##VIDEO ID:eBqRaxv4lng## call the Tuesday December 3rd 2024 meeting of the eam Met planning board to order I'm required to ask if there's anyone in the audience or on Zoom who might be recording this meeting if so please state your name s he and reminder publishing and the method of recording your phone thank you anyone else hearing none uh by roll call we have Bill fona sandre Sher wow Russell Denver and is Rob there I don't see him him a panelist invite I also notified him too of this meeting earlier today and yeah so we're expecting them yeah you still have a quorum if you want to continue with the other matters okay yeah all right um you need me to read it sure why don't you read don't you read um the an anr to skip ahead yeah item five do we need to votee have a motion to move move item five to to be acted on first don't move second all in favor say I I an anr so we're on number five right now an anr 202 24-10 request to endorse plan of land Recon Recon conveying a shared lot line of two Parcels at 68 cical place owned by Kimberly Renee Strather and 718 Parker Street owned by Ronald E humson applicant Ronald humson 718 Parker Street East Long meal Mass 028 anyone here for the petitioner is this for the anr Mr chair it is all right so I have the plans behind me so basically what the applicants requesting to do is to reconvey reconvey a shared lot line between 718 Parker Street and the other address was 68 CLE place I have the plans rolled up behind you if you want me to bring them over the board can view them um before you endorse them I watched well I saw them online does anyone else want us review those plans I took a look at them I'm good I took a look at them okay right do I have a motion to endorse the plan so moved have a second second uh any discussion hearing none all in favor say I I I okay next item would be uh to move ahead under new business Item B have a motion to do that so move second any further discussion hearing none all in favor say I I anyone oppos hearing none passes so Item B sprw 20242 request for site plan W review waiver for 176 foot square foot greenhouse and a 336 foot shed at 896 Summers road to be placed on a site with no current principal Residential Building applicant Thomas k265 mil milbrook Drive East Long met MK oh no please step forward yeah sure you want to take hat off yeah sure the snowy wonderland hello so there's so two weeks ago Jason was in yep so there's one building on this is going to be a separate a separate building yep that's a greenhouse well the greenhouse was the original right and then the 396 square foot shed 330s okay and is it gonna be in front behind this is mostly for people it's it's G to be in a place where the green move the to the left yeah yeah so I I guess the basic question just procedurally I have are are how many more of these buildings before you come with the full plan um this is it okay we we we need something on the property uh to to move forward yeah to at least bring eventually we need to bring Electric in from the road everything else yeah this gonna be like this uh a working shed any other questions okay do I have a motion to approve the site plan review waiver for for the 336 foot shed at 896 thbs so moved second second any further discussion hearing none all in favor say I I I oppose item passes thank you next item will uh make a motion to act on case ZN 20245 of order second um any discussion hearing all in favor say I okay please that so um you all have the copy with our comments and edits from other departments and Town Hall that are provided as well as edits from our attorney there's some sections in there that are actually highlighted and I'll discuss what that means in a little bit um so Mr chair I don't know if you want me to project the language onto the screen so the public can see it or if you want to discuss it loud It's up you I do need a moment to turn on the projector if that's okay with ready right okay do that in the meantime I will read it case ZN 20245 for the addition of subsection this little symbol section section 45051 accessory drilling units adus to the east long metal zoning bylaw and for the Amendments of section 45033 additional use dimensional and density regulations Section 450-9924 15- 111.2 terms defined table 3-1 schedule of use regulations and table 3-2 table of dimensional regulations of the East Meadow zoning bylaw you know work this thing no all right Mr chair I apologize for technical difficulty I'll just read through the text as we have it on so why don't you introduce it sure first absolutely and why we're why we're being asked to act on this specifically and then you can talk about Islam medow version that you're put forward yes so um over the summer the governor signed into act called the affordable homes act and basically what it's doing is that it's a they call it the most Progressive and aggressive housing law in State history and what they're doing is trying to find ways to make it more convenient and easier for folks to build homes in the Commonwealth one of which includes allowing for they're called accessory dwelling units adus for short by right so historically they've been allowed through special permit which is a discretionary permit in itself and now the state is eliminating that requirement so every household that is a single family home Zone residentially in the Commonwealth is allowed to have one accessory dwelling unit on their property by right this can be done one of three ways the first way can be a detached building which a lot of people use the existing garage shed or Barn that they can convert or build a brand new building from scratch that's one way they call that a detached Adu the second way is what's called an attached Adu and usually it's like an addition to the single family home uh it could be around the front back side doesn't matter just a physical addition to the main building um and then the third option is called a contained accessory dwelling unit and what that is is a residential unit inside of the principal structure uh usually takes up like a room or two it has a separate entryway to the outside and to the inside through a shared Corridor and it looks like one giant house so you can't really tell the difference about that so in response to this um the state law that was passed in August gave communities around 180 days to enact their own legislation so the reason why we're having this legislation come before the planning board is because the deadline to do so is February 2nd before the law goes into effect right now the only part of the law that has gone to effect is updating the definition of accessory dwelling unit under uh Mass General Law chapter 48 Section 3 so the document that the planing board has before them that I apologize I can't show up on the screen because of technical difficulties actually addresses several sections throughout our bylaw which in some way shape or form already contradict the existence of accessory dwelling units and those sections have to be updated as well so Russell I don't know if you want me to go through the whole thing and it's entirety or or what the so let's just just put this right out so sure this is a mandate from the state that each Community ad opt accessory dwelling unit zoning bylaw so like other things in the last number of years the state is you know they've mandated educational uses they've mandated as we found out um solar farms in residential districts uh we're required by the federal government to uh allow cell towers in just about any location in town so essentially this is a further stripping away of local zoning prerogative by the by the community I wouldn't say a stripping per se uh it's more of a superseding um regulation they're putting into effect so the section they're updating is section three which they call the do Amendment um especially when it comes to solar essentially what that is it's just a bunch of uses that are protected from local discretionary um rule so they've taken local discretion away from the adus yes so you know other categories in there also include solar uh homebased or daycare facilities schools religious institutions stuff like that so now they treat accessory dwell units to be within that same category as a protected use so whether the town believes it's an appropriate piece of legislation or not we