##VIDEO ID:Gzp8oNzg7xo## e e e e e [Music] [Music] aahah [Music] um welcome this is the planning board hybrid meeting November 25th 2024 this is 5:00 pm of a few a few notes three read please note this meeting is being recorded and will be available shortly thereafter for scheduled and On Demand viewing on any smartphone or tablet device if anyone anyone else is recording the meeting please notify the chair pursuant to Governor Healey's March 29th 2023 signing of the acts of 2023 extending certain covid-19 measures adopted during the state of emergency suspending certain provisions of the open meeting law General Law chapter 3A section 20 until March 31st 2025 this meeting meeting of the Chad and planning board is being conducted in person and via remote participation every effort will be made to ensure that the public can adequately access the proceedings as provided for in the order a reminder that persons who would like to listen to this meeting while in progress may do so by calling the phone number 1508 945 4410 conference idid 458 69 68249 pound or join the meeting online via M Microsoft teams through the link in the posted agenda while this is a live broadcast and simoc cast on chadam TV formerly channel 18 despite our best efforts we may not be able to provide for realtime access we will post a record of this meeting at the town's website as soon as possible uh with with that I'd like to begin with the roll call um Katherine hin present uh orangen chain waren chain present Bob wor shaer Bob wor shter present uh Charlene Greenhall Charlene greenal present Frank Shear Frank Sher present Bob dubis Bob dubis present and art Brew I'm present uh and i' like to ask any of the uh board members if they have to recuse themselves from anything on the agenda tonight um the chair needs to recuse himself for 170 Vineyard Avenue um this abuts a common area of my Association which I'm on the board for so I will step down from this and Katherine will take the lead on it uh let's begin with the minutes on October 28th 2024 to any board members have any comments or questions on the minutes with that Mr chair I move approval of the October 28 2024 meeting minutes I second that motion and with that take a roll call vote Katherine helper I agree um waren Jane Warren chane approve um Bob word chapter abstain that's right I'm abstaining yep Charlene Greenhall approve uh Frank Shear approve Bob dubis Bob dubis approve and sprw ey proove all right so the uh first item on our uh next item on our agenda is request for release of bond for 75 Gillis Road uh is there an applicant uh present or online and if you could introduce yourself and give us some background on this sure um this is Marilyn Mormon Gillis and my husband Jack Gillis and we are the applicants uh for the um uh release of the $4,000 construction Bond uh associated with the construction of our house uh 75 gillet Road okay so what this has to do is I think we've uh many of the board members have heard this uh request I think it was back in uh 2021 that's correct yeah and uh I think the the issue was uh there were two items that had had to be addressed the first item was the second one had to do with lot releases for 3 7 8 and nine and that there needed to be uh improvements made to Gillis Road prior to those lot releases so that's what initiated this um activity back in 2021 um any of the board have any questions about this application no uh Mr chair I do remember uh the procedure back in 2021 and uh we decided to that road Improvement was required and that's when we required the $4,000 Bond um that now they're requesting to release and I believe you mentioned that you did inspect it and it looks like everything has been accomplished is that correct I did take a look at this and and um it's a significant improvement from what I remember in 2021 so um it's passable it looks like the it's real sound base on there so um I commend the applicant for the work that they've done uh if there aren't any more questions uh we should uh take a vote on the release of this Bond uh Mr chairman I move that we uh release um the construction shity in the amount of $4,000 plus any interest accured in full and a second anybody a second okay roll call vote uh Katherine helper I approve uh Warren chain Warren chain approve Bob wsha Bob wsha approve uh Charlene Greenhall Charlene greenal approve Frank Shear Frank Shear I approve Bob dubis uh I approve I know I know both of them and arts for I approve thank you very much great thank you thank you very much okay next um agenda item is one that I have to recuse myself on so I'll step down great thank you Mr chair uh so this item is a request for uh recommendation from the zoning board of appeals regarding a driveway in a Conservancy district and this is located at 170 Vineyard Avenue um you do have some pretty thorough notes from your staff report I'm just going to make a couple of comments um I always request my usual request that we just have a very clear site plan of before and after what the driveway was before and what the driveway proposed driveway is and um I do have a colored copy I think all of you received a colored copy and I believe the blue outline is the existing conditions the existing Drive way and the green is the proposed driveway that is correct okay thank you Christine and just a reminder to the board um in this case um the planning board's purview is limited to the driveway in a Conservancy District so our vote would be our usual vote um whether or not we would send a positive or negative recommendation regarding the driveway um in the Conservancy District to the zoning board of appeals and we usually include our standard condition that the driveway shall be constructed of permeable material and shall be constructed in a manner which permits the unobstructed flow of water in this case the total square footage of the driveway is being reduced and also is being consigned confined to the site previously it did extend into the uh AB budding property so are there any questions on this matter any other comments from the public or the applicant um in that case I would propose that we send a positive recommendation to the zoning board of appeals with regards to this driveway in the Conservancy district with our standard condition um may I have a motion to that effect also move thank you I'll second thank you so let's do a roll call vote Warren chain Warren chain approve b sha award chter approve Charlene greenhalge Charlene greenhalge approve Frank Sherer Frank Sher approve dubis dubis approve and this is Katherine Helper and I also approve thank you very much and we'll welcome our chair to return for the next matter okay the uh next uh item is uh actually site Point approval it's actually a change of use for 216b Orleans Road is there someone present from the applicant uh can you please come up and introduce yourself and give us some background hi I'm Jill Sanderson and Jen Hart mom mom daughter okay hello um we are trying to open a childhood enrichment center with caregiver support um this would be a place where where children can come with their caregiver we would offer music classes um different fun science classes um a chance for mothers and caregivers to connect eventually we' like to bring in things like lactation support and postpartum and um nutrition nutrition all all sorts of things we're really looking at this sort of being like a community Hub um so we are proposing right now it is under a office use and I think that um we're in a very unique situation because it hasn't been done before so the change of use piece um we're being creative okay [Laughter] good okay um first i' like to just ask for a clarification from Christine um I didn't see any information in in our packet about um a previous site plan approval on this did you that is correct we did find something after the fact um after the uh the uh reports were sent out it was actually for 210 Orleans Road um 216 is under that same umbrella it it was a number of different units with a number of different addresses so there has been a site plan review for this there have been an amendment for this app uh this site as well we've had a couple of things starting in 1984 1997 and again in 2010 so this is a continuation of something that has been done on on this site okay um like to um make a note there's been many uh submissions of uh support for this from the uh from the public um I don't plan on reading them all um but when there's a change of use it does initiate a full review if it's necessary on this I think um uh the board need to make their judgment on this but uh the site is fairly welldeveloped um I've been out there uh there hasn't been many changes on this I think there's a few things we usually ask when there's a change of use uh is there a change in the parking criteria uh on this and has the site uh address storror management things like that um I ask Christine to provide us with the list of criteria in case the board members have any questions they'd like to ask the applicant or or ask for clarification um so why don't I just um ask Katherine do you have any that you would like to ask for clarification on this yeah thank you art um actually I do um I wanted to know mostly my questions are about our site plan review criteria number one and number two adequacy and arrangement of vehicular traffic access and circulation including intersections Road widths pay movement surfaces dividers and traffic controls and number two is adequacy and arrangement of pedestrian traffic access and circulation walkway structures control of intersections with vehicular traffic and overall pedestrian convenience mostly my question I wanted to know particularly with regard to safety since you're dealing with young children we do need to look at how people and vehicles move around the site to be sure that everything is safe sometimes we might request some additional markings you know that you go this way and you can park here something like that but could you show us on the site plan you did mention that you'd be having some outdoor activities for the youngsters and we wanted to know where that was um and also where do the adults and youngsters enter your facility where do they exit and where would they Park so we can kind of see how they would move through the site and see if there's any conflicts if you could use the laser pointed this there that's so funny when I was hearing the zoning board I thought the lawyer brought it and uh very official thank you if you could if you could start with by showing us where on this plan your unit is 216b yeah sure so we are should brought my sorry um so we are you got use you got to use the mic up there um these are all the yeah we're right here so we're tucked into this Al Cove okay um which actually is great because it does give us kind of that that small little buffer to get in it's not labeled M sorry um so we are right here this is the grass area this is sidewalk so what we would like to eventually do and um is have little music classes here there's natural hedging which is wonderful um just like when they