should we sched the pl of Allegiance even though no one yes because they're on TV somebody might accuse us of being unpatriotic that is true we have we have a delay which means that we're live even though you can't see it we are live yes oh oh now we're live okay thank you all right we might as well start PL of Allegiance [Music] you want to lead us Lisa I pledge aliance to flag the United States of America repblic for it stands one nation under God indivisible with liy and justice for all thank you I guess nobody wanted to come this is your last meeting and nobody wanted to come see you imagine that I guess so yeah so uh uh minutes anybody take a look at the minutes for April 4th and April 18th any issues I have one comment okay so on the April 4th minutes on page 12 I think the motion should be the same as it is on page nine um so under page nine number six so the motion passed for to zero lzo absent because right now it makes it look like it's 4: one so that's the only change okay anyone else a motion entertain a motion to approve the minutes as presented I so move second second all in favor I I hi okay bills we have any bills we do we do over here front we going to do the other minutes or that was that both minutes it was both minutes yeah yeah I multitask I you know Wonder we're you know we're burning a precious lctv time I I try to be efficient um so there were two bills uh peer rreview bill for 550 King Street and the legal ad for the LEL sun which means the this time the notice actually published did good um while we have a minute you want to talk about meetings moving forward since Jeff is going to be absent M what uh what's I had I had no I thought Mar issued a schedule uh Thursday June 16th would be our next meeting Thursday July 11th voiding presumably 4th of July right uh Thursday August 1st sounds good Thursday September 12th avoiding we're only worried about the June the June I don't know I don't think it's bad to get this on the no that's fine but are you okay with the what is it 13th 13th it says 6th or 13th right right oh I thought okay I thought 613 was June 13th okay I won't be back to 6th I don't think okay so then do you want to do it for the 13th is that work with your yeah thank you okay Anna are you okay with the 13th of June yeah yeah Delisa do you care no all right B you all right with the 13th of June for our next meeting yeah and I guess I can make myself available um yeah that's that's what that was about okay um I'll get those meeting dates um set aside okay and when when are you leaving when are you going on vacation I I gave you a long email with all my vacation I know I didn't read it though it's not something I prefer to announce it never mind all right it's fre people are going to break into your office upstairs if you're not here or downstairs downstairs yes all right never mind that means I have to read okay I'm happy to Circle back with you on it all right remember input on any projects going on anybody well 12 Robinson Road just had the barn taken down oh they saved the roof they lifted the roof off in one piece and they saved it I don't know why why I don't know I I don't I know I know the historic consultant is involved in this so I mean that's why they had save yeah it was so so relevant about the roof well the they were working towards saving the bar or as much of it as they could and got into the construction and found it was more um P more damaged than time damaged than they thought it was rather than um taking it down um they worked through various scenarios one of them was to lift up as much as they could with the crane set that aside and then do the construction and then replace possible so all the sides are just gone oh it's yeah the the roof is sitting in the front yard in one piece so that means nothing of the side walls well they have saved well I don't want to get into it but they they saved the Timbers a few of which were you know rotted at the bottom which you know is to be expected I I always wondered how it was going to work out because to get it insulated and all that stuff you wouldn't see these original Barn Timbers anyway anyway I don't I don't know I haven't talked to Joe about what what is going on but um anyway there's someone there's someone who's overlooking the thing which we didn't have in their Homestead correct which we probably should have that's a process that's up to the historic commission yeah um well I think looks good with the new windows and everything I think they done I I think it looks good I'm just saying they they more or less took out all the timers on the inside also you know speaking of Hao it looks like people are people moving in yes um into the cottage units that's what it looked like exciting yeah finally I saw I saw a bunch of people there yeah it seem like a lot of cars in them um 550 we'll hear a little more about 550 King Street later on tonight um uh what else looks like they're moving right ahead with um um 12 Rob with with um the Northern Bank they've got it fenced off it looks like they was been fenced off for a while but they put some banners on the fence um what do the banners say they're they their renderings the renderings they showed us oh okay future home of Northern Bank you know um Etc good so really had nothing better to do you're going to come here bother us I fig i' might as well go to a couple anyway anyway all right um anything else anybody got anything else anything going on with the affordable housing TR us Dan so I believe the RF P went out for tah hadan is that correct Marin correct okay and then we are looking to have um Mr Harvey take a look at the results of responses for the perk testing at Turkey is that correct no Y and figuring out what's going on with the well yep have you ever yes have you found it we found we we think we found the location um but it's uh they were told I was told it was a circle of stones in back of the barn there's a roughly 15t diameter circle of stones I don't think a Doug well would be that big so I don't know quite what it is and what we need to or what needs to be done to make other okay yeah actually to to build on that just a little bit um the recommendation is um to find a contractor with a small U Bobcat to scrape across the top of that area and try to find the surface top to the well and if that's exposed um then the Vel oper um is on the hook to come back and officially close the well cap the well so they were using a Doug well for water no they had no oh they had it was abandon it was abandoned and they couldn't find it when they put the septic system in to because it can't be within so many feet of the septic so that was a drawback with the septic because they didn't know MH they put it in anyway because it had been abandoned but the Board of Health still was given the affordable housing trust trouble because it hadn't officially been abandoned even though it wasn't even tied into the house so it's one of those loose ends it just needs to be tied I don't I mean I have at least five around my house that have been abandoned and who knows what time and I don't see the big concern they're usually filled with refuges and um the Board of Health was just because of the sepc was too close to where they thought the well might be but it wasn't even it's a potential safety issue if it's not properly closed but it was totally disconnected well there's a safety where people fall into it I agree with that but they can't even find it anyway um what else one one thing about I I was just thinking about CPC last night they voted to purchase the Webster land for its appraised value so that will be in the town what was its appraised value 730 7:30 oh okay yeah is sign 30,000 for soft costs as part of the sale up to 30,000 and yeah cuz you were there I wasn't but I think you came out with they're they just are going to pay for it we have the money rather than bonding it was a lot expensive it's expensive to finance things these days so right and then the other half of that story is that the Websters have agreed to accept um that amount for the sale of that property so it's really a win-win it is actually yeah good open space it's a number reasonable and since there's going to be more people potentially living in that neighborhood um in the future I can't ride my bike there so it that's doesn't matter to me it's too wet anyway anything else Anna do you have anything else nope arlet no delee it you want no you don't want to talk your last last thing nothing I don't have anything else nothing you want say what a good time you've had the years you've been here no you don't want to give us a motivational speech okay don't want us all to urge Ur just to follow your footsteps yeah right not possible anything else um let's see well we could jump yeah under if we jump forward to town meeting which is Tuesday night um Article 13 um there's a draft uh that I just handed out this evening of a letter message from the planning board uh to town meeting regarding MBTA zoning Article 13 um are we're going to read this we're going to hand it out what we want do well um I think it's a little overkill for a handout that people more people have to read given the amount of information that we've included in the town meeting warrant we got the full artic article we've got the brief description we've got the map we've got the long Q&A um that's been tailored um to Littleton um and so I would suggest a a message that we you know post to the page and and um read at at town meeting floor somebody has to read it okay and it's up for any edits okay um first paragraph on the third line so some residents at the special town meeting Express concern that the parcel at 245 Foster Street that the planning board recommended is it that the planning board recomend or which the sentence was just a little it's it's a very run-on sentence I agree um the parcel at 245 Foster Street which comma could could the could we just say that it was not reported I mean I don't like the word unsuitable it is definitely suitable MH okay just saying it was not residents did not support that site okay or something so simplify it it's not supported yeah I don't think we should say after the rejection of the MBTA zoning article can we clean it up um or you could just say um after the November first 2023 special time meeting yeah take out the after the rejection M and um after it was not approved at the I wouldn't even say that just say you know um H okay yeah just we we went forward with for I the other equival on the third paragraph is that we did consider 295 and 305 in the original process so technically they're not new properties um to so yep I can just take out and do we have to put the number of people that that uh the attendees it's it's your letter however you wish to we what's your concern mark because there's a 10,000 people in town and we're talking about 175 people and 164 we listen to that few amount of people where oh I see the um I think we should say after input from concerned residents who attended the meetings you know I mean you're afraid people you're afraid people because they's so few the response rate was so small you're afraid people's point of view it was a lot of people you know not really not well not compared to the to the um I mean it's actually low response rat it's a low respon we had more people write it in then we did have actually come to it yeah maybe we take that out too just think of bad Optics short short and sweet okay so I'll take out the numbers just say guidance from this workshop and Survey yeah something like that yeah and I keep kept stumbling and the one fourth paragraph has sought a better way to say that I and finally in the fifth paragraph the last it's and avoid the risk of being sued the risk implies that it's just a possibility MH I would take that out and just say avoid being sued by the Commonwealth I mean they've made it clear that you know I think they've gone after Milton already the slide that you gave us uh that what you made available about how much money we're getting and how much we're going to get yeah that one is that that's an actual slide we're going to present um that's a backup slide in case the question comes up I think it should be a I think it should be a well we'll do that in a couple of minutes um okay so I I guess I have a question overall um given that the Warren article is I think 17 pages and there's the presentation is this one page necessary needed well and that'll be part of the my question to you after we go through the hearing is do you want the long ver well not the version but the presentation on town meeting floor do you think it's necessary to go through that and do you think um as part of that um we have the the message I think we need to tell them how we got to where we are at somehow may not as long as this but just a recap of where we're at well this is you know two less than a two-minute read can we put it on the web I mean on our page oh yeah I mean not on the pro well we have a project for this but the problem is there 300 people are going to vote this that's what always comes to town meeting that's probably what