really have little um little ability to um reject this proposal so you could definitely reject the proposal but what I recommend is that if you don't have anything in place before February 2nd the state law takes effect and the state law essentially allows for these things to go by right without planning board approval so what the state law allows for the planning board to do if we have regulations put into place is to regulate these through site plan review you can also allow for the creation of more than one accessory dwelling unit through special permit but the town does not have to include that that language into the zoning by wall the only thing we do have to include is whether or not we want to allow by right without site plan review or site plan review so the bylaw that I crafted and and got a lot of feedback on including from our town attorney is is pretty well crafted there's just a few things they point out that's highlighted in the addition that you have that they seen as being unreasonable and it's not essentially clear what is meant by reasonable regulations under state law and usually that's one of those things that's either going to be promulgated through regulations from the uh Department of Housing Lial communities or um from case law and we have not had either of those things yet and so most towns in the state they do the special permit path for these types of buildings including towns like ammer eastampton Northampton Etc and the biggest thing that I do want to make clear Mr chair is that the town can no longer require owner occupancy of either the main building or the accessory dwelling unit and that Statewide mandate that's in the law that was pass 99% of the communities around here that have this in their bylaws require at least one building be occupied by the owner at all times so that's that's pretty much the biggest game Cher from this legislation I would say and that will go into effect on February 2nd if we don't have the appropriate regulations in place now so someone who lives in Florida could own the principal residence put in an accessory dwelling unit not have to be u in the principal residence that's correct yeah so there's not much we can do about that one because the town would be liable for for challenge if we continue to make owner occupancy a thing for for these buildings so I'm asking these questions just so the public is aware of somewhat that our hands are tied but the bylaw we're going to you know act on really is one that we need to put into place for like it to comply with the state law whether we believe it's appropriate or not and we also put additional uh restrictions in there which are reasonable in themselves but obviously there were a few that the town attorney um cautioned us against including just so we don't make ourselves susceptible to a challenge and have the bylaw thrown out because of that so I think uh Mr chair I don't know if you wanted me to go through the additions and the deletions well let's uh ask a board members if you have any questions or beforehand no I mean we're kind of like everybody saying our hands are tied we've just got to do do our due diligence to protect ourselves as best as possible without superseding the law I know that Mr punderson although he's not here called me this afternoon to ask that I just relay his kind of displeasure of the situation in which the state is put us in forther removing zoning from uh local part you know local action but so why don't you hit the high spots sure yeah I'll was talk about each section my small edits and one section in particular Mr chair I think I should read through is um I believe it's labeled as 5.11 which which is a new section that we would create just for accessory doing I'll start from the beginning um I apologize to the members of the audience I tried getting up on the screen but the technolog is not working with me today so I'll just read through very briefly um so article three is the first article that's going to have an edit to it specifically 4 53.3 which is additional use demential and density regulations um there is a subsection uh 1 C which states an accessory building shall not be used for residence purposes and we amended this language to include unless it aderes to the special use regulations set forth in section 450-5130 if they're located 10 ft behind a building can be close to the proper line on the sides in the rear as close as 5T and we insert a language here that says accessory dwelling units are not included in that so no matter what an accessory dwelling unit has to be the standard minimum from the sides and the rear and then the front which essentially is the same so it's the front plus 10 for an accessory building so say if the main building need 50t from the street of of setback the structure including the Adu needs 10 10 more than that so it' be 60 and then the sides and the rear be the same for both buildings principle and accessory so moving on to page three as the beginning of the addition to Article Five which are special use regulations um 5.11 is the new section which is going to be labeled accessory dwelling units um so Mr chair did you want me to go Section through Section then if people had coms they can just chime in or how do you want to go about this um yeah I would touch on each section sure yeah so I'll start with um section A which is the purpose so the purpose here um drafted which obviously could be changed exess dwelling units known as adus are becoming increasingly popular across the Commonwealth in response to the affordable homes act several more communities have adopted Adu regulations including easta metal this bylaw addresses the necessary pering path and design requirements in order to site these buildings in an appropriate manner for the Community yeah so I I would like to change that language so I would recommend that we just say uh five state law accessory dwell or dwell accessory dwelling units known as adus as required by state law are allowed as of right this bylaw addresses the necessary permitting path and design requirements in order to site these buildings in appropriate manner for for the community I don't think we need all of the flowery language that's that's in there so would you say excessive ding NN adus then scratch the middle part and then pick it up from addresses the necessary pering path yeah yeah you okay yep okay so uh moving on to section B which is terms defined we have four terms that are defined that are section specific uh the first is actually I don't think you need to go through each one of those okay that's fine uh but those definitions are there and the definitions are for Adu attached contain and detach adus um the bottom three definitions are not included in article 12 but the sections I will go through Mr chair are C and D because they have some pretty important details yep so uh section C is applicability so uh subsection one says accessory do units adus are allowed by right in the residence ablea a b and c zoning districts after site plan review approval is granted by the planing board adus are not eligible for site plan review waiver subsection 2 Adu shall not be larger in Gross floor area than one half the gross floor area of the primary dwelling or 900 square feet whichever is smaller and that one's taken straight from the definition of the state um number three Adu shall only be placed on res have a single family dwelling on them uh number four no more than one Adu shall be placed on a lot number five a mobile home or any other temporary structure are prohibited from being used or classified as adus does anybody have any comments about section c no no cool so procedurally Rob y so unfortunately we thought Mr Terell was going to zoom in and he has I don't want to keep you two here if you don't need to sit through this you're welcome to stay if you don't um I reached out to him earlier today yeah procedurally I don't get back to me so what procedurally can we do to to uh not have to so you have to by default continue it to the next meeting date which is December 17th won't be here okay I mean you're not going to do outdoor dining between now and no but April spending time spending finan that's that's why I'm trying to maybe proceed well so state law requires that we have four people here for special permit hearings unfortunately