did uh music classes at the library at Eldridge Public Library I don't know if you remember but they natural barriers they're wonderful we love them very much um so we're going to really look to the natural barriers I am a mother I have a three-year-old very busy boy and a four and a half-year-old daughter so I I do understand the safety concerns 100% um we are really lucky these spots right here say Nickerson corners only um as well as these ones right here okay um they there are 62 spots in the lot that I counted and we will have a maximum of eight children at a time we're looking at 5 to eight children because it is only 400 square ft so we're thinking about 50 50 square ft per child that that was sort of the recommendation of what people I've been talking to so um we would only need nine cars um and right now what happens is a traffic flow goes in and then there's a one-way sign right here so the traffic flow has to go around here and then Park up does that make sense it does so your clients or your attendees will park show us where they will park where they will walk to get into your facility and how they will walk back and how they will exit to go to the outdoor play area thank you so we will not we're not going to have like an outdoor play area per se it would just be as if we had if it was a beautiful day and we wanted to bring the guitar outside for our music but where would that be that would be right here okay but and they just exits directly from your building yeah so they don't have to go into the parking area at all um so we would ask cars to enter through the main lot which I think they would do naturally and there's the oneway sign so then they would go around which I actually really like because that's going away from the space so they're going to go around this way and there are lots of signs because the post office is right here um that do indicate slow down you know it's not it's not a high velocity area and then we'll go around the corner and we're going to ask to park here or park in here okay and then how would the they walk to get into your show how they would walk to get they would they would exit their vehicle here and then this is all sidewalk you can see the cve part this is sidewalk so they'd walk down the sidewalk and in through the space great so that's very safe it is very safe they don't have to walk in the other areas of the parking lot to get to your door and what I really love too is the parking lot is actually on our side so they don't even need to cross the whole area it's it's very um and like I said the natural barriers are super helpful great okay that was that was my question okay uh Warren do you have any questions comments um yes when I was out there I saw where the front entrance was and that's what you're describing there but it also appears that there is a back entrance would that ever be used no that's no no no but there is a back entrance which is um important for safety because there are two egresses um so that's that's very important but I just wanted to clarify it would be because you're parking in a different space and then the entrance if you're going in the back door yeah depending on where you park might be the door you'd want to use um in which case it raises the same questions that that Katherine was Raising um I did not have a way to determine all of the positive um comments um exactly where they came from most seem to be from neighbors very much in favor of this but dude have the question to the extent that there are outdoor activities in the common space for this velopment which is businesses um question what is your feeling with respect to your outdoor activities right in the middle of a business Zone uh with respect to the patrons for those other businesses they may not be crazy about walking through whatever you're doing out there singing children sing singing dancing children children it would be very very limited it might be a one one day a week 45 minute music class and and obviously if there's there's a problem we we just wouldn't do it yeah we wouldn't do it we just wouldn't do it absolutely all right thank you very much I don't have any other questions thank you so much uh Bob wor chap I I have no other questions sure please Charlene I have no questions I think this is a wonderful idea thank you uh Frank sheer I have no questions it's just uh I agree it's great great project thank you so much yeah thank you it's much needed we there's nothing on this end of the cape like this oh I don't know I might have a lot of problems yeah I think I think I think my great great grandchildren might want to go there you're welcome anytime I'm all for it thank you thank you thank you very much uh and uh I do not have any uh comments or questions on this uh thank you very much for your presentation thank you um with that um uh make a motion to uh approve the change of use uh for this uh application I move that we approve the change of use because the application meets the necessary requirements and criteria for approval pursuant to the protective zoning by law okay I'll take a rad call vote Katherine help oh I'm sorry second uh w we sha um and roll call vote uh Katherine help I approve um Warren Shan Warren chain approve Bob wsha Bob word shter approve uh Charon Greenhall charlin greenel approve Frank Shear approve and Bob dubis Bob dubis approves and arts Brew I approve thank you so much thank you of good luck yeah it's a good project yeah thank you it's great okay okay the uh next item on the agenda is the West chadam Neighborhood Center discussion uh I think I would like to begin the discussion on this tonight and um give you some uh perspective on what I heard over the last couple of of meetings um I'm interested in what the board has to say about this but but I I think I'd like to uh introduce a couple of things that I observed on this and see if that's something that the other board members uh think are important um I believe Town Council is going to join us and what what oh okay Don counil is here oh that's good um I would say over the last couple of weeks or so there's been two pieces of information that we've been introduced to and received and I think it's important to just flush those out a little bit because I think they do have an impact on where we are today um the first one is the buildout analysis that was done that and the and the second one is the DPW infrastructure capacity of the build down analysis so when when you look at the build down analysis that we saw on I think uh not just 18th I think it was on the 26th of October um I I saw a lot more um building and residential components of a site than I was expecting to see uh when I was looking at this I was thinking that we needed to have a good balance between commercial and residential and I think there's two things that were we driving that from what I observed one is we did make adjustments several times about what kind of density we wanted and secondly we did start with a certain minimum with uh how much commercial development we wanted to see in relationship to residential on a particular site but we dropped that provision um I don't know about a year or so so ago and once I saw that visual I said what kind of flexibility do we have as a board to make sure that there's a good balance and I'm not sure there is without a certain amount of um percentage of commercial so that I thought we we should go back and revisit that and put a certain minimum in and I I'm not defining what that would be but I think that we need to come up with some sort of a balance on that because if it's more residential than commercial I think that that is not the objective of what we are looking for we're looking for a Village Center and a Village Center this is not a resident residential housing project it's a Village Center which require which calls for mixed use uh the other thing that I think we all received in our packets was some information from the DPW they looked at the buildon analysis uh from BSC and they looked and they used eight units per acre as a buildout number and they identified there's two aspects to their uh sewer infrastructure one is the gravity systems and another is the uh pump stations now they indicated in the gravity systems that they could handle that flow the problem is is the uh Pump Station neither of the pump stations can handle that uh increased volume of flow uh that that's a significant issue because that means there are limitations that we need to look at and revisit and see is there something that we need to do different to make sure that we're not pushing a limit on what we have for our current infrastructure you got to remember this is infrastructure that is being built out for the entire town There's hundreds of millions of dollars that are being invested is and we need to make sure that some of the things that we're proposing as part of zoning will support and are consistent with that so I think that when it comes down to these two identifiers one I think we should revisit the minimum amount of commercial that we should have in here and then take a look at uh what is it that should be consistent on density to support the uh and be consistent with the infrastructure limitations that we have I don't think we want to come out of the Block in here and say well we're just going to do this much density because this is what our desire is I think we have to be realistic on this and not putting an additional burden on our Town's infrastructure and we're not quite sure if there is you know they they have a whole program that they're doing and for them to come back and revisit this without um uh without us actually considering the ramifications of it I think that's an important thing so I would like to get some of the board's input on some of the things I observed and also anything things that you picked up on these two pieces of information because I think this is a critical juncture for us if we can uh deal with these couple of things I think we can move ahead on this it's it's important that we resolve this as a board and we're somewhat in agreement on this so that um we can actually get to the next couple of pieces I'd like to see uh Union Studios with what their vision would be on on the type of density that we think is going to be realistic in here I don't think it's realistic to show a union student Studio illustration on something of a full buildout analysis because that's probably not realistic in most of these sites anyway so I my initial thoughts on this I I don't mean to make a decision on your part but I think it's important that we identify these things and deal with it as a board before we really take too many steps forward on this um I'd like to go down and ask for each of your uh input on this can I ask for one thing first I don't know if um attorney talerman was ready to um have a discussion about if he has any concerns from a lawyer standpoint Town Council standpoint with what we've produced so far Well I this is going to change things if the board decides that we have an infrastructure limitation issue all right uh say I mean