e okay it being six o'clock I'm going to call to meeting this uh call to order this select board meeting for April 8 2024 and if you please join me in a pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the stand indisce for all so before we get to our public service announcements you'll notice a little bit of a difference up on at this table this evening uh we have a new member who was elected last week Pat Maloney welcome to the board and welcome back George Dixon uh congratulations to both of you and uh I'm uh I'm honored to be uh appointed as chair for the coming year so thank you to the other board members for that that honor and Aaron Drew is the new Vice chair and Pat is the new clerk so with that we will go to public service announcements and before I do the public service announcements my first honor as Vice chair is to present you with this honor award plaque for your service last year as the chair thank thank you the microphone the microphone didn't thank you um so the chumford Center for the Arts would like to invite everyone to karaoke sober Edition uh it is the every second Friday of the month from 7: to 10: p.m. their admission is free and there are snacks and mocktails available for purchase um it's sponsored by the chumford health department and from the chumford Minuteman company we have an invite for the general public to join us on our 13th annual Patriots Day March from Chelmsford to conquered join the M chelsford Minutemen boys and girl scouts and fellow citizens and reliving the fateful day of April 19th 1775 that thrust the colonies into the start of the American Revolution uh it is Patriots Day Monday April 15th step off is at 4:00 a.m. from the chelsford common and it ends at minam man National Park and um for more information you can contact Captain John Greenwood at 6 middle sex at gmail.com or um Sergeant Jim Curley at J curley2 at Comcast net and just one note about that that event it's it's been a tradition that newly elected members of this board newly newly elected members of this board participate their first year so we'll see you there next Monday 4 a 4: am. shark maybe 4 a. you can continue thank you um the chelsford health departments would like to announce their free program Creative Connections um it's for parents and Guardians to bridge the communication gap with your child um it's a free Arts session where they will create captivating collages together it is for Middle School aged Youth and their parent are guardian and runs April 2nd or April 16th from 6:30 to 7:30 p.m. at the chumford Center for the Arts and registration is required if you have questions you can call the chelsford health department um and next we have a another announcement from the shord health department for free youth Mental Health First Aid training um the youth Mental Health First Aid training teaches adults how to identify understand and respond to signs of mental health and substance use challenges among children and Adolescent from ages 12 to 18 it is April 18th from 9: to 3 at the chelsford Town Hall fire training room and for questions you can contact Taran Angel at 9782546662 if you have questions you can reach out to the sustainability manager uh at [Applause] 9782534077 Gren Road it will convene at 7:30 p.m. um a copy of the warrant is available now on the town's website and any president of the Town who is not an elected Town meeeting member May attend sessions of the town meeting and participate in questions and answer and discussion portions of the proceedings links to the town meeting presentation document and the finance committee's warrant book will be found on the town meeting web page one week prior to town meeting and that's all I have okay thank you all right next up is public input if there's anybody here that would like to address the board about any topic you're free to do that at this at this time U I'd like to note that if you're hear about the 40b at um 2 43 riverneck road we do have a public hearing schedule for that and you will have an opportunity at that time to speak so if there is anybody who wants to speak about anything else now is your opportunity anyone there's no one in the zoom room speak okay thank you we'll move on to committee vacancies committee vacancies uh we have a one vacancy for the bicycle and pedestrian advisory committee a three-year term ending June 30th 2026 the board of appeals has a one-year term open for an associate member the Conservation Commission has one unexpired three-year term ending June 30th 2025 the commission on disabilities has two unexpired three-year terms the Community Action Program committee has one unexpired three-year term the cultural Council has one three-year term open the diversity equity and inclusion committee has one three-year term the historic district commission has one unexpired three-year term for an associate member the holiday decorating committee has three unexpired one-year terms the parade committee all applicants are welcome those are one-year terms the public records advisory committee has won an expired one-year term open the Roberts field advisory committee has two terms open the recycling committee has one unexpired three-year term open uh in addition the town moderator is Seeking a candidate to fill an unexpired term on the finance committee expiring on June 30th 2026 if you are interested in serving on a Town border committee please complete an online application available on the town website or contact the town manager's office for more information okay thank you okay next is uh we have a couple licenses this evening first up is um uh an application from the old millhous for an entertainment license is there anybody here representing the Old Mill House do you want to come up to the microphone okay and if you can identify yourself and tell us what you want to do sure um my name is Kristen hunt and I'm the events coordinator for old Mahal coffee um yearly we run several artist and Market um on our property right behind the shop and we are just hoping to add a little bit of acoustic music to our markets um between 11 and four on Saturdays um we run currently seven markets a year and uh it's seems to be a lot of fun but that's kind of our our goal not adding any stage or anything it's just going to be on the ground a few a guitar and a singer or something similar to that not too loud no electricity involved or anything like that okay so so no uh just on those seven days that you have an event or regular yeah just on no just on the days that we have events yeah okay all right anybody else have any questions for Kristen um Paul I don't I don't know if it matters the on page two where the signature is they didn't date it so I don't know if that needs to happen um The Building Commissioner made a comment about the parking and de conflicting with the other businesses there yes what's the status of that so um I talked with his concern was the parking for navigation in that back parking lot and I did talk with um Mr nron and uh PJ Mercer who's the owner at navigation and with the landlord from the whole strip and we it doesn't have to be in those specific spaces PJ is completely fine with it he's not planning to use those spaces on our Market Days um same thing with the landlord Bobby he's completely fine with it they're excited because they're kind of doing the markets with us but if it becomes a problem at any point we're willing to move the mar the space because again it's very flexible very easy it's not building up anything we can move it back on to one of our parking spaces or in one of our vendor spaces for the day okay and I think you just answered my second question by Bobby you mean the land owner yes I'm sorry I didn't know if there was any further coordination or approval that was needed from from him it sounds like you're all set yes okay thank you good anything else all right you ready to make a motion sure I will make a motion to approve the entertainment license for old mhouse coffee llc at 24 Central Square as presented second okay a motion and a second all in favor okay congratulations we see okay um next up we have a one day um B wine license for um at be exercised at St uh St John's Church I believe is where the location is yeah George for young is on the zoom call okay participating remotely George if you can turn your camera on and unmute yourself there he is okay hi good evening members my name is George for uh uh my son is graduating from uh College on uh May 11th and we are are planning a graduation party for him at the St John's Hall that same day from uh uh 5:00 p.m. to 11: uh p.m. that night so we we we have applied to get uh a one day beer and wine license to dispense our to our guest for the night okay um anybody have any questions about this application okay if not we can take another a motion I'll make a motion to approve the 1day beer and wine license for George boang 115 Middle sex Street for May 11th 2024 as presented second I have a motion and a second all in favor I okay thank you George have a good night thank you thank you very much congratulations to your son thank you okay bye okay we we are at the point for the um public hearing for the uh proposed local initiative project at uh 243 riverneck Road um now I'm I'm expecting that there's a uh representatives from the applicant here okay so the way that I'd like to run this is we'll have them make their presentation um I will then go through the uh uh reports we have gotten from the department heads and several emails we have received at which point then I will open it up for public comment so good evening uh Madame chair members of the board I'm Adam Costa for the record with the firm of me tman and Costa uh with an office in Newport uh here this evening on behalf of 243 riverneck LLC and as shuk Patel its manager uh as you indicated this is a proposal for a lip endorsement by the board we submitted an application about a month ago uh pursuing into your uh lip policy and procedures um what I'll like to do if you'll uh indulge me is just provide a brief overview of the project we have multiple members of our project team present tonight uh we also have our 40b consultant Dean Harrison who I believe is available by Zoom as well but we have our engineers and our architects in the house um I'm not going to go through a detailed uh description unless you want me to uh of all the various plans that we've submitted we've submitted um engineered site plans we've submitted a survey plan we've submitted architecturals renderings uh floor plan elevations quite a bit uh for this early stage in the process but we wanted to provide the board with a general overview of the The Proposal again I have those present I have them on on uh large scale format plans that I can place on an easel um they're also I see on the screen as well at least in part we have some updated rendering so I'm happy to go through all that in as much detail as the board was would like but I'll just provide a general overview initially as to what the Project's all about so uh this property and and some of you may be familiar with it either from personal experience or um just through Word of Mouth this is a property that was permitted for chapter 40b affordable housing development back in 2003 uh Princeton Properties was the applicant at that time we're not we're un affiliated with Princeton and I don't represent Princeton uh same property owner at the time had entered into an agreement to gain sight control back in 2002 made application uh to the town in 2003 a comprehensive permit was issued by the town zoning board of appeals uh that project was a much more dense project than what you see here that was a proposal for 48 units of housing 25% of which would have been um would have been affordable uh that project obviously never got constructed the comprehensive permit was extended multiple times um in some instances by operation of law uh and in other instances by extensions granted by the zoning board of appeals and in fact that permit is still in effect but again the holder of that permit is Princeton Properties and Princeton Properties no longer has control of the site they're their purchase and sale agreement with the property owner expired long ago uh so my client as shook Patel and the the single purpose LLC has created um is proposing the the project that you see on the site and this is a combination and it's a bit unique to the 40b world I've seen a few done in this manner uh combination ownership and Rental so you'll see at the rear of the site we have a proposal for six single family homes these are four bedroom single family homes of those six uh single family homes two would be de affordable in perpetuity um that is higher than 25% um but of course when you have an uneven number of total units we have 23 here in total uh you've got a round up in terms of the number of affordable units you provide uh in the project so we're providing two we're proposing to provide two of those six single family homes as affordable units um as I mentioned total number of units on the site is 26 so that means that there are uh 17 uh additional units you can see at the front of the site these are rental units they're townhouse style rental units um they will be two bedroom units um but there is a an inconsistency that I think maybe your DPW or your community development director had identified in the in the reports uh to the board and that is that we had referred to these in one instance as two-bedroom units and elsewhere in our materials referred to the possibility of a three-bedroom unit the reason for that is back in I want to say 2014 or 15 uh what was then the the Department of Housing and Community Development that's now the executive office of Housing and livable communities adopted a policy uh requiring three bedroom units in all chapter 40b projects the The Proposal was to avoid what many developers were doing which is proposing uh projects comprised simply of single and and and two bedroom units in an effort to avoid the concern that is sometimes raised by municipalities that when you get three or four bedroom units you bring school children to the to the community and that results in increased Education costs uh the state determined that that wasn't permissible and they've now required that all projects have a minimum 10% uh bedroom units and that's done by um by housing style and so we are proposing that um of the uh 17 units uh two of those units would be uh three bedroom units to meet that to meet that requirement of the state the state policy um you'll see we're proposing uh a a single driveway SL roadway I'm not sure exactly how to refer to it I saw again some of the comments from departments had spoken about a roadway it's really more of a driveway that'll be providing access uh first to the parking area for the townhouse to units and then to the single family homes it certainly won't be a roadway that would meet your subdivision standards but of course that's sort of the nature of chapter 40b that there can be waivers requested but I'm also not certain that we would be seeking to again qualify this as a roadway per se but rather as a driveway providing um access to those to those single family homes at the rear of the site um I I know Madam chair you mentioned that you're going to uh speak to the various comments and I'm not going to go through each of the letters I think there were eight of them that you received from uh various departments or or officials of the town but I I want to highlight a couple of things that is worth noting um now and certainly we can respond in further detail if the board members have questions uh so the first is um there were some comments relating to uh sewer moratorium so there's obviously in this case um no proposal uh that has been made for an on-site U sewage Disposal system um a treatment plant um that is purposeful this is a relatively small project U to be candid even even the original 48 unit project that was approved back in 2003 would not have Justified economically uh a sewage treatment plan so um we had a reserved capacity back in 2003 when this project was originally approved uh we would be seeking similar capacity for this particular project we would need a waiver for um from that moratorium requirement uh we we've included that in the proposed waiver list that we've submitted I did have uh some back and forth um with your town manager and with your Council maybe six or eight months ago maybe more than that 10 12 months ago when we began initially conceptually looking at this site uh on the question of whether or not that Reserve capacity was tied to the site or tied to the original permit that issued to Princeton Properties and there was sort of a lack of clarity there as to which of the two things it was tied to so I suppose we could make an argument that we're entitled to that capacity because it was locked in back in 2003 but I'm also not sure we need to make the argument because if this is a project that the board supports and we move forward as a local Initiative Program project at Friendly 40b then we would take a waiver from the zoning board of appeals as part of the traditional chapter 40b uh uh process and the same goes for the moratorium with respect of road openings my understanding is that this roadway was um was rebuilt or repaved um just a couple of years ago so there's a 5-year moratorium uh we would need a waiver from that moratorium depending upon when construction begins I think I want to say it runs through 2026 or 27 it's referenced in one of the letters that was received so to the extent that construction begins before that date we' need a waiver uh and obviously we expected if the uh zoning board of appeals were prepared to issue such a waiver that they would condition it appropriately requiring us likely to restore whatever portion of the roadway we disturb uh to a condition similar to the condition that it's in today as opposed to sort of the the patchwork that sometimes results from projects like this um so that's one point that I wanted to raise a second point and it's it's a fair one uh is something that was raised by Mr balansky and in fact it was a conversation as well that I had with David Hedison uh the the chair or director of the Chumps Housing Authority uh and that relates to the added benefit of this project being proposed as a lip project as opposed to this project being proposed consistent with the traditional 40b route so I suspect board members are are aware of the difference so when an applicant wishes to pursue a chapter 40b affordable housing project they have two options they can go the traditional 40b route all that means is application is made to a state subsidy it's usually Mass housing once the state subsidy issues