##VIDEO ID:bPkrIrL39fk## Zoom all right so before we go on can did we get Graves reviews for everything that we're going to be seeing tonight we got them for um the Kilburn Street uh applications the three storm Waters it in before the yeah we got a flurry on those storm water one those are sort of like holdovers all right great I'm G to open the meeting okay and get us rocking in and rolling all right good evening everybody and uh wel first of all happy New Year feels late to be saying that but this is our first planning board meeting of the new year on this the 13th of January 2025 I got the year right um as always we are here at the upstairs meeting room at our beautiful Town Hall the the Bing bongs you hear above us on the hour uh are thanks to our local clock winders and yeah if this meeting is being recorded as it always is if you are watching at home and you want to participate you can either log into the zoom uh with a link or with the phone and the info on how to do that is right in our agenda on the town website or you can come on down to town hall I believe that's everything we have to say to start a meeting um and great if there's someone who wants to lead us in the pledge we can say it I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America to the Republic for which stands one nation indivisible Liberty justice for all before the meeting started I celebrated because my chair I I I said it to be tall so it wasn't shorter than everyone and now as I sit here I can feel it yep you get the inching the pneumatics are only so good it would seem I enjoyed my moments of height all right so we uh so everyone knows uh we have multiple public hearings tonight and we'll we'll go through the usual agenda everything but I to start with um public hearings 494 electric AV uh they requested a continuance and will not be here is that correct that is correct and the same is true for 558 and 560 Goodrich Street yes to the 27th okay great so uh if you are here watching for that for those to for 494 electric or 558 and 560 Goodrich we're not going to talk about those tonight uh apologies for having them on the agenda but they requested a last minute uh continuance these things happen but that said we'll open as always with public comment seeing none and there's no hands or anything in Zoom correct I'm not seeing any hands ra great as always if you uh are in zoom and want to speak just use that hand rais feature there will be opportunities for public comment uh in all the public hearings but we don't really neglect public comment by the same token so it raise your hand if you have something to say we might get to you at a different time we'll see um okay uh chair and director's report thank you Mr chair through you to the board just to follow up on the permitting pipeline uh with on the um directors or the chairs some comments on some of these applications no fault of the applicants necessarily we got some peer review inss late and now we have pretty much all the peer reviews and the standing items so um the three that uh we're going to hear about tonight uh 494 is continued and 558 and 560 good has continued we know that but we also got the peer reviews in for 171 Arbor and um the two other ones are are new items so the peer riewer is caught up and the applicants and their Engineers are responding it just a lot of stuff came in late in the week last week and I know we have a cut off date you know it's usually a week before the meeting so we like to say to people get it in in a timely fashion or it won't be considered but um just sort of giving you an update that the pipeline is clearing things are moving forward now and um you know we're getting reports and so there is movement in the right direction uh other than that that's a good thing because we need to start considering the zoning amendments for annual town meeting that being the Adu bylaw which you've already seen so it won't be a lot of heavy lifting there but you know we will have to go through it thoroughly and fix some of the things that need to be corrected Ed and also uh the flood plane bylaw now at the last meeting I um told you there had some um very good questions about hey what's the difference between the firm maps and the flip Lane Maps they are different sometimes but in this case we have heard they are not they are firm Insurance map updates from FEMA so uh we now have the model bylaw from them and our regional planning agency is um having some um guidance sessions so we will be fully prepared to talk about this in a zoning workshop on the 27th and that will kick off our public part of the effort to get everything queued up for annual town meeting and town meeting um consideration so that's the plan and um you know I'll be giving you the model bylaw stuff and the staff report for the next meeting as well as hopefully some of the guidance that's starting to roll in on that so I'm I'm now feeling pretty good that we'll have good handle on it as we approach town meeting uh other than that I'm looking my staff report I can't think of anything else so much as um the MBTA zoning thing interesting development Thursday a highly anticipated for some of us uh Supreme Court decision came down on the Milton uh issue litigation with the MBTA denial and the Supreme Court said yes the state has the right to do this uh yes the executive office of Housing and livable communities has the right