime you will see I have a lot of parking space and left okay and so the parking required obviously it's not 100 spaces but just to be for the sake of completeness the parking required for the apartments will be well um I would say two per per apartment two husband wife no what what are what are based on bedrooms yeah how many seats are in the tie Jasmine how many those those parking the parking house that Nancy has presented are likely either based upon what she believes is the actual usage maybe the lease but certainly not zoning yeah so like Marella Cafe how many seats are in that um I think they are like a 60 but if you divide it by four So it's 15 tables Nancy I think the board was looking for um this information based upon compliance with parking ratios what I try to say is um I think this 313 l in place is the has the um um highest number parking space than any property in Cham 57 and it has 100 space empty yeah I mean I think you're right that it's not an inadequate number of parking spaces but yeah we were asking for you know based so the restaurant ones or based on number of seats in the restaurant and you know restaurant business change a lot but but the but the bylaws do not okay yeah so so for like for t restaurant they use three units now they cut down to two yeah but it's not the units it's the seats in the restaurant that means they C on the seat as well the the third unit they have a lot of seat before there's we have the information the the licensing information and the maximum capacity we have that information that's that's what we use to determine uh required parking based upon the licensed capacity okay um so I can work with Nancy to provide that information that's fine I mean I think it's fine yeah my guess is the the seid requires um one one space per Studio unit one and a half spaces per one-bedroom two spaces per unit with two or three bedrooms plus one visitor space for every three units you should be F so it's less than 10 yeah out of available 100 so it's she likely has adequate parking I think she has adequate parking right okay um and then you had given us the plans that we requested for the whole upstairs and also for the apartments right so you can see it's the back of the building that's the where the apartment located m in the back four units so I think Mike asked for this right so the she she penciled in the other tenant spaces dancing Center dancing Center yep signature Architects and then it looks like there's a couple vacant tenant spaces on the second floor yep and then the revised floor plan is here lots of sinks I know it it's um this building originally they they plan as a commercial condle so each unit they have two B classrooms and a separate uh meters separate ACS separate furnace everything separate so so when I convert to apartment it's so easy they already separate in uh on July 1st I talked to the fire department uh what's her name you have the letter from her right after she came back from 10 day or two weeks vacation so I I asked her what's what are you talking about special person to to evaluate this and that and then she said oh you can have your architect you can have your electrician no no no every year I have fire alarm specialist not electrician not architect to do the annual inspection and matter of fact last year um when they did the inspection and then they told me that 15 of the um um smoke detector was on the recall after 35 years and I changed it all I say architect wouldn't know that and the electrician wouldn't know that only well they actually asked for a fire protection engineer yeah that's why I say every year I have a fire protection engineer to inspect my my unit every year and and also sprinkl specialist so I talk to her I say what you and then at the end she said oh you are okay you are okay but L the in other words I the reason I talk to her is I say what are you talking about what kind of specialist we're going to need another letter saying yeah I will tell her I'll tell her and then the water district wanted you to meet with them no I already did before I apply so that's why he did the calculation I already talked to him well that's the sewer right that's the the water I thought he's it's the water he oh I mean Su and the water they they are use the same calculation so so the Chums water district had concerns about the conversion a representative for the project should contact the chelsford water district once the contractor has met with us reviewed and accepted our requirements we will forward a signed approval letter so we would need that as well okay okay I I also talked to the Sewer Department we need the clean letters okay I'll do that am I mean is everyone in accord yeah well the fire fire prevention office just requests that these stipulations and requirements are included in the water too yeah if we approve the project right and it looked to me like the DPW was okay with the sewer based on their calculations but they wanted some official notification from Nancy before they would also give a clean letter I don't recall I don't call that uh I have it I'm bringing it up right now yeah um this is the water district a certificate of occupancy will not be is issued until DPW receives a letter from the owner stating they're using 330 gpds of the allowable 500 for this property so there's just it seems like there's some cross tees and dotted eyes that need yet to be so I have to write a letter to DPW and then I have to get a letter from the water department and the fire department okay yeah um and then I mean so past that then um I guess I'll take take a motion to continue to well do we want to discuss it you want to wait till all this is done to discuss it I just want to know where where else in town do we have mixed use on the second floor residential and office space well we just approved it on that was actually going to be one of my questions doesn't well we just approved it for um one of the parley buildings remember it was Medical on the first floor and then first floor three meeting looking for the same floor right across the doorway is going to be a public office and you have residential on the other floor other side of the hallway this is a shared this is a shared hallway with businesses and Residences but they don't share and one of the businesses is a recording studio they share a they share a public hallway no oh well um yes there's a bathroom that shared too it's still on the plans that we brought up last me if you can see the Dance Center and architect they they just use the hallway from elevator to the uh stairways and then the residential area they use the other side door so they really don't I don't want them share the hallway and and what I try to say is eventually I probably will convert all to apartment but at this point I I'm not sure yet I what is [Music] um if I can you know separate them the hallway wise the entrance was entance you know I try to play low key on both sides because like a Dance Center they really like like the space you know why because the parking space sometimes they have the photo they you know old the student has to come in at the same time same day so they they like to have 157 parking [Music] space so the the overlay allows it the fact that there isn't there aren't mixed hallways I agree there probably isn't another example in town it doesn't make sense doesn't show any kitchens doesn't show the layouts of the rooms I know we don't I know we don't get into that we asked about why there's a common bathroom for the hallway that comes off of a bedroom for the public and that has not been addressed this doesn't make sense and the fire department says if the planning board approves this well if there's a fire in this place with there's a ton of people living in here are they going to say well the planning board approved it I don't like the letter of that the the the fire department's letter I don't either putting it on the planning board so just think about that when you take your vote I don't like that does make sense I talked to her on July 1st and then she said you are okay I said you know because I want to know what kind of specialist he she wants to inspect this space and she said architect I said no she said the electrician I said no I have better fire alarm specialist safety officer said a fire protection engineer and then a structural engineer to make sure it is fire rated your building yeah that's what they're asking yeah it so you do need an engineer so why don't you continue give Nancy till yeah August 28th to Circle back with those departments you're to get clean letters yeah and then then at least the board is voting on the the provisions within the seid zoning related Provisions rather than life safety fire building Provisions yeah I agree we don't even know how many bedrooms are going in here I already wrote it down uh is you wrote it down you're not showing it it shows on the pen two big it's four big rooms no no uh is see the pl is bedroom bedroom in other words basically uh the a whole Space is a bedroom I just thought they were studios are they not Studios the the smallest the one yes uni 19 in other words um the other office they are bedrooms I I don't like to take something down and generate a lot of garbage and then build it up no you're trying to build to suit is what you're saying no I just rent as is and just make sure they have kitchen shower bathroom very so you're taking an office space and making it a residential space and without making any improvements I do I have to I have to add kitchen sink kitchen and a shower store just like uh unit um 13 which already yeah the one we approved for the building manager yeah yes only yes yes it is and now you're coming