a determination of Eligibility the applicant then goes before the zoning board of appeals in the community seeking a comprehensive permit and then later seeks final approval the difference with the lip program or or lip projects is that a lip project requires this initial appearance before the select board or the chief executive officials of the community and ask a select board to endorse the project and provide support the subsidy then rather than it being Mass housing is a direct State sub subsidy it's through the executive office of Housing and livable communities uh typically boards like yours will ask of the applicant well what are you offering us if we're offering you our endorsement what what added benefit do we get by you going through this local Initiative Program process as opposed to the more traditional 40b process and so uh we're offering uh things that are twofold and in fact there's a reference again an inconsistency so to speak that was referenced by uh one of your uh one of your departments but it actually isn't an inconsistency at all um I've mentioned before that we would be offering six total units as affordable that's a requirement 25% um if the number is fractional you have to round up so we have 23 units that means it's just under six total units would be required to be affordable rounding up that's six units and we initially proposed two of the single family homes uh and four of the the tow houses which is required as well that they be interdispersed throughout the the the different aspects of the the project um what we're offering uh through the lip process is we would offer an additional two affordable units as part of that rental development uh part of the uh the tow houses um so we'd have a total of six affordable units in in the front portion of the property uh plus the two affordable single family homes for a total of eight affordable units what we'd also be willing to do is provide a greater extent of affordability with respect to those uh six rental units that are tow houses so as you know the minimum standard to qualify under the chapter 40b program is 80% area immediate income with it a window of 70 to 80% we'd be prepared to offer um three of those six units in the uh town houses at 70 % and three of those six units at 60% so that makes them uh it provides a greater window of affordability for individuals to qualify for those units which has been a problem in many communities where the 70 to 80% standard still isn't quite affordable enough uh for many individuals that we would consider to to otherwise need affordable housing um it it economically it can be a challenge for developers to to provide housing at that lower lower percentage of Ami uh but we've run the numbers and we think that we can we can accommodate that and what Ami what Ami do you anticipate for the additional two units above the six uh so we'd have um they're uh 80% 70 to 80% for the single family homes so the two that are the two affordable units that are uh in the rear portion of the site that compris uh the single family homes would be at the traditional 40b standard um and and that's we Tred to work the numbers I will tell you to make it uh work allowing us to even drop the Ami for those single family homes the challenge with ownership projects and Dean Harrison can probably speak to this better than I can I'm not a numbers guy I'm I'm the attorney not the not the Financial Consultant but uh my understanding and it's consistent with my experience with other projects is with ownership projects it cost developers far more to actually build the affordable units then they can recoup in terms of sales price often twice as much to build a unit as they recoup in sales price so for those single family homes we're already providing essentially a third of the of the total six units um as as uh excuse me seven units as affordable uh units and so that that is is a challenge because the numbers simply don't work we begin to either add an additional affordable unit to the single family homes uh or we we drop the percentage Ami and it just throws the numbers out a whack and doesn't really work for us um again Dean can likely speak to that if you have further questions more eloquently uh than I can so we've submitted um as you saw a fairly comprehensive narrative we tried to um to mirror the requirements that are in your policies and procedures so we've uh provided a summary of the plans that we've supplied we provided a project narrative which I've just summarized generally for you you'll see in the project narrative um the proposed uh sales prices for the affordables as well as the proposed monthly rent for the affordables uh we also have identified the setbacks that we're proposing for the site we do require a bit of dimensional relief uh for the project although it's not significant in the in the uh 40b context um we've addressed uh things like Community benefit we've again referred to and Incorporated and provided a full copy of the proforma that we've have done it's actually two proformas one for uh the uh home ownership component of the project and one for the rental component of the project and then of course we have uh our additional plans and renderings and we're happy to walk through those and as much or as little detail as the board would like okay thank you um so I I guess um you know go continuing on in in the narrative that that you um that you included uh talking about the different aspects that we look for in our in our policy could you talk a little bit more about the community outreach that you've done sure so is a shook here H do you want to speak about community outreach and Communications you've had sorry I didn't see you at the back of the room that's fine uh a Patel represen the project so we we've a Patel represent the project the the community outreach peace um we have U not had a great success yet I know we've had our our agents drop off some letters today actually I do plan to continue to have uh dialogue with the neighbors to figure out their concern as to what we can make better um we were planning to do this on Sunday actually um but then the weather got a little bit uh wacky so we couldn't do it before that month I was traveling I wasn't in town so I think that kind of messed up my schedule itself but we will continue to make the efforts with all the neighbors who are impacted immediately um on this on this site to try and explain how this project is a lot less denser than what it was before in terms of the 48 units 96 rooms uh 96 bedrooms approved before so in in the narrative in your proposal where you're mapping against our lip policy and you map against set policy section 6.23 which is um the community engagement you you assert that you've engaged with the community so was that when was that was that during the previous proposal it it it wasn't recently right no that that's correct so that was during the previous proposal and then there's a reference here and again this was the intention to occur between the submitt of the application and tonight the disc discussions of specific project characteristics and attributes will continue up to and Beyond the board's meeting on the lip proposal so we had it's on page three of their application that's correct so we had intended to certainly have further conversations with neighbors now as you probably know there is a a lengthy history of development of the site um there were issues with respect to neighbors there were issues with respect to uh your Conservation Commission I saw the letter from the conservation agent indicating that um or reminding the board that uh back in 200 2 or 20 early 2003 uh that there had been multiple requests for uh orders of conditions that had been denied locally and then ultimately the state had issued uh superseding orders for the project you know we tried in developing this iteration of uh project for the site to be more sensitive to environmental areas um as you probably see and in fact that the site plan doesn't capture it in its in its totality uh there's a substantial portion of the site I want to say it's upwards of five acres is that right upwards of five acres at the rear of the site that is uh not being developed there could be an attempt to develop it um we we had looked at that in in considering options for the site would require a Wetlands Crossing to gain access to some limited Upland there um but knowing the issues that had Arisen previously um again only secondhand because we weren't personally involved uh we decided to Simply determine that we were not going to cross over that boundary um between essentially between the the portion of the property that is zoned I want to say industrial versus uh residential okay I just have a quick um clar clarification question you mentioned six four bedroom units and 17 tow houses earlier in your presentation and I'm seeing in your documentation that there's seven four-bedroom houses single family houses and 16 to I messed up my math okay so I I I I transposed my six and my seven so there's seven single family homes in 16 tow houses thank you sir okay so if you if you're uh completed with your presentation I'll go through the the uh um feedback that we received from the department heads then see if whatever whatever other comments we have in question thank you thank you okay we did receive a a letter from uh the DPW and they said the uh a full sight plan review has not been conducted so they reserve the right to uh to do that and especially to review the swim Water Management conditions uh note that the there needs to be an enclosed dumpster and dumpster andp a dumpster pad and dumpster upon uh the site with the the plan and a plan for Perpetual care of the dumpster including the emptying which is responsibility of the property owner um all existing and proposed utilities need to be marked on the plans um they note as uh as Mr CER has said that this section of riverneck road was paved in 2022 and the 5-year moratorium will run until 2027 uh they need to provide a snow storage location on the site plan they noted that no pedestrian accommodation was considered on the application um they note that um overflow discharge from proposed underground uh Chambers um could discharge directly onto a neighboring property uh they know a pump station and Generator are located within within 50 ft of the no build Wetland zoning area they want a confirmation of the residential storm water infrastructure and that also should be included in the storm water report and has been noted about sewer capacity um they note that uh there's 500 gallons per day allowed on the site right now and anything greater than that so anything they estimate 6,100 gallons per day would have to be um treated either on site or either with a septic tank or a wastewater treatment plant um then a proposed sewer uh sewer infrastructure has not been reviewed for the for the capacity that's proposed here and they have concerns about the super capacity in this General location the police department notes that this uh needs to be a stop sign at the end of the driveway at the intersection of riverneck Road the um fire department uh has requested a water flow test near the site on calculations to be submitted to the department they note that hydrants must maintain a 10-ft clearance radius from any obstruction or parking spaces uh comprehensive fire apparatus access and maneuvering plan must be submitted um at some point uh snow storage must not hinder or block fire access roads or turnarounds the townhouse units shall be equipped with a monitored automatic sprinkler system according to fire standards the placement of fire protection equipment is subject to approval from the fire department residences must have fire alarms that meet current standards and as far as Street naming and addressing uh the fire chief uh does uh require you to propose three uh potential names for the roadway and the applicant has to submit to the uh tile chancel d911 committee for addresses the Board of Health notes you have to meet the expectations of the general provisions of um the groundwater protection Zone um if an on if there is an on-site septic system proposed it must meet all Title 5 regul ations and uh as was noted earlier by from DPW uh dumpster and dumpster pad must meet the Board of Health uh commercial refug dumpster collection licensing and Opera operating regulations uh Building Commissioner notes that you be uh you will be required to meet all current building codes to include the current energy code and that he will be um enforcing the dimensional requirements as per chapter 195 of the Town bylaws unless you get any Wafers obviously and then uh community development director you mentioned uh several of his comments already about the uh affordable units uh and what level of Ami they would be required the inhabitants would be required to to meet They al he also notes that the greater loal Habitat for Humanity has been seeking a project in chelsford and this might be one that you might consider uh part in with them he notes that the narrative indicates that two town houses that'll be two bedrooms um but then it appears that you have two and three bedroom as you mentioned so you have clarified that uh he notes that you have a four-bedroom single family dwelling with with which each have a two-car garage and a driveway confirmation should be provided that each driveway can also accommodate two cars uh he notes that the proposal appears to lack adequate visitor parking and a preliminary cut and fill analysis should be provided um one of the sheets shows the location for the affordable uh units and this should be clarified as to where they should be and they are required to be distributed rather than concentrated you have mentioned that you're aware of that and he also mentions the sewer system um notes that a waiver at this point um seems to be premature request for r at this point seems to be premature and he asked what is proposed for the remainder of the site uh which I assume that at some point we'll find that out um Conservation Commission notes that as you mentioned it's uh um this site was uh previously denied um uh a 40 the approval of a 40b project um and then when it and then nothing has happened since since it was approved that it was sent back to the Conservation Commission and zba we also did receive several um several emails incl um some of which uh relate to the uh have issues with um the proximity to the um public water supply uh worried about accidents that could cause hazardous materials to go into the the water supply and let's see I don't have others did you touch on the comment from the CHC water district I just got to that yeah I don't know why I missed that one yeah the CHC water district notes that the property is in the zone to Aqua for protection and you'll need to follow groundwater protection statement standard operating procedures um and then what uh one resident um sent an email concerned about the development size noting that this would would likely cause an increase of 65% uh increase in traffic um in this area of uh riverneck Road concerned about the impact on on wetlands and multiple animal species that live in that area um this person uh is in a butter and is concerned about significant drops off drop offs around the property and how it's going to affect his his property um questions about the uh infiltration of storm water and that's been raised several times by other departments um again uh re rear species uh uh noted on eight areas of the property um directly about Zone one extensive Wetlands on the site um questions about the accuracy of identifying the wetlands I think that's about a recap of everything that we have received to date um now if anybody else on the board has any questions we can go to those questions first and then we'll open it up to the um to the public just know this is still a public hearing so we shouldn't be making any determinations at this point just if you have any clarification questions we can ask those at this point George anything um I'd like to ask Mr have any question sure Paul the 4B that was um approved at one time and now it's kind of up in the air if somebody would to take if one of the two owners either the current owner or uh in other words if somebody would get that back into play is that is that is that a possibility is what I'm asking you uh certainly so it's possible that it could still be in play in the sense that the comprehensive permit has not yet expired by its terms um it would require the holder of the comprehensive permit to work cooperatively with the current owner of the property which has historically not been the case um so I I can't rule it out entirely but it seems unlikely and if it were improve if it were what would how many units would there be on that 48 I believe it was 48 48 yes and what the how would the the sewer be effective with the original uh approval want I go back to the original approval of the 40b yeah so the units that as originally approved would have qualified for the um the grandfather in status under the sewer moratorium but that wouldn't carry over unless there was some kind of agreement between the previous applicant in this one it so we had a discussion um as attorney Coster had mentioned that that we we went over this question and ultimately we determined that it was a question that should be addressed as part of the comprehensive permit process in front of the board of appeals if they ever got there we reviewed the sewer moratorium I don't think it's clear whether or not it's project specc uh specific or whether it's site specific um but ultimately we said that it would make more sense to just deal with this as part of any comprehensive I mean the concern I have with that is that we're making an endorsement or a non-endorsement recommendation yep and I mean this board spent the better part of a year with Paul working the sewer issue so I don't is there something that can be done to help us help inform our decision as to whether or not it's even feasible well that's a separate question um obviously from the time that the sewer moratorium went to effect there have been additional connections there's been additional capacity we continue to see but we're at we're at or over typically I going to say we we continue to see sewer flows you know that are Beyond well you know what they should be under the agreements um so that's that is a question that ultimately would have to be determined by the board of appeals as part of any application for a comprehensive permit because the board of appeals under chapter 40b serves as all local permit granting authorities so they would essentially be the sewer division of the DPW as it relates to that project so they could either