I mean you could also we be able to zoom into the meeting or or attend virtually or maybe you could send your architect on your behalf I can send somebody yeah as long as somebody's here representing you that should be fine you don't have to be here yourself physically um if you're going away somewhere but I mean or how would be the first meeting in January it's the first Tuesday I'm sorry chair have multiple businesses and multiple States the rest of the yeah yeah fine yeah so Mr the only thing you got to do is just announce that the hearing is going to be continued uh name the specific permit number and then just say it's going to be continued to December 17th at and it's the only other thing that I I'm pretty sure we touched on was you know across the street the Mexican restaurant the Restriction we put on that was there would be no dining no one operating on the outside area that your construction after 10 o'clock so we're be we did that at East Village Tavern did that in the Mexican place last last meal we served at 10 no no done by 10 everyone's off to sit on the Pao by 10 correct we're trying to be consistent with every one of these that come toward come before us we've been in business 30 years here we've been a good patient good client we we've served the community very well it seems the restrictions you put on businesses are very difficult to stay in business especially the restaurant business after coming through Co and everything else we survived we've done well these are things that you guys put in place here so restaurants can survive 10:00 curfew I can understand not serving anymore after 10 o'clock they telling patrons you have to leave your seat at nine o'clock if someone sits out there you're putting a big restriction on on the on on the restaurant itself to insult the patient the person that comes and eats and say you have to leave it's a difficult thing I mean I'm not saying it's wrong or right but it just seems 10:00 to clear your value seems kind of well four and a half years ago there was no outdoor dining at all in this town the state allowed this it worked out well and so we happily said fine we will do this the restriction for that is for the neighborhood period and you're right when we do a special permit or an amendment to a special permit we do check with the police department there were no complaints whatsoever but we're trying to be consistent with everybody in town Mr chair I think we should yeah I cut dialog yeah so um December 17th or the first meeting in January 1 okay right so can you make a make a motion to [Music] continue that number right there I make a motion my apologies that the two other members aren't here so I make a motion to continue case SP 202 24-10 to December 17th meeting at 6m do I have a second second any discussion here M all in favor say I I I just two clear pass Revis a letter to 15 spaces so we'll have that revised in place appreciate thank you apologies for conven want me to continue Mr chair please okay so subsection D which is General requirements it's kind of the meat and bones of the Adu bylaw before you do that so on the draft there was properties containing a second dwelling unit may be considered a two family dwelling for tax purposes I took that out okay and the reasoning behind that so the um principal of sester um suggested that it wasn't necessary to put in there but also there wasn't actual guidance that they received from the state about how to classify adus and how you would tax them accordingly so it was suggested by her to just leave it out and not include it because it it may or may not contradict something that they get from the state eventually okay so that's why it was deleted okay so uh just moving on um so General requirement number one all accessory dwelling units Adu shall meet the requirements of the following regulations under Massachusetts state law subsection a is the Massachusetts State Building Code um section B is the state sanitary code and each one of these regulations have the appropriate numbers next to them under legislation um subsection C title five of the State Environmental code which regulates septic systems um section D any other relevant local state and federal regulations so they're not just limited to those three mentioned above uh number two Adu shall have the appropriate facilities including but not limited to kitchens bathrooms with a sink toilet and shower pable water source Plumbing connections hot water functional heating system proper ventilation working electricy and operable windows and that language is taken out of um the state sanitary code which regulates those things so number three accessory dwelling units Adu shall not be sold or transferred separate and apart from the primary dwelling the primary dwelling and the Adu shall remain in common or single ownership there was a note here from our attorney that um and this is a discussion for the board if you were to allow the con the Adu and the main house to become separately owned as condos that you would need language in there that one of the units has to be under occupied but I don't know if the board is really prev to go down that route and it seems like you might want to keep the language the same there okay I just wanted to make you aware of that just in case but yeah number four attach and contain Adu shall maintain a separate entrance directly to the outside that's to make sure people don't kind of fumble around designing them um number five which was flagged by our attorney as potentially being overly restrictive stairways need to access Second Story Adu should be enclosed within the exterior walls of the dwelling otherwise they must not be apparent from the street so essentially what that's limiting is that you don't have a bunch of fire escapes leading up to Second stories unless it's hidden behind the building or further away uh other towns did have that in their BW including eastampton um but you know if our town attorney is suggesting that it might be seen as challengeable I think we might consider listening to them but I'm open to comments from the board okay oh just keep going yeah okay number six Adu shall be suitable for human habitation all year round and meet the minimum standards of the state sanitary code 105 CMR 410 as amended number seven occupancy of an Adu shall be limited to what is allowable under the Massachusetts State Building Code 780 CMR as amended and the state sanitary code 105 CMR 410 the reason for that language because occupancy limits do change in those codes so it doesn't make sense to limit it in this bylaw number eight ad shall have their own individual metered Electrical Connection in accordance with 105 CMR 410 354 as a amended the town is allowed to require that under that legislation that just reference number nine oh before you go further yep so in you're draft an Adu shall not be occupied by more than three people nor have more than two bedrooms I don't see that under seven now replaces n so that was recommended to be T that was recommended to be taken out by the health director because she says the state sanitary code limits occupancy already and what is that occupancy limits depending on I know for the building codes by the size of the building I think the sanitary code does it a different way um I don't remember exactly how they do it but there have been other times where bylaws have been challenged because they limit the number of unrelated individuals that can live in a property then there's discussions about you know maybe young people with like one or two kids and it gets a little more complicated than that so I I understand what the state is trying to do I get that you're going to put a smaller smaller building next to the principal residence and you know the definition I think is no more than 900 square feet or 50% of a total square foot of the principal residence then so you're putting in a smaller building on the lot with the principal residents that conceivably could have I mean I I I'd like to I know there's not much we can do it but certainly would be something that I would hope the Town Council or Mr Paige would look at to see what indeed are those occupancy requirements on the state's house code do you want six people in a two-bedroom eight people in a two-bedroom and does that how does that then really change