so here it comes we mentioned it before you're asking for three more here now and you're going to ask how many more you going to ask for in two years from now who knows I I mean I can't predict future I I think archit probably going to retire in five years I I will not get rid out then they love that space m so you know I love my tenent still livelihood you know I I can't get rid of them and and that's why I try to you know make sure they have their own entrance on hallway not they are happy if you I mean they are happy everything separate so far so good that's that's good that you own the building they're happy but we make this change you can sell the building everything changes so it really has to be I think I think that they're correct saying that and an architect should be involved and definitely a structural engineer there's questions about the fire safety yeah I will talk to uh fire prevention and and make sure she address the problem you you you concern I would suggest that you clear that up yeah I just her to have a ladder you know because she said you are okay you're okay I'm not lying whatever I said is on the record okay July 1st 1 in the morning I talk to her let's get it in writing let's get it in writing yeah yeah I'll I'll put have her put in wri yeah okay so um I will take a motion I will move before we do that I would also like to request that um couple things be addressed um I think Mike mentioned one of them uh that I also mentioned in past meetings the bathroom cannot be accessible from the way no it's not it's not it is there's a doorway there yeah why we have to change that that's where the architect comes in well then yeah so present plans that and I also would like to see something addressed where maybe separate entrances for those businesses but I don't like a shared hallway a common hallway for business and residents right now the uh main lobby is for business entrance only okay but the hallway that I'm seeing on that second floor is the same hallway to access replay Avenue well re signature Architects and all through all those units repay Avenue never showed it up you know I I I he his family living in Westford and uh he is blind I don't know why he rent a space for me for 20 years he it's a story almost it's according to what I saw online it's a I know recording studio that people can rent out I know no actually never happened for 20 years he just sto we're talking about the plans we're not talking about the tenants right right he he was asking can me that's why I explain no he was saying the plans in his opinion can't have a shared hallway between residences and businesses and a bathroom actually I talked to replay app and I told him he has to use the side door not the um same hallway as the the other business because actually he just used this as a storage and I won't be to Long the whole the the that side going to be a apartment I think well I I just don't I don't think you're hearing us and so I feel like what I'm afraid what's going to happen is that you're going to come back on the 28th and not have addressed our concerns so I just want to make sure you understand what I try to say it's been uh since um January 1st this year I already told everybody the lobby entrance which was the main entrance will be for business only okay which is only two business Dance Center and and uh architect and I I can ass show you the replay Avenue is just for storage and I already told him he has use the other you know why because the Dance Center doesn't like to see young man walking there which which replay Avenue is a young man legal we took a motion yeah to continue to August whatever it was 28th do we have a second I'll second that yeah okay all in favor I I I thank you and Anita and Chris Chris hi okay and I'm an I so it's unanimous see you on the 28th yep and I'll make sure I have all the letters f for what fire department found water department you know yeah and DPW and updated plans right and the plans that show updated plans that show what we asked for yeah preferably from an architect okay okay thank you um next up we have well going to do the vote to continue V to Contin so we have 150 North Road requesting for continuation um I'll I'll move to continue to uh August 28th was it I want I was a dance dad all right so motion by Mike raisbeck second by John S um and we'll take a vote on continuing 150 North John I for me uh Paul hi Mike Walsh is an i Anita hi Chris hi and I'm an I so that's unanimous and next up we have 10 Hill Street good evening for the record Brian G with Hancock Associates along with attorney howler and uh on Zoom we have John Dill uh project LSP with Will Cox and Barton so this evening I'd like to uh talk about three three items primarily first uh just an overview of the updated four lot exhibit that we have as well as what happened at conservation last night and then I'll turn it over to attorney howler to go over the title that was requested um with the understand that KP law still has to review that and then the majority of the time I'd like to dive into storm water um just to understand or kind of ref familiarize the board with our approach to storm water how it's been reviewed by DPW and then what outstanding unaddressed items or concerns that the board may have uh with respect to that um Evan could you pull up the four Lots exhibit this one uh no the one that was shared earlier in the week this one uh yes so last time we were before you um we had introduced a four lot revision uh it dropped the project density down to three duplexes and then a relocation of the existing home on Lot 4 uh we had a pretty lengthy discussion about roadway waivers and and different criteria and the board indicated sidewalks only on one side this is a reflection of that so primarily what we've done is we've tightened up the right of way to 34 ft um from what is required uh which is 40 ft for a lane so 8 ft kind of a WAV reduction and then a sidewalk on the Northern side of the roadway we're still showing a 20ft paved width uh with a a t- style turnaround um we anticipate further discussion on that item obviously and then we've added uh visitor parking spaces so we've provided seven visitor parking spaces three up towards the front uh of the project by hildr and four at the rear off the Hammerhead turnaround and that's an attempt to address the concern that there's not going to be adequate parking um I had described one garage space and two driveway spaces per unit so there's three spaces um for each one of of the duplex is that is there now last night at conservation uh we showed this plan and um generally it was received better than the previous one um we still have to take a hard look at lot 4 and likely we're going to be revising that limit of work line uh to be at the 100t buffer it encroaches about 10 ft 10t to 0er feet uh given the irregular shape of the of the buffer um so generally with with this exhibit um we incorporated uh what the the board had indicated last time um and with the understanding that we're going to continue to discuss the waivers uh that are proposed um so with that that's that's the exhibit um Doug I'd like to turn it over to you to speak about title and then um back to me for storm water good evening Madame chair and members um at your request I performed a full title examination of the two Parcels that are at issue here um there are two Parcels one is a 38,000 foot parcel it's shown on the subdivision plan is lot five and plan book 88 plan 57 the second parcel is 4.21 7 Acres and that's on plan book 85 plan 33a um I provided uh Evan and and he'll spread it around to Town Council and anybody else the full backup for all of the references I'm making here from the records of the registry of deeds both of the plans that I just referenced are were stamped as a anr plans from prior planning boards going back 50 years or more uh obviously we're talking about 60 years actually um both Parcels have more than sufficient Frontage 179 ft on parcel 2 and 125 on parcel one um I've provided copies of the Deeds of record those two Deeds came under separate chains and eventually became into one chain of title sometime in or about the 1950s um but I've laid out the history I did a 100-year search of the titles mostly because it it was relatively easy in certain in instances what I was really trying to find were um a layout of hildr Street what was envisioned back in 1890 1900 1910 um there was I could not find there's a reference to some type of a a a description of hildr street that was in some deed which I have not been able to locate it was from uh one individual to sold by Frederick fiser and it seems to be sometime in the 1910 period I have searched the records I've not been able to locate it I'm going to continue to try to find that but it's well outside the Massachusetts standard of a 50-year title um what it was interesting about the title I found is that um not so much in the Deeds to the subject Locus that you've been reviewing but in some of the other Deeds relevant to the parcels along hildr Street and most particularly um I found one I thought really hit the spot which was I believe it was for nine hildra Street and that title and it described hildra Street and and as I wrote for that portion of hildra Street Street between Plum and Bill Ricker road so going south to North and it read is described it as follows um first of all they called it a right of way in one plan and then they called it a street or and then an area reserve for Road they all refer to a 25 foot wide Street and an additional 15t area designated reserved for Road that's how it's shown on the plans of record so it was originally envisioned to be a 40 foot wide access route um