we're going to get we tried to maybe we just come up with something we tried in in November um didn't it didn't it didn't pass for number of reasons we came back we listened to we came up with a consensus that we think more the resident of town Litton will be able to get behind um it's imperative that we be that we're compant an MBA MBTA compliant community and this is the steps we've taken to be compliant and something like that something maybe which is what I was trying to no I think this I mean you know we could argue endlessly about it but I think this is okay just removing yeah the little the detail we'll figure out before the end of the night who's reading it but let's yeah and I'm happy to present it if on okay Bo's behalf if that's helpful all right so I guess that's ultimately what what I guess I where I come out is the content is fine I agree with it but I'm just saying do we need to hand out another piece of paper I don't think so have to talk about so so okay so do you want to do since Emily's not well let's time to open the public hearing and then I'm happy to run through the presentation okay so we have at 6:15 MBTA Community zoning bylaw amended King Street common district and Littleton station and BTA communities multif family zoning District LS MFC so um I'll start by reading the public hearing notice public hearing zoning bylaw Amendment the town of Littleton planning board will hold a public hearing on Thursday May 2nd 2024 at 6:15 p.m. in room 103 of the shat Street Town Offices at 37 shatak Street to consider a zoning bylaw Amendment the proposed zoning bylaw amendment is to amend King Street common zoning District The Village common district and add a King Street add a Littleton station MBTA communities multifam zoning district with a corresponding change to the zoning map the pro proposed amendment is to amend King Street common zoning District The Village common District and to add zoning bylaw and the zoning map to and add to the zoning bylaw and zoning map the Littleton station MBTA communities multifamily zoning District LS smfd to allow by right multif family housing for purposes of addressing the requirements of Mass General Law chapter 4A section 3A the full text of the proposed amendment is on file with the Town Clerk and planning offices and can be viewed during their office hours or online at the website any person interested or wishing to be heard on the proposed Zing amendments should appear at the time and place designated or provide written comment by May 1st if possible also um so where you can uh view the um public hearing if you're not uh available in person um also note that the text of the bylaw is uh now Article 13 in the town meeting warrant that's been mailed to every household great so Emily has done a brief we've asked her for the Read's digest version of the presentation I think it was more or less accomplished well I know it's we're going to walk through it real quick right now so we're not going to talk about 550 King Street other than the fact that we're getting a bonus of 600 units from 550 King Street otherwise we would had to put 750 down at the station correct that's correct so we'll just make people aware of that 550 still is where where it was when we approved it a year and a half ago we just get to count the units now towards our NBTA uh requirements okay so um as soon as Article 13 is uh announced by the moderator um plan is for Emily to present um this PowerPoint uh which is paired down from the prior um presentations goes over the overview of what uh we go back to the my only comment it's a graphics comment you have the planning board meeting May 2nd 2024 over the actual site that we're proposing could we move that down to this sort of grade out I because it may be useful when she's presenting to sort of say this is where can she can you take it right off you can take it right off take it right off or yeah take it right off or move it or make it less um important since right yeah that makes a lot of sense thank you okay that's what it is we all know what that is what it is and and the purposes MH um and then what it is not and you've seen this slide at a several SE couple different presentations already um but this provides the opportunity for those that attend town meeting who've not been part of the process yet to get caught up to date um this is the um public Outreach uh that the planning board has conducted since the November um special town meeting including tonight's public hearing um and it's so really from December 4th on we really started up again with the joint meeting with the select board this December 4th and we held 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 eight meetings to get to us get us ready for town meeting mhm even if we don't go into all of that is there a reason that the select board vote to recommend is after the I mean because chronologically it belongs between April 18th and May 2nd yeah probably because I asked her to highlight it but I will I will ask her to put that back in into okay so good I don't think the date's important on that one just take the date off and just say the select board and finance committee yeah or take or put it back in chronological order okay yep I'm happy to update that slide okay okay so um this is um the overall requirements for Littleton uh commuter rail Community 50 acres 10 Acres minimum within uh the station area um minimum contiguous District size Littleton hasn't had to worry about that because King Street common is um over the 25 acre minimum still at the 750 unit um um minimum unit capacity and still require 100 Zoning for 15 units within the maybe you should highlight the deadline if you're high highlighting commuter rail the top yep highlight the deadline December 31st 2024 MH and then so this is uh the updated information um well not updated Present part of the presentation Littleton has a two-part strategy um that includes achieving mea compliant zoning in two areas of town um part one is to highlight all the work of the community in the King Street common District at 550 King Street with three AG jent Parcels in the village common District 410 Great Road which is known as The Old Mill building 450 King Street a small parcel in front of the mill building on King Street and 584 King Street um we know best as the site of the former yangi River restaurant um so by utilizing um these properties uh as part of our um District to qualify for NBTA Community zoning requirements um then we get to rely on existing zoning in place um for um development near Littleton common so and this is the the detailed map that shows those areas we can I can I just um I have a Post-It on this one and it it has to do with the 550 King Street and 584 King Street are the subject of an existing subdivision plan what yeah the sub this subdivision was modeled with I I don't know what that is important for the time meeting yep exactly good point I mean I know it's important to Emily because this modeling is going to be the subject of another comment yeah yeah can I suggest you highlight not being changed as well I don't see I don't think we should even address it well the question will come up how are we becoming getting to 750 we're getting 600 from the common that's it stop there I agree right stop theree I know I know in your legalistic point of view which is you know underlying everything but for the town meeting it's like aren't we lucky we have previously approved all this stuff that the town that the state is going to let us um I we shouldn't use let us the state has approved uh because let sounds like they're giving us this big favor but I think we no Littleton gets to count all of the work that we 600 that we have previously approved and now we're only here to talk you know to I feel yeah I feel like we're going to lose people it's like we're going so much into 550 King stre we have to do because of the resoning of 550 48 448 or because of the King Street common district and the village nearby Parcels in the village common District done the hard work we get to count 600 of the 750 units yeah something nice and easy like that not how we did it now the hot dog approach yep okay y that's that's good all right um and then and so and this kind of actually Litton has a two-part strategy this is part one nice picture all right do we need it why I would yeah I would say yes I would recommend we highlight that um just this way I think the slide is important because people will want to know you know what part where the parcels are where those Parcels are I think they already know well not there'll be some town meeting attendees who haven't been part of this process at all so this allows us to bring everybody up to all right say picture that that one but not the previous slide I on this I think you need to color the 584 and the 410 the same as 550 I because we're talking about one District I it's I sort of agree with Bartlett I I don't like them being different yeah being different I mean for the purposes of this calculation one thing we have one District that's going to for the actual legalistic and Zoning thing I understand that Division I think you're right you need to put them all the same okay um and the only thing I'll push back is it's not one district there we're not changing the zoning districts there we're just using those Parcels to we'll be using those yeah to to achieve a lower density we're doing this to achieve a lower density on this proposed um okay sounds good um and then these are the minor changes in the uh King Street common and Village common District that's part of the four five six and seven all right do we need the would adjusting affordability to meet eohc who cares do we need the because it's just the rounding down um and actually that's that's a good question that's pretty well covered in the um uh description at at the end that's printed in the warrant so yeah if it's going too much into the weeds we can get rid of that yeah I think it yeah okay second part of the strategy so if we jump right to this map and then Lauren real quick going back to on that map you need to color the two Parcels that we're talking about yep that okay y mhm I think the other thing in Emily or whoever is going to speak for folks who have not been a part of it I think it is important to use language that we all recognize you know these two properties are up at the corner of Taylor and Foster so as you're leaving the train station you turn right on the other side of Route two on the other side of Route two right so using language like that that people right near the interchange of Taylor Street and 495 a scant mile from the train station no don't say that yeah I think you do need to color it definitely yep and those Parcels as opposed to the other one will bring up well there's a building there m MH and how do we I mean we explain that this is a zoning thing it's not a project thing and that there may never actually be housing there but I don't I don't know if we want to say that but um well it it gives some um economic Redevelopment potential to underu to underutilize All Digital equipment office that's a good yeah that's a good answer I don't think we need to put this one in there this starts getting confusing again the one that's up there now we know it's 295 305 fost street do we need to put that in there um I would think if we can somehow combine the map and the and this together into one so it looks yeah if you can put that kind of like this one yeah if you can put that on the map that would be fine yeah and then the these two Parcels provide the station area numbers I I don't like that what you're basically saying is that because we are because of because of King Street we have managed to come up with these two properties that will be able to have a you know this six units well here's the other thing is that I'm already being asked well how many units are going to go there 150 uh is that the case cuz in Emily's last presentation for 181 right it was like higher than that that's that's a sticking point I mean it seems silly but that's a sticking point for some people they're not saying they wouldn't support the proposal but it's a stick point I don't know how we get around I think we say a minimum of 150 but the potential build out could be up or or say something like if you're we're trying to compare it to what the requirements are because the trying to compare to what the requirements are requirements are a minimum of 150 it meets that do you want more information no I think in reality what we're saying is that um because of the size of the parcel that's why right it comes up to it could be potentially it could potentially be 181 but it need not be it yeah once development limitations and parking as long as it's a minimum of 150 I I I I wonder I wonder what that red X is doing there I mean to me what this picture should say is 10 acres within the station Area 15 50 units more or less within the station area and those two two Graphics of the puzzle pieces we don't need the 15 units per acre because that's the average for the whole project both sides and we don't need