the character of the neighborhood that it's going to be in because I do know that there are people interested in doing this and I've said used my own small Street of 12 houses I figured at least four could go on that and so that increases the the density 25% and so it could have a dramatic impact on different neighborhoods and services that are required and okay that would get a challenge in court but I think so I'm looking at how the state sanitary code regulates occupancy so they set a minimum square footage of living space per person so the buildings a certain size you're limited to having a certain number of people living in that building I'm not sure what the exact measurement is but I know I think it's like it might be two to 300 square feet per person so I don't want to say that's the official metric but it's around there and that's that would equate to what you had in the dra if you can go up to 900 square feet and it's 300 feet per person that gets you to okay but I would suggested just leave that out because State sanitary code's going to supersede that anyways so that's that's why that um that point was deleted Mr chair thanks yep so moving on uh number nine states that Adu shall not be used as a short-term rental so we do have the authority to prohibit that for ad use under the affordable homes act uh number 10 mentions one off Street Parking Spot shall be provided for an Adu The Only Exception there is that you're within a half mile radius of a transit station which we're not I to us so you're allowed to require that one additional parking spot be provided for accessory dwelling units so I don't understand that because you're because we have public ways so if you're a residential vehicle you can park overnight on any public Street in town so why do we need that language well I mean you can think of an example where say somebody has a narrow driveway they can only fit two cars and they're putting an Adu in that's going to increase your occupancy by one more person so if the board does have the authority to acquire an additional parking spot be provided for that Adu if you wanted to um it's just the language that's allowable under state law that's why I put it in there but further down under detached accessory dwelling units you've got a section that says detached a use must use the same driveway as the primary dwelling so in that older edition that they you have there Mr chair um we update that language um according to DBW re they do allow for more than one curb cut on certain properties of the circumstances allow for it and Tom might be a better able to explain this to me but some properties police and DBW have agreed that another curb cut is allowable so they recommend amending that taking out that language and replacing it with detach ads requiring a separate curb cut and driveway shall adhere to the DBW curb cut regulations and gain the necessary curve cut approvals so they it was recommended against from DPW that we shouldn't just limit to one driveway because there have been times where they allowed for multiple curve cuts on the same property so if someone wants to put one of these in and only has the two driveway spots like you mentioned wants to put in needs one driveway spot they could possibly if allowed add in another driveway just for the home the Adu if it meets the regulations of the DPW then technically yes but they need a per but if they couldn't then they wouldn't be able to install an ad you because they couldn't add another off Street Parking Spot technically yes and the state says we could regulate based off of adding that one additional spot if we wanted to I'll go back just because you can park in the street doesn't mean we want people parking in the street yeah that's why you but then do you want to look out at that property that used to have two cars now have five cars in that sitting in that driveway so that's kind of my argument has always been with commercial vehicles and we don't necessarily enforce that all the time you look out and you've got two painting trucks two electrician trucks two Carpenter trucks five Landscaping trucks and it's just it changes the character of the neighborhood and it changes the character of this is changing this has the ability I don't know if it's going to be and I'm going to vote because I I'm going to vote in favor because I know we need to but it's going to change the it has the potential to change the character of the town in a way that a lot of people may not like and I understand that we're oblig ated to do it and I understand all of that but I don't think people in general understand what is the potential um the potential that this could cause both positively and negatively we haven't opened it the public hearing yet Mr paig thank you just com okay yeah oh I've got a lot okay I I I think it's going to come to you anyway right i' rather make them here comes to us just oh okay Sor no it's okay I have to find where I was off street parking there we go yeah I recommend the board keep that language in there uh number 11 they you shall have a separate address from the primary dwelling oh sorry no but then sorry but it's only one spot regardless of the size so if it's a 200 foot Adu versus a 900 foot no matter what it's only one yes that's the most we can allow that's what the law cly States all right going back to number 11 the Adu shall have a separate address from the primary dwelling for the purposes of receiving mail and deliveries Adu may have the same street number as primary dwelling and be followed by an alpha numeric character example 121a 121b both toing units shall have shall be easily distinguishable and properly numbered from the Street in order for emergency services to identify each building that was supported by the fire department and police department number 12 NAU shall have separate trash and recycling receptacles from the primary dwelling and must comply with Bo requirements that was supported by the health department which it is a requirement to have a separate receptacles for separate dwelling number 13 was flagged by Our Town Council to being overly restrictive um potentially the accessory dwelling unit Adu shall be designed so that the appearance and scaled ad is compatible with the primary dwelling a lot of other bylaws have that language in there but I did want to mention that it was flagged by our town attorney um I'll keep moving on number 14 in order to encourage the development of accessory doing units for disabled and handicapped individuals and persons with limited Mobility the permit graning Authority may allow reasonable deviation from the dimensional requirements of the Z bylaw where necessary to install features that facilitate access and Mobility for disabled person so that includes uh putting a ramp in a setback or extending the height of a certain structure so somebody can get a wheeler in uh minor things that typically would require a zoning variance for dimensional regulations but you are allowed to technically wave that in the section if you have that statement in there and I think that's wise because that prevents any sort of lawsuit going down the road uh number 15 detach accessory dwelling units there's about six sub points here that are mostly focused on just the detach adus versus the general Adu I'll go in order so uh 15a a detached Adu May either be the result of new construction or the rehab rehabilitation slon conversion of the existing accessory building or structure the rehabilitated slon converted building or structure shall buy by the provisions of this section 450-5130 number B sorry letter B detach Adu shall have separate Water and Sewer connections from the primary dwelling adhere to the DPW Water and Sewer regulations DPW said that that was okay to have in there uh and is actually a requirement if there is to have separate connections detach ad sorry letter C detach Adu shall be constructed in the side and or rear yards detach ad you shall also observe the minimum front yard setback for accessory structure which is the additional 10t that I mentioned earlier the side yard and rear yard minimums and I also reference table 3-2 dimensional regulations as a reference uh Town attorney did not flag that one because we're allowed to require dimensional strict compliance with dimensional regulations if we wanted to