to promate regulations for it but no you did not do that properly and so this is basically not enforceable at this time so they can correct that they're going to just have to go through the procedure what the issue was is uh something called the procedures act where you have to send something out for public comment you have to have the AG review it it's a process and they didn't do it not to the letter and so the Supreme Court found that therefore the law not having strict compliance is not enforcable at all usually there's some severability but not in this case so they have to go back and do that and they will but the time being I would my recommendation is we proceed with the plan of going to fall town meeting after we do public engagement you know get anything lined up here all the uh recent um regulations and um plug all that in to something for a fall town meeting and then it's the will of town meeting and what the town wants to do but that's status on that I thought you should know so we're expecting uh despite the Supreme Court saying they didn't do it right we're expecting effectively they'll then proceed to shortly do it right and will be right back where we are now yeah there's a theory that Governor Healey will do an what's the equivalent of an executive order and and just get this done but there also the feeling that that will not fly with the Supreme Court so it was remanded back to a lower court I would just say um you know it's just that's an interesting development but they affirm the right of the state to do it and um for the process that they identified to to be the um origin of the guidance and the regulations and so forth that flowed from it so that all has been confirmed in the case law but till they get this right on the process it sort of influx and it certainly doesn't help their standing um but we have to assume that they'll Rectify that quickly so we should be prepared I think in the fall um you know it implications for other communities like Milton are being being sued by the state and took had their money taken away I'd say they're pretty profound and that they'll get all that back but um for us it's sort of you know with our December 2025 deadline stay of the course all right great that's all I have thank you um yeah wonderful let's dive into public hearings we'll take things in the order as on the agenda again uh and because I see some people have joined us since I've said it uh the public hearings for 494 electric AV and for 558 and 560 goodr Street have been continued to our next meeting at the request of the applicants um so we will not be meeting uh which we won't be having those public hearings tonight and that means we're going to kick off with 791 lemonster road again uh 791 lemonster Road 795 lemonster Road 70 Kilburn Street are three tightly related but technically separate separate projects per application so they're going to kind of we have to treat them separately but if you're not watching real close it might feel a little redundant or flowing into each other these things happen great to Mr Cher Just update if I may real quick because there's been some development as of today uh this is uh these three applications I said have received the peer reviews finally and the applicants responded received all that that should have been uploaded to your SharePoint and there was a further response by our peer reviewer late this afternoon a follow-up response saying I didn't have uh you know a major comments to begin with initially but they seem to have resolved everything so that is the latest development I have just didn't have time to to get that on the SharePoint I wanted to make you aware of that okay great so there was a peer review is fine with the status of their response perfect thank you that is good to know because I read everything else up to that point and so for 791 let's rock and roll even chair representing the owner and applicant Timmer realy trust uh as Mr Riley just mentioned we received a peer review from graves two Fridays ago um with a short list of comments for each application um but for 791 uh we provided a response on Thursday of last week and Graves was kind enough to reply with a follow-up review letter about an hour and a half ago um basically uh documenting that they were okay with our responses if you have not had a chance to review it I'd be happy to go down through the comments quickly um if you have any questions or um if you're okay with Mr Riley's determination then that's okay with me too I can try and forward the board the email but you probably won't get the attachments so yeah I think yeah if you could just certainly go over it yep quickly I think for the sake of the board and also for anyone watching at home absolutely who hasn't sat down and reviewed the public documents absolutely um so this is the letter uh from earlier this evening from graves um I will read their initial comment and then their follow-up comment from earlier tonight the first comment is uh gei which is Graves engineering Incorporated I'll just use the abbreviation gei has no issues relative to compliance with these regulations except as noted in the following three comments um I'll get to those following three comments after this but their follow-up comment was gei has no issues relative to compliance with these regulations the second comment the arrow on the Locust map incorrectly identifies the