the cushion because people aren't going to understand that correct so take those out are you taking notes on this or you're going to remember all of this oh it's on the you're getting us verbatim oh yeah kooper Koopa is real good about this right and here we go another no let's no we don't need this okay all we need to know is we need 150 units out there we don't need to know about King Street anymore we've done that we're beating a dead hor so so the well I I I would suggest that if we have the the one puzzle piece for King Street common District on one slide the two puzzle pieces for 295 and 305 on the other slide and then once you put them together you come that's right right but but I think in your mind we're voting basically on these two top parcels and everything else is and then we have our planner to say I am confident that this will achieve P State pass the E hlc you know well take the cushion off the bottom we don't want any ambiguity to just take the cushion off or confusion okay next um and then this goes into detail about um the zoning that's proposed at the 295 and 305 um the pieces I think that are important there are the um the biggest building height maximum Building height stories and feet the setback from Foster Street and the dwelling units parade I I think this minimum area is confusing minimum lot area yeah I don't think that's we could yeah that's a legalistic thing one of the things that um we might want to consider is if we anticipate getting a lot of questions about this maybe it gets put put at the back of the slide deck and then if it needs to be used it can be pulled out correct otherwise it just sits there MH no I think everything else is good I agree with with Jeff we get the minimum out of let's we don't want to confuse people you what's what is the test yeah take that word out well these two headers I'm not sure are should be the headers District name and test oh okay yeah yeah you could say metric MH okay [Music] next I would I think you got to leave this one oh allows the planning board to add design guidelines okay yeah which we will do it later that yeah I think you got to leave this one Mar on the second bullet if you do decide to remove the dimensional standard slides you want to say based on the dimensional standards not shown okay move the word shown I still think that third bullet about the limits building size to more than 12 units per building allows is just confusing I remember Mr rambacher brought that up at the last meeting and yeah okay um and which got me to thinking about how um development might occur on on one of these Parcels either a the property owner could decide to to cut off one lot and do up to six units on this one lot or they could um cut off maybe half of the site for development and cluster more units together and count the um density across the entire place but that leaves I didn't say that very well but that that allows for um them to meet the open space requirements in the bylaw and um to uh you know cluster the development together to make a a compact neighborhood style development but the only problem you're going to have with the these two sites you have an existing building oh yeah if the building stays there let's just say that's not going to stay there well if it does let's say the second one the the guy who's come to all our meetings is is really interested in this maybe doesn't want to knock his building down I just spent a fortune on a septic he's got plenty of land there maybe he wants to try to develop half of it so that that has to stand on its own so like you said he has to break off a piece of it and that piece has to be with stands and and to me it makes a lot of sense to use part of the over parked area part of the existing parking lot for parking for as as part of the new new development because yeah because there was a digital parking lot that was way over built yeah I get I get that part but that's why if you leave the 12 units per acre per per building then he has to keep it small which is what we want we we don't that's why we have to keep it in there might be a little confusing but that's why we have to maybe the allows more than one building per lot is the confusing I mean I think people can understand the 12 units per building the bylaw actually refers to the 1 acre minimum lot size correct correct why don't we just why don't we just take a lot out why don't we just say 12 units per building yeah that's what I mean and just take the rest of it out because that's what people should fix in we don't we don't need to confuse [Music] it any bigger than 12 units okay okay and that was the end of that that's it wow that's not bad oh so much better we're getting there and and yeah the comments and then the other slide um that we'll have for backup um is the graphic on the grants that we've had and that could be expected over the next few years M so my only question about that is why aren't we getting $15 million in the next few years like we did in the last we haven't applied for it we got 4 million we applied for we we haven't applied for it yet well and and actually um there is a proposal for next round uh well actually the Housing Works Grant um staff is working with the Lupi team on a Grant application for $4 million um Housing Works Grant um for public infrastructure to serve the 550 King Street site so that would be an extension of the Sewer Service um and roadway infrastructure um within the site so so yeah so that will be at least a $4 million request this current round if we're compliant yes okay all right so that's that's go to lupol and not to the town well it goes to the town um and then the town hasn't would have an agreement with the developer that it's only on the public infrastructure portion of it so yeah but it is a it is a cost sharing well that's to make up for the 7 million we had to get back right is that is that the the rationality well I you know none of this happens without the strong commitment between the town and the state and the developer to work together on this um Town sewer is being paid 60 more than 60% by by this development oh yeah absolutely without that there'd be no sore right and we'd be and we' still have the water quality issues at the common no way to address [Music] [Applause] those nice do any other Bo have any questions about this no so we'll figure out May maybe we should talk about who wants to read this before Emily gets up do I thought we weren't going to read it I thought we weren't going to read it well let's talk about it we're not going to hand it out so somebody has to do a okay preview Before Emily gets up and does the vus digest [Music] version Jeff what about you what about you dele some one last shot you yeah no not no espe oh well no you'll still technically be a I I know that but Jeff what about you I'll read it yeah okay I'll Leta thank you no you have a lot of credibility in town I've been dying to be the face of as opposed to me no I did not say that I think jeffon okay then I'll have to pay more attention to exactly what but I think it it can be called I think you can yeah no I think you can definitely Mar's going to give us the I mean I I think the big picture is we're voting on sites for 150 units not the whole I mean we've are anyway that's the big yeah we're lucky we get to count to 600 otherwise it 750 and while some people might feel that's a lot it's a lot less than 750 right okay all right so we're good with that we have everything pretty much covered I would say um yep so um right now you're in the public hearing for zoning bylaw Amendment so you want me to ask the the five people that showed up here if they have any questions that would be the proper thing to do does anybody have any questions or concerns about our presentation that we just [Music] did guess not y we did a wonderful job we pared paired it down to keep people awake and relevant and it's and after we've been in the weeds for so many months years on this it's good to get your input on how to look big picture so that's great well yeah you guys have been looking at it you probably glazed over you haven't didn't even notice that that should have been underlying to that yeah we're just kind of thinking of it as how people are going to look at it mhm y as best we can right I think we're good so it's one more one more how will Emily deal with questions the actual units allowed in her calculations what if it comes up you mean the six the number six the actual when she presented her modeling and I don't know how to feel about that I mean I know that there there some people who would be interested in the the aspect of the modeling but there are some people who just say well let's just have a number MH um right well she's run this proposal through the models and has numbers for the model that the state will use to analyze it right that we have to we have to run the model and present that information to the state um so she will have those numbers and be prepared to respond with those numbers if asked um the other thing I would add to that is in reviewing the letters back from the state back to communities who have asked um about compliance um for their districts those districts that um show more units significantly more units than could be allowed well than they're required to have it shows the model shows more units than they're required to have those are tending to get the um yes approval from hlc those that are cutting it really close are tending to get the NOS so where by I know but we have King Street common with a huge excess with a with a nice big number for and you call it nice big number because which does for the modeling okay so that's the point of putting that in the model for so here's my next question how does that model um how does it expressed in the bylaw because how will how would an applicant m come before us and know how many the only thing the applicants going to come and see is they can put six units six units per that's it right the applicant will have nothing to do with the compliance model okay not to me that's the point of not talking about it yeah okay and but I mean we have to know we have to know in the background that it's running but in terms of what we're doing at town meeting it's not yeah exactly so if anyone even asked about it the reason that we ran the compliance and did everything is to go down from 15 units per acre down to 6 units down to 6 units per Breer well we chose sights well no it doesn't matter no matter what site it was over there if we put it somewhere else it still would be six units okay everything we did at 550 brought the density down to six units per acre foret the to 150 right correct yeah so that's all we have to say that that we did the calcul and rather than having to be the difference between this byar and what was proposed in November is that since since that time the governor has weighed in and we used the calculations from um we were allowed to manipul manipulate the numbers to be able to reduce the density otherwise a the numbers that allowed us I like manipulate and that's where I always appreciate um Emily's ability to hear the questions that respond thoughtfully at public session so she will be there to help the other thing I don't know if it should be in this statement from the planning board but historically Littleton has always um complied or exceeded with State housing goals um we true we've exceeded the subsidized housing inventory for as long as I've paid attention to it um so anyway we have a we have an ethic in the town of Litton has been a housing Choice Community since that program was initiated and but which is one of the reasons it puts us in good dead for um some of the state grants okay anything else was you hear was that Emily beeping in that she's still no that was my husband as the cator actually actually said tell Emily that we're done she doesn't need to come by Will um so we should all sit together at up in the front somewhere I would think um yes um so there will is a official planning board meeting posted for a town meeting uh town clerk does that for a lot many of the sitting boards um so yeah we sit together fine um so I know the CPC post posted meetings for the 7th and the 8th in case it went over but we're relatively soon well it's posted for both in case it run's over do you want to give her the good news or the bad news em good to see you you want us to give you a quick overview of what we came up with I would be happy to he apologies to the board we'll give you the five minute it's only going to take us 5 minutes we cut everything out yes the the slideshow is going to end up even shorter all right do you want to do it real fast we'll do it real fast for 8 minutes we have 8 minutes we don't know what to do it okay so we're going to get rid of this let's see how many of us remember what we talked about we're going to get rid of the plainly board um logo that's on there just to make it less confusing put either put it on the top or somewhere else and because it's over the actual properties properties that we're talking about okay um this one was good this one was good one was good