that's how it was adopted the language particularly in many of the Deeds was a strip of land 2 5 ft in width bordering bordering on the easterly side of the premises so basically from my client's lot line um on hildr Street then going 25 fet West for uh Westerly and that that is to always be always kept open with the benefit of a Perpetual right to pass and repass on foot or with horses or wagons or other vehicles said strip running to Bill Ricker Street so-called as mentioned in the deed and this is what I was referring to George M Wright from Frederick a Fisher so apparently sometime in 1910 is time period they envisioned a 25 foot road with a another and then it goes on further and later on with a an additional 15.11 foot uh plan uh plot shown on the plan reserved for roads to be kept open for Street purposes being a street 40 ft in width that's what the records of the various Deeds are showing along Hillis Street they do not say that in my client's Deeds because it just directly abuts an anr lot that is a record they're using the plan of record um they they have the right to use the road I then provided some case law on this which I'm sure Town Council will review and I'll be happy to discuss anything with Town Council but what I found under Massachusetts law is that a right of way is a publicly owned area reserved for transportation purposes and that adjacent land from private owners may be required to construct or reconstruct highways or Bridges within a ride of way and generally in chelon we use a 6 to8 feet area to for reserve for you know right away expansion um we are seeking to expand that road with from what it currently on ground is I think approximately 14 ft in some places um but that's the the the entire purpose of the easement that's been declared the road purpose of that easement is for transportation we're just looking to improve it as is the legal right of an AB buding property owner to a road uh an AB butter to an unimproved public way has the legal right to use the unimproved public way um and it doesn't constitute trespass because he's entitled to use the entire width of the way um so somebody like our applicant is using his rights to use Hilder Street he possesses a right of travel over the entire width of the land that's been reserved for the street and he's entitled to make the street passable and usable for its entire width so technically if my client desired to do and I don't think it does whatsoever um it could ask and demand that it be 40t and build out or build 32 and Reserve the8 ft it's not looking to do that because it's not looking to further disturb any of the abutters along the way um I also cited some case law including a 2023 appeals court case U it's well established that the holder of an easement has the duty to make repairs and improvements necessary for enjoyment of the easement so long as the burden on the servient estate is not unreasonably increased we're not looking to overburden the easement we're doing it exactly for what the purpose of the easement was for travel passing repassing um and then I cited a whole series of um cases about easements and the right to enjoy the rights to use the easement um it there was another more recent case in the L Court 2013 that said it's well settled that where there are several owners in common of a private way each owner may make reasonable repairs which do not injuriously affect his co-owners but he cannot make any alteration of the course of the way or any change in Greater service which makes the way less convenient and useful to anybody who's using the right of way so if my client was required to have to take some portion of somebody's front yard it's not lessening their property it's benefiting the entire use of the street for everyone's purpose so it meets the definition so he's just trying to make reasonable improvements to the topography withd and grade of the road um I've given up uh in the in as attachments plans of Records Deeds again going back a 100 years I think it'll make it fairly straightforward that they has a right to widen the street and we'll be able uh be pleased to answer any questions after Town Council has a chance to review it or the board has a desire a chance to digest what we've just given to you thank you for your time was that in our packet I missed it just came it came I'm going to email it out to the board and councel tomorrow did I already email that out you did this afterno did but I thought okay yeah so council's still with us he obviously hasn't have a chance to do a deep dive on it right okay um so do we want to have any commentary on that or should we go to storm water hav read it so I no I'm happy to dive into storm water I know the material was just given to the board so it might take a little bit of time especially with KP law reviewing um so moving on to to storm water um we issued an exhibit today that was brought up uh during the last hearing uh and it was it was an overlay of the the hydrogeologic groundwater um contour map uh it was within the the Board of Health required Hydro Geo study uh and we under overlaid the five lot subdivision plan which is the actual engineered plan that we have out here so just taking a step back from from this our storm water methodology is um focused on primarily mirroring existing conditions so right now we have a single family house out there and a drive way and topographically the entire site slopes from north to south generally speaking it's like Northwest to Southwest our stor mortar analysis points were at the southern property line um at the abutter and then also at the southern property line for River Meadow Brooks so we took two analysis points one of them conservation has uh a little interest in because of the potential Vernal pool and the wetlands that are associated with it off site so we we Analyze That separately we're charged with making sure that at property lines we're not discharging um a higher Peak rate than uh existing conditions so the way that we're approaching storm water is uh the roadway captures the northern Lots um flow onto the roadway there's a series of catch basins and then at the end of the uh culdesac or Hammerhead turn around however it ends up being configured there's an underground infiltration system so they're plastic Chambers in the ground surrounded by Stone that uh capture storm water attenuate which is slow it down and then provide recharge put put storm water into the ground again the goal here is to mirror the existing conditions uh now DPW has reviewed our storm water twice now they reviewed it originally with the six lot subdivision plan and then the revised five lot subdivision again with the four lot exhibit that we've shown we have to engineer that um and it will be be another revision to this plan and that's essentially right sizing the underground system so our our treatment train if you will uh it's how we we uh treat for total suspended solids we have deep sun puty catch basins to a hydrodynamic separator those two elements exceed the TSS that's required by the town uh and the state and then it gets passed into an underground infiltration system the infiltration system itself is also uh configured with an isolated row an isolated row is a row of Chambers wrapped with geotextile that provides additional filtration to any of the the SE water entering system before it has a chance to to be infiltrated into the ground our outfall pipe is uh there's a little arrow pointed kind of on the the southern portion of the culdesac um so there's a 12in ads pipe so that's discharging um excess runoff for those less frequent events so think 100e storm think 25e storm um again all of our calculations have been reviewed twice now by DPW and they are uh they found them to be consistent with both state regulation and local storm water regulation now in relation to the exhibit plan that uh you see before you six monitoring Wells were installed as a part of the hydrogeologic analysis it basically uh the point of the wells was to test for specific constituents um as well as determine the direction of groundwater flow and the influence of um the Cher water Department's public water supply Wells and what the results of the groundwater kind of contouring analysis is is generally speaking groundwater flows the same direction that surface water flows it all goes from North North West um to Southeast towards River Meadow Brook um the report itself determined that the site is outside the zone of influence of the Cher water Department's public water supply Wells so there's no impact when the pumps are on or the pumps are off um and you can you can see generally how it's located uh the the storm water Chambers are located on the site in relation to those Wells and the testing uh that was performed there now again John de Mill with Will Cox and Barton is here so if there's any questions about the testing or constituents of of the groundwater uh Wells he will be happy to answer those now our position is uh that this design as it sits uh again with the caveat that we have to revise from five Lots down to four so basically shrink down our storm water system for the reduced impact that we currently are proposing um meet all of the the state and local regulations um I know we haven't had a chance to to dive into this but because we are again embarking on um a full redesign of this I want to make sure that we understand uh any concerns that the board has with respect to storm water um and and the groundwater and monitoring Wells that are out there right now um so that is my presentation kind of a high level review of what has been proposed previously kind of the process that we've gone through um and been reviewed by DPW uh