the the the DPW did a u analysis of eight units not even the 12 I'm not sure that the 12 is is a realistic goal at all now and whether the eight is is appropriate so that could change an awful lot of things so for example if we decide that even the eight is too much and we're just going to go down to what we started with way back when which is you know five units uh per acre we're back to not having an impact on the infrastructure and we don't even have to deal with the bonus issue so there's a lot of things that could fall into place or not not be an item depending on where we're going to go with the bo with the board on this and may I comment Mr chair yeah in other words I think um what's being said is that we are at some decision points we've done our due diligence we've gotten some important information in the buildout anal Anis and also the DPW um assessment um but but our discussion tonight may actually change what input we we would need from Town Council so it might be more effective to go ahead with that discussion um and we're uh very happy that Town Council has joined us and he'll be listening in and then based on our discussion um we may ask for some we may have some questions for Our Town Council you think that's accurate Mr chair yes yeah okay great do you have any um thoughts associated with what I introduced here yeah um thank you so much um I'd just like to express my agreement with what you said I think we've gotten some important information that does in a sense uh Force us to reassess what we're doing um I've been involved in this process of developing the West chadam Neighborhood Center Zoning for all of the 10 years that it's been in process and the purpose of the West chadam Neighborhood Center is to implement um the principles of the comprehensive plan for the neighborhood centers um in that time period over that 10 years we have experienced a significant uh housing crisis on Cape Cod in chadam Statewide Nationwide actually worldwide I think in response to that housing crisis the board wanted to create zoning that emphasized the residential piece of the neighborhood center zoning but I agree with our chair that um it was never the vision of the West chadam Neighborhood Center zoning to be primarily a residential project and never the vision of West chadam neighborhood zoning to be a housing project per se because it is mixed use it is intended to be a vibrant commercial center with mixed use building that will by the nature of the case provide a diversity of housing options just because if you have an apartment alongside a commercial building or above or you have smaller residential um structures it will provide more of a diversity of housing options for all income levels so so it's a piece of the West chadam Neighborhood Center zoning it is a piece of what is required or asked for in the comprehensive plan for the neighborhood centers but it has never been the primary piece of any Neighborhood Center zoning um that we've worked on so it was rather a surprise to see the buildout analysis where it's almost entirely residential the residential is completely separate from the commercial the commercial is just along Route 28 in one-story buildings I think this is not what we've envisioned for the West chadam Neighborhood Center aesthetically or in terms of livability or in terms of being a vibrant commercial and residential mixed use Neighborhood Center so I think the buildout analysis did reveal that if the buildout analysis was very closely based on the way the bylaw is drafted now I agree with our chair that we need to look back at the wording in the bylaw and maybe reintroduce some things that we took out like like asking for a more of a mix of commercial and residential through all the zones the a zones and the B zones and so on um because we want to create an aesthetically pleasing um mixed use um Neighborhood Center so I also just would remind everyone I'd want to remind everyone that um we do and this by no means is against our efforts to increase the housing of available in chattam and to allow for a diversity of housing options but the board also we have on our to-do list on our agenda some other zoning initiatives that may be more amenable to creating more units of housing that we require one of those zoning initiatives is the uh buffer zones or transition zones on the um east side and even the west side of the West chadam neighborhood center and potentially other neighbor neighborhood centers where we could introduce zoning we could propose zoning that would allow a greater density of housing um and smaller housing structures um but would omit the commercial piece that we have in the neighborhood center and that may be a better opportunity to introduce zoning that will allow for um greater number of units of housing there are also a couple of 40 BS friendly 40 BS in process um the those are more you know on the on the ground getting ready to go um there are also some townwide housing initiatives in zoning that previously our housing director Gloria mcferson has mentioned to us that we could begin to look at that also will offer more opportunities to create zoning that encourages uh diversity and housing options it's just that we don't want to look to the neighborhood centers to being our only chance or we don't get any housing um just a reminder there are supposed to be mixed use developments that are aesthetically attractive um and livable so those would be my comments I might think of a few more later but I think the suggestions our chair has made of reconsidering the density um also reconsidering how we how we disperse the commercial and um residential uses throughout all of the zones all of the what do we call them sections or areas within the West chadam Neighborhood Center the A and B zones um I think our are things we do need to reconsider now in light of the information we received in the buildout analysis and in dpw's um infrastructure impact analysis so thank you Mr chair thank you uh Warren uh any thank you Mr chairman um I think it's very important that we try and uh have a very clear um response and answer to those other than on the board that have raised and will raise the issues that you're raising um because if we don't it doesn't matter what we decide to do we have to have be very compelling and persuasive to the voters um and questions you're raising are quite legitimate um but I um I had a few comments here which I'll try and direct and given the uh what you have said Mr chairman sure um the first things that that I made a note when we had our our our um presentation by the Consultants where that they really never determined they weren't focused on the number of bedrooms so it's the number of units all right okay well well um that's not the way DPW looks at things or the way that the town tends to look at things and so to me it's still a question mark regardless of whether it's their eight units or 12 units or 200 or 300 units uh to be added to the West chatam Neighborhood Center um doesn't really address um or can't tie back into the kind of zoning that we are going to draft for uh with respect to the actual expected uh water and sewer flows um so that's one um also it's my understanding that the buildout analysis that was really being updated uh was done for really the entire 28 quarter and at four units per acre as I recall and the sewage um the sewer capacity of the town I assume has been developed with the idea of being being able to handle the flow that resulted from that buildout analysis um but since that buildout analysis much of the route 28 Corridor has been rezoned to R20 or R40 R20 I guess it is um and therefore there's going to be less Demand on the rest of Route 28 which ought to be an offset to whatever extra demand is coming from the DP DPW comments today I'm not arguing that other than we need to know what that is so we know what the net is it does seem odd to me that if the DPA uh had no problem with the buildout analysis of four per unit on the entire Corridor it it wasn't on the entire Corridor I don't think I think it was just on West chadam neighborhood yeah I I I think the DPW director said the gravity systems can handle this flow mhm but because we're so flat mhm everything goes to a pump station from there it gets pumped to another point and that was the weak that was the weak link doesn't all right yeah that was the weak link they said is is that their pump stations do not have that capacity now I don't know what that means from the standpoint can you just replace a pump do you have to replace the whole whole system it's not something that you can just uh make a simple adjustment on so I I'd have to rely on that part of it but it the gravity system they did say once it gets into the line that's in 28 it's not that's not the issue it's the next point in the in the again in their system I'm basically agreeing with you but at the same time saying if I put my hat on as a voter yeah I've got these questions which aren't answered by anything that I read in their report yeah um and need to be answered um the uh other item which which really wasn't brought up um at least if I if it was I missed it in there the DPW report was the impact of the 40p developments that are close to um and have a significant number of units in them that were not presumed uh or considered I think in any previous analysis of the demand on the sewer systems um in that general part of town um and so um I mean you know that's going to be 100 plus units for those two 40 BS I don't know what the numbers are going to end up as but it's going to be a significant more than 100 units I not all in one location though it's in two separate loc understand that makes a difference on the infrastructure understand that but my only point is there are a whole lot of housing units that have nothing to do with the West chadam neighborhood center and all of our considerations but they're in the same general part of town and do they have an impact on MH the capacity of the system I don't know I think that's a question that you need to we need to have an answer to um I would agree and um let's see what else um well yeah whether there's a way to get it to a number of bedrooms that might be appropriate um for them to think about it the same way that I always hear about it here and then the 40b analysis as to whether that um and then also really your question is to what extent would um would an issue be resolvable with a bigger pump or this that and the other in the future because again what we're talking about here is ultimately a buildout was going to take 50 60 years or so before anything got to the kinds of numbers that they're analyzing for um and by that time who knows everything that is being done now in terms of pump stations is going to have to to be updated replaced whatever anyway in its normal useful life so um I would I would think we would also need to know what would happen if along the way uh items needed to be upgraded for capacity but it was in their normal replacement cycle so it it wouldn't be a big deal put it that way I don't know