determine that there is not sufficient capacity to allow a waiver to be granted or they could determine that there is sufficient capacity and allow a waiver to be granted it it's ultimately they would work they they would absolutely work with would inform help inform their decision correct so I I just want to follow up a little bit on on uh on our responsibilities versus the zba nothing we do is going to change anything that the zba is going to do correct absolutely correct yes so the process that's in front of you now is a request for a lip endorsement um and as attorney Coster noted it's one of two different ways in which an applicant can proceed under chapter 40b If you deny a lip endorsement um as requested they can still go to Mass housing MHP or another funding agency and request that they get a project eligibility letter for them take that to the board of appeals file a comprehensive permit application and they're ultimately in the same position as they would have been if you would grant that a lip endorsement granting a lip endorsement does not place any restrictions on the board of appeals um they have you know whatever rights that they have to either deny or approve a development it doesn't matter that you know you endorsed it as a lip it can still be denied if you know the board determines that there are legitimate issues of local concern that outweigh the regional need for affordable housing and we don't have any authority to issue a waiver is that correct no only the board of appeals would have authority to issue waivers okay anybody do have yeah can I ask a question so the comprehensive permit um and I think this was I am familiar with this uh from the CBA but the comprehensive permit how how long because I know that this this one has been extended several times twice can you tell me I two or three times but there's there was also the co extensions that were by law it didn't require the board of appeals to take any action um so that's why they're currently still a valid permit and when does this one expire Adam do you know I think it was just redone a couple of years ago it extended my my recollection is it's later this year I want to say September it does expire this year September correct um correct so then in the board of appeals leaving aside the potential for cooperation between this applicant and the former holder of the comprehensive permit um they they wouldn't be able they wouldn't be in a position to request an additional extension because they don't hold that comprehensive permit anymore interesting right P anything okay I don't have questions I just have some comments and concerns I don't know if you want me to hold that or yeah why don't we wait till we hear from the public and then we can kind of wrap them all up and see where we go from here okay thank you okay so uh members of the public you can now come up to the microphone and please um identify yourself and um I I'd ask other members if somebody ahead of you has covered the topic that you wanted to talk about to keep your comments brief you can just say yeah I agree with that person um we we don't know if we're going to finish this hearing this evening um I think it's very likely that we will not so um anyway so we will go ahead okay my name is Ruth Luna ten Carter Drive PR 10 rep um I was on the Conservation Commission both times in 2005 and 2006 when this um 40b was um denied by the commission I wrote the findings for the second denial um and then Joel here was on the zba when it was remanded to the zba for a limited scope um so I just wanted to just quickly say that in the 2000s it was a contentious CBA process um additionally I was on the um affordable housing plan committee and this site was not identified by the town as being a suitable site for 40b project it's identified now after it had already been permitted as one and so obviously you're not going to leave off what you already have there um I've gone through the older records for this file before the 2000s and found um interesting information from the late 1990s as far as that there had been um disputes over whether one could make two or three buildable Lots out of this whole site and um the it was cited as the that there were a lot of challenges with due to the topography and the soil on this site making it questionable whether you could get three three lots out of it and sighting steep slope ledge and then when 495 was built too much was excavated such that there are points that are excavated down into the groundwater and then that apparently materials were left behind on the site that were they said at the time unsuitable for septic but an important important point to consider is then does it also make it unsuitable for infiltration which the storm water relies on um so I just wanted to raise those questions um and they also said that the development of the site beyond that was um not something that they thought could be done the site um is environmentally sensitive in terms of where two of the people along with another person here who tracked the radio TRC the rare species as far as there's two types of turtles here the applicant has not noted that the the existing filing that he references for the 40b has on it a 6.6 acre conservation restriction which um would preclude the use of that area and there would actually be a fence running around everything but River Nick Road a felink chain link 5ft chain link fence that goes around the entire property with Turtle Gates along the two Wetland sides so basically this area was all to be fenced in to be protected from the turtles and anything that is proposed here on this part or the lower part has to go through natural heritage the state agency tasks with protecting rare species um they additionally don't identify that zone one directly AB buts their property um and on their existing condition plans there are some changes there that need to be made as far as they have their Contours incorrectly labeled they don't even show it going over as far as they proposed to do building um and there's some changes on it when you compare it with the plans that were approved uh for an or ad by the Conservation Commission in the early 2000s although no work should have been done without a CR being executed um and there's questions about the Wetland line both around this the one large Wetland to the north um but additionally um in going through the old records I found old Wetland maps that show that presumably as a result of the excavation what looks to be two isolated Wetlands potentially are have been created on this site they were identified on those PL on those plant and if those are in fact isolated Wetlands then you have two houses that are sitting on isolated Wetlands those are a protected resource area under the local bylaw they have their own buffer zone as well so the the Wetland lines definitely need to be checked both for the overall the BBWs as well as for isolated wetlands and I would recommend the commission be consulted on that the I was told by D that the superseding order they issued has expired so they would still need to deal with the Conservation Commission whatever the situation is the main concerns the commission had were the impacts to the Wetland from all the clearing and all the work being proposed and as far as the storm water management that was proposed and um so those would still carry over now even with a lower density um as far as the storm water management um there as I said from the cited from the 1990s and the commission felt at the time in the 2000s much more testing has to be done on this site because it's not clear that what is proposed can even work you can't site infiltration on Phil it's not clear that they have the needed separation from groundwater so that kind of testing D tells PE applicants to do that before they do plans to have made sure that what they propose can work so that absolutely needs to be done beforehand not after the fact because they've already before said for this site that it's too hard to do septic um so I would definitely not want that and the water district the commission before had asked for hydro geio study for the water district and that should be done before a permit as well and then I just wanted to add as far as the effective density they talked about the overall density as being 2.44 but your um policies say that they should also address effective density so if you assume the CR that was in effect the Heritage natural heritage called for before that bumps you up to an effective density of 8.2 units per acre which would make it slightly greater than what the town has for the multif family district and then you have a sidey yard setback um they have up to down to 9.5 feet for an RB which this is in it would be 25 feet when you have multif family within an RB it's supposed to be 45 ft so I just wanted to add those points okay thank you is there anyone else that would like to make any comments at this time hi my name is Steve coropolis um we're a uh resident of Forest Street a longterm uh resident almost 70 years um I the beautiful map I just can't see exactly where their driveways coming out in correlation to Forest Street um my parents are still living there they're in their '90s they do not want the additional traffic um they resisted the truck company going down the street they resisted the first project I grew up there and I played on this land it was originally the Puro land um there's one home situated on it in the only I consider buildable and I'm a former contractor site contractor uh only buildable portion I don't see how they can build in wetlands and lowlands in New Hampshire our rules aren't as strict as yours in Massachusetts that's lowlands I've witnessed several floodings of that area in my time living there um the final thing I wanted to say is um I don't know you date back to 1990s on information on some of the land um when the peros passed away Mr Pio had 30 to 4 40 junk cars in the back parts cars he was a mechanic of sorts and F their family ended up cleaning that all out but I would like to see maybe somebody test that land because I know when you have that many vehicles radiative fluid oil brake fluid leaks you just can't get away from that and if even that land is somewhat contaminated I don't know how they're going to build this really unless you fill the wetlands in or fill the lowlands I don't want to call it Wetlands cuz I don't know specifically was designated um I I can't see the pitch of the driveway there's only one lot there that's Road level the rest of it a drop a massive drop I don't know where the stream is located on the map on here I used to fish in that stream right in that location because we used to cut across the street go through the woods Mr P let us go down that little driveway of his and go fishing down there I just I just can't see it I just can't see the location all the other stuff the conservation people said yeah I mean we have this problem up in New Hampshire they didn't want me to put a driveway in because of a spotted salamander and I had to fight that because a spotted salamander is not endangered so uh this is I mean I just can't see it we originally thought one house like they said two houses maybe but when they went into this multiple families thing uh the traffic alone just on riverneck road uh I don't see how riverneck Road would handle it um the intersection of 129 in rck road is already disastrous uh as a youth I used to be able to ride my bicycle to chord to the friendlies in in the library I wouldn't send my kid down that road now with the traffic and this would just increase that's all it be is increasing the traffic I don't know if it would impact the value of our homes like I said we've owned the place quite a long time we found out from our neighbors sales that now our home's worth a lot of money I don't want that disappearing on me I mean we're getting all older here and uh I don't want that I don't want that okay thank you okay thank you Chris L Val 10 Edgewood Street Town meaning rep Precinct 10 um I liveed not that far away from there and that is my precinct um I moved to town about 12 years ago now um so I wasn't around for the first uh 40b projects that were proposed in that that area uh but I've heard about them and every time I drive by that property I look down and see how much water is down there I looked actually on my way over here tonight and that is a huge Pond down there right now um I'm a big advocate of affordable housing I think we need more in Massachusetts but I'm appalled at the location that they're actually trying to put affordable housing down there um it's not a it's not a livable area uh it's not a place that I would want to put affordable housing in this town and I think it's awful that we're trying to put that in there again so that's all okay thank you [Applause] Judy d'angeles 217 Riven road so I'm on the other side of this project so with all the work that we did with Davis and the road studies and the school studies I'm looking where that driveway is coming out too is that right on that dead man Corner coming around after the smarts house so you come around it's a blind corner and from this it looks like that's where the driveway is so there are going to be children in there let's not kid ourselves so we had to go through all of this with Mammoth and Davis and the bus stops and the ability for the buses to stop coming around that corner is definitely a blind corner and if that driveway is where I think it is there's a problem so just getting that spit out there okay thank you anyone else okay we have a couple more uh my name is Judy clock 21 Carter Drive um we are right behind um on on Carter Drive um we are right next to the brook um we went to many many many many meetings opposing the other 40b which was way too dense I agree with everything Ruth has said she could say it much better than I can because she's much more knowledgeable about all of the regulations but I'm concerned about you know it just is common sense to put that dense I understand we need affordable housing but this location is just not suited to such a dense um development it's still dense and I'm afraid that the excavation will cause more flooding we have the wells in that area every year for the past two or three years we have scientists come through our yard and study the rare turtles so there are rare turtle species there are multiple reasons why this is an inappropriate site you know um but the biggest one is that if you just go it drops off it's Wetlands I'm afraid it's going to flood more and then I mean we've been having problems with our water the last year too turning yellow and all sorts of things and you know I'm just concerned about the wells in that area too okay thank you hi uh Eric finny Clark a um I'm not in a butter but I'm uh like a few streets down down the road um the thing that like struck me with this project and um I was around for the uh the last time there was a proposal for the site um it's just the uh topography like it doesn't work we've kind of already highlighted that I have cons concerns about that but um you know with the recent sewer moratorium um and I I'm I'm concerned about what that you know if you allow something like this in with a a higher density um with we when we already have concerns about the sil like and if if it does become a problem like what does that really mean to the rest of us um you know if we're increasing the capacity beyond what we think um that our our system can handle like what does that look like down the road like are we going to have sewer backups are they not going to be able to process the waste like what does that really mean um I'm not a sewer engineer so I you know I don't know I'm just throwing it out there for you guys to think about um the other thing I look at the site and like a knowing the topography and how how it it looks kind of crammed in to me um like really dense like a snow removal um Fire Equipment access um you know waste pickup like how does that flow through that site um you got a a steep hill down there that they said it's going to be a driveway um like a not a roadway um what does that look like you know trucks are going to be going back down like go go down in the uh into that driveway down to to the end or our residents going to have to like haul their trash out you know like what does this all this look like you know all of our uh Operational Support that we have in town um so that's all I just wanted to mention that thank you thank you anyone else here yeah my name's Chad DS I live right across the street from it and uh you know this is the first time I've seen this guy he hasn't come talked to the abutters at all he they try to minimize it by saying it's a it's going to be a driveway if people are coming and going that's a road to me like get what you they going to pull over into the the the side to let someone go some of these buildings are 9 ft apart they're 20t from the road with no sidewalk what if they put a sidewalk in you going to have a house a three-story house 15 ft from a road that's like from me to you that's that's basically all I got to say about that uh and if you look to the right of that it's a huge Pond and there's a compensation behind it if they excavate that place and there's a rainstorm there's no hay Bill going to stop all that water that's all I got to say thank okay thank you anyone else oh we have another one an Marie smart 223 riverneck Road I live right next to this project and this is the first I've heard um I have a question you mentioned If the previous owner I believe that's prinston connected with this company with this group then there's a possibility maybe slim but there's a possibility that this could go from that back to the original 44 buildings did I misunderstand that uh Town Council could maybe answer that yes so the original comprehensive permit is still valid but right now the valid for how many units for the 48 units that it was approved for okay so it's possible that this could turn into 48 un so right now the the permit holder and the property owner are separated in the sense in the sense they have no reason not to join together well I think that there's a pretty significant history of animosity between the two so I I agree that the potential exists I that's that was the only thing I wanted to know there is definitely a potential there is because we've seen I mean I've been here for a long time and we've seen things that weren't going to happen and they happened you know monit Street's one of them they were never going to make that road the access road and now they were talking about luckily they're not doing it but they told us they would never do it and we're fighting to get it not done so that's that's scary thank