this one um take the date off uh select board and finance committee vote to recommend and actually if the planning board votes again tonight to recommend well I'll put them all on there Y and I think as far as that one goes we're only going to say we we got together with the Selectmen in early December we had eight meetings on this we all came to consensus that it was important to move forward with this to keep it going and eight meetings we can have them up there but we don't have to go through them we just put them up there or you'll just put them up there cuz you're going to talk understood okay all right yep oh yeah we're going to change the red we're going to put the deadline in red okay um so take this slide out yep um and just cover that by by introduction to this slide so Littleton has a two-part right um approach the F first part is King Street common we're going to color both we're going to color the other sides other pieces so same color we want to sort of take away all of the planning minutia and ambiguity of it yeah these are the these are the parcels we're not going to reinvent the wheel there [Music] okay take this one out yeah right so just in cas sorry that was out or that was in out um take this one out same thing talk to the images color this one right right color the two Parcels here and combine it with this one this slide so it looks kind of more like this one and we take out the bottom part about um um next next one right the units for the cushion take those out yeah 10 10 acres 150 units within the area get the cushion thing out in the 15 units out once you put it all together yep take the cushion out take the cushion out y that's me that's my phone okay I have it on silent okay uh on this one the blue dark blue Banner at the top didn't was was confusing no the district name and the test get that out in the minimum area square footage the the one acre size out okay so and were you guys good with all of the rest of the people are going to focus on that um this one you were good with MH except for take out allows more than one building per lock it's building Siz is to no than no more than 12 units per building and the shown part right based on the you weren't sh oh yes yes bullet two based on the dimensional standard well that was the previous Slide the dimensional standards from the previous slide well right but if we take out sh then all right that's fine yep no no problem well okay and then so it brings me into the question dimensional standard setbacks are a dimensional standard so if there's a way to make that sentence simpler I can make it simpler awes I've been listening to them and that's the end of it and then the other thing the only other one we'll have is the um the graph that shows the funds that we've gotten we'll probably put that up there too if somebody asked about it we've got $15.8 million pending right now and another couple of million as long as we stay compliant yep um and then Jeff had had a few questions about um if questions come up about the modeling and how many units are allowed according to the model how we got to the six I guess the best way so at your last presentation yeah you ran the model the way the eh whatever will do it and you came up with a number of like 181 units for those two Parcels right so we how do we deal with that discrepancy between what the model shows and what um or I I I I'm struggling people it will be a question right I had a question today you know are you sure it's just the 150 I said well no actually not the model says it has to be you know blah blah blah so the model is a function of the geographic inputs and the dimensional inputs it how it calculates an estimate based on those inputs we Tred to get as close to 150 as possible without putting you know super ridiculous numbers in it's highly unlikely based on anything that we've seen um uh in work with other towns that anybody it's going to produce that exact number so it is uh you know it is a mathematical construct that 177 cities and towns are using to improve their clients it is not the same thing as actual production okay there could be less because of the G the demographics could the wetlands and everything else by exactly every parcel is different so so the way I explained it recently to another Community I can I can certainly do it is both zoning and the model treat um land as empty right that there's nothing on it in the case of the model it essentially treats land as a rectangle right it doesn't it doesn't know that those parcel have weird dimensions and you start with a rectangle you Lop off the excluded land if there is any you Lop off the open space um standard that was put in there you Lop off an amount for parking you left with the building footprint you take that building footprint you multiply it by the number of stories to get your volume you divide that square footage by a th and you get the units nobody has ever developed a parcel in that way right it just not how you do it um you've got irregular Lots there you've got Wetlands you've got to figure out how the access Works you've got to think about the relationship of a building or buildings to each other it's just you don't take you don't shoehorn something into a rectangle so it's it's a mathematical way of understanding the maximum possible unit capacity it is not going to be a built capacity well so does that mean we're safe in saying that what we'll get is 150 units are very close to that down there you could get well could you get more well you can't get any more than the dimensions allow right so you know it's not the the as of right has stripped up a lot of people they think it means that somebody can just come in and build whatever they want and that's not what as a right means you have to get a building permit the building commissioner or inspector in every town or city is going to look to make sure that the The Proposal meets the zoning so if they come in and say i' like you know a four-story building well you're not allowing four stories it's not possible so having said that they can come up with something that that meets the requirements somebody creative maybe they could get to 181 units I've been doing some stress testing to see what it looks like I don't think so but they might come in and say we only want 75 units or you know 90 units just because you've got a capacity at that level doesn't mean somebody wants to build it there's so many factors that come go come into play there yeah so I wouldn't I would say you know the way I'd say it is you needed a unit capacity of 150 you have an estimated unit capacity of 18 181 for compliance purposes you're meeting the requirements who knows what a developer would want to come in and do but they can't build more than your zoning allows okay does that makes yes I think the um the key thing is to distinguish the zoning and the compliance they're two different things theoretical compliance and the compliance is something the state will go through to assess whether this is a good faith effort and it is but it doesn't relate to the actual development proposal yes and that that's a key piece is that the state is going so assuming town meeting passes this the next step is that you submit the shape files for those two Parcels you submit the um and actually you're you of to show King Street and and the village commes as well you submit the zoning um for this you also submit your existing entire zoning bylaws um and you submit the fully completed compliance model and so um once those all go to hlc they and there's some other pieces in the application that youve submit so they're going to be looking at the compliance model they're going to be looking at the geography um based on the shade file they're going to be looking at your zoning ordinance and the zoning that you just passed all of that is very different from from what somebody would apply be able to build exactly and it'll be based on each parcel too it might be based on each parcel yeah and the financial conditions under which they're building the labor conditions under which they're building the market demand under which they're building there's a lot of factors that go into that okay great so um like Jeff read a little statement to get you started and then you'll get up and do your stuff and then hopefully you'll answer whatever questions there are if we have to get up and help out we obviously will that's it so I have 10 minutes what I have 10 minutes that's the presentation Li yeah 10 minutes yeah I like to be shorter but okay I I think yeah I mean 10 will be good you know we've sorted out the big issue it's the site and that's that's the gist of the kernel of what we're I think under 10 would be a breath of fresh air for town meeting I mean I could do a couple of hours but so we need to vote this we need to we need to close the public hearing anyone may want to make a motion to close the public hearing go ahead I'll make a motion to close the public hearing on the NBTA Community zoning bylaw I'll move second second all those in favor of closing the public hearing signify by saying I I okay I'll attain a motion to approve this and send it to town meeting floor I will second it recommend recommend I recommend didn't I say that no I make the plan board recommend that the plany board recommend we send this to the town meeting floor for a vote second it I'll take a roll call for this one Bartlett hi Felisa hi Jeff hi Anna I and I'm an i okay so we can put that on our little slide now too yep and um I'll prepare the official report to town meeting that reflects the plany board's vote um and actually uh town moderator will expect that first um so I'll give you that sheet of P that cheat sheet as well okay great thank you Emily okay we have we have a what do we have at 75 it's continue public hearing 550 King Street 5 584 King Street King stre common [Music] thank you Mr chairman members of the board uh my name is Chris Raymond from Tec here alongside my colleague Rick fryberg um we're here as a continued public meeting from uh last month's uh meeting on April 4th at which time we had presented a proposal for an amended uh special permit for the master plan at the 550 King Street Commons development [Music] um as you might remember um this um this project um uh received a special permit uh master plan uh back in June of 2022 um and at last month's meeting we had presented um three changes to that uh master plan since it's been approved just to run over those three changes um since the previous uh master plan was was approved uh we have Incorporated the uh Yang the existing yangi River Site um that was not purchased at the time it was thought to be part of the master plan purchase has gone through and now we're looking to incorporate that within within the master plan um we've also Incorporated a 150 room Boutique Hotel and we've increased uh looking to increase the retail space by 45,000 Square ft to um enhance the uh East West pedestrian Corridor um and create a a much more visually appealing um and pedestrian friendly um development at the front of the site and along King Street um at last month's public meeting I know um the board wanted a little bit more time to uh review the plans um and and the proposal and uh we're we're happy to answer any questions uh and feel any comments that that you may have um actually if you don't mind I'll jump in um there had been some question back and forth about the number of deeply affordable units um um and developer team confirmed that they're happy to stay with the same number as before um with the 40 units of uh deeply affordable senior units the 30 to 60% Ami range um rather than um bumping that down um so they're happy to keep with that and the draft decision does reflect um the 40 number um so one of the things that we saw in there were two options one that you had provided Marin and then a developers option and so based off of the information it looks like there are now fewer one-bedroom affordable units but more two-bedroom affordable units correct y yeah I think at at last month's meeting um it was suggested um that we try to balance um the number of affordable units for 10% of each of the the housing types um so we went back through the numbers and tried to the math was um a little tough to to nail nail perfectly but we try to get as close to that 10% of of each of the different um one two and three bedroom units so I think um in Tak a look at what we know from town data um the 40 is much more palatable and in fact um from a timing perspective I would really have liked the information to be able to share it with the affordable housing trust um but unfortunately we won't be meeting till May 21st so to the degree that we can you know review that with them that would be terrific I would I hate to give you more homework but I would like to see a breakdown of how the development of the affordable housing relates to the phasing um because we don't want to be in a position where we want the affordables brought along at All Phases thought we that's a requirement that's a requirement requirement could we have some representation of that I are