##VIDEO ID:vEdphWezd2U## all right I'm going to convene this meeting of the gardener planning board begin with the announcement of open meeting recordings any person may make a video or audio recording of an open session of a meeting or may transmit the meeting through any medium subject to reasonable requirements of the chair as to the number placement and operation of equipment used so as not to interfere with the conduct of the meeting any person intending to make such recording shall notify the chair forth with all documents referenced or used during the meeting must be submitted in duplicate to the director of Community Development planning persuant to the open meeting in public records law all documents shall become become part of the official record of the meeting is there anyone here recording tonight who needs to identify themselves to the chairperson hearing none item one approval of minutes for the November 12th meeting for first uh for the public hearing motion we accept the uh minutes of the last meeting of the public meeting second motion made and seconded to accept the meeting minutes uh November 12th for the public hearing any discussion I abstain as I was in fav very good sir uh very well by voice all those in favor I those opposed motion carries now next our regular meeting on November 12th make a motion we accept the minutes of the uh last regular meeting on November 12th second motion made and seconded to accept the minutes of the regular meeting on November 12th any discussion I abstain again yes sir very well uh by Voice vote all those in favor I those oppose motion carried all right now we'll move into a continuation of the public hearing for uh privates over the matter of private oversight LLC uh for the proposed compass definitive sub division plan consisting of 16 Lots Templeton Garder Town Line on the south side of West Broadway now I understand that we have uh received back peer review yeah Mr chairman uh tyin bonds um did conduct peer review on the traffic study and the uh storm water in subdivision rules and rs and we did receive their their um their view on December 6 and Jean Christie from tyon is here tonight to present those findings uh to the board very well miss Christie I'd invite you to the floor for your uh briefing please okay I set over here sure you're comfortable is this microphone hear me all right y you have one there all right uh my name is Jean Chrissy I'm a principal engineer at tyan Bond um myself along with a couple other of our staff engineers and project Engineers um perform peer review of the civil and storm water aspects of the project as well as the traffic impact study um so you have two different letters in front of you then I will qualify and say first and foremost I'm not a traffic person um but I know enough about what is in this letter to get the just across the board so um in looking at our peer review for the the storm water you know in the subdivision regulations what we do is we take the the regulations um kind of compare make sure everything that is supposed to be on the drawings is on the drawings or has been taken care of um we're not perfect and sometimes we do miss things so I just want to say that up front um I don't know if we want to go through every single one of them um but I think it you know for the most part A lot of the comments um specific to some of the the contents on the plan we just need some clarification about you know what are the zoning uh the setbacks building setbacks for the first one um kind of meeting with those open space calculations for the second one just make sure that information is presented clearly on the drawings um so I think that's you know the first three are just really specific to zoning compliance pieces uh starting at number four is where we get into specifics to your uh rules and regulations of subdivision um and know these are number four specific to benchmarks making sure that we have that information available number five is you know being can you just explain what benchmarks are please kind of uh a permanent Marc or demarcation of a a point um so that you can relay where other things are on the plan based on that one point thank you um is that like a a survey marker or pin or something something like that y some kind of demarcation some point you know sometimes they use top of a spindle of a hydrant sometimes you lose other things so got it thank you um looking at curving we want to make sure that that the plans are clear um I find them to be quite busy um there's a lot of information on the drawings and sometimes it's not as clear with some kind of text overwrites and line overwrites um where the limits of curbing are so we want to make sure that those are really clear so that board members can see what are the proposed you know where's the driveways for each of these these units and and making sure that our curbing is appropriately uh [Applause] spaced um number six is about some of the water services we found that they may be a little too close together to construct um you know being that this would be municipally owned at some point we do want to make sure that the water department you know approves how that construction is happening happening making sure that they're the right distance away um and of course if at any point I'm too fast I'm just going to keep going but until you tell me to slow down so um you know these again very specific to your subdivision rules um we'd like to see on the plans you know kind of your your planned start and end dates for construction um you know I think it's all going to be one one construction phase it's not that big of a subdivision but that information should still be provided somewhere not necessarily in the plans it could be in a narrative I just want to say that uh number eight is about sight lighting um I think there's there's three points we want to make here we just need more information on what's proposed um if nothing's proposed nothing's proposed um number nine also again about light fixtures uh number 10 was where we got into a little bit more of the technical storm water management pieces and and what we're looking at there's you know a couple storm water man basins as proposed making sure that they are designed to accommodate the 100-year storm event um and this one also talks a little bit about um you know kind of the methodology to get there again very technical stuff I don't know how much the board loves to hear about that uh number 11 was about the drain pipes we want to make sure that they are meeting the standard of the subdivision regs which is the