uh so they didn't see a problem with that the next one they did highlight and I did mention this about the curb cut um but I'm going to mention it just in case d attach adus is requiring a separate curb cut and driveway shall adere to the DPW curb cut regulations and gain necessary approvals so I think they probably see that as burdensome because you have to get a permit for a driveway I think that might have been a slight misunderstanding um but I do want to mention that it was flagged by the town attorneys as being potentially overly restrictive um e attach ad shall be limited in height to one and one half stories and the extra one half is for a pitch roof in case you need atct space for a building with a pitch roof uh and F there shall be no occupancy of the of a detached Adu until the Building Commissioner has issued a certificate of occupancy so the reason why this needs it versus the other types of adus is because you're creating a new building here and before a building can be occupied it has to get the proper inspections uh for a regular addition or a contained Adu the building already has abidance inside of it so it doesn't need a CO so that was section D which is General requirements I I want to leave it up to the board yeah and I don't think you need to specifically read through review process and enforcement sure I do want to mention that is site plan review yeah so just so you know we open to the public any good so this is a public hearing like to open to the uh public who might wish to be heard on this matter please step forward I would like to just ask a general question of Tom and Rebecca so so this has come so the town is in the process of doing the Center District I keep forgetting the proper name of it Center Town District Center Town District review and one of the components was housing and it was and it was indicated that one of the things trying to work out of that was to create more housing units in town so does this really kind of supersede the need for the Center District housing component in your thoughts I mean me answer that like Rob do you want me no you can you can from wherever no I mean like Rob we don't there's no case law there's no nothing we don't really know what um I think even Jesse opined uh his commity that he's on the planning board for how this bylaw and they thought they've had it for a while and they thought it was gonna and they don't it just didn't okay didn't make sense that as much sense as they thought it was going to um that's not to say that this won't be different in this community so I don't know for us okay it fair enough right I mean I don't know how popular they're going to be I don't know say what's that real number of how many units we need um I think we need diversity in our housing yeah um more than some number that magic number that we have um I don't know if you want to add anything else to that but you know yeah fair enough to say yeah okay sorry go I would just offer that we are in the process of creating a housing production plan that would project how many units we need over the next 10 years based on population Trends so that data is being compiled and we'll get a report shortly uh but also I would imagine and this is this is just my impression of how things would play out is that if you're offering more different types of housing in the center of town where you're developing walkable neighborhoods that are you're offsetting the pressure for adus to pop up in the neighborhoods without a cent Town District I think you're more vulnerable for uh people seeking relief in other ways and put PS into their own hands and setting up uh additional units in their homes and around their their yards so I I do agree that we need a greater variety of Housing and more of it in town There's no question thank you add something to that Mr so you know the cost of building one of these things too is not cheap so if you were to build a detach Adu unless it's like an existing building you know you got to lay Foundation you got to put up the four walls the roof insulation heating system electricity run water and sewer then you have to provide a parking spot that could cost you tens of thousands of dollars unless you have a preab building which you still need the poor concrete foundation for anyways but still that runs you up pretty high so at our last meeting Mr Terell said you can buy these online at Amazon yeah you can and so I actually went online to look at what I mean you can you can you know get a pretty nice thing for $40,000 you know or less or a lot less yeah and um that's kind of what that's kind of what is scary you know but at the same time you know some communities only see like one or two a year permitted and yeah it's the great unknown and the most popular one is probably going to be the aach adus because people already have in-law suits anyways yeah yeah convert those Mr Paige welcome yeah are we just assuming I'm gonna jump up well you did say you had comments correct will never disappoint Mr I try not to let me sign in first and I would just like to just for people who might be watching I thought our planning director did a really wonderful job on this I do I think you did a really nice really nice job I apologize for technical difficulties really nice job not an easy not an easy one to do and I thought you did a nice job and a quick turnaround too yeah we got hit with a deadline that was almost unrealistic yeah the Town Council didn't see any problems CL your thank you um I haven't had a super long amount of time to look this over but I did have a couple general questions um one if someone has um an existing house primary structure they have a detached garage the detached garage is already in the backyard it's already five or six feet from the property line and they want to put an addition off of the detached garage for an Adu how is that going to play out especially if we put regulations in that says it's got to meet the setbacks well the setback has already been determined by the previous building and they're just doing an addition off of it as an Adu and if you do an addition off of an existing accessory structure then does the entire structure fall under the 900 square ft or is it just the portion that's the actual Adu so it's the fortune that's the actual Adu and usually it's done by where it is in relation to the main building so if it's off a garage it's still technically a detached Adu even if it's above the garage still technically a detached Adu because detached garage is what I'm talking about yes exactly so I have someone in town that has a detached garage in their backyard it's literally 6 ft from the property line they can't put it there because this will limit their ability to put it within whatever the setback is of that property so that that's my question so if they move that forwards even though they attach it to it they would have to move the garage to they would have to move the whole garage is what you're saying yes it would and does that make a lot of sense I mean you already have a detach building they just want to add an Adu to it um and I think these are just general thought processes that um I would think it would make more sense if there's an existing building there and you're going to add to it that you don't make them put a separate building in just as an Adu you want to blend everything so that it just goes with the neighborhood um is this where the someone would go and seek a building permit be rejected and then they could appeal that to the zoning board no so usually to appeal building code you have to go to the state but in this situation they would apply for a building code get denied and then be told they have to get a permit from the planning board or comply in this way Etc start that review process but also yeah he does bring a good point about existing garage that's 5 feet away from the property line I mean would the board consider putting a dwelling unit five feet from the property line because this is a dwelling unit somebody's going be living here they're going to have Windows there might be kids inside I mean that's something to consider too when you think about it and also if you were to require that it has to be the regular side setback and then put it on a building that you're not going to move that's just going to stay 5 feet from