and again John John is on zoom and and I am here to answer questions the board may have hi everyone just for the record I'm John Dill with Will Cox and Barton licensed side professional uh Michael the favor has brought me into this project ever since the initial detection of posos in groundwater I'm here to answer any questions you may have this is Joel have we received um have we received a report that uh indicates to us what the BS levels are and where they were detected and so forth It's pinned the agenda it's been submitted to numerous departments uh Brian I'll have you chime in on that yeah it's it's uh it's posted linked on the agenda right now it's Northeast geoscience uh Hydro geologic report okay I apologize I haven't had a chance to look at that could could you tell us um what wells was people well first of all was P pass the only reportable um contaminant contaminant that uh that that you discovered so with regards to contaminants regulated under the mCP um I believe the water district required sampling for posos and volatile organic compounds uh it's my understanding so ngi did the initial sampling event at Wells if you see the exhibit mw1 MW2 and MW3 those three Wells were sampled for both voc's and P boc's were not detected above laboratory reporting limits however P5 or total posos 6 which are the six regulated posos compounds regulated by mass DP and the mCP were detected at concentrations slightly above the existing threshold for gw1 Waters in two monitoring Wells on the Eastern downgradient portion of the property mw1 and MW2 so after this initial finding this is when my company jumped in we resampled those Wells U because posos are very delicate they're being detected at levels uh parts per trillion which is extremely low um if there's any sediment in the sample if the sampler has sunscreen on that contains Posas if they're wearing waterproof clothing you can cross-contaminate the sample so our first step was to go out there and resample the three existing monitoring puls we did that we found similar results so we said all right is this you know is this an on-site Source or is this is this a regional issue so we started looking into it a bit more um obviously many of you are aware that the chumford water supply several of the the water supply Wells are impacted with posos um I believe it's riverneck water treatment is the um the Water Resource that serves this neighborhood and they have had detections of posos at similar concentrations so that means these folks in this neighborhood are using their hoses outside to wash their car water their Garden power wash their house and these posos are coming from the municipal well and infiltrating into the groundwater surface so what we did just to kind of evaluate this Theory and the thought process is we installed three additional ones on the upgrading side of the proper proper this is mw11 mw102 and MW 103 you can see that we we sampled each of those Wells only once and at MW 103 which is the most upgradient well right at the upgrading edge of the property we have p56 concentrations at 15.4 nanogram per liter it doesn't exceed the threshold but as I said these are very this is a very sensitive Laboratory analysis this is PPT in my mind in my professional mind and what I've seen at numerous sites across the Commonwealth 15.4 and 22.8 those are the same concentrations in my mind so to me that again 15 yes so because the the concentration the detection limits are so low we're looking at PPT parts per trillion mhm at at MW 103 I have a p56 concentration of 15.4 at MW2 where it exceeds the threshold I have a concentration of 22.8 with my experience at P sites throughout the throughout the state those concentrations are are pretty much the same if I were to go out in Sample 103 again I could detect P5 6 at five I could detect P 6 at 24 you're going to get a fluctuation in fact MW2 was sampled twice first time it was sampled it was below the threshold it was detected at a concentration of 17.6 the second time when we resampled it went up a little bit these these concentrations are going to fluctuate above and below the standard because the standard is so low and the detection limits are so low so after all that jibber jabber what what my current theory is based on the data based on my my site inspections at this site I don't I don't have a source a significant source of posos contamination on my site it appears it's migrating from an off-site Source or it's a factor of the impacted public water supply well that serves the property so the so the um the fact that you're detecting it at sort of the most upgrading I assume that the the one that's close to the road is about the most upgradient that's correct I have I have another upgradient Well uh that's right on the Northern portion of the proper yeah yeah it's a little bit forther north yeah and that has a six so that is a difference that is that is a difference so there was speculation that there was contaminants dumped on that property at some point so your professional opinion is that the difference between a six and a 2 uh 22.7 is just the water we use from riverneck is that it's not undeveloped site other than that house right how is water being used yeah neighbors like people's nobody no one's been in that house for a very long time okay so but POS peos compounds are familiar they're called the forever compounds because they don't they don't go away so how how long has the how long has the public water supply well been impacted we've only started monitoring for posos how long ago posos have been in use since the 1950s but your premise is that someone was using water in that general area from riverneck Supply that may have contaminated from washing cars whatever but the problem is there speculation that there was other things happening on that property like car repair car repairs he ran a car our um repair business out of that property cars were so when I I did a phase one environmental site assessment as well at this property I interviewed the uh property owner Garrett Garrett overhauser um the information that he provided with me and based on what I saw during my site inspection granted it's vacant right now he indicated that he did hobby personal automotive repair in his driveway and in his garage he had a company he had a company that he as far as we know I I mean there was speculation that mail was delivered to a neighbor with his business being a automotive repair business yeah so I don't I don't know about that um I did question him about any commercial industrial use of the property uh the only information that he indicated was that he ran a small you know hobby farm horse farm grew corn grew hay his dad did I could I make a suggestion here yeah I I believe the Board of Health is scheduled to meet it's either August 5th or 6th to specifically discuss the phase one and what about the peer review of the hyro and I believe they're peer reviewing the phase one as well and they're discussing the hydro geologic Report with a peerie reviewed also yeah yeah so is that that that leads me to believe that the proper venue and form for the phase one contamination is what the Board of Health and I you I would encourage the board to engage with Brian similarly as you did with 93 brick Hill storm water as it pertains to proximity to um infiltration areas and then see how the Board of Health process plays out in a general sense related to contamination well it just seems like it gradually gets worse as it goes through through the area where we're concerned sure I mean what I'm suggesting is so it starts out at 6.7 and it slowly get under definitive subdivision I'm not sure you're you're going to be able to require cleanup or or pursue it doesn't start out at 6.7 it was detected in that well at 6.7 it also was detected at another upgrad in well at 15.4 but but the board's Focus under definitive subdivision is is storm water and then you have a special permit on aqua protection as well so I think you need to figure out whether you know you're going to lead the the phase one pasas contamination um effort or is the Board of Health the Board of Health is the one who who required it because they have the legal authority to former Council indicated to the board that under definitive subdivision the planning board didn't have the authority uh right and we never asked about Aqua for protection special permit but the board of health is pursuing that information and in this process to date we haven't spent a lot of time on the aqua for protection special permit um but tonight I think it's about um but the storm water is changing too so I mean you're changing the whole project so to to we don't even know how the the road's being laid out a hammerhead or a from a stormw perspective it doesn't matter so our storm water design is not going to fundamentally change unless there is the interest of this board to do something um regardless if the road ends up as a full culde act a hammerhead turn around we're showing 20 ft wide if the board doesn't grab that grant that waiver and it's 22 feet wide we're only talking about square footage of impervious being contributory to what we've designed so that's a volume calculation and that's a TSS calculation so fundamentally none of that matters from Storm okay all right Brian in the new design are you guys still considering the slope Granite curving uh I don't know if we're showing curbing on this right now are you showing two sides sidewalk there I can't tell no it's it's sidewalk on one side I believe Chris you would ask for curbing in relation to storm water and we would make that concession and not ask for the waiver on Curbing we would still want the reduced pavement width