you okay thank you anyone else is there anyone on Zoom Paul no there's no one requesting on Zoom um Madam chair since I've been sitting here looking at the board of appeals meeting minutes from February 3rd 2022 this was before the board of appeals um for administrative review and I'll just read the motion M Mr Patel was there at the hearing and so forth the motion was made to approve the extension request to riverneck Road realy trust until March 7th 2024 which overun concurrently with the co extension that was seconded by Miss Brown the roll call vote vote was unanimous the extension was granted so there was an extension granted by the board of appeals till March 7th 2024 so it's EXP I don't know if there's anything since then but that's all I've been able to find I think it ran concurrent with the co extension so that was September so it's actually I don't know well if it's running concurrent it wouldn't extend it beyond that right that's the motion reads to approve the extension request to Rivnick Road realy trust until March 7th 2024 which shall run concurrently with the co extension okay well that might need some more resource but I just want to point to the bo okay so um anybody on the board uh uh Virginia you said you had some concerns you'd like to tell us about well um I guess just some suggestions I have on terms of going forward um I'd like to see the department letters answered because I think there's a lot in there that we at least need to know what the top level answer is even if there's more work to be done later with the zba um I'm very I I need more information about the wetlands and the habitat species um it appears to me that our conservation agent gave input but in the time frame that he was given didn't have time to go back to the full commission to discuss this so I would like to um give the Conservation Commission an opportunity to put this on one of their agendas and give the board some formal feedback sure makes M makes sense y um I appreciate the added number of units in terms of the total benefits I would just point out that uh the Community Development director's comments also stated that uh typically a 50 at least some of them at 50% is more beneficial to the town um and then my other question with Community benefits and I'm just thinking back to other development agreements and things that we've done I don't know how this typically works but are there other benefits being offered to the town either financially or in terms of the conservation land that's there um you know what are the community benefits to doing something like this I'm a little bit concerned about the list of waivers and the assumptions that say things like we're not going to worry about the subdivision regulations if this doesn't go to the planning board I think they're still wholly relevant cuz somebody thought through that and I get concerned about the setbacks and some of the other things that uh people brought up I'm I'm just a I'm I'm assuming we're okay and it's it's okay but I'm a little bit confused about the two of butterless that are in our packet the one that is a separate attachment up front is much shorter than the one in the applicant's packet so I think it's I know when in our policy they have to do a Butters to a Butters within 300 ft so that might be is that what the Yeah I mean I'm not worried about it cuz it looks like the um the one that's up front in the packet that's smaller is a subset of of the one that was actually used you like the direct Butters um I still feel uncomfortable with the sewer question I don't know if there's any way that we can get any more information to help inform us recognizing that the full up process would be at the zba level I would like more information to help us understand the density and the traffic impacts um I'm guessing this board doesn't go off and do traffic studies but something simple even like how many um how many residences are currently in that area and then you know what kind of an increase does uh the additional development provide and I had the same concerns about the traffic out onto River Neck Road given what some of the other boards have looked at in that area I I don't know if there's any way that someone can help us verify some of the concerns or the just the facts about the Contours the Wetland lines the land the slopes um um because we seem to have conflicting input on that I would like to understand what the density of the development itself is in in terms of it's not it's not on the full acreage of the site right that we were given the number 2.44 units per acre but what is that density really represent um and then my other question well my other um suggestion is that if we are going to be making a recommendation one way or the other perhaps it would be appropriate uh if the applicant is open to this to hosting this board for a site visit so we can better understand what we're looking at beyond the paper okay thank you Erin do you have any comments um mine are pretty pretty similar to Virginia's I I would like to hear more from the DPW regarding some of these bullets here number seven they um talked about the overflow discharge the pump station and the generator and Sewer capacity of course is a huge one and I also yeah I found the conservations letter particularly concerning that they've been previously twice denied under the protection act so I'd like to hear more about that um and I I would kind of be interested to get clarified when their comprehensive permit actually expires if it's March 7th or uh September um and then kind of what the procedure is I guess if they if we don't grant them the lip well then they can go and do it the other way we've done it you with the other the other three that we had before this so yeah I guess yeah kind of the benefits that would be in US granting them a lip if there are any benefits in US granting it I mean they've told us a couple so yeah yeah okay any comments well I am on the housing Advisory board but we didn't go into this detail for the whole thing but I think initially the single family was going to be like five homes then it was extended to six and then seven but I think that's what a 50% came in uh and I heard that as an afterthought I think because I think that discussion was with EV and maybe in the M 's Housing Authority uh on the 50% uh you know um the Ami Ami yeah affordability um am I correct on that uh may I Madam chair respond um so uh so the answer is yes when we when we looked at this initially there was some discussion at the early conceptual stage probably a year or so ago uh even before my involvement of potentially five single family homes at the rear um when we prepared the concept plan that we brought to the housing Advisory Board and got support from the board on it had six single family homes we then ran the numbers and recognized that we needed to provide two of the single family homes as affordable units and providing two of the six or a third of the units was uneconomic and so we added the seventh home to the rear which is why I slipped up earlier instead six because that was in my mind because when we presented earlier it was six um we added the seventh home so that we could designate two of those homes as affordable but that is correct that is the evolution of the plan okay thank you I had the same problem as can you talk into the microphone George Counting oh I'm sorry I had the same problem as Pat had accounting when you were giv the numbers out I had different numbers than you did and I thought maybe I wasn't letting them up correctly so I'm glad he asked the question but so anyway so I thought they had agreed uh I mean it was it did get an okay from the housing Advisory Board based on a few things but I think a lot of the things have been changed and some of the things have been changed I wasn't crazy about the size of the 3,000 foot house all of them being 3,000 ft houses to me that's not a a Workforce house but um it's a matter of an opinion so um I'm just telling you what my opinion was um but I think you know 50% would be uh or at least Le less than 70% anyway would be when a couple of them would be a lot better than you know advantageous to the town if in fact they were going to go if this plan was approved just for my my input thank you P um similar concerns to uh Virginia and eron um one thing uh further to that is I I really want to get a handle on what our obligations are as far as sewer um is concerned um because if it goes the other way um I guess and probably either way I'd probably want to get an idea as to the soils out there just U because if there was overex ation during the highway project then that could lead to a host of other issues over there um so some soil condition reports might be in order and then uh I agree um with Pat that um uh a me S sidewalk would be appropriate and I guess a question right now is is it currently flagged for wetlands and if it is when was it flagged and if it's not can it be flagged hi Tim power uh civil engineer um to just to answer your question about the wetlands uh what is shown on the plan was the uh previously approved uh anrad that was there uh and just as part of process we discussed when would be appropriate to go back to conservation and get them ref flagged so it's not an official oad yet uh but that was as last uh last approved is what was shown the previously approved what sir previously approved Wetlands the oad the order of resource area delation uh for the previous development effort um I don't know exactly when it expired but we used that as a starting point just to create our concept and so that would be back M you know 2006 somewhere around there yeah I think it expired with the superseding order of conditions uh is when that Wetland delineation would have it also expired which will would have been uh I believe a couple years ago could we have that flagged prior to a s sidewalk uh I think we can I think we rehung the flags the surveyor when he was last there so someone can take a look and and reconfirm them or move them based on what was needed so we certainly can have it flagged uh i' have to flagged to today's conditions not correct to 2006 correct okay good thank you okay and you know I agree with you know I have same concerns that everybody else has raised uh one thing one of the uh um Butters from the public here mentioned also was about sidewalks to you know especially given how close together the the the uh buildings are um in our in our lip policy it does uh require that the Housing Authority provide comments I know you know you did orally give us some of those comments I would like to see something in writing and we you know I can follow up with with David hederson over at the housing authority to to make sure that we get that so that he uh he can give us a sense for uh the benefits of this project if it were to go forward um I mean I would like to see The Narrative redone so it is accurate so we don't have the discrepancies and the numbers um with and with the other other documents that you provided um and neighborhood Outreach I think is is critically important I mean you see the room is filled here tonight tonight um I think whatever you can do to to reach out to them and um alleviate some of their concerns is is definitely going to be beneficial um as Virginia mentioned a a site visit would be good with things marked out so we can see you know even if you could where the buildings are going to be um in addition to the to the wetlands um was there anything else that we and we want to wait at least till the next till the Conservation Commission has a chance to weigh in on this again I just have a question for my own education George mentioned the housing Advisory Board is there an output from them that we should be looking at now you said they looked at the the previous one or did they look at this one this one and they got they they kind of appr they approved this one okay but it I don't think it was in the detail that uh that we've seen tonight and and I think it was with the additional ather was with additional the two the two additional uh houses at 50% so do you think they want another shot at it too I mean we defin you know I think we'd like to get as much input as we can from boards like that I agree so absolutely so I think that's another one we'd like to have them um you know review it again and give their feedback if there's any any other benefits is that up to us to ask them to do that or is that the applicant as so Madam J we're happy to make a further submitt and if the housing Advisory Board would like to meet with us that's I will say for the record the plan you see on your screen is the plan that was submitted virtually identical except we only had six residences not the seventh we added the seventh residence after the meeting uh with the housing Advisory Board in all other respects the layout of the site is the same um uh Mr Dixon is correct that the discussion that was had by the housing Advisory Board was certainly a more brief discussion I think we had a maybe an hourong meeting maybe not even 45 minutes uh they asked some questions generally they voted unanimously to support it um they didn't uh specify that we necessarily needed to designate a greater number of units as affordable or greater percentage but they expressed the desire they said to the extent that we could make it work they would obviously like to see the greatest affordability possible so um we're happy to go back and and run our numbers again and if the housing Advisory Board wants to look at it and make comments they can do that if they prefer to meet with us we're happy to make a further appearance okay all right so so we'll leave it to you to follow up with uh their representatives see if they want to have a meeting or that's fine or well how we move forward with that that okay with you Debbie Evan would Evan would probably be the one to talk to set it up can I ask one more question sure can I just ask one more question just for my own maybe personal understanding of the affordable conversation sure so I'm looking at your comparables here and it looks like they are all kind of in the one 1.1 to 1.4 million range the single family homes yes the single family homes so is that I would I assume that the range that these houses you'd be kind of looking at pricing in so so that that's possible I mean with with um doing a market study on a project of this sort is obviously difficult right because if you find single family homes on one and a half acre lots or one acre lots they're going to be treated differently than a single family home that um is surrounded by other single family homes in a rental devel and the market changes and things like that correct the idea behind the market study is to give us some sense so that when we're preparing the proforma we have a a sense as to what revenues might be so we can determine whether the project is profitable so then the affordable units the affordable even at um the the lower Ami at the 50% Ami they're not offering that I'm sorry they only offered to go as low as 70 70 70 is what you'd be offering so the the standard for uh chapter 40b developments that all of the subsidizing agency require is between 70 and 80 they they want to create a window of affordability so we have committed to do what the programmatic requirements would require us to do um and that's 70 to 80% what we're offering today is in the interest of recognizing we need to work with the board under the lip um project uh policy to provide some additional benefit we'd be happy to reduce the Ami to the extent we can what we proposed is for the six units within the rental development we would provide three of those six at at 70% Ami and three of those six at 60% Ami now I've heard a number of members say tonight that they prefer us to go if we can to as low as 50% and obviously offer as many as we can so we can try and rework the numbers and see if we can get lower practical standpoint just so I have a number in my brain for like if if the the uh market price units were to go for 1.2 then what would those two Ami at even if you were to hit 50% they wouldn't no the 80% so so the numbers I I can't do the numbers at 50% on the spot because it's a it's a calculation a formula you input the but the numbers we did submit with the application was based upon the 70 to 80% and the single family homes were going to be between 225 and 265 okay okay okay thank you and and if you could on on your plans um has been brought up um about the the location of the driveway if it could be excuse me could you please keep the chatter down um if you could more clearly show where the driveway is going to be and and and the width of it so people can see how you know there were concerns about driveway versus Road um how how wide it's going to be to allow for traffic and the um any egress through Forest Street that might be anticipated the the one um neighbor had mentioned about that Pat may I ask another question about that so if I look at that driveway um at about 1:00 is that a fire truck turnaround an emergency vehicle turnaround that that's correct so so what happens if they go all the way into the development how are they turning around so um so one of the comments you can see we have a turn around at the end but it's not nearly as deep it wouldn't accommodate a fire truck so one of the comments that was made by DPW I think it was it might have been the fire department it was in one of the two letters was that they needed a better better access for turnaround so I've discussed that with the engineer but we just got those comments at the end of last week so we haven't adjusted the site okay so I think it's apparent that we're not going to finish this hearing this evening um we have another meeting in two weeks and we have one in four weeks um would you have a preference do you want to come back in two weeks do you think you'll be prepared or should we wait for four weeks so if we want the Conservation Commission we won't have it in two weeks because they're meeting tomorrow and they haven't they don't have this on their agenda okay we might have to wait until our May meeting and that's I'm sure my clients are anxious and they're think they're thinking two weeks but I I realize that there's a lot to do so one of the questions I'd have for the board you you referenced the potential site visit uh obviously site visits are exempt under the law there not meetings so would you like us to try and coordinate between now and our return in weeks uh a date and time when we could make the site available we need to coordinate we'd offer something today but we need to speak to the property owner um but we can find the date when that would work Ser dates that'd be really good to do that