you saying like in Phase One how many especially especially I'm looking at the seniors um it would seem to me I don't know what's what's the um what's the theory would should they be clustered together or spread wasn't the thought that the seniors were going to be in the retail up above in the retail correct with the elevators and no I think the no that that's high end that going be the high end on yeah I think I think um sorry I fromc um I think the thought was for the affordable senior housing that those ought to be clustered together and the reason being um they're really a different unit design MH you know um to make it so people can age in place um you just build the units differently um than you would sort of your your standard you know sort of unit yeah um so I think that they would get um congregated together and then what phase building um I you know I appreciate this presentation but and I appreciate the phasing presentation but it sort of all works together and um you know we're anxious to get some affordable housing yeah I'm scan I'm sorry Jeff I'm scanning um trying to look real quick to see if that 10% you know if there's something in the conditions that requires that um you know that we stay basically along that 10% number it is it's I think it's in here somewhere but I'm just trying to if I remember correctly so if you build 100 units have to be afford that's right yeah that's right and we need to stay we need to stay with the hard the hard question to answer and I don't know even if we went home and did homework if we' be able to answer it is you know when are those 40 deeply affordable senior housing units coming online in relation to the phasing um because you may know this but um there's some consideration that perhaps we try to do that offsite remember this was top is this building so it's just a it's just a question you know is this going to be phase one or phase three m m um the senior housing um more likely phase three I would say that's the answer how do we feel about that I don't think it's a big deal because it was a it was an add-on after the fact for this building that was yeah and if I'm sorry and if it if we end up with an off-site alternative it could be in between them could be between phase one and phase three oh what you say upsight okay yeah yeah and um I'm I'm thinking you're constructing them offsite in a warehouse maybe maybe I mean as long as it's there's 10% in phase one right well could you bring this up to the I mean I know this won't I I I just think it it's an issue uh I think that um it's an issue that's all yeah I think maybe I can offer this too is you know obviously each each building that we do would come back in front of you guys for site plan r view at the site plan view it's typical that you have us actually label on the floor plans which ones are affordable so you can not only add them up you can look at where they are on the building um make sure that we're sticking to within the numbers um with specific unit numbers attached to it so I I think from from my perspective because there will be 10% affordable units so taking phase one as an example and phase one I think has what 280 yeah so that would mean 28 affordable units and that you would then do those proportionately to that plan so at so seniors would still have an opportunity to buy for those that's right that's right okay yeah um okay and and so what I guess I wanted to share going back a little bit going back to what I would like to share with the affordable housing trust is just the the option of continuing to keep the path of 40 units being for seniors and the rest proportion he's suggesting to congregate those 40 units right and that could be another question we could talk about with the affordable housing trust and I think that that makes a certain amount of sense that for that particular particular group um for the other groups I think you're required to separate them and have them sort of not adjacent and all that intermingle they've done different floors and different ways of the building and again I I kind of have a I have a question about the affordable units um my reading of the or my understanding of the um station area rules are that you we can't have age restrictions um at in in that that complex and um I I would interpret that as meaning that all 40 of the set aside senior units would have to be at the King Street site um and you know as as a member of the Housing Trust I would like to see them built yesterday so so you know you know I I don't know where to go from there but yeah I wonder you know sorry sry than I'll poke poke at that just for a minute the um NBTA community's requirements allows for 10% affordable units and and no age restriction however if the during the permitting process if the planning board negotiates with the developer for uh restri more you know more for an age restriction in this example then that's perfectly allowable um in the same way like I plus we have 600 units designated for the MBTA right I mean can we just say those other 200 can have age restrictions or it doesn't make any difference it doesn't make we can do it they just don't want to hamstring it by saying that we the zoning can't requ Ser okay zoning can't require if we make it more restrictive it's okay they don't we can offer it or you can require it of us but it can't be required yeah but let me just say as a personal opinion that I would prefer to have all 80 affordable units that are part of the project at King Street to be built at the King Street site I don't want it I don't want to see off offsite units okay that's just my opinion Well Bar the reason we got to the 40 units was when we talked about this years ago was about this particular building about this being senior housing and they the Leo company agreed that it could be right now this building is not in play it's not right now but it may be in the future and that's where the 35 to 40 units would come into play so they would all be here one reason we were wanted to talk about the offsite possibility was um you might remember this came up was about um construction costs and the cost to develop a new site including you know bring in utilities site driveways roadways the building the shell itself Etc obviously it's much more expensive to build a new building than it is to renovate an existing one because a lot of that base infrastructure already exists so it's speak and so that was one of the that was one of the aspects of how we were going to get to those kind of affordable levels because as you know the the 30 to 60% Ami I'm not sure have you guys ever seen a project propos that no not that um we've done 60 60 yeah but but it was push big push back yeah it's they're hard they're hard to build um and uh and so one one mitigating factor that helped with that would be if we could locate like say an existing building that had and not the that is this building but you know a parking lot that already exists water lines that already come into the site um driveways curbing sidewalks in the Shell I understand so um so um I just say they may very well end up at the site because we don't have a candidate site um but um but that was one reason we wanted to keep open the option for right well if this building gets back into play then I that's right I might change my mind but I just wanted to get my opinion out right now and then I was going to offer to I participated in one of these in the past um but if you want us to attend any of these discussions we're happy to do it of course okay that would be great yeah thank you my uh other comment was um well first I you know back just before we're leaving this I I think the board really would like you to think clearly about the congregating the senior housing together anyway so beyond that so we we had some concern about the not the existence of the hotel but the massing of the hotel and I noticed that you took off the four story designation what does that mean um so last meeting we talked a little bit about trying to understand um there's a discussion about the size of the hotel we're trying to understand is it the unic account that's the issue or is it the massing related to Tel house you know and the surrounding other buildings and so what we thought we would do is rather than um write in there four story three story five story whatever whatever may be represented in those images just up to 150 rooms in the hotel and then what that does is it leaves it to when that site plan comes forward with real architecture because we're like we like we said before these renderings that we're showing you are presentations but when the building are further along the design and you can see the real architecture um then you know it's it's required to comply with form based code and meet your expectations and so we thought the best way to reflect that now was just to remove the height designation Al together and just say um so it may very well be that that building is three stories or maybe three stories in the front or maybe two stories in the very front and four way in the back or something like that okay something that complies with the form based code um but we didn't want to get hung up on the height of it now because we're just showing a representation anyway well and I don't yeah I think that you removing it is the right thing because then we're not help anything either not help anything that's right no that's right what else you have a question for I think that was the biggest really the biggest thing I we all like the enhanced area that you showed us for the uh retail obviously putting yanki in this makes all the sense in the world get it every talks about what's going on with the anxi what's going on with the anxi um so do we have opportunities to ask more questions at this point go ahead so um in terms of let's see where is it so in the peer review the very first question was about needing a new form one and I think we did get a new form one um and so I have a request and that is that on that form one you all checked off the marijuana and it is in that District it is in the district so it's not saying that you are applying for anything related to that just yeah if you yeah if you go on the town's GIS system and and just click through the layers of the different overlay districts we just check the ones that apply to the site and than we are within that District but there's no planned use no yes right P page two is the um what this site is applying for page one is the districts that it happens to be in and I just wanted to make sure that I heard it directly from you guys that there is no plan to do anything like that okay all right thank you would not be compatible what we're trying to accomplish I was going to say what is what is your L's experience with do they none that I'm aware of like I know a lot of his I don't know all his business but I'm not aware of any information thank you very much for for answering that question um so then let's see another question I had and I appreciate that you answered most of them um before uh so I know that from the renderings some of the pear trees appear to still be intact is that correct um those are probably new those are probably just new plantings new plantings so you're going to have to get rid of all of them even if they aren't impacted um it may not look like they're impacted but there's grading there's topography um changes to make sure that that area can be flatten level you know how you know when you visit the site today if you go especially to where those are there's sort of a a Crest to the road and then it Dives down quick um that whole area to make it all accessible um you know I think we called it the two ax but like there's the the North South Green Space that carries up into the residential all the way down through the new Green Space to King Street and the boulevard we want that area to be really accessible walkable easy for people to navigate and in doing so we changed the grading quite a bit in that area okay and I only bring it up because when the Tuttle house first was in play a couple years ago we wanted to make sure that that stayed intact so so can I just give a little historical sure so at the time IBM was built that Farm had what was considered the oldest continuous pear Orchard in the United States however when IBM came in all those trees because of grading were ripped out and they planted calorie pears which are not really pear trees they don't fruit you know they you know you guys probably don't even you know spec them anymore so it's not I just keep it in mind they're not the original pair trees they're not the original pair trees they're not even there's noal and and I that bothers me but that Whats water under the bridge but keep that in mind when you're Landscaping there's you know to call back to that situation yeah that's a great idea they might not be the same ones but if there can be something that sure represent is represent representative of it that would be good um okay so then the second question I have is uh the stones that are there I mean people have kind of become accustomed to the fact that there's