and a hammerhead potentially but if there's an assurance that Granite kurbing gives us board I think we're willing to do that as far as the as far as the storm water goes our concerns for example on 270 we had a reportable concentrations at about 20 or so if I recall at b r Road and then in the back of the the back of the property it was about 90 uh so there was an appreciable difference there um as opposed to what we're seeing here um in the case of 93 brick hill we had a place a sort of a a spot of pest which we don't know if it was bigger or smaller because of they didn't test around it um but in that case they were locating a large amount of infiltration just up gradient of it where Dow gradient it was leading to a Zone 2 in this case um we're detecting what looks to me like a more uniform distribution potentially of P that isn't varying significantly over the property and we aren't I don't think we're sign necessarily the plan is is introducing infiltration in a concentrated area close to close to where we think there is a potential source of pest so I'm a little bit less concerned in this case in 270 there it was it was pretty drastic because it was all impervious and then we were making it largely perious or not largely perious but rather we were whereas whereas before it was impervious and that water was not going into the ground then with the new design a lot of water was going into the ground which is why we ultimately um you know were very open to them not doing that um so at least as far as storm water design goes I think that um I think that uh that I don't see a a significant difference uh that's certainly something that Brian's well aware of what the concerns were in 93 Bri H and he can Factor those into his his thinkings there some of the other questions I had which uh I'm sure DPW will address but I'll just mention them here is that is that a seex particularly setbacks from the infiltration and septic and setbacks of infiltration from gradients um both up and down uh so those those I would suggest you to definitely keep an eye on uh you know in your in your design of this thing I'm sure DPW will look for us too Brian I also had one more question I thought I heard you mention at the beginning that the impervious services for the northern three um units and driveways would be emptying into the street uh correct to topographically it's higher so as water sheds off the roof off the driveway they're going to be collected by the catch bases within the roadway and then funneled through the underground system okay like it's just uphill it's just uphill correct you're going to keep that great but that's just for the impervious Services of the driveway you're still going to have the rain gutters on the buildings uh so we haven't we haven't shown gutters or no gutters downs bels we are not proposing individual lot drywalls at this time our recharge is through the system in the roadway and again it's collecting runoff from the northern lots and a portion of the driveways on the southern lots that are pitched towards the road including the roofs of the houses no uh if you look at lots for the back of the house is going to sheet flow towards the property line the front of the house is going to sheet flow towards the road on the Northern Lots it's the entire lots that go towards the road okay and now that was one of the the kind of key points that I tried to to highlight with using the southern property line as an analysis point to make sure that we're not discharging um storm water that doesn't mirror existing conditions anyone else have any other questions for the LSP or for Brian or comments okay shall we open it up to the public before we do that can we talk about the discussion we had last meeting where we were doing the straw poll to move to to do the waivers for the street width in order to get that completely out of concom jurisdiction and based on these plans and what I've heard at the concom meeting uh last night on on the recording that actually didn't happen so while we gave the while we straw hold to give the waivers they're still in conom jurisdiction not only with the pieces of lawn but also the outflow and I've got serious concerns about that the fact that we're now waving things and having concom make compromises as well well I thought we were only waving it in order to get it out of concom area yep and that did not happen it's still in concom jurisdiction for both the lawn area and the outflow and so if that's going to be the case then I'm not willing to wave those conditions yeah I agree so I can I can speak to that based on last night's Conservation Commission meeting we are looking hard at the backyard of Lot 4 to limit the yard and pull it outside of the 100t buffer what the waiver allowed us to do is move that lot about 20 ft North we're still maintaining a right of way that will allow for 22 ft of pavement curbing on both sides sidewalk on one side and the culde sack at the end so we only Shrunk The RightWay enough to reflect a waiver of a sidewalk on one side so on lot four we need to shrink the backyard as for the outflow that is um something that we can now look at as a part of our storm water redesign and in hearing kind of the commentary and and potential concern about pasas or potentially there not being a concern about infiltration on this site we can look at moving the outflow as well um we would shift it East where topographically we can um provide the daylight grade to to provide relief to the underground system so so that waiver for a sidewalk on one side and the waiver of RightWay width is still facilitating no impact and it would be reflected on the next plan I'm still not 100% comfortable in weaving the right away when we're having so many issues with the same type of waiver however it may have happened on HRI itself so I still get reservations about that well we haven't granted any waiver all we've done is had straw straw poll that we would consider doing that given XY and Z so it seems to me we have to see about X Y and Z but we are still maintaining the authority to not grant that waiver I think did we do a drop hole though yeah we did last time I don't remember you voted against it okay I was six hours ahead so maybe I I I was there and I voted okay that makes sense thank you um I mean I agree with Chris but I mean I I'm I'm not opposed to seeing what happens with the next rendition of plans before making a determination I also feel like the um phase one in the um hydrogeologic peer review are going to be informative to us very with regards to our willingness to Grant these waivers mhm should we open up to the public now what's that should we open up to the public good good good evening uh board members my name is uh William Harvey I reside at 36 Bartlett Street in chord and I also own a two family um that's illegal AB butter to this property it's located at 91-93 B road so I I'm here and I have standing um to speak regarding this project so as many of you know I am a a real estate a a real estate attorney um I know the zoning extremely well in chompster as I try and look at numerous PES of land and how to figure out how to get uh use out of it especially a single family lot or even a two family lot so maybe this one over your head or or the general Public's head but it certainly uh didn't go over um my head so I noticed that you have an updated plan and the updated plan perceives to show a proposed three duplexes and a single family dwelling but I immediately noticed and it doesn't make any Financial sense or reasoning to me whatsoever as a developer on why you would actually move an old dilapitated house and put it as it sits on that property and my perception is this is that I immediately noticed there's no notation on Lot 4 that there'll be a deed restriction that'll be a single family dwelling so therefore let's just say tonight you approv this plan and it shows single family dwelling well this board would have absolutely no uh standing or anybody or any of the neighbors thereafter when the developer or even a person that wants to buy a lot um this is zoned RC Zone 2 family it meets all the setbacks and therefore it's legal to to build the two family dwelling however if you put a deed restriction that it'll be a single family dwelling prior to acceptance uh by the board then that would cover um the statements made to this board that it would be a single family so that's something I would strongly encourage even though um as I stated I think right from the beginning that based on my knowledge of this land and extensive research that this property is only good for three lots and that's what it is it's a three lot subdivision and I believe that's something that the neighbors would be happy with but I wanted to raise that to you with regards to the single the so-called single family dwelling that can easily be changed to a duplex and I had a project on 101 mil Road um that I bought from the swiming Tennis Club where I built four single family homes it's a beautiful beautiful development however you might not know that that land is zoned RC to family where I possibly could have made a plan showing single family dwellings got it approved by this board and then 6 months later just go right down to the building department and pull building permits for duplexes because it's zoned RC it meets all the setbacks and that's it however part of the deal with the town was is that I had a deed restriction that was placed on that property prior to my purchase and the deed restriction stated that only single family dwellings could be built on that land so that's why you have single family dwellings so I if if that has to be questioned I think a lot needs to be questioned