before the next meeting yeah okay we can do that okay so four weeks would be fine and we'll try and coordinate that side visit to occur between now and then okay and it would be good if we could have some flagging Done Right prior to that visit sure do we so we don't have our May schedule but are we assuming we're meeting on Monday the 6th after town meeting correct yeah so we need to continue the public hearing so unless there's any other questions yeah I would take a motion to continue the public hearing I will make a motion to continue the public hearing for um the local initiative project at 243 riverneck Road do I need to recall that no to get the date to May 6th May 6th 2024 second okay we have a motion and a second all in favor okay we'll see you in four weeks thank you very much appreciate it thank you thank you to everybody who came and for your patience okay the next item on our agenda um is the discussion about uh the development agreement potential modification for a 255 Princeton Street and I believe um Chris Lali is going to make this presentation is he's still there he is for the record Chris Lali Vice chair of the planning board if those folks are going to stay out there you might thanks Johan so while Paul is finding the slides what I can do is go through the slides um and then uh towards the end of the presentation uh we have some information about the developer agreement um recommendations from the planning board that we can go over [Music] okay you guys have a big packet yeah getting through the the one that we just finished yeah a little bit further Paul it's after the warrant after the warrant yeah there it is to blow it up okay um so in to give you some background on the MBTA zoning uh in 2021 Governor Baker uh signed the amendment to the zoning act essentially it designated 177 communities uh in scope of this law that are either MBTA communities or MBTA adjacent communities um LOL and Billa are identified as MBTA communities and because we AB but both we are an MBTA adjacent Community um what this law requires is that we have zoning ordinance um that permits multif family housing by right um in certain zones that we designate in town and you can go to the next slide slide so why is the state doing this um essentially it's their attempt at uh trying to solve the housing crisis greater production of housing uh making sure that we have uh housing near public transportation and addressing the the what they call the missing middle housing next slide so what does this new law require um it requires us that we create at least one zoning District of reasonable size where multif family housing is permitted by right and meets a number of other criteria in their statute we cannot have age restrictions in the zoning it has to be suitable for families uh minimum gross density of 15 units per acre in the zoning uh it has to be at least 50 acres where 10% of the the current housing stock uh could be built by W and it's based on the uh 2020 census so it it comes out to about 1477 units half of the uh zoning must be contiguous with no portion less than five contiguous Acres it's has to be a neighborhood scale District um not a single site so we wouldn't be able to scatter these sites throughout the town um and if you go to the next slide you can see so what they're trying to address is that missing middle housing and what the planning board strategy was to do is to really Target the lowest possible density uh that we could um we could work with and that that Target was 15 units per acre if you notice the uh some of the larger buildings are are other parts of the missing middle um but we decided to uh Target the the 15 units per acre next slide so in looking at what areas to zone for this MBTA zoning we deci decided to really look at what our strategy was we wanted to minimize any negative impacts um any negative impacts to Wetlands over development of single areas we wanted to minimize the likelihood of short-term development and aim for longer term uh this is because we do have a number of constraints on our infrastructure we wanted to maximize any positive impacts if there were any um we wanted to uh put them up close to the LRT bus routes we wanted to base the new MBTA zoning on our current multi family zoning as well as the UMass uh West multif Family overlay District zoning we wanted to minimize potential decrease of commercial property because of this we wanted to increase the area the acres in scope from 50 to 100 in order to decrease and keep the density down and we wanted to select areas that are currently developed and have a low probability of Redevelopment primarily to Target that long to uh longer term um strategy planning board process uh it started in June 2023 we worked we started working with ncog who have helped us uh significantly uh guide us in the process interpret the state requirements uh they worked with us to perform the scenario modeling for each of the areas that we were looking at um in June and July we started to understand the requirements in the law brainstormed areas and then in early September we started doing the an analysis of the area models to narrow down the list in September we narrowed it down to a few areas uh where we presented uh these areas to the public and gathered their input it was ums West the UPS area and the 110 area you know October we um looked at additional areas uh that we had um been given input from the uh public in different areas in town we looked at those and and modeled them and did some analysis in November we uh went to town committees boards and departments to gather additional input um and we selected two areas uh to propose uh to you and the rest of the uh town meeting um in November we Pro we brainstormed uh are things that we wanted in the new zoning and in November is when we also made the decision to really uh base the MBTA zoning on our current zoning uh for multif family and for the overlay uh ums West overlay and now we're in the process of the Outreach uh to different boards and to town meeting reps uh to get the uh the final push for the district reviewed I'm not going to go through every one of these um but we did look across town at various areas uh we looked at riverneck Road uh the Davis company Parcels uh they did approach us to include it in the analysis so we did we looked at the Rison properties um we looked all across town the two areas that we did select are the MS West area and then the 110 West uh multif family area so in the next slides I start getting into a little bit more of the details for the areas uh so the UMass West area includes the UMass West uh overlay property as well as the two condo uh properties uh attached to it windir and meow wood next slide so this gives you some uh information about the area uh so it's gross area acreage is about 70 Acres uh the developable density is about 18 but the gross density uh comes out to about 15 Acres so that gives a uh a capacity of this Zone uh at just over a thousand units um for comparison sake we wanted to include these numbers about what it could be developed as versus what it currently is to give you some idea of how big it could get uh if it were ever redeveloped uh under this overlay so the current units in these areas um including the uh units that are currently under development is about 522 units um if everything were essentially leveled and rebuilt according to this overlay uh it would only have added 521 units on top of those units so it's not a thous additional units to the town it would be a 500 unit ad and the next section we include um the 110 District multif family area of Ledgewood Fox Hunt and six of the eight woodrest buildings as well as the Enterprise Bank property uh this provides a gross density of 15 units per acre uh the capacity of this area is 477 and again for comparison's sake um it would be a doubling of size under this overlay so this gives uh modeled uh information about the uh entire area um again we are instead of the minimum 50 acres we're looking at 100 acres to keep the uh units per acre down at the uh at the minimum capacity if we kept it at 50 acres it would be about 30 units per acre which would be incredibly dense for our town so we looked at 100 Acre uh areas and that keeps us down at the 15 unit density so people are concerned about um how big these buildings could be um again because they are following our current zoning it would be limited to three stories um and and all of our design features and and current uh zoning requirements would still apply uh and these are the the current areas of 175 uh Littleton Road for Glenbrook woodrest and fox hun and this is essentially what we would also get under the the proposed zoning bylaw so to give you some highlights um maximum density that we're proposing in the zoning is 15 units per acre nothing more it limits the buildings to three stories uh permits only up to 24 units in a single building and not more than six dwelling units from a single entrance again mirroring what we currently have in town uh it allows town houses and and the medium Multiplex style buildings we uh require varying architectural elements so it's not a boxy looking building um we include recreational open space as well as uh bicycle storage all right so we in March 18th um or sorry March 6th we received a letter or an email um from uh EOL e eohc uh from the state um that essentially guided us uh with their preliminary review of our submission um they had some minor concerns with the language uh pretty minor we made the edits in our March uh 13th meeting uh but since then uh they did give us the official letter which as you probably know by now included an additional uh significant concern of the developer agreement the reason why this is such a concern is not because of the restrictions themselves per se but because the town has entered in the agreement uh so it's essentially uh usurping the zoning uh that we're trying to put in so there are three main concerns with the developer agreement are uh related to capacity uh the developer agreement requires I believe it's either 12 or 13 um units per acre which is 77 units below uh compliance it requires 15% affordability uh which exceeds the current level in the the zoning bylaw of 10% uh we are working on uh trying to get a feasibility study to increase that that percent in the bylaw to 15% uh but we don't have that yet so the uh bylaw as it currently stands is 10% the last one is the age restriction um and and that is in direct conflict with uh section 3A uh being suitable for families with children so at our last board meeting um we did discuss this significantly um and we are still recommending we move ahead with this uh with the uh developer agreement uh being uh amended is our recommendation I will get to the proposed timeline and why we get to that in a minute uh but essentially um these are the reasons why we feel that uh amending the developer agreement based on that timeline is relatively is very low risk the first is that the site is built out um with approved plans so if you look at the site plans you can see the site plan it's hard to see on that slide but essentially there's no more space on the site for for a building with 77 units and the required additional parking they would need to rec redesign that site completely and that's unlikely to happen at this point in their development the project is fully financed fully permitted and actively under construction uh things are being uh developed as we speak and it's unlikely to change course at this time however if they were to change course um it would require significant modifications to the plans and these are the additional hurdles that they would have to go through in order for uh the building to take place so any permits that were pulled after July 1st would be um applicable under the uh enhanced energy stretch code currently they have all of their permits uh so they don't have to comply with the the stretch code uh if we were to um amend the developer agreement after July 1st and they would pull new permits they would have to redesign all of their buildings to comply with the new code uh they would also have to refile under the meepa uh filing the planning board and Conservation Commission would have to re re-review and approve the site plans they would have to have a North chumford Water District uh review and to add capacity and any potential design changes to add capacity to the units would require a redesign on their wastewater treatment plant with additional capacity and that would require additional reviews and approvals from D we have confirmed that the current uh design does not allow for increased uh capacity Beyond usual spikes occasional spikes as well so they certainly don't have capacity to uh add 77 units so this is our proposed timeline of next steps um we anticipate that in late March the regulatory agreements for the uh age restricted affordable Choice units and the six affordable units um are likely to uh be approved in the next uh few months May 2nd we are are proposing the town meeting vote with the anticipation that we would change the developer agreement to to bring come in in compliance we are proposing on June 2nd and early June we get the approvals from the state attorney general after their 90-day review of the zoning and in early June uh the regulatory agreements would be approved uh September the Attorney General would issue their decision on the zoning uh from town me meeting and that's when we would anticipate um the discussions and the execution of the recorded uh developer agreement uh modification and then in December is our deadline for submitting all of this to uh the state so the key takeaways are that we have to comply with state law uh there are two areas that we selected for compliance with the state law while minimizing impact and likelihood of development uh they're extremely low probability of being redeveloped even with the amendment to the developer agreement uh the new MBTA zoning is based on our current multif family and UMass West overlay District so there really no changes to the zoning and currently we are including a 10% affordable housing requirement uh but we do have every intention of increasing that to 15% once we are able to get the feasibility study completed okay anyone have any questions for Chris I have a question sure so the the um in regards to the age restriction age restricted units the um multif family housing should be without age restrictions and shall be suitable for families with children is there not a three-bedroom requirement for family units and because the age restricted units that that we plan on building are one bedroom units right or maybe two bedroom I I do not believe that that restriction needs to be in the zoning so the 10% three-bedroom unit requirement is a requirement that was adopted by the state subsidizing agencies as it relates to chapter 40b development for being suitable with families and children it was required for three bedrooms right well the the requirement for 10% 3bedroom is in the chapter 40b area it's not part of this statute okay so while the statute does say it should be suitable for families with children there's no specific requirement in terms of the number of bedrooms okay interesting okay any other questions for Chris so Chris you're talking about amending in the developer developer agreement is there cost associated with them changing the agreement and are they willing to just do that or I am not sure that that would be our question because we hold the developer agreement yeah the developer agreement is not in our purview that's under your purview so I would have no idea Paul have anything yeah Paul has some yeah so there wouldn't be a cost per se associated with amending the developer agreement as as it relates to the developer side of things um you know there may be a minimal expense for them and having their attorney review it and and sort of participate in that process with the town um all of the provisions of the development agreement uh are something that you know is adding cost to the developer um or restricting um uh revenues for the developer so they don't really have any concerns with they shouldn't have any concerns with amending the development agreement other than they did go through an extensive process with the neighborhood and that development agreement was part of sort of the selling point for getting that zoning changed so to the extent that they have any hesitation in coming to the to the table and amending this that would be the nature of it not because that there's going to be any cost Associated to them you and my understanding is that um Evan binsky has been in in conversations with the de a representative from the developer and is working to get something in writing that they will agree to these changes but basically not change their development correct we do have an email um from Mark baransky uh that the um subject to the develop subject to treml Crow uh their Investment Partners and debt entity and other interested parties doing a full legal review and getting comfortable that there's no negative impact upon the project they would agree to cooperate with the town and amend the developer agreement I just have a follow-up question from what Pat just said so um Pat said they would give us a letter saying they agree to the development agreement modifications and they wouldn't change anything that they're doing but can they actually put in they wouldn't change anything that they're doing that won't pass mustard with the state will it yeah I mean essentially that would be a side development agreement deal and I I don't if I mean if the state got wind of that you know we'd be still faced with the same problem so what Chris had the three biggies on there the um the the sewer capacity no no no in terms of in terms of the development agreement modifications you had the affordability restriction the age restriction and the maximum number of units or the yeah the capacity and my understanding is it's still unclear from the state from the discussions that you guys had today whether we have other things in that development agreement there were Financial agreements that were made there was an easement granted to the Augusta and St Andrews Way community there's a conservation restriction um so what how do we how do we get to a level of confidence that if we go modify this development agreement the state's not going to come back and say keep gutting it some more because we are really gutting it and and I let me just say I think you guys have done a phenomenal job and I'm like 90 to 97% of the way there so I'm not trying to find reasons not to do this I just want to get our ducks in line so I I will say Evan and I did have a a zoom