the property line technically that makes that building a knock a forming building because it's an Adu now with a garage attached to it that's too close to the property line so there wouldn't even be an appropriate ping path anyways if the current language was implemented so that's also something to keep in mind too next question so um under 5.11 C8 says Adu shall have their own individual metered Electrical Connection in accordance the 105 um and what are we going to do with existing um structures in town that have their existing in-law apartments that electrical is not separate but they have their own entrances um I could probably name 10 of them for you that are that would fall under this category as an Adu um but again because they had a doorway that you could leave open it fell under the building code that hey that's just an addition to the house so now if they blocked that off now it becomes an Adu but maybe it doesn't have its own meter are you going to make them go through and rewire or is it going to fall under a pre-existing condition and again this isn't for direct answers this is stuff that so it would require that they rewire they want to be classifi as Adu but it's also hard to regulate retroactively through zoning that's why you have vested rights and non-conformities and stuff like that so anything that exists now it's going to be hard to catch or regulate it unless they come to us for a permit then that's when we can start regulating stuff such as electrical connection and also if you look at multifamilies in other towns most of the time I would say 95% of the time you see separate meter boxes on the same building and the state law also allows for the town to regulate and require that as well so um currently we do not require a site plan for a residential dwelling um from this any accessory dwelling unit shall furnish a site plan that conforms to the requirements so my concern I would be okay with saying any detached accessory dwelling unit shall have a site plan but if you're putting an addition off at the house for an Adu as long as it meets the building code in the sepex why are we requiring a separate site plan now where in the past you could technically put on an in-law apartment and all you needed was a building permit what if you what if you try to put that going toward the street and so you change Building Commissioner would look and change the entire look of the of the house your Building Commissioner would look and say it doesn't meet the setback requirements or what if it does then you're allowed I would like to be able to I would like I would like to look at that person and say you know you're doing an injustice to your neighbors but that's what I would like to do I would like to look them in the eye and tell them that but if currently you do that and you put let's say you're going to expand your living room and you're allowed to go closer to the street and you put on a 25 foot by 25 foot structure you're allowed to do it and as long as you meet the codes in the setback requirements I don't see the need for a site plan for an attached unit how you attached is completely different I would say any detached building should have one so that you know where it's going on the lot you know where the utility connections are and um I mean same thing as far as for utility connections I'm assuming that an attached or an enclosed you know that's part of the house can actually Connect into the House's system but yet detached would be separate Water and Sewer that's correct and um I was also told that it's hard to I just do you mind if I address two points so the first one if you don't have a site plan requirement how you going to proove the additional parking space that's required and then the second point I was told by Board of Health it's actually they they approve separate meters for two units within the same building so that's why that regulation for separate Water and Sewer only applies to the separate building because it is a separate building so you can easily regulate both with separate meters if you wanted to but usually if it's a multi family building you don't really have people paying water and sewer bills in those units uh they're just paying electricity and then the landlord pays for the water and sewer and then does whatever they want with the rent in that regard so that's the justification for writing the language that way and that's that's why you know the the detach adio is a separate house essentially right it's just smaller and the a attached and contain is kind of like a an apartment or like a two family except the two family has shared Water and Sewer connections so that's that's kind of the way that uh when crafting this and got feedback from our departments that's the way we all saw it I'm sure that's the way plan board sees it too thank you my other thought process is on a separate driveway um requiring a separate for a detached um I think the board should really consider that because sometimes these units you're not even going to really notice them and if the person can park in an existing driveway I would much rather see that than a whole another separate driveway which takes up more green space and all um I have a client in wilb Bram that has what you would consider a pool house you look at it the pool's outside it's a pool house that's got a full living room kitchen bedroom um it's an Adu I don't care what anyone says and literally when his in-laws come that's where they stay so that they are completely separate um but there's no ability to put really a separate driveway in they they pull up further in his driveway they park off to the side and no one has any even back there um and if I didn't work at his house I would never know I would just assume it was a beautiful pool house and that was it and I think that's what we're hoping for is that these units will go in just blend in with the neighborhood and you don't even notice them and so um all of a sudden you hear from the neighbor oh yeah John's been renting out the back and you're like what are you talking about I didn't know that um I I I agree with you hope so and I will say overall I was extremely impressed reading through it seems as though you've hit on most all of the the items I just think no matter how good it is as we all know there's going to be something that pops up that we just didn't think about and um like I said if we can take care of as many as we can before it goes in that's the best way to do it I think I hope that this is continued so that I get further chance to read through I I think we're under we made some adjustments tonight so small small I we're I think we're also under a time crunch yeah we are correct yeah so this needs to be this needs to be enacted by the Town Council by February 1st yeah so if I'm under um if it falls under the normal rules is as long as you've started a bylaw as long as it's been advertised that bylaw is in effect until you know once it's approved so in other words if someone came in to apply for a permit even if the bylaw wasn't completed as long as it's been advertised they would still have to uh fall under the guidelines of it so uh basically what he's referring to is uh 48 section six which talks about vested rights and non-conformities so if a building or site is currently used for agents or is inhabited um technically any zoning revisions that apply to that type of building when it's advertised first for the planning board technically that regulation goes into effect even though it's still in the zoning amendment process so in this case existing houses cannot start putting adus in the way the state allows it they have to do it through the way we're doing it here in this bylaw because of the fact there existes so that's that's what he's referring to and uh yeah he's he's a little bit extra time if so with that said in English what what's our what's the responsibility of the Town Council to to act do they need to act on this by February 1 so the fact that you have the public hearing now is a good SA n and don't put that in when I said in English please explain that to me so basically existing houses can't uh do what the state allows for putting in ad years they have to comply with our amendments that we're talking about right now okay and it's because this confusing paragraph the beginning of