in this development I think somebody's trying to pull the the wool over your eyes thank you thank you Patrick morassi 15 Plum Street um thank you um first of all um I Believe Miss tanini was right there was a straw pole last week but I think it was just on the sidewalk um being on one side um you were close to doing a straw pull on the road width but never actually did it um that's my recollection at least if you want to look back at it um after the public comment I think some of you might have changed your mind um so we just heard a little bit about um the right of a property owner to widen the road um and I think that all made sense um the only thing I wasn't sure about is the property owner piece as far as I'm aware property possible is not a property owner on HTH street so they don't have the right to do that if they purchase the property then maybe they could come to you with that argument but at this point I don't really see how they have a case to do that um if the property owner wants to do that again that's two separate issues for me um so look into that please um another thing I was uh curious about was that this is the first time I I heard the word Lane used to describe this new road it was always described as a minor road before um so I would just like to hear a little bit more about um how that decision was made if it has something to do with the number of units or what exactly is the protocol for making that change um because that was a significant difference it went from 26 ft to a requirement of 22 feet um for a minor Road versus a lane uh still not meeting it with 20 ft proposed um same thing with the uh right of way it's 50 ft required for a minor Road only 40 for a lane but still only being proposed as 34 ft um so I just want to make sure that that's actually right I haven't seen anything in the proposals online that said that it was a lane um so please consider that but like I said still not meeting the requirements even for those and these are minimum requirements so I would encourage everybody to continue to ask for those in fact um when we met on September 13th there were seven waivers being asked for and um many of you said that you were unlikely to grant them and now here we are 10 months later and I'm just wondering um what does The List look like now can we get a list of which of those waivers aren't being asked for anymore I mean uh they've been told that they're probably not going to get these waivers we just keep come back meeting after meeting what is the new list of waivers that are being asked for how does it compare to that original list of seven and for example um the one about the 50 Foot right away wasn't even on that list so that's a new one we're going to be adding on if they' like the right away to be 34 ft um thank you thank you Kevin Chelli 11 Hilder Street um the documents that the attorney gave you are those going to be uploaded so we have an opportunity to download those also yeah those will be uploaded to the next agenda okay thank you um I'd also like to talk about the waivers um I would like to ask the bu you know not to Grant the waivers you know they the applicant uses the town bylaws subdivision rules to get what they want if the board tries to stop them from something they basically will tell the board and I've seen it that they meet the town bylaws so you can't stop them right now they're asking for waivers and I'm asking you please don't approve those waivers you know show the town residents in the the people of chumford that you know we actually do have a say in what goes on in our town you know if we start to Grant waivers where does it stop you know it's 20 feet today is it going to be 18 feet tomorrow for the next division so it's something we really need to consider because once you go down that rabbit hole it opens it up so I'd like you just to please consider that thank you hi Linda Carney 17 Hilder Street and 19 Plum we on the corner lot diagonally across from this property and I'm here tonight to say that although I applaud all your efforts and I really appreciate the job that you're doing I think we missed an opportunity at the last meeting when the applicant came to you and said could you please tell us what we need to do to make this property fly and you carefully made him out a list verbally and said you may adjust and amend that but what I would lik to have seen and what I thought would could have been appropriate would be for you to say we would like for you to bring before this board a piece of property that's designed to meet the regulations as they are today because actually that's all we're asking as residents is to please hold people accountable to what the town requirements are and to make a piece of property fly meet those requirements that's all they have to do we shouldn't be making lists and playing back and forth and I'm really um not disappointed in this board at all please don't misread me but I think we missed an opportunity last week to just simply say bring us a plan that meets the requirements that we're asking for it's as simple as that so please keep that in mind thank you I asked for that my first meeting I asked for that my first meeting good evening uh Nate Montero for Hildreth I'm just trying to get a question that I can't wrap my head around um the chelon water D District sent a letter on April 10th about septic systems it uses the words significant poses a serious threat we cannot condone it goes on and on about the letter Hancock sends a letter June 20th two months there's not one mention of septic or alternative I would like to ask the board to ask Hancock what is going on with the septics and what is the alternative have they mentioned any alternative method that clearly the Chelson water district has a serious issue with thanks good evening uh Paul wood six 16 Hill Street I just want to um touch on the U variances we possibly granting and realizing everything that affects the new potential uh Road Lane culdesac is going to affect Hilder Street negatively if it with like all you've heard it all you know all our our issues this street I know they're talking about widen it you know they're talking about but if it's just the the more you restrict that road it's going to put more pressure on Hillis Street you know it's just got to H it's a fact um so that's all I want to State thank you Bo mcmas six Hiller Street uh I'm getting coached so I I ran track we didn't didn't do well with coaching um I just have a couple of quick questions one and Brian may be able to answer this right now as far as I know those duplexes on ten hild are on Higher Ground than my property on six the water is going to run off those roofs he's just established that that's not a concern that where that goes but it's a concern to me where that goes if it's headed toward me uh my wife has forwarded to you guys a video of water running down our driveway at one of the big storms if we got it coming this way and we got it coming the other way uh we're going to be under siege so I don't know if Brian knows the answer to that question or not where was the water going to go from 10 held withth toward six held withth or will it not thank you very much much appreciate it I appreciate the job you guys are doing hi Massy comtoise 24 Hiller Street um and then can you scroll down that just a little bit for a quick second nope the other way go up so I here is the catch Bas that um Mr mcmas is talking about that actually is not a catch Basin um so water does not go into FL where it's supposed to go so it does flow down his driveway into his garage and floods his property when it rains so just you have a references to what he's talking about and is concerned with the duplexes that are high ground than his ground and it's going to add to the flooding my other quick questions and concerns and I know this is not a completed plan um but with this new plan here fah hydrants are missing um and one of the fire hydrants that was on the original plan or the last plan or I don't know we've seen so many of them um was now where there are three parking spaces so where is that fire hydrant going to get moved to when this was a culdesac the idea was they were going to use that for snow removal so snow was not pushed out onto hildra Street which then gets pushed down to in front of my house and because I am officially at the dead end and it's a private way from the F hydrant to my driveway and my neighbors at 26 they leave a nice pile which now I'm not going to be able to get out of my yard um to get up the street because I've got all this extra snow being removed there so where on the plan are we seeing where they're going to remove snow so that it does not get pushed onto hildra Street and you can correct me if I'm wrong but I'm pretty sure I've gone down that rabbit hole I've watched every wood meeting over a couple of times to make sure I've had my fact straight but there was talk about having a dumpster on this property for trash um that doesn't seem to be a possibility now with this new Hammerhead plan or I don't know where this would go um and even just looking at the driveway of property three with those parking spots right there at the end of the driveway they are going to have to pull all the way up through that Hammerhead before they can turn out because right at the end of their driveway is a parking space um those are just some things that I had noticed on this new plan thank you anyone else anyone on [Music] zo um a couple points for of clarification I just wanted to say that my list last week was not meant to be exhaustive and was not exhaustive um and about the sewer and the water letter we share those concerns that or many most of many of us do um