meeting this morning with representatives from eohc they were not willing to make any commitments in terms of what revisions to the development agreement would satisfy them and addition in addition to the big three and as Virginia just sort of uded to there are a number of other Provisions in this development agreement that they had questions about um including the uh the payment as mitigation to the schools um there's other payments in there um there was the traffic mitigation payments essentially what they're looking at with regards to those is are those the sort of requirements that could be included as part of a site plan approval process or is this something that's sort of above and beyond what would be allowed as that my argument to them was that it would not be at all uncommon to have some sort of impact payments as part of a s plan approval process um so I I think that we can make an argument that these should be allowed to remain but they are not committing one way or the other to that and um the development agreement said that an easement would be granted to the Augusta and St Andrews Way intersection so once that can you clarify like what happen once that easement is granted does the development agreement matter anymore no once the agreement is is been granted and is on record I'm sorry the the the easement has been granted and is on record it remains doesn't matter whether or not the provision in the development agreement is stricken it remains how it goes with the property it runs with the land it's on it's on the property and it cannot be amended or rescinded without the agreement of the the party that benefit from that easement and so that was my recollection was that was like 20 something Acres 20 20 something thousand square feet yeah it's not that significant so it would the the the the um the state wouldn't care about that much of the land being deed restricted from an MBTA zoning standpoint I you can't go ahead I'm asking Paul yeah I I don't know if the state has raised any concerns with that but again they have not committed to to any provision of the development agreements um being allowed to remain and so the the original agreement had three parties it was Princeton Properties who owned the land traml Co Crow and um the choice whatever the organization is affiliated with with choice if if traml Crow owns the land have do we have to modify the parties on the agreement as well if we start doing this since traml Crow now owns the land and not princent properties it would have to be whoever is the current owner of the property they would be the ones that would execute for the property owner and then the developer would execute for them and if there's an identity of interest you know they can execute for both okay and I'm just thinking about the timeline there's a requirement in the traml crow agreement in section 10 and in the choice agreement in section 4 that the final amend the way I interpreted it as any Amendment can't be finalized until there's a duly noticed public meeting so that wouldn't necessarily be us getting input from the neighbors to make this decision it would be once we make the decision to do it and we're ready to execute it we have to have another public meeting to to to notify the public that we are going to formally modify this agreement I I think that's the way I read that I think to be on the safe side definitely with regards to the notice we want to have a a notice to any AB butter who may you be impacted by the revision of the development agreement okay and can you remind me under so I understand we have the two regulatory agreements that we filed right Crow is marching along under what condition will the choice regulatory agreement expire or be invalid is it if they don't get their permitting or their financing the the the choice regulatory agreement once it's executed and recorded will remain in place I heard discussion in the in the other meetings that there's a risk right now that at some point this year it could be rendered invalid because they haven't gotten their financing or their permitting no no so this goes to whether or not the units can be counted on the the town's subsidized housing inventory okay so within one year of the date that the units were approved by the in this case it was an administrative decision from the community development office because that's how the original traml Crow approval yeah was was issued within one year of that the units can be added to your Shi presuming that uh regulatory agreement has been executed sometime in that one-year period but after 12 months of the issuance of that decision those units come off of the town's subsidized housing inventory that's where we have potential exposure and they come back on once a building permit is eventually issued okay and um Chris's chart pointed out that windamir and meow wood are age restricted communities so if we go through and change the development agreement what is there a possibility that the state comes back and still rejects this proposal because it's got two age restricted communities in it no no because that's not a development agreement with the town those are local permitting decisions um that ultimately could be reversed if if the property owners you know ever determined that they were going to come forward and dissolve the condo association and move forward with a different type of development okay and then my um my last question related to this is you you have very well articulated one of the lowrisk um factors is that there's no room to build 77 more units if the current development doesn't necessarily comply with the MBTA zoning I'm thinking maybe there's another lowrisk AR arent here that if they wanted to put 77 more units in under MBTA zoning would they have to start all over to make the rest of it comply if treml Crow wanted to go through the overlay to to add the 77 units they would essentially have to start over from scratch because none of the rest of the development complies right now they would have to find space for the 77 units and there's no physical space no no no I'm just saying I get that argument but I'm saying is there another one that says if they're going to invoke the overlay what they're building right now doesn't wholly comply does it they wouldn't invoke the overlay they would go through the underlying zoning which they already have they can they can they can split it they can put use the overlay on part of it and the under well first of all yes they can okay because it would be in this this instance two separate overlay districts yeah that would be applicable and they could operate under either one or under the underlying zoning they can operate under both at the same time I don't think that there's a significant difference between the district thank you I mean ultimately they're both 15 units per acre and are the red lines that are in the warrant article those would be like a friendly amendment that you're proposing yes based on the work that you did here okay y those are the um those are the simple edits that we did in our March 13th meeting yeah Madam chair if I may clarify sorry this is I was going to call on you go ahead y yeah no problem I'm sorry I'm not on camera but I'm in a car and um there's very bad lighting in here so um the the Amendments that are in the zoning right now are basic amendments that that reflect the changes request by hlc that were sent to us by email back in March and so those are just to clarify exactly what can be allowed by right and other sections of the zoning bylaw are not applicable okay Pat anything else I have is comments or suggestions going forward I done with my questions okay anybody else have any questions for for Chris okay now if you want to give your comments I mean as as has been mentioned um one of the reasons that we're here tonight um is potentially to vote whether to recommend approval of article 26 I believe it is in the uh Tommy warrant uh do you want to make your comments before we talk about that um sure okay um so I I I would like to make a suggestion that perhaps we take a poll of the board so the planning board and the board knows where we stand I would be more comfortable taking a vote on August 22nd April April 22nd I'm sorry um looking toward putting two things in place I would like to invite the neighborhoods back because we went through an extensive process from May to February last time with the neighborhoods and them with the developer and I just feel that we should honor that and allow them to give us some input and I would like to try to get if we can more formal letters from both choice because they have their own agreement and from traml crow that delineate what we're going to change in the development agreement and that they sign off that says you know it would be Our intention to to do that and also to put in there that the AG the changes wouldn't go into effect until July 1st or upon approval for from town meeting whichever is later because that would Safeguard us with the um the the July 1st energy Milestone that the planning board has identified is also helping to mitigate the risk that they would try to do anything different well on on that point I think the Plentywood has suggested that we not amend the development agreement until after that point right but so what I'm so where I'm coming from I'm trying to get something in place though is that um there's been conversations too about like getting this in front of town meeting and getting it to pass and that's where my head's at right now I think um the last time around we had signed off the agreement before we went to town meeting and a large part of selling it at town meeting was the neighborhood saying we want this we trust this developer we'd rather know what's coming than have to battle the next round so I think from the standpoint of getting it to pass it town meeting having that conversation here rather than forcing all the neighborhoods to show up at town meeting on without having had a voice yet is going to help the process and I think having something in place rather than a trust me will go change the development agreement having something a little more formal from the parties in the development agreement is going to help sell it to town meeting um I did you want to say something Chris if I could I agree with the public input 100% y um my question about the um letters of intent is that if we pass this a town meeting and we don't change the developer agreement the state won't accept our changes our our zoning so it has if we passes the town meeting that developer agreement will have to be changed exactly and all I'm saying is before we go to town meeting let's have something clear in front of town meeting from the parties saying we will commit to changing the development agreement should you pass this and that those changes that that change would not happen or maybe we just write don't don't execute it till after July 1st but the change wouldn't happen until July 1st or the approval of town meeting whichever is later if I could just jump in as we noted earlier we haven't gotten the commitment from eohc as to what exactly in the development agreement is going to need to be changed so it would be it would be helpful to have you know something where we've got an agreement from the developer that they will modify the development agreement as necessary but not execute it until sometime in the future so that we can get that feedback from eoh hlc okay is it I me I think your what but what if he what if hlc comes back and says we want you to gut a whole bunch of other stuff out have we just committed to modify a development agreement that I don't think so no okay I would say I think you can definitely paper it in a way that you know we we're not committing we're not committing anything until we find out from eohc what exactly they need to be removed but but but at minimum we do know they want us to change the capacity and the two restrictions on age and affordability so we could have them put we could help them with that language could we not or do you not recommend doing that either I'm I'm not suggesting that we don't do that I will say on the affordability um when we noted that we would likely need to change that eohc pointed out that you know there is the provision that allows you to petition for up to 15% so they're not 100% sure they're going to require us if we're you know if we successfully petition them to to raise that to 15% then that Vision could actually stay in okay so again I think it's helpful to get an agreement in principle with the the developer to modify as necessary to support the M but but leaving the details until we actually get feedback from eohc and that I'm okay I just think it should be something I I really feel that you're going to be much stronger going into town meeting if we can get something formalized and it has to Choice needs to send us something too correct and I understand that you know they're not they're going to do what they're going to do regardless of whether there's a development agreement in place but we still need it from them um my only other I just wanted if I may just give you a couple suggestions about messaging and preparation for going to town meeting I've heard um I went back and watched the entire February of 2022 special town meeting again before this meeting and I've heard multiple times members of the planning board saying well we can tell town meeting we did this zoning with MBTA in mind you know and now we just have to modify it and that's really not accurate and I'm I'm afraid that if you present it that way you're going to alienate the neighborhood that you need support from and you're going to Al alienate the town meeting reps who remember because when when Evan presented it in the written word and the spoken word there was absolutely no mention of MBTA and it came up a couple times in questions from the floor and every time it came up Evan was very honest saying that is not the selling point here we don't know enough about MBTA yet it may possibly help us but that's this is the reason we're doing this is because it is project-based zoning and and the community wants it and so I think that's very important because when you say I I sit in the back of the room at your meetings and I can see you alienating The Neighbors when you say things like that and and I don't think it's intentional but um I would just go back and refresh and remember what really happened and then the the other thing in the messaging is um a couple times people have said well it's just a really straightforward change to to modify the paper and the development agreement and that's the you know the best thing to do and easiest thing to do and again um for the people who put a lot of Blood Sweat and Tears and fears into this you're alienating them because it really is gutting a lot of that development agreement and so I wouldn't treat it in such when it comes across a little bit Cavalier I wouldn't I would just be careful of that um and again I think you guys have done an absolutely phenomenal job this is such a hard problem thank you so thank you so Paul hav I have a question um what is the likelihood that we would know within the next two weeks from hlc what other amendments they might be looking for is it likely or not so I told them that we you know have town meeting coming up um we said May 2nd because that's the date that this is going to come up on the the agenda and I asked them you know to give us a response in advance of that they didn't commit to doing so um but hopefully we'll hear back from them before then okay but they you know they've got a process they've got a chain of command they've got to run everything up um and that's why they usually take quite a while to come back back with responses okay so how do other board members feel about Virginia's suggestion that we wait until 22nd to try to get some more uh confirmation from the parties about what's going to happen and do our recommendations at that point and to invite the neighborhood to I agree I agree okay I think that could we would the board members mind just taking a poll so the planning knows where our minds are at because they are going to be meeting this week to determine their finalize their path forward straw poll that well like I said I'm I'm I I mean I'm happy to offer it whether we do a poll or not I am um feeling supportive of this but I just feel that we need to get a couple more things in place and we need to we need to make sure the neighborhood is on boardon I'm okay with that I'm supportive okay yes supportive okay yeah I'm supportive too I mean whatever we whatever information we can get um to help us know what it is we're agreeing to obviously is helpful thank you I appreciate that straw pole too because we also have to represent to the fincom as well because they were anticipating um what your decision might be related to the developer agreement so they wanted us to represent to them as well before taking another vote Paul Paul can we formally notify the neighborhoods that we're going to ask for their input on yeah we we'll we have we have two outspoken members here we'll start that process tomorrow morning we'll get that we'll get that out spread the word'll spread the word for us okay all right so I think um that pretty much covers everything we have on that topic which moves us past topic 8 too since we're not going to take the recommendation on MBTA um on that article and um um I did trade emails with Daren desler over the past couple of days and she will also be here on the 22nd to make a presentation about her Warren article citizen petition one article so we can move on next to the letter and testimony that we sent to the Joint um do you want me he for anything else legislative committee on bonding Capital expenditures and state Assets in our meeting packet is the letter as it was finalized subsequent to our special meeting last week and Virginia if you want to talk a little bit about the testimony that you gave clean it up that would be helpful um if you want to I um I basic basically uh Pat was not able to be there when they called on us so I um my testimony was really around the the letter that we wrote and uh I went through I emphasized the front end points of the letter with respect to taking away local Authority and the infrastructure and um and then I just went through some of the other bullets a little more quickly and I also um you saw in the article they also picked up on uh questioning the number of units across the state that would be built because we have an estimate of potentially 4,500 in Chelmsford Alone um I don't know what else you want me to say yeah no I yeah I mean I didn't obviously like I said I couldn't watch it I had another