section six that talks about vested rights which means rights that property owners have now um but the exception is that when you have a bylaw amendment in place that you're talking about active that hasn't been fully voted on yet technically the rules of that bylaw take effect after the first advertisement for the playing board public hearing okay so that's basically what is in plain English now uh Jason gumper you want take a question from sure yeah it's still public hearing so he has to accept oh there you go I think he accepted it yeah hey hopefully you can hear me we can we can't see you my let me see if I can turn my camera on hi hello hope everyone's doing well uh yeah thanks for taking my comment uh here I just wanted to uh add yeah I don't I I would like to see the board reconsider the off street parking requirement it sounds like it's a factor that's in there partly just to limit the use of of adus uh especially if people AR unable to comply with it uh and I just generally would wonder why it's it's it's in there it seems like more of an imagined problem than a real problem based on any evidence I've heard about so um I I think if street parking is a concern that town should deal with it some way just not maybe as part of these rules so that's kind of all I wanted to add there um thanks for holding the hearing for letting me speak and uh yeah that was it thank you thanks thanks um so um is the pleasure of the board to uh continue it at continue this if now there's not the hard and fast requirement to forward this to the Town Council yeah I'm looking at you too I mean no I mean I heard a lot of technically and you know probably and he's right and that's exactly what the law says I asked the attorney specifically however we could still be challenged in the court of law if we do not have this bylaw in place by February 1 that's also correct yeah well so you made some really valid points you always do Ralph you you know you I know you study this um I I guess because of the chart the way the charter is written we're making a recommendation to the Town Council and then you are the board that either votes yay or nay on this so I think you know 98% if not more um I think we are comfortable with and you know the rest can be kind of hashed out in front of town Council um so Mr chair I do want to ask one question so it seems like the only change that was recommended from the planing board tonight was to take out the fluffy language in the purpose section yeah but I was going to when I create this report if this fler flowery langu flower Lang flowery language there you go you know I I was GNA make note that that's your recommended change to the Town Council so they know what your recommendations are um it's up to you what you want to do with the public hearing if you feel that you're comfortable to move it tonight then so be it otherwise your call yes sir so technically the town council's responsibility is to either approve it as submitted can make changes or we can send it back and say we can't approve it as submitted um from what I've gathered unless they're only extremely small changes uh the Town Council is shifted a little bit in their thoughts after doing an entire zoning bylaw for the Mixed use Village that if it's something that we can't approve in its entirety as submitted that it's better off just to send it back that's why my suggestion was if there's any changes to make them now continue the public hearing um see if there's any other input I mean December 17th is it two weeks two weeks away yeah so there won't be a council meeting in between the 10th and the January one anyway so it's not there's it's really you're not fast-tracking anything by continuing to next so when is the next town council meeting then 10 of of December of January December December 10 and then when January 14th oh so so I'm not going to be able to be here on the 17th so so um so our first meeting in January is the 3D I think or the 7th sth seventh it is the seventh it's seventh here also I do want to bring up the point that um under M General law because we have a Town Council style government technically both the planing board and the Town Council have to open their public hearing within 65 days so there have been times where they happen at the same time uh so typically Town Council does their own hearings and so planing board but then the planing board sends the recommendations to Town Council then Town Council can either accept your recommendations or reject them and still continue forward in the process anyways so realistically Town Council does have to open their public hearing soon and I imagine it'll be is it advertised anytime soon Tom or it's not for the 10th and we won't there's no council meeting till the 14th so we have plenty of time to advertise whatever we want January 14th yeah so so I would like to be here uh the discussion yeah so and you could continue it to January if you want to but the Town Council should advertise their hearing as soon as they can for that January meeting just to start the process just open and continue their hearing yep yeah and they can't close their hearing until recommendation from the planing board anyways right so that's one thing to consider the hearing is the second meeting correct so through theair so I'm not sure if I agree with with that the Town Council has 65 days from the time it receives a petition to do a public hearing word too they both at the same time the clock starts for both simultanous now this is crafted so technically the Town Council hasn't received a petition from the planning board yet so the Town Council Council was asked to do is recommend for public make a recommendation should even go forwards or not do we have the exact language of the vote for that meeting because I believe we recommended to hold the public hearing the plan board did we not because I believe that's what happened at the last meeting that's why we started this process for the plan board to have a public hearing of the matter and that started the clock so for both you have to once you receive the item on your agenda and dispens of it you start the thought for the planning board and then also for the council but I believe the way our Charter works we have to whether or not we even want matter whether Nots the time with that being said days should still not be an issue tonight they should and I do want to say that you know courts typically are very strict with the zoning amendment process oh yeah they fighted tooth and na to keep it as strict as possible to 48 so that's why you know we have to be cautious and observe the correct and appropriate procedures are outline there um as well as observe what's in our Charter so I think 48 supersedes here unfortunately so that's just that's one reason why makes sense to advertise public hearing I understand what is being said so I'm going in English jur coming out you know I took lat I took Latin at Cathedral so I don't know if that helps my English or not um you were probably in my class um probably was though can I get a motion to continue the public hearing until our first meeting in January which is January 7th at six o'clock so moved second okay okay any discussion hearing none all in favor say I hi hi so I do want to say so I've asked a lot of questions and a the reason I ask a lot of questions is I want the public just to know number one that we do our homework and we do as you can tell by the questions that we have we do our homework and two it's our responsibility to ask questions that we know the public should know and you know whether it turns out to be a Panacea or not or if it turns out the other way you know it's too soon to tell um I mean the comments about how it didn't really work in East Hampton you know um it might work here and not work there it's just the great unknown but I do believe that you know people want their planning board to do the homework for them and make them aware of what's going on I agree with that and I don't have a particular um I'm either in favor or I'm against you know we're being asked to do well we're being required to do this by the state so our hands are somewhat being tied uh so technically we could do nothing at all think it's appes for us to do this yeah it's our responsibility to do so all right next item do we have any outstanding