but that's not our jurisdiction that's um we have aquer protection so that's a way for that in storm water but the actual sewer and um water district is being mostly handled by the Board of Health well um not necessarily because well the Su the the septic issue this there's a septic issue is totally which which pertains to the water issue is is Board of Health it's aquafer protection and aquer protection it is aquer the aquer protection they do not want it near um a Zone one they don't want it near Zone one they just said that in the letter the we haven't heard the for protection overlay zoning District allows Title 5 systems by right so it's not a zoning matter remember your Aqua for protection in this particular case is going to be storm water so the board of health is going to uh at some point need to review the title 5 applications that have been submitted and they'll have to make a decision not Brandon Cantina he has no saying he provides as I understand the Board of Health process the water district provides input into the Board of Health process is decision so this this letter that he sent us should have went directly to the Board of Health not us because it's confusing me that that letter is a distraction at this point I don't know how else to put it it doesn't it doesn't reference any peer reviews it doesn't reference what what methodology was used to make their conclusions the Board of Health is actively peer-reviewing the hydro geologic report that the water district um assisted with the methodology so that peer review is not even done so I don't I don't know how any Town board or committee never mind an elected board would would make a issue a memo like that okay that would confus me yeah so I mean at this point I think the a for protection is a for protection simple as that none of this is none is none of this is as straightforward as it the regulations are are pertinent the regulations the law needs to be understood and applied and uh as I understand Title 5 if it complies it's presumed uh to protect um aquifers and groundwater if it complies with the state law so the board this is why I keep telling the board you guys should focus on your jurisdiction and let the Board of Health focus on their jurisdiction because trying to intertwine them is you know you'll get the information when the Board of Health process is is done or the peer reviews are done you'll get that information some of that information may be Perman permanent relevant and pertinent to you and much of it may not be yeah so residents that have a concern should go to the Board of Health meting yeah yeah that's because that process is is actively actively un un undergoing we have another member of the public we didn't it just nothing to do with your what it's well it's to do with the project tonight Paul wood 160 Street um I know they're potentially coming back with a more complete plan next the end of next month is that going to include what they're considering for Hilder Street and we talked about sidewalks widening is that part of their their they're they're going to presentation that night is that that's going to be part two is just one I would assume so okay I just I don't I guess sure no uh So based on based on the conversation that we had uh two weeks ago and you kind of the board outlined a lot of the concerns that they had there was a desire to see a plan of the hildra street widening we are working on that we wanted to get title out of the way to prove that we have rights to do what we need to do on HTH that's what is being requested of us um so at the next meeting I would anti iate you as long as storm water is is generally um addressed which I I I think I have marging orders based on this evening's conversation uh we'll be pivoting back to Hilder street street widening and then um what we're proposing for the new roadway in terms of waiver not waiver okay yeah I I also would like a list of the waivers that you're currently requesting to be you to send us that so if you look if you look at the exhibit plan on the right hand side they have the waivers that are currently being listed and that hasn't changed uh no it has not changed I mean what's the date on that plan was 7824 so it's the most recent plan the one that's on there so that right hand side um list all the waivers just just on the waivers I've said this to a couple of you I think via email you have the legal right to Grant waivers historically for private ways they were the planning board routinely granted waivers it's good planning it's good for the environment and it's a Chumps tradition to try to keep private ways looking like glorified driveways and not town roads why because they don't want to overbuild the over bu roadways they wanted to keep them like uh the Aesthetics the rural Aesthetics roadway private ways and then we have these all over town and they're not problematic they're they're private ways until more subdivisions get added to those we're trying to get away from this this you can't you can't you can't ex you can't extend you can't connect a a public way well what you're suggesting is that this is going to be extended or it's going to be used as a cut through like hildr is used as a cut through true but it's not not not not based upon any planning board decision it would never receive definitive subdivision if it had my guess is hildr would have been upgraded but hildr isn't going to be used as a as a as a as a cut through or a thorough fair right but hildr was never planned to be and just as none of these private streets are ever planned to but who knows what's going to happen in the future all I'm all I'm trying to say is this is the first time that I've sat through hearings where the waivers are basically being politicized I don't know how else to put it they were rou routinely rely granted I don't think we're we're we're required to to Grant waivers all you're not required to you're not required to but history has proven that there's good reason to consider them give me a reason but ouring for a reason we are considering them I'm just trying to tell you the way it's been handled uh in the past by former planning boards okay I just I I want I want to make sure that the board and the public understands that the way the subdivision regulations are are unifor are drafted with the understanding that the waivers provide flexibility on a case-by casee basis and there's been good reasons and plenty of reasons as to y former planning boards have granted those waivers one division one subdivision and what was the reason what no hundreds hundreds of private ways in time give me one just give me one I I'll have to bring you the names okay well this isn't addressing items I just wanted to bring up one thing if I could so for the I I think it would be helpful for the next since you're working on a plan is to address to contact the fire Department to ask them their feelings on whether or not they can navigate that that Hammerhead design or not because that would be helped that we need to know that uh just very quickly our original proposal the six lot subdivision had a hammerhead turnaround that was reviewed by the fire department okay but absolutely as soon as we get the revision done we're going to resubmit to the fire department and we'll get you an updated letter hey Brian on on the Hammerhead if that went in the right is still the KAC right away is still there on the plans though it's all grass though it is all grass I mean we found that in other developments the fire department will drive right up on that if they they said that so they're they're make a turn if they needed to but I didn't know if so that right away is still there as extension of the right away it is and they're taking that into account so the way that we've been asked to do sweat path analysis is to take the largest apparatus the town has and turn it within the right of way within paved surface to make sure that it can make the turnout yep okay so not not taking in account of going up on grass or it has to be on the pave surface and it has to be within the right of way proper so by that definition does it have to be a circle no but we do need at least the T style right away at the end right now we're proposing the circle because we don't know if we're going to get a waiver right okay and that's how we ended up doing off of Route 40 right yeah Route 40 has a big turnaround it does have the circle yeah okay we stock what no it was no it was on the um Jackson Road has the turnaround cuz that has multiple homes on it the one that has the two further down uh Route 40 it has a hammerhead okay and the fire dep and that has four units and the fire dep dep was okay with that okay um again I don't think we're going to make any determinations this evening so I would like a motion you have it to uh continue till the 28th oh wait a minute well gu the public remains open so continue the public hearing I'll second that that's to August 28th yeah continue to I'll second that okay all in favor Mike I I John I I Mike Paul Anita hi Chris hi and I'm an I so unanimous okay thank you thank you next up we have liaison updates um does anyone have any liaison updates I didn't have a chance to watch concom thank you very much for your time thank you Yep this is Joel I can um kind of give you a concom update that's a good start sort of kind of I'll watch it but sort of kind of I um I tried to to represent uh Chris as best as I could and um sure you did a fine job I questioned his priorities about being in Italy versus visiting oncom but you know we each make our life choices um they had elections Carl was reelected as the chair and uh so they'll they'll be continuing sort of in the same leadership