whether it would be a big deal we don't want to be doing something now which would commit to the town to Major uh construction projects down the road that you knew were coming uh but it's not clear to me um that given the time it would take to do any full buildout in that area which I think I'm going to say call it 50 years might be more than that um and I'm not even sure a full buildout could ever happen because all of the buildings that are there aren't going to go away probably you know so um go so at any rate being having a handle on what would happen if uh in the course of uh developing this process uh this U property in the west chadam Neighborhood Center that um that changes needed to be made what would they be and what would they cost and when would they normally need to be done anyway just uh in terms of replacement of of materi of of of equipment all of those things are only Again by way of agreeing with every objection that you've talked about from my point of view it is we need to know answers to this because if we don't and can't therefore comp explain them to the electorate then forget it it doesn't matter what we put forward um I do think some of these things do have responses that may be acceptable uh or and to the extent we need to adjust then we need to adjust but that's all those are my comments thank you thank you um Bob War shter yeah I guess I'm um pretty uh surp surprised by your reaction uh I I said at the meeting uh last week that we needed to be careful that this report is a a study as to what the maximum could be not what we're doing and I and and I wanted to make sure that the public didn't get that idea and yet here you guys are coming across as though that's the plan that we're dealing with here it's not it's just a measure of how many many houses we could possibly fit into that space and nobody is suggesting that we would have that number or that the design would look like that or anything else it was merely a number that we could then give to the Sewer Department the DPW to say okay can you do that and they came back and said no they can't do it today but it didn't say as as Warren has said I think they're going to have to redo do their plan a little bit based on those two developments and I think if we ask the question how much additional money would it cost to meet that uh capacity it might not be the game uh ending thing that you're making out here so so my and and the other point that needs to be made is we spent an awful lot of time uh determining what we wanted the the property the idea to be and it was to get enough capacity in there to make it economical for developers to to have uh affordable and attainable housing as part of a a development and that's why we ended up with giving the option of 12 well a 12 per acre well not everybody is going to do that that's not the way way it is and and and if everybody jumped on that today we would have to say okay the first ones in have sewer capacity and the rest of you have to wait until we we don't we have sewer capacity but it but realistically that's just not going to happen but the worst thing we could do is say to well we're going to scrap all our ideas to have affordable and attainable housing and we're just going to make it a five units per uh acre instead of four but that's not really going to solve any of our issues so I I I I totally disagree with where that was going I think we have the right plan I think we we can move forward I I I'm more scared that Warren's correct that whatever we do is going to scare the heck out of everybody because they're now they're going to take this as whoo look at that plan and that's what we're going to be voting on and that's not what we're voting on in the at least not for a very long time and um so so I I I hope we can reframe the the the uh the uh study that as to what it really is it's a maximum study I think we should get some better plans about what we're we hope to see it look like uh and I agree with you that it doesn't we hope that it has more a commercial but that's that probably is how it has to work out economically for developers as well I I don't I don't know that um everybody will want to build just housing units so so anyway I I I just let's just take a step back we have more information now about what what our limitations are we we have um I a study from the the sewage Department sewers that needs a little bit more refinement some more questions we need to know how long it would take to to change that how much it would cost whether there is likely to be upgrades anyway um and I really don't want to I really don't want to start saying okay well we're going to limit it to five per per acre I think that's absolutely not why I'm on this board okay uh Charlene do you comments um I want to thank Bob for his comments because I I I share greatly what what he just expressed um right now the way the bylaw is written and I wish I had it in front of me the Zone a um has to have commercial it has to have commercial so what happens behind those commercial buildings well okay let it be residential if that's what we need and I think we do need that and I'm glad Warren brought up and I I actually chatted um with Katherine after the last meeting and just said you know everything is based on number of bedrooms not number of units so let's say we do only allow eight units per per uh acre or what have you whether it's 16 one bedrooms or eight two bedroom units it's still it's based on bedrooms and I think I think we're we're kind of getting caught up in the unit discussion quite frankly because flow is based on bedrooms not units so I think we're kind of losing that in the discussion there are going to be some properties that are going to be able to have let's say 20 bedrooms maybe and the adjoining property may be can only have six bedrooms you know I I I'm just throwing that out there but how those bedrooms are used in the number of units I think is going to be the defining factor in you you're still going to have the same number of bedrooms you just may have a different configuration of the number of units that are associated with the residential part of the development but I I I tend to agree with Bob you know this was um and you actually I think used the term at the last meeting and I cringe the worst case scenario well I I hate that expression because I don't think it is a worst case scenario I think it's the maximum scenario that could possibly happen but quite frankly I don't think it would ever happen and it is going to take a number of years I don't expect to see the end of it and I'm not saying anything but I think I'm the youngest person on this board right now I know how old you are Bobby um so I mean I will never see it in my lifetime maybe his grandchildren will but I I won't see it in my lifetime but I'm I'm concerned that you know we're we're just going to lose what it is we were trying to do in the first place thank you um Frank uh Shar yeah um well there's I'm I'm I'm reluctant for us to get into the weeds of you know what does it cost to you how many pumping stations have to be improved when are they going to be improved um Etc um I what I'd like to see from is is how many bedrooms uh the the can be accommodated uh by the sewer uh as currently planned as currently proposed um I think we need to know that first of all um and then um I don't know what that number is maybe it's five let's say it's five and then I think we need to know what it if if you wanted to go say to eight what the additional cost might be granted it would be overtime and you know phased and all of that or indeed 12 what the additional cost would be so we have that input um and I think that's all we need to know frankly that that's um from from them um and then I think we should take on the chore of making the Assumption of how many are going to be one bedrooms Studios two bedrooms three bedrooms or whatever I don't think we should put that on on them I think we have resources that could come up with that uh so that would translate into number of units Etc um I I don't have a problem with 12 units per acre frankly um I think it can be done um in uh consistent with our you know um uh architecture seual desires for the town Etc um and I would be reluctant to back off of that but um uh I do agree with you Mr chair that the uh buildout analysis that we have seen and what is going to be used uh presumably um shows you know residential in the back very large L you know buildings uh in proportion to the commercial buildings in in in front um and there isn't a lot of mixing so I I think that that is a problem and I I I would like to see something done uh along those in in order to make it more integrated um if if you will um so those are my comments thank you um Bob DUIs Mr chairman I um I think that the sewer is part of the part part of the thing to find out what the sewer can handle but I know there's room for growth on it so that's not the biggest problem that I I can see is is uh as as they build or somebody build structures and and absorb some of the flu sewer flow and more sewer flow and more sewer flow the whole town is going to be absorbing sewer flow my biggest concern is the water that feeds the sewers that that's going to be a problem uh as we expand we need water drinkable water that is one of the problems that that the town is just starting to envelop and they're about 10 years late I believe so we can have the sewer but we need the water to flow and I I believe there's enough expansion and over time they're going to have to improve the pumping stations they always have we're just starting to do mil Pond we did uh we did 28 in uh oyster Pond F long uh oyster Pond Road there so over time they're going to expand it expand it and they'll have to maybe lay more pipe or bigger pipe around the perimeter not 28 but around the perimeter to get to to the site as we expand expand that so some of the problem is the water flow we need to concentrate at least some effort to see what's going on with the water right now they're building that uh station in the training Field Road hopefully that'll take care of that area we were a little short on expanding the building in South chattam we should have gone with the original plan in instead of just doing half of the building because I believe now we're going to have to put the other half of the building in to take the uh some of the problems out so there's two it's twofold I have no problem if somebody's building and can put 12 units on a piece of property comfortably I don't have a problem with that if they can only put four on there I'm I'm comfortable with that I I don't want to see a big massive structure somewhere I'd like to as long as it's done Tastefully I don't have a problem with that we we're going to we the more we go down this road the more housing we're going to need so it's it's tough back back in the 70s people used to open their their non-used bedrooms up and rent them out to people uh a lot of a lot of college kids would come down here and for back then it was like $25 a week and for $5 a week you get kitchen privileges