site as being in lemonster so originally the Locust map which I'll point to the actual point was slightly skewed so it looked like the site was actually in lemonster uh so we've adjusted that and their follow-up comment was acknowledged the label Arrow has been revised the third comment was estimated seasonal High groundwater information needs to be provided for the infiltration Basin aka the grasp Swale their follow-up comment to that uh was the design engineer responded that a test pit was performed in the area of the grass whale on January 3rd the plan was revised to include a summary of the soil testing information and infiltration was removed from the design calculations the revised Hydra uh hydrology calculations show a reduction in the peak Peak runoff rate during the 2-year storm event and a DI Minimus increase of peak runoff rates for Less frequent storm events gei has no issues with the revisions uh the fourth comment was to minimize the potential for inadvertent overflow of storm water from the stone recharge trench to the lemonster road rway and to meet the design intent of conveying any overflow to the Wetland the plan should be revised to include a leader note at the end of the stone recharge trench near lemonster road that requires the contractor to grade the area to direct storm water overflow from the stone recharge trench towards the Wetland their com follow-up comment was acknowledged a leader note was added to the plan requiring the contractor to grade the area adjacent to the stone recharge trench to slope away from lemonster Road and toward the rear of the property I'll just point to where this was added the fifth comment was gei reviewed the hydrology computations and found them to be in order and then there follow comment was a re re reiteration of that uh saying the revised hydrology computations are also in order sixth comment was compliance with the mass DP stormw handbook is reasonable provided that the following comment is addressed and their following comment uh from today was compliance with the mass D stormw handbook is reasonable comment seven was a reiteration of the soil testing which we addressed in comment number three and uh comment eight was uh relative to the north Arrow that it was orientated incorrectly originally it was facing plan up um so we've rotated that to be consistent with the twist of the actual plan itself and then the last comment was relative to the numbering of the lot originally these were all part of a parcel that was identified as 20 Kilburn Street after the subdivision and after we filed this application this lot was assigned a number of 791 lemonster road so we've updated all of our documents to reflect that new number that the lot's been assigned um and and Graves acknowledged that the materials have been updated to reflect that and that is all for 791 Mr chair there's any questions on that I'd be happy to take them um I have a quick question I I know we have um some public feedback I saw I noticed it while going through on uh 70 kilber was there similar I might have missed it I don't know while I was putting files on my computer was there similar public feedback on the two Lemer Road Lots or just on 70 no I believe the only one that I received was specifically relating to 70 K cool great that's I putting things in the right bucket for myself as well as I feel myself slowly inching shorter as I speak I sit here all of a sudden all right great I turn uh well first of all this is well I'll turn to the board first do we have any questions or thoughts excuse me I'm sorry I have one um the um you addressed comment three and comment seven about the soil testing and the infiltration capacity y so the soil testing was performed and it was deemed that it was not capable to infiltrate so the groundwater was less than the estimated season High ground water was less than 2 ft to the bottom of the Basin so for design Cal we removed infiltration from the design and resubmitted kelks uh with it functioning essentially as a detention Basin with the Overflow okay so that so was there a revision required to accommodate the excess due to non infiltration no so we announ the soils here are all C andd rated soils uh so um the peak runoff rates for the post-develop were still di Minimus they were still less than half a CFS per second um during the post runoff rate of increase and uh Graves agreed that that was a diminus increase okay well just just for the board's edification this is another reason that we have peer review and and I'm I'm not just just as a general comment is that that's not something that this group would have caught nope um and it just so happens that apparently the engineering powers that be didn't require modification to accommodate it but it quite possibly could have and and seeing these soils are very tight they're not very accepting of additional water they're they're less porous so that would be and it adjacent to the wetlands which is typically um saturated so just as a general comment for future great thank you thank you I appreciate that comment because that was going to be a question of mine is how how how did this peer review play out in this this was one of the ones that I was seeking additional you know guidance on the the use of a peer rreview so I do appreciate that that comment and it you know helps me as I continue work through the the you know the usefulness of it