structure that they had before and uh also as U Maran G described uh they were there to discuss uh their project with the commission and the commission largely was expressing a desire for them to be completely out of their jurisdiction so to you know modify the Lots such that they were not within 100 ft of any resource area um so what exactly you know they do with that I don't know but it was just interesting to hear them sort of drive that as a as an important point for them and uh the rest of it I I uh this is where the sort of comes in the play cuz I didn't watch the rest of them so oh that's okay and then as far as the Board of Health goes that was uh that was an interesting meeting also uh basically I think I think you already know it was been said tonight already what they said there which was the two things on hildr that we're concerned about or following uh are in peer review and that they are going to have a hearing uh their next meeting which will not be the first Monday in August but it will be the second Monday because of vacations people on vacations and um in general uh you know I think those are the main things that we were tracking uh there were some general discussions as well one of the questions that Richard day asked that I thought was an interesting question and that is you know what was the source of the um of the what what is the source of the sewer uh policy in the sense of you know only allow and not allowing residents control so forth and so on you know by what Authority was that obtained was that through you know town meeting was that by dictate of you know group or whatever and I I didn't actually know so I thought that was an interesting question um he was select was it it who was it it's it was it's through um it was adopted through reg regulation of the DPW in consultation with the select board okay okay so I can um I can mention that to him if I If he if he doesn't find out before I see him so do they have any way to waiver that for specific there there are waiver Provisions if the Board of Health deems it a public health and safety issue like Zone one aquer yeah that's an example right then then I believe there's Provisions where connections can be allowed h so that's um that's uh Board of Health then because that might be an interesting subject to bring up I I I don't know if the provision is I believe the provision needs to be within the um the DPW regulations um I don't know if they're actually in there or not okay that would be an interesting question because it it definitely the Board of Health was very interested in having a conversation with the DPW about how all that works uh because they're concerned about septic they haven't they haven't they haven't completed their review yet okay okay well I think that's obviously something of interest to us but they do have the report they have the the study we we seen that right it hasn't been completed I don't think the the board's peer review has not been completed yet and um then uh there was also um I'm trying to think there was something else but then it it was interesting because and this is this isn't anything official but um one of the board members Dr Michael Mikel I don't know exactly how to say his name but uh he he he reported that on vacation in uh I think it was in the yukatan or somewhere Mexico and apparently there was an aquifer underneath this area where where he was visiting and people there you know they they have indoor pools and when they get tired of the water in the pool they just pull the plug and it just drains into the aquafer and then they have a pump that pumps from the aquafer back into their pool and he said that he was in somebody's kitchen and he could actually see at one point at like 8 ft down there was a pool of water there and that was the aquafer so that was kind of fascinating uh interesting things you learn when you attend the Board of Health so that's that's it were there a lot of people there at the meeting uh well if you consider one to be a lot yes I guess I went to the busiest one they ever had three yeah no it was it was a full room it was a full room well it was pretty full well I haven't had that since the great chicken Wars exactly yeah so it makes makes for a you know a a an intimate moment with a board you know when you're the only other person there and uh you know you get a chance to yeah they're some good people talk about some things they are they're they're very committed to what they're doing and they're very competent uh and also I might add that Donna Greenwood has been promoted to be the health director Sue right Su Rosa or Su R Roa retired so yeah okay that's good any other liaz on updates just I'm sorry uh there was a meeting of the master plan committee I had to miss it it's turned out that my schedules changed around and we so I don't know what we're going to do about that uh and you were there I suspect I was there um pretty routine on your at your August uh meeting uh there will be an agenda item for the board to review its um recommendations to provide a status report to the September master plan implementation committee so I'll get that circulated so people can begin to think about it okay and I'll be attending the Z board of appeals representing the planning board tomorrow night so I won't have a report yet but I I will the next meeting okay I think I have a senate Village tomorrow night we do uh yeah you do I heard about it everybody knows um okay we had talked um two meetings ago about we voted on the zoning priorities to tackle and Joel you were not there so we didn't get your vote so Mike Walsh is going to take your personal vote Yes so we need your vote Joel do you remember that handout that we gave I get to vote Yes so I will I will list wait a minute wait a minute on our on our priorities to undertake as a board it's going to take me a minute just to wrap my head around that one all right so um the other the other thing I'm trying to wrap my head around is when is the sun ever going to set behind Chris like where are you the middle of the night in the middle of the night he wants to go he wants to go to bed all right so um one was uh this is for um listing zoning updates and projects that we want to address this year is a group right brainstorming so there was 11 items and uh we all voted on so the super majority so I'll read all 11 and then you can tell me what your uh or do you want me to just go by the top four that everyone voted on and you yeah do the top one all right so top one number one was uh which was number four the 129 overlay also 110 allow or incentivize retail commercial on the ground floor and housing above um we have a tie for second which is uh was item number two encourage areas not at the best use as I.E the Rison in the mall area uh the also item that was tied number two was Kate's Corner uh the lock keed Martin to remove them from IIA so that's the top three items that we had and then um item number which was a close fourth um had three votes uh was to look at the River Neck priority areas where con where there's conflicts do you want me to read any of the other ones no no I mean I'm actually really interested in the um in the area that would involve uh the 110 and the 129 okay because of Chumps for CLS on that sort thing which I think are areas too would be really good to to try to see to what to what degree we can you know address those things so all right so that will be all sound good too so I'm happy with any of those we asked for three votes we asked for three so your second and third would you would you still encourage the uh the two of the Rison and the mall area and then the Kate's corner or would you prefer to head towards uh riverneck I actually am a little reluctant to go to the river neck so I I'll just say I'm not going to vote for that one only because um I think that I think we want to sort of see how the zba thing shakes out as well okay I I think it's better to address the zoning when something is not volatile you know and or unstable so to speak so perfect I'd rather let that sett down all right great so you're uh going to endorse what the the rest of the board is in vot put it on so yay I got three votes that's great thank you that's great you want that yeah sure okay so I think that did we have uh a couple of minutes to approve oh yeah we did have the minutes to approve read I read them as well did everyone have a chance to look at the minutes yes um take a motion I move to approve the wait should we see did Chris did you have any corrections 612 and 626 okay 62 none okay yeah move to approve the minutes of 612 second all in favor I I uh Christen Anita so it's unanimous and move to approve the minutes of 626 second so moved both of those by Mike risbeck seconded by John um all in favor hi hi including Anita and Chris is so the next meeting is on the 28th of August y yep hey we got almost a vacation here unless you want to do a work session to work some do some zoning work Chris will be travel yeah somewhere so he needs to be here okay enjoy your trip Chris yeah enjoy the rest of your trip thank you for joining Anita thank you for joining last time you guys are this was this was the sunset tonight oh nice that was pretty we can't see it right now but we saw it earlier I think you can't see it now is that really the sunset behind you no we can see it that's beautiful yeah those was the sunset I picture I took tonight at dinner fantastic six hours ago you know one of the interesting things about being on Zoom is you you actually at one point are behind the audience are we get that view when you're when you're sitting at the table you know are we adjourned motion to adjourn second I all right all in favor