if they worked in a rest restaurant they could eat eat there they if they worked at the Christopher Ridder house they could eat there I mean a lot of them a lot of them worked at hotels motels uh and that was that was where a lot of people got their housing because they were only here in the summer uh people here it was a long winter we never worked year round in chat a lot of people didn't anyway and that got to gave those people an extra boost in the summer uh so we've changed all of that maybe sometimes we could get back to Renning a room out for the summer to a college person some ideas like that instead of just renting houses for people to come here for a week uh two weeks I mean I'm all for that this this town lives on the influx of people in the summer without that there would be a big uh change in this town um uh Bob yeah I I actually want to direct this question maybe to the to the council um if if we have the the uh plan that we have and people start giving us uh um properties to develop is is there a point at which the sewers can no longer reach uh serve the capacity that we would have a way to hold that property from being developed until the sewer had adequate capacity I mean I I I I what we're doing now is saying we don't have the capacity we're completely not allowing what we really want here when it really is going to come in on stages anyway I just want to know that we're not going to like okay if God forbid everybody did build these out would we be able to control the development by uh saying the sewers aren't ready for you to make that property that where it is now can we legally do that well um and thanks Jay talerman Town Council um well there are some means to do that through but it would have to be through special permitting otherwise obviously no one's getting a building permit unless unless that there unless there's sewer capacity or septic available so um the concerns I have and so there's ways to control that in condition permits and approvals that that that can be done the concerns I have would be treating two different Property Owners or permit holders different unless we had a very highly developed means of allocating remaining capacity by property which some towns do they can get that targeted um with respect to this but um certainly sewer capacity determines what's available now I do want to note that if properties have paid a betterment and there's sewer capacity available for them then they're entitled to it if they haven't paid a better mint then and they front on a road with sewer in structure they're entitled to connect as well provided there's adequate capacity if they need an extension that's a different question so I know that that's an unsatisfying answer because it there's a lot of Shades of Gray but it it can be used as a management tool but there is also some entitlement to sewer and some circumstances and we also have to be careful about treating different classes of properties but if if we if we get a report back a more clear report that says right now that that uh Center can accommodate x amount of of additional capacity now and we as people come in and and put in come before us we say okay well you've used 20% you've used 20% uh you've used 60% the next one to come in uh we have no more capacity for you now well that that really would depend upon what the sewer Commissioners or the sewer department outlines for capacity it also may depend in some part on whether or not some of those potential users are 40b developers because that has an impact on our ability to control an allocation of capacity under some of the cases so but we can't I mean we we could perhaps condition certain things through zoning permits but we're really not allocating sewer capacity in a bylaw as a whole but we could pick it up during the permitting condition um we can make it a specific criteria for any special per for the bught uses it gets harder to do um but I mean there are tools to kind of manage that whatever the remaining capacity is if that's what folks want to do I would suggest working closely with the sewer department on developing bylaws that can man when you're developing bylaws so you can manage whatever remaining or potential future capacity there is uh Bob I and the other board members I I think uh when I was introducing some of this I think I wanted to put some of the measures and controls in the planning board if there we're if we're the special permit granting Authority here we should have the flexibility to deal with that and that's the reason why I talked about if we have all 90% of a site developers residential and only 10 10% commercial that's not something that I would like to see what controls and what measures in the bylaw should we have so that we can dictate some of that that's why I was suggesting that we put some minimums in if we don't have the minimums in then we're at the mercy of what the applicant is going to try and do and the other thing is is I don't think that we want to go to this High degree percentage wise of residential if we don't have a good balance I think the other um um commercial areas have a criteria and Katie if you can remind me on this is 51% commercial in in one of the other districts no um what I had mentioned was that our definition for an apartment incidental to commercial use we require that the commercial space is 51% okay of um the developed area right so to me there has to be a real good balance associated with that and I and and many of us have been through this development they're going to take a look at where am I going to get my returns the quickest from the standpoint this and if they use up all the capacity and in the sewer and the next guy down the road gets screwed I don't think that's beneficial to how we want to develop the whole neighborhood center it's not about one two or three Parcels that somebody is going to jump in on it's I would I would like to see a balance on all the parcels that are within this neighborhood center because otherwise why are we doing this we just going to going to cater to a couple of early arrivals and then the rest of them are sacrificed until we can get to that point and I I'm not sure that's being really responsible on our part if we're going to actually say well it's never going to be developed well if you put this out there there's no control over it unless you remove the zoning and try to try to turn back two3 vote to remove the zoning after you pass it I think we have to be very cautious the first step into this there's no reason why we couldn't adjust this density as we go further I think there's no reason why we couldn't look at this as part of the adjunct pieces to the West chadam neighborhood center and all the village centers we talked about that those adjacencies that we could look at uh some different densities there and strictly with residential those can be an outlier and a development of this further but the Hub still has to be the Village Center and the Village Center needs to be a real balance so I'm suggesting that we not push the envelope on this and not just use the neighborhoods The Village West Chan Neighborhood Center as the solution and push push to 12 I think we have to back off of that a little bit let's live within the environment of what we have make an adjustment later or by adding those adjacencies because they enhan then the Village Center rather than um you know taking away the capacity of it that that's I'm I'm trying to look a little bit as an engineer and a realist on this uh uh yes Frank um this is a in in support of of your position in in my prior town in in Connecticut uh the main street was um very important to the town it was historic and the problem there was that the uh it was be converted into too too much commercial and so they wanted to keep a balance with with the residential so the rule that they actually put in place was that for any uh housing or structure on on the main drive that they would have to be 5050 so I and I'm okay even with fixing something like that rather than a minimum here or something like that that is that then we know there's going to be a balance on every single site I would love to see a balance on every site rather than 90% in here and then the next site is going to be all commercial I would like to see a balance as much as possible on that and uh the other the other thing I see is is once we start working with some of of the commercial side of this it may have an automatic limit liation on some of the residential for example if there's a restaurant the parking gets jacked up a little bit now fortunately we've done a couple of things in the bolaw to provide that relief we talked about shared parking and Link parking that to me is the way we could balance some of that and we can still get the residential component in that is all up to us when we do our site plan reviews we would be able to work with that and if we set some thing up like that in this one property the adjacent property has to somewhat mimic that they have to join their property to it they have to share the parking so that it could uh very much like our current Town Center is there's shared parking all the way through the rear that that's what I think is going to help balance this all out on whether one person has a uh one develop site has a high amount of parking that's in demand again a couple of just a couple of thoughts I'm just trying to not pin us down but I also want us to have the flexibility to manage this and I'm not sure I would want to relieve it or push it on the DPW or the town or put it into a legal issue I think it should be left to the board here on this that that we can control this once we get it to the point say 10 years 15 years down the road and we think we can do something different or we want to do an add-on with the adjacencies to this Village Center and we want to make that uh a more defined development of just residential uh you know multi multif family I think that would be a great way to go about it that just and I I've been thinking about this I was out there on vacation of course I couldn't stop thinking about this so I I had a sort of interject first on this and I it wasn't my intention to drive the message in here but I I thought that uh it would be important enough that I do lead off with that today Catherine I just wanted to make a comment I wanted to respond to Charlene's comment about um we do un just about that we do understand that the buildout analysis was a maximum I mean in general that is the question that's asked for a buildout analysis we want to see the maximum um and yes it's very likely the case that the maximum would not be built however my res my response when I reviewed the buildout analysis more carefully is that if the way the zoning proposed zoning as we've worded it now would allow this to be built which it clearly does I think we do need to go back to our draft and look at things that would not allow this to be built because I do feel this is a significant departure from everything we've worked on and from what our uh what our vision of what the West chadam Neighborhood