because it is still a lot of money to you know spend on behalf of the the applicant you know oh Fair great um I'm going to turn to the public who will be anyone speaking will be from Zoom unless they're hiding in the locked closet over there in which case I'm sorry it's locked uh with a pad lock good luck um again this is for 791 lemonster Road public comment go ahead and raise that hand if you want to speak seeing none if that changes go ahead and raise your hand and Logan will let me know and we'll hop back over to you um okay um it sounds to me like Graves feels uh our as our peer reviewer feels everything that changes put everything in order um do we have any other questions or concerns uh before we close the public hearing all right um and so let's uh I could I mean a motion could be to close the public hearing for the storm water management permit for 791 lemonster road so moved second moved and seconded all in favor I I I okay great uh public hearing is closed and um do we have any other deliberation um I'm trying to remember do we have we have standard conditions for storm water don't or or do we even do condition I don't remember if there's conditions we put for storm water or no or do we just approve the permit I don't remember I believe there needs to be some sort of a a deed restriction or some comment on the deed about a requirement of Maintenance doesn't it yeah so we do put I'm just trying to remember um we haven't met much recently I'm a little rusty but um so I haven't heard any requests for additional conditions so if we don't have further discussion and if we do that's fine if we don't there could be a motion to approve the storm water permit for 791 Lemer road with all standard conditions do we Mr Allison you have your pensive face on I do I CU honestly like like like you've said it's been a while um these have been persistent pain in our behinds um and I want to make sure that we get this right um we did change recently about um requiring certain things and quite honestly I don't remember exactly the extent of the those changes but we did make it standard I believe to record the CH that because we had a big Hollow like it took us a while to figure out what we wanted there because we were debating back and forth on what was and wasn't effective so but if we want to delineate I'm fine with that too well I I think we just made sure that it's the maintenance requirements are listed on the deed of the property I believe so with all standard conditions and if necessary that the maintenance that the maintenance requirements be recorded on the deed sure I'll even so move that one would that work your your question was to him oh I don't know why oh uh standard conditions uh standard standard condition we're trying we're a little rusty on exactly what's listed in our standard condition conditions so standard conditions and if not otherwise specified in the standard conditions uh to uh also to record on the theed the maintenance requirements yeah uh standard conditions have been the same in the permits and so as to whether they're separate ones for the storm water as opposed to site plan review we do have separate ones for storm waterer yeah so then you'd want to use the special permit ones for with that and deep recording is in either case the requirement okay great so it sounds like we have a so moved on that uh Second moved and seconded so the so moved only applied if if we had all our ducks in a in a row and are we are we it sounds like the answer is yes good okay moved and seconded all in favor I great 791 check hey um before we move on to the next one I also want to remind us that we do need to move in second and continue the public hearing for 494 oh that's a good point I'm I will thank you for that I will have us uh continue the public hearing for 494 in 558 and 560 Goodrich at the end of the list just because that way sounds good people's business thank you mat appreciate it sorry Mr Allison 795 lemonster Road still here Ryan Proctor Dillis Roy representing the owner and applicant uh similarly to the other one we received a follow-up letter from graves engineering earlier this evening um once again if it's okay with the board I'll just go quickly through that letter um in summary the comments are very similar uh the first comment uh is gei has no issues relative to the compliance with these regulations except as noted in the following two comments the second comment is similar to the uh note comment relative to the Overflow of the recharge trench uh and the follow-up comment from this evening was uh a leader note has been added to the plan requiring the contractor to grade the area at the end of the trench to slope Northerly Northerly towards the Border bordering vegetated Wetlands I'll just point to this again uh the third comment was a requirement to provide a uh soil testing within the Basin the response to this uh acknowledged the design engineer responded that a test pit was performed in the area of the infiltration Basin on January 3rd the plan was revised to include a summary of the soil testing information and a groundwater mounding analysis was submitted gei has no issues with the groundwater Mound analysis or the data used the fourth comment is relative to the hydrology computations uh gii says uh gii says the found hyd gei reviewed the hydrology computations and found them to be in order and there was no further