a stone wall going across there in the renderings I didn't see any of the stones being placed again are you planning to put them back in any particular place and the the ones that are sort of within in the area around the turtle house around the turtle house and then got that whole wall of stones on King Street there was Back to Before Before I there was a barn that there were the two stone walls with the big Maples and there was a barn there that they moved that they got rid of and those are the stones that Anna is talking about so when I look at your plan it seems like possibly the left side one corresponds with your I don't know once again an invitation uh there's some interesting Stone it's it's um you know it's been there for a long time yeah I think I think uh tan so the ones along King Street certainly I would suggest that we keep them um I would just want to look at the width of our sidewalk to see if we're making the sidewalk much wider than it is today I'm not sure the ones along King they're Farmers walls the one ones are like that are in like yeah they're the older yeah I'm not sure those are original but whatever I have a picture if you we want to okay yeah actually I think it's slide like seven so which one am I looking for uh in the slide deck that I had sent over was it today or before yeah oh yeah she been busy shoot never mind well anyway yeah okay just take this in yeah I think that's a good comment because you're right I mean those particular the two walls we're talking about are not the so-called Farmers walls they have some big pieces of granite and you know they're more distinctive yeah yeah I think we we should find a way to incorporate those into the public B probably even if it's moving the ex repurposing them to whatever use you can there's also the tree in front of yangi you looked at that is there a way to keep I could stay y the tree stays can we like get a giant ribbon and put it around there it's not going anywhere well but that's that's an Elm isn't it or not I'm not sure okay it might be going anyway yeah yeah it might it'll I had a big H hel that died last year so any other questions or concerns the only thing is if there are that condition 49a and 955a are agreed by the the applicant to be put into any final decision and I have a question so when did when did you all get the decision to us this ver this version um was yesterday or yeah yep so I yeah I I have not had an opportunity to take a look at it so if there's any brush to it I'm afraid I won't be able to vote on that tonight so um I did have the opportunity just to put put a plugin I did have the opportunity to to um read through it again it's uh very well written and responsive to um the issues that arose at the first um iteration of the plan and this one as well um so it's does include a lot of the issues that came that came up and so I hope you're so we have a bit of an issue this is Del's last night so we could voted subject to the conditions because we all agree with the concept we just need to iron out all the conditions so we could close the hearing voted subject to the conditions every working out the conditions of approval I'm only we thinking about it through yeah I mean it's so similar to the last decision um really the changes are to incorporate the three things that Chris mentioned so the yangi River Site the additional retail square footage and the hotel um and then um and then obviously the the updated T which we talked about with the units just to kind of rebalance the the unit mix um yeah but probably 90% or more is exactly how it was before so I don't I feel like that's okay with that Mar because Mr chair because um I just feel like there's probably not going to be much comment that comes from that so I think the decision that you have is substantially similar one with is the board okay with doing that close it vote it and then subject to the conditions of approval we're all pretty much good with the concepts right Jeff are you okay with that I am um it wasn't until you mentioned the turnover aspect of it um you know my concern is as a planning board we're dealing with the NBTA communities it's tough to get headspace for anything else but since um since this is um I I would be okay with it and are you okay with that what are the conditions that you were concerned about it I just always like to review the decisions before we vote on it so that's that's we're closing it we're voting it and we're voting it subject to the conditions of approval um and then so what process would you like to go through to confirm the conditions well You' sused out most of it we've already gone through most of it this we haven't really come up with any I can't even find the conditions that you referred to 49 okay so it's kind of my point right the um decision is set up in the same format as it was two years ago um with the findings in the text of the document and exhibit a at the end um has the conditions so the condition is just goes to page 14 item 25 are [Music] [Music] Miss conditions I have conditions I we definitely have conditions but they last last one okay yeah I'm just referring to and his comment yeah yeah right so are those two in there yeah I haven't even had a chance to look at anything so are those conditions that the applicant agreed to in in the decision do you remember what one it was 49a remember was regarding like the um I have to pull it up um the previous decision had only 25 conditions considering the size of the project that's pretty good no long conditions though condition 49 and 95 a so um see if I can find it I don't think we've ever had any Sub sub conditions like a no it had to be could it be eight so I'm looking at 88 is a condition that has ABCD F let's see I found it so 49a or no curb Cuts storm water bmps and drainage system to accommodate any of the other sites what are future pled and then you said we Rec green said we recommended this be made a condition of approval that the Lots will have onsite storm water management separate from the roadway infrastructure yes I'm sorry I'm sorry so so that's um a separate approv that's definitive subdivision approval which is different than the master plan oh that was the old that was for the road that's for the roadway yep you're absolutely right you know I was wondering why I couldn't find it we already approved that one never mind okay so we have 25 of them here it's basically the same as what we had before trying to see if we can vote this subject to everybody agreeing to the conditions for next meeting so that at Lisa can vote it and we can move forward we all good with that I like to take a motion to close the public hearing then subject to conditions of approval that's it but what does that mean subject to conditions of approval so we've already discussed everything that goes on that's all we're dealing with now is the conditions of approval the 2 condition for example we discussed the the trees and we discussed the the stones and all that so but that's more of a um C planine review yeah C that's not condition approval so but the main thing is that they they you know they have the the original 40 you know 40 units for senior and you know that spelled out it so we're not going to have the affordable housing trust provide input to that then it's it's really not your purview to that no but I'm just saying to proail to be able to provide in well since they have um basically agreed to what they originally agreed know they haven't changed it it's 10% affordable it's the same I mean I I would agree with you if they'd gone down in number to keep an exact we're getting our 40 seniors we're getting your 10% affordable yeah you're getting everything with that was proposed originally nothing's changed so what we're approving is the addition of the hotel and the additional shopping space correct right which if they if they scale parts of the hotel back so it works with the Tuttle that's right we're good then we're all good we think it look big too I would just like us to get to a point at some point soon so that our staff works with applicants so that we can get our decisions in a more timely manner that's our fault that's my fault yeah that's our fault but they wrote the whole decision basically and and handed it to Marin all done and Mar's looked at it and Marin's relatively comfortable with it it's all we talking about a decisions draft decisions so that we close the public hearing we vote we and we vote that and we keep the draft decisions open and we make a final determination without the lease on our next meeting that's what I'm proposing okay so someone has to make a motion to close the public hearing I thought we did oh I moved to close the public hearing I'll second it all those in favor of closing the public hearing public saying I I I with condition say I yeah with with so now we will vote this subject to the conditions being finalized at our next meeting without the lease's or or F whenever or maybe not even you know it's just okay finalized is fine I mean there may be no changes right you so we're going to we vote this and then we vote the conditions at a later date we all good with that I I don't that language I mean we are we we are going to be voting on these conditions but we reserve the right to change and modify them yes before we vote on them we're voting on the The Proposal the Pres the presentation these are the conditions that go with it and we'll vote those at a later date can you support that I'll just obstain I'm good thank you thank you okay so entertain a motion to approve this the special permit the modified special permit that includes the yanki river proc parcel the boutique hotel being added in there and the how many th how many square 45,000 45,000 ft retail increase in retail as presented to us subject to the conditions being approved at a later date ratified and approved that L dat any want to second that I'll second that all those in favor of that I'll do it by roll call Bartlett hi Delisa hi Jeff hi I'm an i and you're going to abstain correct okay thank you before you go Rick um I just want to say that I was really pleased with how this developed I do think you sort of ran out of gas in phase six but um which is the Yi River but um it's pH six but the the the idea of increasing the retail I think is more um conducive to a successful project we feel the same way it's like one of those things where if you don't have the critical mass yes it's It suffers you want people to you want people you want people there and we think like with the with the plaza anchoring at the one side feeding into that just has such huge potential so we're excited about it too and your vision you guys have actually done a very good job with what you're proposing out there as far as the vision goes when you getting started we from you guys so when's phase one and any update on the commercial space uh actually on the existing IBM buildings yes um so um you might notice lights on when when you go by actually we have someone I was with said lights what's going on so so there's a temporary tenant in there on the third floor and there's um works it's in the works to make them a permanent tenant and I think maybe we can take more of a building too um for that we call building a but though if you're looking at from King Street on the left are you allowed to say who it is no okay yeah um but it's why um we had a slight change if you look at the phasing we had a slight change to what we thought would be phase one from two years ago we think we told you the one on the top left would probably be phase one and now it's the one closer and that's because we think that it's going to be important to build that garage um because of that promising news with and then that allows it to kind of build away from them it's good yeah yeah it's like I I think we talked about this but you know the the more things become concrete and real the more interest it draws it's hard for people to commit to something that's so far away and so distant with so many variables in the way in so we're there now we're excited congrats thank you m congrats to you thank you thank you than you guys okay touch late 7:30 continue public hearing 95 Tor Street any subvision St water permit strawberry farm three marks up um and we do have a representative from Green here to go over the engineering details um if I recall you wanted to review the uh waiver requested one of the things you wanted to review was the waiter requested in the engineering okay where do you want to start it's up to me there you go um well I guess we last we left that we were talking the first waiver was the REM building of the roadway so one of the concerns was to show us that you could get the roadway in with the drainage outside of the roadway have you had a chance to design that for us um um mark eler from s Harbor development thank you Mr chairman uh during the past month we've been working with um green International we've also been working with with the fire department the Water Department Public of um Litton light um and we provided M minin I believe was the beginning of this week uh with a