Center should be everything we've worked on this is a significant departure from that and so therefore what we've drafted is not producing what it should be producing so I do think we need to look at it and introduce some of the things that your chair is suggesting such as you know having the percentage of and that Mr Sher um confirmed that there's some percentage of how the residential and Commercial is mixed and I do think we need to look at reducing the residential density with the understanding that West chadam Neighborhood Center is not the solution to our housing problem it can offer some um diversity of housing options but really I think we need to look to the for the bigger solution to the housing problem in chadam in other areas in the buffer zones in townwide zoning initiatives and in Friendly 4bs and other on the ground you know on the ground projects just to remember that zoning is sort of there's many tools in the toolbox to address the housing needs or any particular need that the town might have which with regard to its built environment zoning is one tool in the toolbox and in my humble opinion it's sort of the weakest one uh it's the Wimpy EST one in in the in the sense that zoning gives an idea of what could be done it encourages and allows certain types of um development or Redevelopment but it doesn't build the things it doesn't actually do anything so um there are stronger I I think more effective solutions that I think the town is already pursuing with great Vigor so um anyway that was just a comment um yeah Charlene do you have one other thing um certainly within the a Zone and if we need to make the depth of that zone yeah a little bit larger y i I would not have a concern at all with having uh you know a 50/50 orire or whatever we want to call it um for commercial development again it's going to go down to flow as to what you're going to be able to have on each and every parcel right regardless of the size of that parcel y um uh Jay would we be able to allow for transfer development rights yes yes specifically under the um under the zoning act you can do transfer uh development rights through a special permit process do people know what that is please enlighten us okay so uh I'm I'm really reader digest version um you've got a development over here that you want to uh build more than it capacity would allow you purchase the development rights from this parcel over here to be able to do that and you put restrictions on that other parcel got it yeah um so there may be um uh some thought put in that it has to be in uh correct me if I'm wrong folks cuz I've been out of the professional planning biz for a little bit now um but it would have to be within the same zone of contribution and and all of that kind of thing so you know something in North chadam couldn't be used for something in West chadam you know it would have to be within the confines of of that area so you know there are some like Katherine said there are some creative ways to do development mhm um and I think if we did you know have a minimum requirement for or however we want to board it for commercial um and if we because right now the depth of the azone is only what 200 feet no I don't even think it's that much I think it only 100 I think it's 100t yeah so we may want to think about expanding that right to a bigger depth that's an excellent that would allow for the Mixed use that we're we are trying to create and then if there's ability and and capacity to build further residential to the rear y that I think that's a win-win y it's a good suggestion yeah I I just had to agree I think extending that zone further depth is is an excellent thought um and uh we we're in November C you know and we're heading towards 10 meeting so whatever we do to make this work we need to make it simple and and quick and I'm a little bit worried about doing transfer development rights if that if that affects that wouldn't be included in the zoning at all it's just something we can do you know johnq come in yeah johnq public can come in and say I really want to build this here but I need more capacity so I'm going to buy this and restrict it yeah that wouldn't be part of this it was more okay they uh since uh Town Council is here tonight is there any other questions that you may want to ask them about about yeah I'd like to get through this piece here because there's other things that we may want to revisit with Town Council but this one might put a little curveball into I I don't want to do a speculation on on to cil's opinion on it let's stick with what we have and where we think we we need to focus on but if you have any questions by all means I don't have a question for Town Council but I have a comment on this what we're all talking about right um abolutely I think the other thing that we really need to do is is produce another drawing that's what we think it should be because quite honestly we would never with the limited control we have now and I agree we should have more yeah but with the limited control now we would never allow any of that development to take place there's not enough parking y there's not any recreational areas there's not any of the things that we think are part of of the development so correct with with all those things that we want in here the density is is likely to be half of what's in here and I think we need and owe it to the public to say this is our vision of what's going out there the other one was what what is possible possible but not under our our uh leadership you're thinking like I was on this I I thought what we should do with Union Studio exactly that point I I'm not interested in in portraying what the maximum is because I think we're in agreement that that's not likely to be the case I think division should look of what the desired uh uh site layout would look like with a balance of commercial and residential and what was ADV visually be if you do the setbacks uh off off of uh uh the frontage road on Route 28 where we' desire to have a little bit further setback so that there's uh streetscape there or there's dining areas there uh that we wouldn't have if you put them right up front that is allowed by the way we've structured this right now but that is probably what we would pursue with an applicant if they were coming before us and as soon as you start doing that while you're not putting parking or anything else in there you're you are residential you're just you're essentially dealing with all the uh the Aesthetics and the additional pieces so my suggestion is I think we have Union Studio coming in on December 9th that's the next meeting right these are things that I think we could bring up to them ask them to structure their illustrations to be what we desire them to be and then let's make sure that we have some uh s sufficient guidance in the bylaw so that we can create that and manage that as a board and not just rely on some other entities that are going to perhaps put us into a legal Quirk bar which I'd like too yes I did have a question for Town Council can we require shared parking require it you can certainly allow it um yeah and I know we can allow it can we require it I I think ostensibly you could you'd obviously have to examine whether or not with every single parcel in the zoning District it makes sense but I don't see a reason why you couldn't I mean you'd have to look at it across every single year use that's allowed yeah and whether or not it's practical but it's certainly something you could do I I I think that's exactly the case I think an applicant would want to do shared parking because it benefits them from the standpoint they don't get anything out of putting base pavement down for a parking space as long as they have a good neighbor yeah I I it if I'm a resident in that neighborhood where I don't have a space because they're all shared that's true I'm not so sure I'd be so happy well I I think that's the sight by sight does dictate a lot of that oversight that we would provide uh I'm not quite sure that everyone's going to want to do it like you say they're going to want to take care of their own and that's okay but uh I I think that this helps from the standpoint of of creating that Village atmosphere a little bit more yeah one more well yeah I I think this shared parking is is important um it's U because you know you'd go through town um and except when you know it's a big holiday time or something like that there's lots of spaces that are theoretically for this building or that building that are completely empty empty um and so you can increase the amount of parking available generally by incentivizing uh you know Common parking and maybe there some sort of incentive we could put into the rules where people get a benefit if they allow the the parking that's it all right so there was a couple of things what I want to take uh some public input if there is any but I do want you to think about this and I'll get back to it um I think I'd like to add another meeting or two to our normal agenda on this and uh in discussion with um Community Development staff the challenge is it's not really adding the meeting it's an evening meeting that's the challenge uh if we are going to add any meetings say in January or February it's likely to be more in an afternoon meeting than an evening meeting because of everything seems to be booked up uh is the board members are are you open to that and we certainly can work with some suggested dates um through the uh um through Community Development staff to see which ones make sense on that as long as some of them we can participate remotely that's fine yeah that that would always be available I would say for right now that's great okay uh with that I'd like to open it up for any public comments and I appreciate it if you could um uh um hold your comments to about three minutes uh that would be helpful to us is there anybody on board um Katie Rick lit Rick levit go ahead Rick thank you Mr chairman I think this has been one of the better if not the best planning board meeting I've ever attended or watched I think you guys are doing a outstanding job I'm looking forward to your meeting on the 9th with Union Studio presenting and presenting what West chadam Center can look like I think I know what union Studio has done in the past actually building things designing and Building Things that they create exactly the kind of environment the atmosphere that you guys have been discussing tonight so Bravo keep at it thank you thanks Rick uh any other comments from the public no okay oh yeah uh any other questions for the attorney while we have Mr Talman uh cine yes um I just had a general question since you've joined us uh attorney tman I just wanted to ask um this is a more general question that I know is on has been on the table uh with regard to West chadam neighborhood Center for some time but we understand there is some new legislation through the state of Massachusetts that may affect um what we do in West chadam especially with regard to the residential piece and I wondered um if it's premature to ask for your comments