event I had to get to but um and everything that I've read you did an excellent job thank you and um I'll just also mention Sam Chase gave some verbal testimony as well as written testimony so um that was helpful to have that reinforced and the the gentleman from the planning board in LEL I thought did an excellent job as well Gary Gary um and I will mention one thing um at last week's planning board meeting the the planning board had talked about the the letter also and the and the testimony and made a suggestion that we resubmit it with their signatures on it and I you know I don't know how the rest of the board feels about this but I'm not I'm not crazy about that idea we've already sent ours to where we sent it if they want to reference it in a letter that they might write I'm fine with that um and if they want to send it to others than than what we send it to if they wanted to attach it to a letter they might send I'm okay with that I don't know if anybody has any comments about that I mean I don't think we want to resend resend ours under under those circumstances no I I I agree with that Pat I we had to get it submitted in time for the testimony so I think it would um if there's another reason why we want to use this letter for some other audience and we want to coordinate joint signatures I'd be happy to do that and I am also happy to have them circulate it to more people and attach it um with their support I I have a I'm sorry when you're done with that I have question go ahead I just Paul I have a question about this article that you sent out it says that the MMA supports Governor Healey's housing Bond bill and I know that's the whole bill but do we know what they submitted or if they submitted for the adus cuz I was under the impression they were going to have a presence at this hearing and nobody was there I've not seen it with the what the mma's position has been consistent that they don't support anything that takes away local control of zoning okay um but but beyond that they support the the entirety of the bill meaning the the the VA vast majority of the bills Provisions you know which provides significant investment in and and housing in the Commonwealth um but they support everything as been their policy of local option you know for the for the example the one St can provide the search charge for uh affordable housing and but they also oppose anything that takes away local zoning such as the Adu by right and they've tried to make that clear but they've not published as as you noted written their written testimony um yeah it's a little bit cont I think they might feel a little bit torn on this one so they're not too public about it yeah well you know listening listening to the testimony as much as I did listen did I you know so many good things in it exactly but it seemed like they tried to kind of slip something in that maybe didn't relate to the other things that they were trying to do or maybe they feel like it did I don't know but okay so we'll move on to our next topic which is um the the letter that I have drafted for the Cobblestone place um proposed 40b this is the one that needs to be sent that is is Will should is to be sent to um Mass housing in response to their letter from US asking for comments so far that development is the only one this is under number 10 yeah um they're the only one of the three 40 BS that we have um had meetings about that uh have gotten to the point where Mass housing has asked for our letter so this is what I have come up with as far as the inputs that we have gotten uh when we when we did the site visit with Michael Busby um he said that everything should be in one document he prefers that to having attachments and things like that so I try to consolidate everybody's comments into this letter uh if anybody has any comments um I can make edits anything of course you know I do um did I have a misspelling I hope that's all it is no no no and so um at the opening where we say it's a five unit proposed 40b development on 1.05 Acres I didn't know if we should put a just a statement in there that says due to the shape of the lot the five units proposed would be on approximately 0.9 Acres yeah I guess I would not say that because um the whole it the parcel is 1.05 and if somebody a single family it be the same thing so um with respect to the neighbor comments um there was a I don't and again I don't know how much of this you want to put in there P but we did have someone speak up about um potentially hazardous conditions backing out of the driveway next door because of the proximity of the road to to their driveway mhm um there were neighbor the neighbors were concerned about the proximity of the Wastewater or the septic treatment to a neighbor's well they were concerned about having a single entry or exit for emergency access and then I think um the Cindy who was the retired firefighter EMT she had she had made like four points and I don't know if if or how many you want to include there but one was the width of the road and whether the the exact number of 20 ft is going to be acceptable when there's delivery trucks and snowbanks and things that might drive the width below 20 ft one was with respect to the um being in the aquifer protection Zone which I think you you touched on that somewhere did you not I I think in the um I was pretty sure I did yeah the I thought it was under North ched water district but I don't see there there were she raised a concern about the eradication of trees that filtrate the the potential contaminants coming down from Route three and then she also I don't again I don't we don't have the facts of it but she referenced the 20 years ago the mass D um issued something that wanted to prevent developers from in in zone 2 regions which this is um so and I can if you want I can just um type this up for you but I didn't know if we would want to include any of the um board comments so like I I still feel that they ought to look at um handicapped adap adaptability in the in the affordable unit and I'm still concerned about the unit density because it equates to about one acres per unit and the existing pre-existing non-conforming single family homes are at 3 acre lots and then uh the other the other concern that that I had raised was about just the the straight use of Evergreens and we would want them to really work a little bit more on the foliage with our DPW or the the tree committee but P just for the record George is recusing himself from the discussion because he's legal about so that's that's what's going on yeah that's all I had I don't know how much of that you want to put in there but I iess I am I am concerned about I am concerned about the density I understand they can do a higher density than what's normally required but I still think that five units at 0.1 Acres 18 acres per unit is is something that I would like the zba to look closer at okay I mean I guess I'm going to ask Paul Hy what MHP is kind of looking for in this response letter should it be that level of detail and it should it be um you know board um I guess is it just department and neighbor comments or is it board concerns too well no it's absolutely board concerns too so what what Mass housing is going to do when they issue a project eligibility letter they are basically going to regurgitate the concerns that the select board raised in their letter to them and then they're going to instruct the board of appeals you may want to look into these issues as part of your review um so that doesn't mean that the board of appeals can't look into whatever issues it wants to look at as part of its review but it does help to provide some guidance so it's better to have any suggestions that you have in the letter to Mass housing um I'm not suggesting that they're going to put every single one of them into their project eligibility letter but they do they they put a significant number of of concerns and and comments into their letters and ask the board of appeals to review them as part of their process okay because I mean something like like density I mean it seems like that's the whole point of 40b is to increase density so yes so the density concern I mean again I'm sure that the board of appeals will consider that as part of their review I don't think that's going to move Mass housing too much the traffic concerns with regards to the the vehicles coming in and out absolutely something you know that should be pointed out and that the board of appeals should be instructed to review as part of their process Okay and like the the neighbor had also suggested even look at reconfiguring where you're putting the multif family units on the highway side instead of right up against I don't know if those types of things come in or do we just leave that up to the community to go comment to the zba I it doesn't hurt to point that out to Mass housing that suggestion um but very likely it's going to be addressed as part of the process with the board appeals okay any anybody else have any comments on the letter okay okay how about if I I'll make updates I'll send it to you and then and then you can we can get it you know I want to get it it's du the 15th so we got to do it next couple days right it's due the 16th yeah yeah okay okay very good all right thank you for doing that Pat that's what I'm here to do okay George you can come back and we're going to have another this one too regulatory agreement case that comes up I'm getting good at these too so Paul Cohen do you want to tell us about these or is going to do just just real quick the um what's being sought here is the board's approval of a regulatory agreement in the gocal action unit application for affordable housing at three Meeting House Road let me give you some background on this and I think Paul sat in at the planning board hearings on this um basically this is a rental Housing Development on the 1.6 Acre Site at three Meeting House Road which is off of Fletcher Street um there's eight rental dwellings and two of the units will be affordable under the under the agreement um and what this is is seeking this submitt is to seek the inclusion of these units on the town subsidizing housing inventory so the planning board's already approved this project they've already um uh peel period is lapsed and so forth and and so now in order to get this onto the our subsidized housing inventory we have to submit this development agreement and the local unit application um and going back to this one this does have the affordable units are at 50% of the eligible um Ami so that's what's being sought here is basically the planning board has fulfilled its role in terms of a hearing and so forth forth um you a Butters were notifi the project was approved now what the town's responsibility is and interest is is to submit this regulatory agreement and the local action unit program application in order to apply these units uh onto our subsidized housing inventory um same thing as as Council noted earlier this will this will be valid for a year from the date of the planning board's approval um and I think the expectation is is that they will um move forward with this project because they went through a considerable hearing process to get these units constructed uh and if anything they probably would would want to do more at that site then then than to walk away from this so that's what's being sought uh your approval this evening to um for the regulatory agreement and then the submission for the local action units okay and this one should as you said should move more quickly because there's no real new construction right it's just changing the insides of the building exactly and the butters are commercial yes yeah there's yeah how do they address sewer on something like that where you're going from an office use to a residential use that was part of the calculation when they were for the planning board was the sewer usage from the site and then what would be required under this and I believe they they were compliant with the sewer requirements I would imagine an office probably is about the same as a resident right on an average day how many residents depending how many resid I know there one was that fact I just wanted okay any other questions ready for a motion yeah sure um I will sorry where I'm I will make a motion to we at number 11 um approve the regulatory agreement and local action unit application for affordable housing at three Meeting House Road as presented second okay we have a motion and a and a second all in favor thank you all right thank you so Madam chair you don't need me for anything else do you I I think we are done with you yes thank you thank you so now it's time for our town accountant thank you so much for waiting all night to make a presentation good evening um first I want to congratulate George for re-election to the board and Pat to your election to the board welcome um I promise I'm not going to talk about any housing because I think we're all done with housing tonight right we'll talk about where we are in the fiscal year 24's um revenue and expenditures it's crazy that we're getting almost at the end of our fiscal year um we'll first talk about where we are at revenues um we are actually doing really well this year um even though you're hearing everything with the state level how things aren't doing very well but the town's fearing very well their revenues these what I'm showing you here is through February by the time I was doing these we didn't have all the revenues posted for March so I'm giving you revenues through February the when we get to the expenditures they actually are through March because we do those real time but the um revenues we have to um enter those through we have to wait through all the bank statements and everything come in through the treasury Department to get those entered in and they usually weren't entered all in and posted by the time I was doing these reports but we are um $160 million budget we are 73.6% collected of our of that budget uh so we're above what our Benchmark of 66% is at this time um what we should be this time year in February uh one of the biggest local receipts that we have is motor vehicle uh motor vehicle is doing very well we've collected 42.3% of the $5.6 million that we have budgeted uh to dat we've collected 2.3 we've received a to we have a total commitment this year of a $5.2 million so we will be collect and so um we should be able to be collecting most of those through the end of March we got a that was when when the bills were the motor vehicles were due so um when you when I send you out March reports you'll see that we've will be be collecting most of those Motor Vehicles we did get a small um commitment a second commitment it's actually not that small it's just under 7 $700,000 those bills were out in April uh so they'll be be due in May and then the total com um commitments are actually running about $500,000 above prior year or 9 almost almost 10% higher than the prior year so car sales are still doing well um I think the cost most people when they're buying Vehicles now they're probably buying electric vehicles which are more expensive uh so it's just bringing up the the motor vehicle excise Revenue there uh local option Mals tax uh again we're our our first and second quarter we've totaled about uh just a little under uh $460,000 seen some really strong uh collections there males are up actually 12% from prior year um so we we should be exceeding our $800,000 budget by about $100,000 by the end of the fiscal year is our predi prediction there same thing with Hotel uh room areny tax uh we're about 300 just a little over $300,000 of collection there um we're about 7.5% higher than prior year and again we should see about an additional $100,000 collected by the end of the fiscal year of that budget building permits uh this is where it's really helping out our bottom line and our local receipts um we had estimated about $11.65 million of collections but we actually through February collected $2.4 million uh the west campus uh the ums West Campus pulled their permit that was uh just a little over a million dollars right there for a permit fee so it's like one of those things that you so one time we've seen that when with with u with scientific fishing when they were they came in with their million dollars it's at one time but it's a nice it helps our bottom line for the fiscal year and it will help our free cash uh so we've uh you know we've already exceeded our budget already by just a little over $800,000 so we'll be doing well on in that line item and the same thing we've we've seen a great um increase in our interest investment line items uh a significant amount from prior Year we're almost 90% higher than we were prior year so as the market doing better uh it's stabilizing rates a little bit of bump in the interest rates and just in a stabilized Market has really helped with our with the our interest Investments and as always um our finance director tax collector John Souza does a marvelous job with our property tax collection so I see no problems with that tax collection rate any questions when you're going through if you just I just anybody have any question and certainly line items um the next few pages are just the the report that just shows you the the separate line items that we have in the budget um state state collection everything else is is looking fine I don't see any any concern with revenues this year at all I think we'll do very well Fe for our bottom line expenditures again we're within the the right at about the 65% expended line where we should be like 66 uh we are going to this is the time of year I reach out to the Departments before town meeting where do they you know going to need a budget increase for the current fiscal year we did have some some departments that didn't have are going to need budget adjustments that are going to be on the warrant article at town meeting so we needed about $488,000 worth of budget adjustments um a lot of them are for personnel um because we're having some retirements coming up um we've uh in the police and we've had some um retirements there they're having a hard time bringing those officer new officers on in time so overtime is running a little bit high so we just have a little bit of personnel um budget requests that we need and then there's just a few um expenditures also that have come up during the course of the year that weren't budgeted at the beginning of the fiscal year um one of the things under the municipal we had a five station study we had some website support services that we need to hire and then we had some property assessments um that we're hiring Consultants to go out and do and do some abatement claims so those are just really the we