plan that relocated or showed the relocation of the uh basins outside of the right of white um the RightWay requirement in the town uh of Littleton is 40 ft and and uh the basins uh were originally or are are proposed to be at the front of uh Lot number one um several reasons for that all good engineering practices but you would asked if there was uh the ability to locate them outside of the right of way and um this was one of the concepts we looked at early on but we decided against it because it was going to require more tree clearing it was going to require us being very close to the natural resources which we were trying to stay far far away from um also with the Bas and behind the house um you know it if if you do want to do inspections coming in off of the road I know there was some concern that some Basin have been failing in town this is easy to see and monitor should you ever decide to whether um for maintenance and upkeep or if it was for other reasons you you know it's it's right adjacent to the road in the front and it makes I think you know from an engineering perspective a better location however having said that we did look at this as a conceptual um location originally and we worked away from it but you had asked to for us to indicate or show that we can uh have it all of the the entire site is Santa gravel so I mean it it could literally go anywhere on the site it's it's the absorption rate is so strong and and the and the and the materials beneath the uh the loom are so strong that it wouldn't really matter where it went uh it would it would be successful anywhere on the property do you agree with that um you know I always patory test bits wherever you're going to have a infiltration system so um based off the test bits that they do have it does seem like they're it do good soils so um but you know wherever they do put it I'd like to see at least the test bit in that location which I think they do um in the locations that they do have the uh infiltration systems right now I know before they were um either the right away now they're in the back I know that there's some test fits in the back too so um so yes the answer is yes I they do have good soils um in either location uh for infiltration okay because the the reason that I had them go through the exercise was to show that if we do wave the roadway that we're not waving the roadway so they can put the structures in the roadway cuz we don't normally allow that it has to the structures have to be outside of the roadway so the fact have a wave in the roadway before we waved it want to make sure that they can fit in and you you you concur with Mr Gallagher that the the soils out there are such that there there's a strong possibility that way they propos it would work right yes yeah good that's there 36 test pits that we did we went down 16 ft on every test pit no groundwater every every single location was 2 minutes an inch per well you you that brought up another interesting you're talking about us going out and looking at the the um locations of the drainage that's going to be it's private no I I I complet understand but there when we went in front of um the consom there was some concern and conjecture that at another location they had failed and they were in a location that they could not see uh the upkeep and maintenance and they had a homeowners association as well so you know I I I think in the front makes the most amount of engineering sense also you know in terms of being away from um the natural resources as far as we could which was one of the promises we made to you as a board you know early last summer okay so all right so let's go over the rest of the waivers uh um s plan and profiles for every street shall be in a separate plan vertical references cross-sections on cut on 50 ft um because the proposed roadway is relatively short and in a uniform Road width proposal one one cross-section is provided yeah it's just how it's supposed to be displayed it it's not a big deal the way that they did it is fine with us okay we follow what they did all right the travel way exceeds the curbing shall be specified in figures 1 2 3 in the following Lane 22 foot proposed road is 20 ft wide no curbing or sidewalk is proposed um so they have a reduced pavement L of 20 instead of 22 that's okay with us as long as it's okay with the fire department I think that's kind the biggest concern is as long as the fire department's okay with getting in and out of there then it should be fine where are was we sent this out have we gotten anything back from the fire department May provide you something all of you what can I provide you [Music] with not quite that fast did you get a truck out there did they do the testing and T thank you counted 10 I hope I was right all right thank you thanks so we usually get a rendition that shows the radius for the for the fire truck to turn around in correct so we agreed with the fire department which was part I think of the discussion the last time we were here a month ago uh we met with them at the beginning of this week um they required or requested required that the uh Lane be 20 ft they had written back um and Mar had posted some concerns that they had so that's why we went and met with them we went out on uh Monday night a week ago Monday night uh between 10 and 11:00 we were requested to test the fire hydrant that's at the front of the road to make sure that we had enough pressure for pro fire protection we've provided that uh to the town um the fire department has a copy of that they have found that acceptable there was no need to have a additional fire hydrant um on strawberry uh Farm Road um they were concerned about um they were concerned concerned about the distance back from the um turnaround that um they would not be able to get their trucks close to each of the buildings for fire safety so we have agreed and it's shown on this plan that um we would expand the width of the driveways the two longest driveways on two and three um 100 ft into the property they want to be within 50 ft with their with their Hook and Ladder and then we changed the vector on I think it's lot three so that when they come out they can come directly out into the turnaround and then turn and go out should they need to give pry protection um we're going to go with the same pavement width that we had proposed originally and we're going to go with um pervious pavers grass pavers that they found acceptable um to enhance the width of the road uh to to 20 ft for each of those two dryway of fire protection okay well we still need a drawer from and that shows that they can turn around this no no that we gave them them they've already approved previously they approved the draw for the turnaround that's that's that's already been done what we worked on with them this week was the the need no need for the fire for the hydrant and we also worked on the 2T2 driveway do we have a letter from them that there's turnar around is acceptable all right I believe so I just want to make sure we have it that's all for the fire turn around the yeah for the fire turn around that was behind the  sir yeah because usually we get it a plan that shows the truck the little diagram of the truck it we don't have that I just want to make I'm curious just for the future this prvious pavement within 50 ft of the house I it's a new one no it would be just easier for us to say that we've agreed yeah and compromised because I there are some long ass driveways in town and that would this became a General requirement I well according to the newest NFPA uh standards and this came to us at the beginning of the week and we did do research on it quite a bit there was a question whether 600 ft was still an applicable distance for a fire hydrant um to each of the the residences um we went through that and we also went through testing the the the existing one there which is part of the NFP um because of the the width of this being 20 ft um their original read of this was that it was a uh essentially it's synonymous it's it's a way or fire lane and because they they consider it a fire lane the NFPA if I understand it correctly from reading it and and meeting with the fire department no longer support or allow common driveways and I said well that's interesting because Littleton and any other cities and times who work in virtually have you know have it and and I understand from their standpoint so they pointed us to a reference and the reference uh paraphrasing it is from it's it's a fire lane in the city Jeff you're probably familiar with if you're in Harvard Square or any other place if a lot does not have adequate Frontage on a way and it's less than 20 ft it requires a fire lane to surface the second building makes all the sense in the world because if everybody fills up the parking lot in the front how do you get to the second building makes all the sense in the world however there there the way it's now written it can extend to individual residential driveways um and they they supported this and showed us where in the nfba standard it had changed um and that uh the NFPA no longer supports uh common driveways if you had provided a new hydrant at the end of the tea would that have changed would have had you done a cost cost benefit of I don't know that it would have changed um I don't think it would have we we were we were offered you know several means of working um around some of their requests and and ideas one of them was to put a sistern in one of them was to put a hydron in one of them was to sprinkle the houses and the other was to give them the access per the NFPA standard okay in my experience the NFPA is trying to push sprinkling all new houses I would agre and that really bugs me well it bugs me also in certain circumstances but in this one um the cost analysis of putting sprinkler system in a hydrant a sistern or putting in um perable pavers the permeable pavers one out okay um we've done it before we've you know we've dealt with fire lanes and in a lot of different applications so um you know the chief and the safety officer were very kind honestly to to meet with us very quickly and they were they were very educational in terms of the information they provided us I may not agree with it you may not agree with it but they did prevent I'm just curious about our development standards you know Well normally we build the road this is not getting Road built if if you if you think about your open space which we talked about last July app using that as an application here the and we had five units which is what we originally proposed um it it would no longer work um us standards would no longer work with the NFPA uh decisions so I I think on any open space uh Sky Meadow was one sky sky Meadow is that what it's called Sky something or other on um New Town Road up and back by the oh the yeah the it's another one that that would not I don't believe meet the the new FPA standard okay the next uh waiver is the U Street cross-section design in accordance with the minimum design requirements The Proposal is 20 F bu sidewalks at the same it's because it's so small yeah I mean this is kind of the typical cross-section that's from the subdivision regulations which is kind of pretty hefty it's a crown roadway so and then cured on both sides and then a sidewalk so that's kind of the requirements of the subdivision but you know this is a pretty small site so um you know if you don't feel it's necessary then you know it's not necessary cuz it can right now what they have right now is it CH flows off to the side and it goes into the two catch basins and then uh or into the subsurface system or into the swes swes um and stuff like that so that should work um and yeah so I wasn't sure if you wanted to have a sidewalk on there or not or and if not then you know it might be Overkill okay so since we're not building subdivision roadway most of these W was it because we aren't building the subdivision roadway yeah next one is the nearest line of any driver shall not be 50 ft from the intersection of two streets the intersection proposed off of tail streate is the street um driver 30 96 Street the driveway at 96 St street is within 50 ft of the proposed intersection yeah I don't I don't think that's going to be much of an issue there's not going to be much traffic coming out of so um let me see the vertical alignment of the intersection approaches shall be designed to Accord table forage R Associated for the minimum length of the approach grade to the street is within designed speeds of 50 to 20 mes the proposed length of the approach grade is 7.3 so this is basically saying the where the the road basically meets the intersection there should be a 20ft flat section they only have 7.3 but I don't think that's much of a big deal it's not like people are going to be driving very fast how much of a pitch is it there uh it's pretty flat I think it's what is it like 1% 1% the 20 ft is is because of stacking of cars at the intersection or which is unlikely to happen this okay trees shall be planted on both sides of the street and shall be spaced at intervals of 40 ft on Center