reinforced concrete um we knowe that the plastic piping is proposed and that we have the adequate cover over all of our pipes um you know number 12 is about drain man holes having a 3ft sump we just want to make sure that we have that incorporated into a detail in the plans um number 13 you know these are getting very specific into your your storm water design um your drainage Design Systems um just to making sure that they are meeting those requirements in terms of what kind of mortar you're using in the man holes um just making sure that the that information is on the construction detail so that they get built properly 14 is about your catch based in sizes um making sure that they have the right size Gres to the town standard uh number 15 is about the St your sewage system um you know it's on the applicant's you know responsibility to describe how the project complies that you know there's adequate capacity and things like that um within the system same thing for number 16 the same about water distribution want to make sure that we have the right we have adequate pressure and flows um out here to you know meet the requirements of this subdivision um 17 it's kind of a duplicate of a previous one about curbing um but they were specific or separate requirements of the subdivision R so we kept them separate here too um where was I sidewalks um you know one thing that we did know is sidewalks are proposed I think only on one side of the street I don't know if the town wants to see it on both sides um that also is reflected in our traffic peer riew as well and then the section 78 of number 19 there has some requirements for the grass strips as well so we want to make sure that all of those pieces of your subdivision RS are being addressed however they can be addressed either on plan or a narrative um starting at number 20 we get into some real technical storm water things um your town requirements require that the project complies with the 10 Massachusetts storm water standards um so we do go through each of those in detail um you know number 20 is really specific in making sure that we're comparing Apples to Apples in our drainage calculations and we're comparing the same sizes um number 17 is about making sure that the manholes that are proposed can accommodate some pipe sizes we know when we have multiple man on multiple pipes going into one structure um sometimes based on the piping size and the configuration there's not enough solid wall between some of them so we want to make sure that those are large enough to accommodate some of those like bigger pipes and then number 22 is where we start getting into the the storm water standards um and can go through all of them they're pretty specific to making sure that we have um adequate design so that we aren't increasing Peak rates off site um that when we do have discharge is coming from a pipe to a ground that they're you know at a velocity that the ground can withstand that they're not going to be erosive um that we're providing groundwater recharge where we can um making sure that we have that adequately designed making sure that any of our storm water is treated in terms of removal of TSS total suspended solids um so getting into standard five these aren't that exciting they're I mean they're very very specific uh five six and seven don't really apply to the project um standard eight is about construction period storm water making sure that we have the right plans in place to deal with storm water during construction which can often be a a big challenge for projects um that is one place where we did think that a storm water pollution prevention plan is going to be needed for the project um the board may want to consider having that as a requirement of a a condition of approval to be provided at a later date it's not something we need to review at this point um standard n is about omm plan so that's the the how we're going to take care of the storm water management system um it prescribes what activities we have to do what inspections we have to um have and we just want to make sure that included a location map so that when you open up your your uh omm plan you can see where all these features are and where you have to inspect them and then a budget so that you know either for both the applicant until the town takes any ownership of the roadway has an idea of how much it's going to cost to do this um and then number 10 was about elicit discharges um that can always always be a condition of approval it's not something I need to see at this point um number 23 details out a couple pieces of compliance with the G with the storm water and erosion control regulations um you know talking about the construction period waste and fuels and things like that that are expected on site that just kind of helps us to identify um what potential pollutant opportunities there may be and then um letter B of that same comment is about where we're obtaining our rainfall our precipitation data from um this one does require the atlas 14 which is a little more aggressive than some of the uh previous state requirements should say and then for the site plans um the really only thing that we had is to talk about the erosion or the uh construction entrance um you know Mass D he wants to see a minimum of 50 ft at for that and we have a 40 ft on the plan I think so that's kind of engineering review um is there any questions any I went through that very correctly okay Mr chairman if I may fire minutes do you um maybe want to have see if the applicant has any comments at this point in time or before we move on to the traffic yeah anything on this section Mr Fletcher H um I think the only one we kind of or we kind of want clarification on at this time was the sidewalks on one side of the road your regs say that uh with all streets other than collector streets you can approve it with just uh sidewalks on one side of the road which we have and then the um the other stipulation of that is that on the other side of the road where there's no sidewalk that the grading within the RightWay be such that a sidewalk could be installed in the future um so I guess that's kind of up to the board's discretion uh on the project currently the way I have it uh designed is the uh we have the sidewalk on the south side of the the street um and on the the north side of the street um I believe it's north yeah or the I guess it would be East and West so though the uh Eastern side of the street we do not have one but the grading along where all the houses are is uh relatively flat to accommodate the driveways so it already