on this that's fine but I did want to uh hear your opinion and ask for your comments on this and how it affects us as we move forward well I think that the biggest piece of legislation that's out there that may affect what you're trying to do and based upon what I saw in the in the draft bylaw was the requirements for byright treatment of most if not all accessory dwelling units so as you're developing this or any other bylaw um you should keep that in mind you should also be thinking about what your current bylaws do with respect to accessory dwelling units but um I would say that how you approach the dimensional requirements which you can adopt for accessory dwelling units in around West um chadam that you give that some some thought for sure that's the biggest new piece there's a a few other assorted smaller pieces but um that's the biggest new piece thank you if I might sure Jay if um if the zoning that we're proposing actually does not allow for single family dwellings would the accessory apartment um new legislation impact that it no it wouldn't in in my opinion and it really depends ultimately what your n result accessory dwelling unit bylaw says some towns are allowing for accessory dwelling units on duplexes but otherwise we take the position that the new legislation only covers instances where it's accessory to a single family dwelling um I think we do need to work on our existing accessory apartment bylaw by the way yes if I could uh through the chair so um staff has begun to look at our Adu bylaw um in comparison to what the state is proposing and we're waiting for for some additional uh guidance from the state and so once we have that we can then um will'll likely come to the board to ask for a proposal uh to amend the Adu by law at town meeting okay good all right so um the uh Community Development staff is going to reach out to us on dates um I appreciate it I think we're looking for at least two is that right uh Katie yes we um I think we probably need at least you know two work sessions um I guess a question that I would have for the board is whether or not we think do we need another session before the conversation with Union Studio or do we want to have you know perhaps start that meeting a little bit earlier and come to some conclusions about what we're looking for from them um prior to that meeting so that's one question well I know some of the things I heard especially from you Bob and I I was right in and tuned to this so when you said let let's have a visual of what we want it to be I think that's what the discussion would be with them on December 9th and we can Define it right then and there about what we'd like it to visually look like and have them created it and let's make sure then if we wrap our head around they come back with a visual and says you know what this looks pretty good what do we have to do to make sure that the narrative or the the the the ink is consistent with that and again again as long as we have some control as a board on this uh whether we go one way or another uh I'm okay with it I just want to make sure that we have the flexibility as a board to manage that aspect of it as we see things coming in I really hated in the past when zoning is sort of Silent on this or they get through a change and then all of a sudden it's forced down that we have oh we got four apartment units in the back and we and was only allowed to be two but they got some waiver on it or something I I would rather not go down that that pathway I'd rather stick with whatever it is that we can control rather than have it circumvent us as board Mr check I come yes um in that regard I I personally think it might be helpful for the board either to have another meeting before meeting with Union Studios or just prior so that we can sit together and think together what are essential elements that we'd really like to see in the visuals so I do think that would be useful and also just a reminder to the board that the West chadam Neighborhood Center is in the um historic business district and the planning board some years ago adopted the design guidelines of hbdc as our design guidelines so we might want to take a look at those in uh connection with the form based code that we've integrated into the the West chadam neighborhood center and put it together and maybe what a nice way to think about this is from BSC we got the maximum build out in terms of quantity of stuff and but it's not really what we want um what we want to ask Union Studio Studios is give us the maximum in terms of desirability what we really want quality yes what we really want the West chadam Neighborhood Center to do and to look like um uh and to be aesthetically pleasing and livable and workable and all of those things are you looking for that to be just before the meeting on the 9th or uh a separate day before the 9th whatever works whatever could work you you suggested a meeting we could even do it before the N just before the meeting if I can just I will need to confirm room availability and such but we'll do that um this week and then get back to the to the board members separate meeting might be better in a way because there's then there's a little time to pull together a summary of what the board's discussed to present that to right so that that will be our Target something between now and the 9th yeah I think we do because there's some things that we want to see and there's some things that we have to agree on are our limitations Li I I totally like the idea of widening the aid but we have to come to an agreement and tell them yeah okay now it's this large and and so there are some we haven't discussed you know what percentage is going to be Recreation we haven't discussed parking limits we haven't discussed bedroom sizes you know a few things like that that we probably should do before they come okay good uh Warren you had some questions um yes first just on this subject here it seems to me that we are still proposing that we be the permit granting Authority for permits mhm and that the criteria by which they will be evaluated is still um to be developed or fleshed out right uh completely but it does seem to me that um given that many of the uses that we're talking about in our use table require a special permit M that uh as the permit granting Authority with uh we have a great deal more uh clout if you would or ability to affect the uh development uh that would be requesting a special permit than we might in other situations so I would just say that y um um and then totally different subject if I can change it because I don't know if this is the last chance to bring it up but with Town Council here I mean for me uh my colleagues here will uh not think it a surprise that I say for me the elephant in the room is short-term term rentals and if we can't come up with a way that prohibits short-term rentals in the west chadam Neighborhood Center we're going to have a commercial district and then a bunch of of short-term rental nobody to live there um it's my understanding um from the opinion of Town Council um that that can be done but we have not uh done that it was even proposed by staff at one point that a a way to do that would be to require a special permit for the multi-use developments that would be proposed and that the criteria that would be used by this board to evaluate a special permit request for a multi-use or multif family facility um could very clearly Define that it has to restrict uh short-term rentals it has to be year round accommodations um and that would be a very quick way to quote fix what I think is a fatal flaw in any of our developments is to require a special permit rather than permitted by right um for a multif family unit in our use table um but the whole issue of restricting short-term rentals has never been discussed completely or if at all other than by saying it's a concern of mine and the more of I have reflected on it as you have on your time off um the more I realize that there are many incentives uh that are going to push towards uh as many units as possible that can be owned by corporations or owned by individuals and with the intent of maximizing um their their revenue flow and we do not end up adjusting or addressing the principal objective which was to create some more moderately priced housing for those who wish to live in chadam um because there isn't any um and that's the issue for me and the way I had seen proposed was to uh make a special permit as a requirement for the multif family developments in multi-use I guess as well uh in our use table um when then have the discussion about what are the criteria that this board is going to always apply to everybody in this entire West chadam Neighborhood Center no favoritism it you know that's you know what we'll what we will base the assessment of whether the grant a special permit or not but anyway that subject I would love to have discussed and actually I would would love to have some uh input from the board as to whether a special permitting might be more appropriate than uh permit by right which is what we have in the use table as we speak so that's my comment Catherine by all means I just wanted to comment um we actually have discussed this at length and we have received opinions from our previous Town Council about how to approach it we've also received opinions from our previous planner and our uh housing uh director uh Gloria mcferson on how to approach it one suggestion that has been made in the past is that it's problematic to apply any standard to just one zone in town that a townwide rule or regulation or um provision in the bylaw regarding the Restriction of year of seasonal rentals is something that's uh more appropriate but I think the best thing to do is to ask Jay for his opinion um that if we do want to address this issue of seasonal occupancy or seasonal rentals and restricting that what is what would be your recommendation for the best way legally to do that so it's a sticky issue um especially on the cape in the islands and a little bit in the Far Western part of the state is as well where rental of units is kind of a necessary component of the local economy and also is the engine that keeps some people able to keep their homes that said there's a lot of pressure on it under the the two notable cases an anet case and a and the other um a St the case called styler and I believe it's from Lindfield technically if you don't say anything about short-term rentals they're just they're not permitted except in the sense that there may be permitted General business in the district that they're in because they're not determined to be residential you could prohibit them in a specific Zone if you so desired you may want to address whether or not you're going to allow them in the other zones for consistency and then there's other safeguards obviously including safeguards outside of zoning all together in terms of lure and things like that that can be done but you certainly have the tools under zoning to choose where and how you might allow them in some districts you could allow Special by special