items other business other business did you remind me what the first item is in business please director reform and I believe Mr Cherry asked me to also include discussion on desire Review Committee yes so Mr punderson called and asked that we have a discussion about bringing back the design review committee so um he has indicated that he and a number a number of other officials in town have received um comments about specifically the new Chase Building in the center of town m i for one as chair of the planning board have not heard one thing from any person but we'll leave it at that so um what do we need and he said that he would volunteer to be a member of the design review committee so what do we need to do Rob to reconstitute the design Review Committee sure and I have that the back of my report start with that okay and I'll continue the rest of the report uh I did look at the language included it at the last page your packet from article 9 which regulates site plan review uh subsection 9.2 is design review which includes the board on it they do how they do the review process so just to go through that language um and actually to address your first point Russell to talk about how you can repopulate it so to Des Review Committee is still an existing committee correct ever vote out of existence so the only thing you have to do is just Rec group members and then I believe the appointing authority is the planning board according to the zoning bylaw so typically what you do is you would you know send out advertisement have people submit uh applications and then hold interviews which could take about a few months to do but that's typically the process for populating a unpopulated board uh so just going through what's under 9.2 I did take out some key facts that the board should be weary of so design review shall apply to only n non-residential proposals to construct new or change alter modify remodel move or demolish any and all existing structures or including interior modifications the industrial Garden Park District is exempt from design review and the second key fact is that for external enlargements of less than 2,000 square fet again non-residential 2,000 square F feet the planning board May request a determination from the design Review Committee prior to waving any or all the site plan review requirements so for example if somebody comes in for a site plan review waiver request uh if it's under 2,000 square feet and it's a non-residential building you could require design review if you wanted to uh and talking about the character and the terms of the design Review Committee um I keep putting in here as design review board but it's used interchangeably for some reason it's confusing but we'll dat that um says the design review board is appointed by the planing board to serve for three-year terms with member rotation every three years after the initial two-year period the drb shall also consist of five members with the following credentials possible it says the plane director to serve as committee chair one person qualified by training experience and architecture or landscape design one person owning and or operating a business located in easta Meadow governed by this bylaw one at large resident of the town and one member of the board directors of the East LA Meadow Chamber of Commerce or whatever Chamber of Commerce governs the area also say to the plan board May appoint up to two voting alternate members at least one of whom shall be a business owner representing the business district in the event that Quorum is not obtained a member of the plan board May participate as a voting member and then the last point taken out of section 9.2 design Review Committee shall review applications for all actions that are subject to provisions of this article and shall make recommendation to the planning board prior to the public hearing for site plan review so you would do design review first sight plan review for any uh commercial construction as to the conformance with designed standards established within the section um those are included in at the end I want to go through each but they're pretty thorough okay playw show routin overall responsibility Authority for design review approval which means that they're just advisory you could take or leave the advice they give you so that's pretty much it so I would ask are you going to do a little piece in your article about this possably okay um you want more you can call Rob okay um is it yes please please yeah please um uh it's now call the east of the river Chamber of Commerce if you're trying to find that east of the river I like that name River chamber um and Pete indicated that you know he would be a member at least he did to me done deal huh done deal so he could be so there's three there's three people right there so yeah okay so we're going to try to reconvene this I I do know that we are you know there will be some projects that will probably come in front of us next year that this would be a a good addition to so that's great director's report continued sure I'll be quick um our upcoming meetings are included in the director's report for you um the next one as mentioned is December 17th and then January 7th after that uh there are no scheduled public hearings at the moment for any of the upcoming meetings aside from the fact that we just continue this hearing to January 7th and then December 17th we just continued Villa so those two yeah um and then upcoming events I just want to keep reiterating that the citizens planner training collaborative cptc has several upcoming training opportunities opportunities are right there we were hoping that you know people would respond to me with anything they're interested in the town would cover and these are all virtual so these topics includes roles and responsibilities of planning zoning boards site plan review special permanence variances and then writing reasonable and defensible decisions so those topics they're they're good topics to listen to and if anybody has any interest in attending them please let me know town will pay for your admission um and then the last update that I have is updates regards to current zoning amendments before the Town Council and I'll go through this pre Bri pretty briefly as well so commercial kending um is going to be discussed for the second time by the plan mayor subcommittee on December 4th they're also discussing the Amendments uh the public hearing for that before the Town Council was continued to their December 10th meeting plan matter subcommittee is also discussing that same bylaw tomorrow at 2m and there was also two um bylaw suggestions from the planing board that were asked to be brought up to Town Council uh they talked about this at their previous meeting um the first of which is the drum bylaw so overall the council seemed okay with the proposed bylaw as long as it's addressing privacy issues which I state to them is a concern um they wanted to hear from the Poli the chief of police to see if there's any incidents in town and whether or not it's a concerned to them so they want input from them and also how they currently enforce Federal Regulations on drone usage so those are a bits of information they're waiting on that was continued to a future meeting it's not public hearing so they don't have to have a date certain um and the last item is the property upkeep and maintenance zoning revisions which we call Russ's rules but we were discussing it uh call it that Rella did oh yeah no property ke it's a maintenance rision Visions um that I did fight for it the council was not uh in favor of recommending it for public hearing um some members said that it was seen as too restrictive uh specifically the large dumpster requirement and then the parking on the grass and then some large Vehicles they were talking about how it might be hard to garage them such as large RVs or or boats so that's they voted to uh not recommend that for public hearing before the planning board but I told them always come back with update language and do it again if you want to so I do yep so and I want to be notified of when it's going to be heard so I can go sure and I can bring pictures that's pretty much all I had for my update Mr chair no problem and uh yeah right do have a motion to adjourn moved second all in favor say I I