this usually it's usually just a housekeeping um that we just go through the Departments it's hard for them to budget at the begin of like they're they're budgeting for this fiscal year and then year a year and a half down and you know things come up within within the department of people needs we are going to be taking this money um from we're taking $400,000 from the uh finance committee reserve and then the 800,000 is 88,000 is going to come from the snow and ice we do have it um we'll have a reserve in the snow and ice we had a mild year so there'll be some money that we can actually recoup some money from to cover the budget increases any questions on the expenses I just wanted to show I know we just for some warles where we are with with sewer enterpris and storm water Enterprises when you're looking at this it looks like we're running a they're running a deficit again these the revenues are through February but the expenses are March so the expenses of course are running a little bit higher um but last year's revenues um we've already exceeded what we've brought in from the prior year so I I have don't have any concern with their revenues coming in um Christine Clancy does a great job managing um the dpw's budgets along with sewer and storm water we don't see any problem they're not going to have any problem with their expenditures either um and they do have a current undesignated fund balance which is like their free cash amount they get certified every year when I close out the books they have their own undesignated fund balance of free cash and currently there's about $898,000 in that account um so and then we'll just add last year they had they run theyve ran kind of tight they only added about $170,000 to their undesignated um but at least they did end in the end of their their the year in the block so and I see the same thing for this year it may not be a large sum of money but they will be get be having a certified free cash amount uh same thing with the storm Warner um this runs this just this runs very tight it's not a it's not as big as sewer um they have an undesignated fund balance or free cash currently of $345,000 um and at this point they're running the same they're kind of running the same thing that their revenues are less than what they have expended but again these revenues are only through February um I'm sure if I had matched if I do the when I do the March March and March they'll they'll be running in the black they won't be running in the red I still again at the end of the fiscal year I don't see any concern they'll probably have a very small free cash amount that will add to what they currently already have last year was just a little over $10,000 so they run they run very tight on the peg excess or the tel media um they currently have they certified of their free cash last year 536 ,000 so that's what they have in there they run a really type ship and because they're just running basically off the revenues that we pay on the the cable and telephone bills and they um they're going to be asking you'll see there's a tell me they're going to be asking for some funding um getting together with Pete he has some computer servers that he needs to buy and new cameras and camcorders and things so he's looking for 40K currently for some computer comp Services he needs to upgrade to get some um to run the run the station and then about um $18,000 for some cameras and corn Camp Cam quars that he's going to be asking and those will be will just come from his and undesignated fund balance which he has plenty for and then the last fund I thought I would just touch base with you is where we are with CPC um this first sheet I'm very I'm sorry that it's it's so small but these are just basically all of the projects that we currently have on the books even for projects that may have already been completed but we actually still have debt um we um some of these go all the way out to the to 2030 to pay for so you'll see there's a line item in there for always for the the debt and interest payments that we have um and then of course one of the big projects that we took on last year was cool as Farm the purchase we haven't borrowed the money yet we will be borrowing that in June I just did just show on here that we will have a bond proceed coming in for $4.1 million that's going to be covering the cost of that purchase of the property um so these are just all of basically what's the color coding so the color coding um basically the yellow is debt so those those were the Articles that were funded at town meeting to cover the debt so I just kind of make that for myself I make that yellow so I know that and then the orangey ones are just they were just town meeting articles that um had separate articles they weren't part of the main article they were actually separate articles so we had a separate article for coolers farm for $50,000 that was to just for administrative costs that came up on that project and then we had um the town clerk had the Vault shelving um article that was at last time meeting and that's the amount that we allocated for those so I just kind of keep it separate just for myself so I know what's what's Bond what's going to be um uh debt payments the middle part of this is actually the revenues that we get in so we had a commitment the commitment on for CPC was just a little just a little under um $1.5 million to date we've collected a million so we have a receivable balance out of up there about $390,000 that will be collected by the end of the fiscal year there will still be a small amount we end up again always collecting if you look under where the fiscal 24 if you look under 22 and 23 how we have just small balances um those do get collected from the tax collection um at some point and even if they go into into tax collection we we we still end up getting it when it goes into even tax title we'll still receive those payments the interest income there was $20,000 and then where our state match this year was $295,400 the top the the top three there um where it says CF and then open space historic those are actually the projects that are currently open in those three categories I split them out put them in those three categories so we total is about $1.3 Million worth of act after projects like I said some of them may be just the debt they may not be worked on them just the debt that we owe on it to then we have the reserve there's about we have about a balance of $945,000 and then in our undesignated fund balance it's kind of like the free cash balance amount the amounts that we set aside um is just a little under $4 million and that can be used again we were going to purchase another piece of property or we've got also got to remember that CPC debt has to be paid from CPC it we always have to set money aside if for some reason CPC goes away we still are on the hook for the debt so it's always good to probably have some money set aside so that this you always have money to continually pay for debt if this actually goes away and you wouldn't have to raise it through another appropriation the three on the bottom those are the 10 percenters that we put the 10% in at Town meetings part of the main article you see it again this year with the um CPC se's um always has recommended is they put the 10% in then they take the 10% back out to cover debt on any of those three if um those three buckets so if we put in $140,000 we may be taking $140,000 out of that say open space or whatever to cover the debt and you've found you've seen those I think in the Articles how they go in and then again then we just pull them back out and it's just a good way of actually covering the debt um instead of taking it out of a reserve or undesignated you can just put them right take them right out of the 10% buckets um and this this is probably the strongest we've seen this CPC um they're doing really well and when we do go through um when we do borrowings when John does the borrowings they always ask and and kind of run John through the mill a little bit about how much is in the fund and we need to show that we do have a good fund balances in these accounts especially when we do big projects like that one we did with coolest farm so it's it's it's probably the healthiest it's been for a while that's really where we are in 24 it's going to be good um if I you know I I know I never like to tell you what I think free cash is going to be but I think we'll probably be looking at another two and a half um I would think two and a half million on free cash could be a little bit more depending how if these revenues continue to keep being strong like that any questions I hope your prediction is accurate I think it will be it's to be with the with just with the um the amount that came in for the for the permitting that will help us right there there's there was a million that we really weren't expecting so at this you know we were expecting it but it's it was a time good timing for us for this year okay all right thank you thank you all right next up is uh appointment of Select board member to the um New open space and Recreation plan committee um I had volunteered to take this temporarily I I think I kind of would like to keep it um so um and but that kind of brings us to I was going to talk about it in my in my referrals but um we can talk about it now as far as um liaison assignments when when Mark left we all took on Extras so I guess I would ask for our our next meeting you know maybe if by say next Monday or so everybody could get me except Pat since he doesn't have any Liaisons right now get me a list of the ones you want to you want to keep or you might want to change or they might might want to give up the pat so get a you know give him good ones now help us some offerings for you see which ones he wants well I mean if you have some that you that you you specifically want yeah let us know that too yeah oh yeah there's no doubt one or two that I would like to sure it might be helpful to um send out an old list where Mark was on it so we could see what people actually had before that change okay yep yeah all right so I will send a blank one out and and that out um later this week so you all can look at that and yeah my plan then would be to to remain on the open space and Recreation unless anybody has a a strong desire to to do that okay very good all right next on our agenda is uh this draft um Proclamation for parents of kids with cancer um and the uh attached email that uh Amanda Barn had had sent to us about why she wanted to set this uh this date um there is no organization that um that promotes this uh she just um thought it would be a a good idea for the community to recognize parents of kids with cancer um and picked the date of um April 22nd because it's meaningful to her um on April 20th there's going to be a program at the CCA where she wanted to be able to present this proclamation to some local folks that have lost kids with cancer so there is some time time sensitivity to it but for our policy this would be our first read of this Proclamation just want to see if anybody has any um any additional edits before we sign it and send it back to Amanda to present the only thing I see is on the second um it's probably some of it means to say day instead of say y that's been changed there's there's several others too there was one in the last sentence too a typo in the last sentence right there was just a paragraph that didn't belong yeah a stray a or something yeah so if everybody's okay with that absolutely and I think at our at our next uh meeting on April 22nd we can include that in our public service announcements to be read publicly okay I don't remember do we take a vote on this I don't think I think we just say we're going to review it okay all right so we will move on to appointments oh that's yours yeah just re real quickly we've got two appointments for your the board's confirmation this evening the first one is the commission on disabilities the seeking the board's confirmation the appointment of Derek Jones who's a resident of Newfield Street um to the Comm on disabilities um for a ter ending June 30th 2026 and then the second one is Christine mcamera who's resident of High Street to the tree committee for a term ending June 30th 2025 okay any questions about either of these applicants I will do I have to do one at a time or can I I will make a motion to approve the town man appointments uh Derek Jones to the commission on disabilities and Christine mcamera to the tree committee as presented second okay we have a motion and a second uh all in favor okay very good okay um next on our agenda is if we want to do any more or any we haven't done any yet any town meeting um recommend ations um it being almost 9:00 um I guess I would suggest we hold all of these for our next meeting call unless do some other really what do we have for our next meeting we know we have the the MBTA thing um yeah um you know you'll have your monthly Christine Clancy be in with your offera updates um you may have Paul McKinley for the um P updates so there's a few things that are pending for the next meeting as I said so I I don't want to give the board the assurance that you you know the next meeting will be any shorter of duration than this one but it's really different subject matters uh as you said um WEA on assignments uh board's meeting schedule yeah that was going to mention that those be the items that um that will will you know come up uh next meeting um but in terms of the town meeting recommendations um Virginia sent out the results the finance committee is recommending all articles the only one as was no early this evening that they have not acted upon as the MBTA zoning and all the finance committee votes were unanimous um there were a couple with one abstentions for for a couple personal reasons so forth but um so I don't you know I don't anticipate that they'll be significant uh concerns because you're right if you leave it the next meeting then don't we don't have chice to put it off after that right so um so I will leave it up to other board members we can either spend another 15 minutes doing some or we can start fresh at our next meeting that would be my preference but I'm okay either way yeah I wouldn't mind waiting okay is there anything I don't I don't feel like there's anything else in here that's even relatively kind of contentious no and that's why even one that might be worth kind of discussing quickly now before we go home and get to pour over yeah I mean I I thought it was surprising that there's what 16 art articles on the consent agenda that's that's phenomenal yeah yeah that's a lot well because I think most of them are the regular recurring articles at Springtown meeting uh and and the moderator sense was we'll put it out there and if anybody wants to pull something off of it they can but I think the expectation is we'll be there two nights first night dealing with the budget and approvals and all the Articles and then the second night as was noted earlier tonight will probably be MBTA zoning um if that moves forward um you know so I think that's that's the expectation which is why I think you'll probably have a select board meeting that following Monday the May 6th because the expectation is they'll finish in two sessions okay so you two guys okay with holding till our next meeting to get started on those George no you want to stay here another hour and a half don't you rather start okay we do have one set of meeting minutes to uh to look at for March 25th anybody have any comments I do okay so on on page four in the discussion about the Cobblestone place um public input session it says um Cindy lazinski of aelon Av appeared before the board and gave her perspective on the project she read from her written statement hereby made a part of these minutes and she did hand I I went back and watched it she did hand you the statement but it's when I had asked James for the inputs from the residents that wasn't part of it and it's not listed in the supporting documents okay I yeah I'll get so he's got the holy inputs in the supporting documents but I think um Cindy's need to be included too okay yeah I thought she gave those to everybody okay I will I will take care of that anything else Mo I will make a motion to approve the regular meeting minutes from March 25th 2024 with as amended that's as amended as amended as amended thank you uh second okay we have a motion in a second all in favor Iain okay all right we are to Leon reports and referrals George okay um Pat it's a surprise Aaron what do you have no I don't have okay Virginia um Pat mentioned the open space and Recreation plan they're going to be kicking off that project on April 16th um the Strategic plan steering committee reviewed seven submitted proposals and we've um invited a short list for interviews later this month and uh the fire station study committee is um finalizing its final report for town meeting Paul and chief Ryan are working on getting some estimates from Weston and Samson for the station rebuilds um and chief Ryan is also in the process of a Grant application to help support staffing needs and then I just um I wanted to request a potential agenda topic um for one of our upcoming meetings and that is um I was wondering if we could look at the select board lip policy requirement to notify bu a Butters within 7 days cuz I feel like that's kind of short and most of the statutes for regular hearings require 2 weeks and I'm I'm I would just like to um potentially have the board consider changing that from 7 to 14 okay all right um I have a couple of things uh first congratulations to former Sergeant Bill Carlo who was recently uh promoted to Lieutenant congratulations to him um last week there was a ribbon cutting at the Glam Beauty Lounge at CH chood Street um a new beauty salon in town and they do really good work so stop by and see them and um last week I was at um an event with a congresswoman Trahan where she um announced nominations to service acmy including uh one to Navin rshh who lives in North chelsford he goes to Central Catholic High School in Lawrence um but he's a star in his class and I'm sure he'll do well at the service he still has to go through the um acceptance Pro U process but uh based on his background I feel confident that he will so congratulations to Na and the only other thing is uh as Paul mentioned at our next meeting we'll be looking at the calendar of our meetings for the remainder of this year so if you have holidays or vacations coming up be sure to um have those available so we can try to work around when people might be out of town and that's it for tonight I think so I'll make a motion to adjourn second hey all in favor thank you we are e for