uh would accommodate uh a sidewalk if the city did want to install one in the future um up to the point of the infiltration Basin at the front at that in that area the grading kind of drops off but um what I would propose at that point is uh to put a crosswalk right at the last house have it come over and have the sidewalk just have on one side of the road from the last house over back uh to the uh the roadway okay well you can incorporate those comments into your uh your response to these and the board will take that under advisement okay and um and one other one sure I know I had discussions with Rob about the uh using the uh hdp pipes versus the reinforced concrete the RS do by uh reinforced concrete but in speaking with DPW and and Rob HTP pipes are used all the time uh in in the city of Garder and so that's kind of why I had that design so if the the board would be okay with that I don't know if I would have to ask for a formal waiver for that um if I may um it's in the subdivision rules and right so I think a formal waiver you want um just so it's on the on the books okay okay that was it that was it okay and before you move on since this is public hearing are there any questions on this portion of the peer review from the public Mr chairman if I may so just just a clarification so everybody understands um we're doing the initial peer review presentation tonight um the peerreview documents are are available to the public we just this week so we haven't you know we haven't posted them online or anything so um there will be a response from the applicant to the peer review comments uh and they will be taken up at the next meeting um most likely there will be a another third party review of those comments and to come to a consensus consensus of all the aspects of it so there'll be a lot much more information and finalization at the next planning board meeting so I know this is the first time you're hearing a lot of this it's probably not very clear because you're not seeing it on paper you're just hearing small bits and pieces of it but you will have the opportunity to see all the information digest it and responses to it and then responses to that before the next meeting so just so you know what the process is going to look like moving forward thank you thank you for that good okay and if I may add to that a little bit um you know Trevor and I will talk outside of the public hearing to resolve technical things um where we need to I mean we can often do it by responding written but sometimes some clarifications are needed so we will have separate conversations about that you have a question you ask us if we had a quick comment or question yeah I had but I didn't see anybody so I no you were talking and then you just turned around oh well I'm sorry um I'd like just ask her a quick question is a clarification sure could I get your name for the record please Gary Roberts butter um go ahead I'm sorry I don't remember your name Jean Christie hi Jean um did you actually go to the site or you did it from the paperwork you had we did it from the plans that were submitted the other documents the traffic report the storm water report that was submitted I have not personally been on site nobody from the company that wrote this up has been to the site not that was not within our IAL scope of work so project typically we don't we don't always go to a site unless there's a specific need you know warranted by the public through town so things like elevation above and around the specific area you guys are talking about they have no idea what's around it we only know from the information on the plan which has the Locust map and has the topography on the drawing so I can see what's happening within the confines of the lot um but outside of that I like specific things that been going on up there that would add to your information that you would take into account if it wasn't on the drawings of the reports I don't yet know about it that's what I mean that's we have to know is nobody's actually been up there and seen they're looking on paper cuz above there is a whole hill that's all been clearcut so that adds to the your store water in everything else that completely changes a lot of your information you just gave because right now everybody's getting flooded out from the pre another Builder that tried building up there and he cut all the trees down we've been getting flooded out a previous builder that built the four houses that I live on he got sued into bankruptcy because he flooded everybody out just by putting four houses on a flat level above us and all around us has been clearcut and it all feeds into the area you're talking about so unless somebody's been up there and actually sees where everything is coming from and what's going on up there it's hard to take this information and go well this is what we do because there's a lot more going on than what you see on the piece of paper an streak up here this area coming R here that rear area that comes down uh I do have a small response to that um after the the preliminary um we uh had some discussions with the engineer uh going into the design of this and uh I was asked to uh give a a worse rating to the woods up there to account for additional runoff because of the clearing so that has been u u accounted for in in my calculations I gave it to typically you're supposed to use a good Woods rating and I put a horor rating to it so it does give it a worse curve number and with that achieves more runoff coming off the hill so it has been U accounted for in that way as best as I could anything else all right let us uh Miss Christie can we move on to the uh sure traffic peer review and with the traffic again I'm not the traffic engineer he was not able to make it today um the the beginning of this up through the conclusions and recommendations are um really specific bits of information um he does not believe that it's going to change any of the end results of the traffic study um the biggest concern is site distance at the end of the road at the you know the main intersection um so in the conclusions and recommendations starting at number 10 um we're wanting to make sure that that intersection is you know adequately cleared that there's the appropriate stop controls visibility um is there making sure that all of our controls are with mutcd I mean these are pretty standard things here [Music] um and in that piece number 13 about making sure that the vegetation growth can be maintained so that we have this the site distance we need um there was a couple pieces on the site plans that we should