or less Wave by the board yeah that's the waiver we met with the um tree warten um on the this waiver and um the second and the third one down and um all of them we're not we're not trying to get out from under placing Street trees it's just the location of the street trees be allowed to be worked with the shade tree committee and the uh tree wood so that we're placing them in a place that they don't get damaged in the future so you have trees indicated on this plan we do okay and that's the more or less placement that you we've met the requirement that you in the um PL the subdivisional rules and regulations and we've proposed that we be able to move those where it makes sense so that we don't block fire access or they don't get damaged by snow or any of the others we're not trying to get out from underneath the number it's just location yeah and that's pretty much what the second full so right as far as process goes um it would be helpful if the um if this moves forward for approval before you um you know set a deadline for having um the approved Street tree plan that way they get the work done with the um uh shade tree committee out of the way and we're not waiting for that sometime in the future planting operations and pl rece shall be sh excuse me Mr chair so to what maren just said so would that go into the decision as a condition yeah um and what prior to issuance of the first building permit have the approved approved that's fine yeah okay okay and uh waiver requested allow planting operation to be determin at the final gring of inut from the shade committing want to put that in as a condition of approval to I think that all goes together together catch Bas to mano system of drainage is required catch basins relatively graded the were proposed Sub sub elevation so the Run trans only to the left side of the propos they area area drains are proposed off the site side of the road to collect run off from the roadway so there is no real drainage proposed for this this is all sheet sheet drainage off to the side right so yeah it wouldn't make sense for them to do this because they don't have curbs so is the sheet drainage going to work yeah yeah it should work okay we did that a curve we had a curve on the um truck to area um yeah because that one area was directly discharging into the Basin Y without pre-treatment so they have a curb directing it to the pre-treatment beforehand so it's only a small area but the rest is all sheep flowing like the proposed drain pipes are Ada you want you want we see it all the time ad yeah ADF yeah that's not problem right that's what everyone's used T night yeah yeah everyone use that okay the pipe and L discharge into the Bas shall be above the 25e storm even event ponding elevation a minimum 35 ft set back measure from the top of the inner slope to the property line shall be required infiltration basins pipe inlets are below the 25e storm event ponding elevation the top of the inlet inside slope of the infiltration Bas is proposed 8 ft from the nearest property line the 100e storm elevation within the proposed base is 11 ft plus from the ne lot line so so it it's very difficult to have something discharged into a basin above the 25y year uh floodline so it it's very typic difficult to discharge under it so I think what they're doing is acceptable in terms of that and the other requirement is 35t setback from the from the next property so I think that's kind of more of like a fa factor of safety like if fails it doesn't flood the neighboring property they are saying that it does hold the 100e uh storm and you know the calculations look like it it's right also um the neighboring property is at a higher elevation so there's less of a concern of it flooding onto the neighbor property on both sides uh the other side's also yeah what no the yeah it's just the drainage is all going this way to the street no to the left hand side where that like turn around there's actually a a a grade change of I don't know 4 five ft yeah it's it's it's pretty large the the neighboring house is on a hill and it kind of slopes down so so how far is it actually from the lot line it's not 35 ft it's it's yeah it's like 10 ft 11 ft so it is pretty close to the lot line um we have no burn right and normally when you have a drainage PL your elevated and have a burm we have no burm so we're actually depressing into the existing soil conditions and you think it'll work it won't flood I I mean I don't think it's going to affect the the neighborhood property cuz you know basically their roadways come like this their basin's here and then the neighboring property is up like this so it's going to you know it's going to just flood along the the so we we been contain the 100 years storm uh yeah I mean based off the Cs it it should hold the 100 storm okay as long as it's maintained properly sorry sorry I mean to sorry yeah as long as it's maintained properly it should based off the calculations what we going to say the the math is amazing I mean just just looking at at everything looking at the amount of water and you know one of the criteria on this is determination that the development at this location does not entail unwarranted Hazard to safety or health of future residents and that's part of what I worry about right is that you know whoever is going to be living here is going to be able to maintain it all and and be able to to handle it and what I hear you saying is that the math works and it should all be fine yeah yeah okay and yeah I mean there should be an onm and you know be able to maintain everything so um and that's going to be through the HOA right yeah there there an provided it to um to with proper easements for maintenance and up so do residents generally hire somebody to kind of take care of that for them or do they actually I mean it depends on the complexity of the drain system I mean we've had if you have higher perk rates you have much larger storm water requirements you know holding them and you have stormm water requirements coming off of the roof drains and stuff so the roof drain is pretty simple you know it's it's a it's like a drywall in the old days it's just a lot more um technology in it today but these basins um again based upon the perk rate and maintenance which they brought forward um they grasped and um as long as they maintain them and they clean them the onm usually requires after every major storm you don't want to have any trees and you know leav leaves and build up in there so normally it's it's the most of it's relegated to a landscape person but um there is requirements for the you know the homeowners to maintain it on a regular basis as well they're going to be on their property so it's going to be in the homeowner's property it is every one of them is yeah and last but not least the waiver is requested for written certification of approval of the design by all utilities which are provided provide service within the subdivision so that's one that um current workflow the utility companies don't provide any back notice but I'm assuming everything's going right down the middle of the uh shed driveway and then it's actually actually off yeah a we met with both Littleton light little the water district wanted um the services pulled out of the right of way which is on this new plan that I provided you so every one of the meetings that we had with each of the Departments and all of the requests that they made are on the newest plan and you're not bringing gas on the no no we're not bringing gas gas is a no no and what now um have any questions or concerns about the Wes that they're asking sir so there a lot of them water talk to you and confirm it in writing yeah they all are they um so with the I'm they do their designs after we start breaking ground so I already gave them a preliminary it shows basically that there's going to be a telephone pull that's going to be brought onto the property on the left hand side of the road and then we're going to go diagonally across So to avoid being in the center of the road we going to streak up the right hand side and we're going to bring it to a Transformer that sits between Lots 2 and three which I believe this plan should show it's kind of hard to see my eyes so there's a transform so that was what they discussed they're going to take it uh light department is going to add it into their Cad and once they confirm that we are building the road they'll they already have it in their CAD they're going to come out and just approve everything that's on the site um I met with um the gentleman at the water department uh we had the there's three 1in services going in here cuz we're only doing three home so didn't and the runs aren't very long um we were going to put the curb stops um in the in the middle of the road basically those are the water shut offs the Eerie boxes that come up you turn the water on them um they they had asked us to pull it out of the right away because that's where their commitment basically ends and then everything after that turns private so it's going to be about 5 ft Beyond where the the existing sidewalk is okay and that's where their uh earing boxes you know the black boxes that sit up on top of the ground and that's where their commitment ends and then each one will run each water line will run to each individual home so then that becomes private property um who am I missing you didn't okay did you do I asked if the um you could put the rch lck formula on number what two is that on there I'm going down yes they put the lot formula corre they they changed uh Mark they changed the lot three they changed lot three um for the nitrogen loading and when they did that um they put the the um shape Factor uh on on the lot they just omitted at the first time what is it Anyway I think it was 46 do you remember shape Factor um it's down I might have it off the truck gra okay long as you have it we do anything else any other questions you want to handle this one with the Lisa being in our last meeting as well okay so then there was one more um application oh yeah the shade Tre yeah the the public Street trees MH um there are what three three public Street trees um and Taylor Street is designated a Scenic roadway um we got got the application not in time to advertise for for tonight um but we now that you have the meeting the J June meeting set we could advertise for for that date for that just that just just that on the so at that point you could either continue this hearing to coincide with that one if you wanted to go that route what do you want to I I I think the same thing that 550 King situation that we responded to at 550 King implies here we've gone through many meetings we have detailed answers for all our questions um I think we could close the hearing voted subject to conditions of approval and approval of the shade Tre yeah are you all right with that too no are you speed last thing you ever get the vote on you all right you're not and I can see the face well we're going to be talking again I had an opportunity to go through all this stuff right didn't have a chance to look at the last one but um with that said yeah I'd be fine with that okay thank you and I'd also like to say thank you for green for us to get through all right so then I'll entertain close the public area accept it for the subdivision not for the we haven't even opened it for the uh shade tree okay uh I so move second I'll second all those in favor of closing public hearing I I I I okay um all right so we're going to draft a detailed decision with the conditions as discussed and we'll be able to present those um well in time for your next meeting so then I'll make a motion that we approve the the subdivision subject to conditions of approval being agreed upon by the board right and as a definitive subdivision with no special permits technically it's three out of five so there's no question about being able to accomplish that okay I'll entertain a motion to approve it subject to the conditions being done at a later date it's so move second I'll second all those in favor I I I I thank you Mr chairman do you have to vote the um waivers or is that part of the approval we're going to include the waivers in the in the final decision in the final decision okay but I didn't hear any no I didn't hear I didn't hear any anybody anybody opposed put the W in the final decision thank you you thank you again okay I think that's about it right do we have anything else I think that's it it says adjourn on our on our well I going to take this opportunity to thank you for your 5 years of service Delisa it's been a pleasure it's been a pleasure serving to have you here we wish you all the best of luck I'm not dying no I'm I'm going to see you on Tuesday I know but this is your last meeting and you know we have to than I appreciate that it's been an honor to serve the residence of Littleton you can come and visit us yes yeah you never know I may be out there in the cheering you on you going to be heckling us I'll make a motion we adjourn a second all those in favor that's it poopa what the switch thank you very much all right so thank you