comment necessary the fifth comment compliance with the m EP storm handbook is reasonable provided that the following comment is addressed uh their follow-up comment was that no further comment is necessary six was a mirror uh redundant comment of soil testing again the seventh comment uh the plan needs to include labels for the proposed topographic Contours at the infiltration Basin so originally we did not include labels within the Basin itself um we uh we added those uh Graves acknowledged topographic contour labels were added to the plan and then their last comment was relative again to the numbering of the lot um this one is was identified originally as lot one we've now updated our documents to reflect the 795 address that it was assigned at the beginning of this permitting process and that is all for this Mr chair if there's any questions I'd be happy to take them great do we have any questions about 795 lmin Road seeing none oh don't have any questions for the for the uh for the engineer but I another note to the board is that um so they were they had more than 2 feet of groundw to depth to the groundwater and then so the grounding the mounding analysis just make sure that when it's receiving as much water as it's going to that's still going to be more than 2 ft below yes it means the mound will not breach above the bottom of the Basin so basically it's it's similar to the last one but they did have the depth and they had to perform an additional analysis just to assure that it would maintain that twoof foot separation just FYI then that's and that's the other thing that we got out of this review thank you know actually I want to take one moment just to actually give a shout out to Jeff Walter Graves engineering for getting this response back to us today because that last minute respon really Smooths this process out for everybody we are that's a thank you and we're grateful um Second and again public comment this would be for 795 lemonster Road go ahead and throw that hand up in Zoom seeing none and if you do want to comment and you're struggling just get the uh hand up and we'll get to you great um seeing no public comment no further questions from the board is there a motion to close uh close the public hearing for 795 lemonster Road don't move oh second moved and seconded all in favor I great public hearing is closed deliberation um I like it when things feel easy yeah if there's no other comment or discussion we could have a motion um about for a decision on 795 Lemer road we've got a recommendation here our staff notes move to close the public hearing and approve with standard conditions yep okay that was my motion oh so we've already closed the public hearing so the motion would be to so move to approve the storm water conditions yep okay I will second moved and seconded all in favor all bangar rang two down one to go 70 Kilburn Street all right uh lastly Ryan Proctor Dillon Roy representing the applicant um similarly we received a follow-up from graves engineering earlier this evening I will once again just go quickly through the letter for 70 Kilburn Street the first comment uh gei has no issues relative to compliance with these regulations except as noted in the following comment uh second comment is again relative to groundwater uh and the needing to provide soil testing in the area of the proposed Basin the follow-up comment from earlier this evening uh acknowledged the design engineer responded that a test pit was performed in the area of the infiltration Basin on January 3rd the plan was revised to include a summary of the soil testing information and a groundwater mounding analysis was submitted gei has no issues with the groundwater Mound analysis or the data used the third comment gei reviewed the hydrology computations and found them to be in order and there was no further comment necessary comment four compliance with the mass D stormwater handbook is reasonable provided that the following comment is addressed and there was no further comment necessary comment number five was again the requirement to provide soil testing in the area of the Basin uh number six was gei has no issues relative to the to storm water management and there was no further comment necessary and then the last comment was again uh relative to the numbering of the lot um we've updated all of our information to provide the oh I'm not showing the plan yet uh 70 Kilburn street is reflected on all of our revised documents I'll just flip to it so you can see the plan but that is all great thank you um I'll call uh the board's attention to the fact that in our um SharePoint drive for this project we do also have uh an email as part of the record um from M uh Joan Hoy as well with concerns about water in the water runoff in the area that I'm I don't fully understand where exactly the location is we're discussing with that um but I wanted to make sure we were aware that that's in there as well um but I'm also you know is uh are is uh M hoy in chat per chance who could speak to this a little bit not seeing a hand raised don't see the name listed okay um all right questions comments from the board I remember when join was here um I believe that she was the abutter directly across the street mhm um I can I can tell you from personal experience that there is often ponding there when we have excessive rainfall um and I think that this site is it's it's