be looking at one more time um making sure that our Stop Bar control at the end of the road is there talking about parking along the proposed roadway um I don't know if anybody's discussed that at all it's probably a discussion topic more for the board than anything um making sure that emergency vehicles are you know able to accommodate the culdesac I think your subdivision rig is likely deal with that and address that but we do like to sometimes get double check as equipment does change over time um checking out that hydrant this was something that civil didn't pick up but the traffic did a hydrant um you know at the end of the culdesac making sure that you know we don't have any conflict there um consideration for providing a gate or another kind of barrier at the um gravel Access Road the emergency access road and then in the back um you know making sure that our the center island has the appropriate curb meeting the regulations um if there's anything you know prohibitive about that um number 21 was again about the sidewalk which me we just discussed and then number 22 again about the landscape strip which also civil commenting on as well so I think for the the traffic piece um is it with VH fuss and O'Neal okay so with um we would likely have a conversation with fuss and O'Neal just to hash out the few technical things um and make sure that you know there's nothing comes out of those Chang um relative to traffic impacts so on that note Jean um we would recommend that F Neil submit just a response to all these um maybe even using the same letter in you know in red or another cursive or something just addressing each one of these comments I believe yeah we've been in contact with him I think he's prepare that and make the few recommend uh recommend changes and then you can once we get those as responses you can initiate we go back thank you m you have any questions uh Miss Christie board members I don't this not this time all set members of the public any questions on uh I know this was gone through at warp speed and it will be uh the principal engineer on the project will respond and as Mr Boer guide said it's all going to come together at the next meeting to be gone through again and uh in the meantime this stuff will be available very shortly on the uh on the website but up topy heads any any questions on on the traffic study sir just that um here Robert SK from the compy just that you know there's construction going on in the center of East Templeton so a lot of traffic has been diverted from that area because of the constant construction for the last year so traffic study right now is kind of so Al because of all the construction going on a lot of people avoid that area because of the construction going on so right now a traffic study is kind of an iffy because of all the construction so you don't get a true sense of what's going on up there until they that the construction's done and the rotary's done and everything's back to normal again now this traffic study was originally done what last I forgotten the date now August August yeah they've been doing a year and a half at least of construction up there all right well that's that's noted thank you Mary Schaffer um to Oak Lane and butter and I is there any recommendation yet on um the location of the exiting Road in what you did when you looked at the traffic study we did that's the important part of that was making sure that there is adequate sight distance that when you are you exiting the roadway you can see appropriately left and right um it is on the applicant's responsibility to prove that to us that there is adequate site distance that there are measures that you can take to remove vegetation or whatever um at that point but it's not my role to recommend a different location at this time okay cuz we do have you know we do have concerns about St still about the location of that drive the driveway that goes into the development okay anything further all right thank thinking further from uh staff no sir no all set you're all set yes and you Mr Fletcher you're also applicant representative all right very good Miss Christie we thank you thank you pleas all right at this time we will uh continue the public hearing until January give uh the applicants uh engineering firm time to respond and uh continue to pull this together January January 14th January 14th all right we've continued the public hearing let's move into new business in our regular meeting of which there is none unless you have anything that didn't make it to the agenda I do have a couple things just um the city is going to be undertaking a um Hazard mitigation plan starting after the first of the year so there should be probably should be some representation from the planning board on that committee and um so basic it's looking at you rob probably better describing it than me what it consists of just the hazard mitigation plan yeah I think you're you're the expert for now thank you just looking at any like hazards that may uh come about with large storms and things like that so some of the weaknesses that we can address to kind of mitigate any potential disasters um over time so it's it's funding through FEMA that's funneled down through Mima we got a grant to do it so it'll be starting we've hired a a firm West and Samson to help us along to to write up the plan but there will be some there should be a plan a board representative on that committee um we're also going to be undertaking a master plan um process which is something that the board really gets directly involved in because it's really the board that is up approving it and implementing it with staff obviously um so uh you know there should be uh representation on that Master Plan committee also from from the board um we just finished interviews we interviewed three different consulting firms um we have selected the finalist we have not informed them yet so I won't mention anything here tonight as far as names but um so after the first of the year sometime probably mid January or so that process should be starting also just to give you an idea you know so we'll be reaching out to the members in the near future just to confirm interest or participation okay very good old business Compass lines def def ative subdivision plan well we're going to be uh reexamining that in January uh 2025 meeting schedule is in your packets and the next meeting will be Janu Tuesday January 14th 2025 at 6:3 anything else motion made to adjourn I seconded and seconded any discussion by voice all those in favor I those opposed we are adjourned thank you gentlemen