permit or site plan review or by right there's any number of means arising under zoning to regulate either across town or District byd district short-term rentals ask sure sure um am I understanding you correctly to say that basically they are prohibited everywhere so everywhere in chadam that somebody's offering a short-term rental it's actually prohibited is is that am I wrong I don't I don't want to be I don't want to be alarmist but the cases suggest that short-term rentals are not single family housing now it depends upon whether or not someone might consider a short-term rental an occasional accessory element of someone's residency or if it's the predominant use of that house which is pretty prevalent on the cape as you know so if if I live in a house and I do a short-term rental twice a year you know for a couple of weeks I don't think that would be illegal I would say that would be better termed as accessory to the primary single family residential use if I rented my that same house for 40 weeks a year I would say that that would be prohibited because it would be a business and not a single family use provided that that business isn't allowed in that District so it really depends on exactly what you want to do you do have the right to even prohibit it as an accessory use altogether if that's what you want to do so my point is that in the cases suggest this that where you don't regulate it if it's the predominant use of a single family house that use is no longer single family it's a business use that you know for um uh short-term rentals but chadam is not alone in towns among towns including on in towns on the cape that are trying to figure out how their future with short-term rentals is going to be written and people are catching up to that regulation now and in other areas they're not doing it through zoning at all but they're regulating it kind of through another process through lure registration processes but yeah I mean technically if you any of us rented our house for 40 weeks a year as a short-term rental it ceases to become a single family house in terms of use that's what the cases State okay um Frank Sher um I I read that and then talk case with great interest and and the Skyler case and uh I'm not admitted in Massachusetts so I'm deferring but we those involveed both purely residential districts is that that's my recollection is that correct right or that particular use I think that the point of those is that if that particular use isn't described or allowed in the district I mean most bylaws State unless something is expressly allowed it's expressly prohibited yes and I my my before I even was aware of those cases I thought that it was pretty clear if somebody was in the business of renting their home in a residential district that would not be a proper use within a residential district so the cas is seem to be coming down that way um I am concerned that chadam has allowed short-term rentals in residential districts and in fact in a way has approved it because we have our uh Health regulations and registration regulations Etc so I think uh we may be in a position and I'd like you to react to this uh of of not relying just on or not saying anything but actually coming out and specifying what we think about short-term rentals in various districts that's a huge topic yeah right it's not a topic AAL if I could I just like I if we're talking about short-term rentals in relation to West chadam I think that's fine as we're talking about short-term rentals in general I think we're getting away from the agenda topic and I would caution against that I do think that we need to further that discussion uh we've talked about it internally we've talked about it you know you know even as early as today with Town Council it's something that you know we know that needs we need to look at however I just want to caution from today's standpoint the discussion should absolutely around W absolutely agreed uh so focusing just on the west chatam um do you think that we should specify how short-term rentals are handled and can we do that legally yeah I mean if that's a question for me you 100% could do that legally if you wanted with or without a special permit we could just state it you could just state it I mean that's one end of the spectrum okay thank you absolute prohibition without qualification yes okay okay good well that that actually clarifies a few things doesn't it members that clears up a very big issue that you know there's um been some misunderstanding about so that's great um and just to clarify we can specify it and if we don't specify it it is prohibited sort of the default position is it's not allowed unless we say it's allowed yeah what I would say is it's unclear if you don't specify it it's in the same boat as every other house in chadam um the as the cases develop and as towns develop mechanisms to deal with it you know we'll look at it but those cases are quite clear on the subject okay great I I would s suggest that this um since we have a little bit of clarity here uh this could be something in one of the workshops that we would use this as a focus point I think it warrants just doing that and I'm I'm always concerned about just doing something in just this Zone and in West chadam in no place else in town I think I think I would like input from from Katie and others about you know and maybe Gloria about where we're going with this townwide at the same time we have that discussion but I would just like to be careful about that aspect of it and not I have a yeah a thought I I I don't know how it will be received but um should we have goals and objectives for next year um the the things we're going to focus on and obviously it's the neighborhood it's uh aduse maybe it's short-term rentals but you know have have a list of of topics that we're going to address we we usually do but um I'm new on this in this position so that's something I'll put on my my tasks of things to uh to outline and suggest I think I'll take something from what uh um uh Katherine has done in the past one one one possibility if if I could throw out a thought um then I'll can we finish with the um I thought we were I'm sorry I still had finish if I could just make a comment usually often also you prepare an annual report um for um Town manager and uh select board and the public and usually in that report we also have an outline of our goals um and actions for the coming year so there's actually a formal procedure to do that but excellent point can I get J absolutely one one last thing because it it occurred to me that we do have existing single family homes in in this district and some of them may already be set up as um short-term rentals is that make it more difficult for us to um put that into the the um zoning law other than trying to get the votes I mean I'm talking about legal um issues later on and things like that not not not legal issues because it's not like it's an allowed use so there there's no grandfathering of uses that aren't allowed okay so there so not legally I mean in terms of passing town meeting maybe but um legally no that's that's good to know all right if if we're uh done with this for tonight not yet but um I'll entertain them any other uh discussion points before we make a motion to well I I just um what is the process under which we would okay go ahead goals and objectives for next year how how has that evolved uh let me look at that okay I okay I have to do my own homework all right and then I'll I'll I'll bring it to the board maybe on the meeting on T night no could I comment Mr chair oh okay um go ahead if I could comment what we've done previously is usually the chair will have a discussion with the board okay okay and then we determine our priorities um and usually but you usually have a list of our to-do list which has already been established and and that's what I'll do I'll I'll make the to-do list it's probably going to be longer than what our goals can be possibly be but yeah yeah I just on the timeline that was given to us and thank you for that I'm a little confused on the February 24th 2025 um that that is the uh uh the last date we can this I asked that same question 65 days is from the date it's referred to the planning board from the board s correct that that would be probably an early date we probably could go later than that okay I just wanted to clarify that I think what I wanted to do on that is um I like to push uh my goal would be to actually push us that's why I want to add a couple of meetings and I want to push us let's resolve these things uh and we can do that I think by getting together that's a Target date if it has to slip a week or so I think I talked with staff and they said there's a little bit of flexibility there but I said let's just put that in as our starting point that's our T but I just don't want people ESP who are not familiar with the process be confused by that thank you for clarifying yeah right this whole thing is adjustable week to week this is just sort of my plan for things that I think can make us work speaking of adjustable Mr chairman um so your scheduled meetings for December right now are December 9th and December 23rd right um we right now have one item that was submitted for December 23rd that we could actually put on the December 9th meeting my question and then we also have a request from um Penrose who will be the developer for the 40b uh to come in to discuss um their proposal in an informal way with the board because technically it will go through the process through the zoning board of appeals but as a courtesy come to the planning board to to explain the project and and you know perhaps get some input that they can come back you know take back and to inform their final design with the zba um they're not available on the 23rd we were wondering if the board members would be willing to meet on December 16th at 6 p.m. to hear that proposal um and in that in turn we would actually then cancel the meeting on December 23rd have or have an extra one available if folks decided that they wanted to meet that week I would rather have both on the schedule just because I think we're going to need them 16th works for me yeah work so then we're just we're going to say we're going to do both the 16th and the 23rd 9th 16th and right now we let's reserve the dates so that it seems like we have plenty of things to go into and we can focus a certain topics for each date is but if we don't have a date set we won't get a room we won't be able to so if the board's okay let's keep both dates for now okay and then we'll I'll try to work out with staff what we should focus each of these workshops on that work okay yes Mr chairman thank okay thank you now motion Mr chairman I move we adjourn the meeting and wishing everybody a very Happy Thanksgiving and I second that uh okay then we'll take a roll call vote uh Katherine helper yes I approve we adjourn uh Warren chain Warren chain approve wor sha approve uh Charlene Greenhall approve Frank Shear approve dubis approve Arts bre and I approve and it is uh 750 4 [Music] a [Music]