raised up a little bit for the septic and the and the foundation but I think for the most part it's going to shed away from the road and I believe those were her concerns but uh I don't know and then and I do believe that her her property is uphill from from this property so the impacts would not be felt by her necess necessarily but maybe by the roadway uh and okay I see the date on the email is uh mid I apologize the date on the email is mid November so that would track with our discussion at that time as well and then we met after the email okay cool I I saw it in there today I didn't check the date I was thinking it was more recent no that gives scope thank thank you good looking out though I'm glad yeah it's always important to look out for the voter's comments we did discuss that at the opening meeting as well and Mr Allison is correct this this property sits down from the road with the exception of the septic so um any any water that are problems with the street will more like more than likely become problems with this lot rather than a Butters okay believe I got this email the other public comment so if the board could afford that to me and you receive it um if it was sent mid November oh this even email is directly from the SharePoint Drive okay it was sent to not seen that or aware of it okay okay thanks all right great um so okay wonderful so we have talked about it I I feel I remember the conversation with that with that reminder and yeah no I'm personally comfy with it um other questions or thoughts from the board and then we'll go to public comment I have a question it looks like you're actually pulling water off the roadway and you've got some grading shown in the right of way is that true so the entrance for the driveway is um about at Road grade and then the driveway does slope down from from the roadway okay so that's the driveway grading I'm seeing yes okay thank you be very shocking if the entrance for the driveway wasn't at about Road grade yeah like that's 3 five foot difference could really be dramatic on the car test your shocks yeah um great public comment this is for 70 Kilburn Street seeing No Hands Up In Zoom um again if you're looking for it if your hand comes up in a moment we'll still take it if there's no other hands popping up though and if there's no other questions or thoughts from the board we could close the public hearing motion to close public hearing for 70 kilogram streets I'll second moved and seconded all in favor okay it's closed um great any th any other thoughts or deliberation go ahead just globally still wondering you know contemplating um I think this one might be unique where it was three three Parcels by the same applicant just where uh we called for the uh the um peer review so that is it fair to say that it was up to $6,000 ated expense for the applicant based on those three peer reviews uh I don't know what the final cost actual cost but I think our motions were up to $2,000 per peer revie MH so that's just and I'm not necessarily looking for an answer you know for this comment this evening it's just stating what I'm working through in my head is are the corrections that were brought forward you know uh worthy of um two you know up to $6,000 in cost on the applicant So Okay I uh per I mean I personally very much value the peace of mind and there were certainly things here that what one we saw changes in at least two of the three lots I don't remember about 70 that did need to happen because there were some and I don't mean just labeling changes there was some about grading and everything too as well as catching some issues that in this instance wound up not being a problem with the uh soil with the water infiltration for the soil and everything but in some ways to my understanding that's a bit of luck because if soil and things had been different that catch could have been could have been a bigger deal um and I I mean personally I always come down the side of man we got to protect the water because it's getting it wrong could have could have disastrous consequences and frankly getting it right is still only doing so well for us with all the other changes environmentally we're having but it's a fair point because we don't want to place undue burden either so to follow up on that comment um so in my in my view what having the peer review does is give further protection to the existing residents abing the sites um it it could quite possibly be that any problem with the system could cost a homeowner existing next to a new home $1,000 a year in perpetuity and possibly more or possibly less um and I I think that that's I think that's a valuable service for us as we approve projects for the town and we're supposed to be looking up for the best interest of the town and the people that live there so I guess I would just feel better if we were actually spending like the the quote Town's money versus reaching directly into the applicant's pocket and compelling them to spend and I'm I'm really not arguing against the whole concept I'm just trying to wrap my head around it it's just you know that that specific point of reaching into the you know government essentially reaching right into the applicant's pocket and requiring them to spend you know additional funds um to basically um confirm what they've already paid a professional to do and it would be you know in a in a simple situation if if there was a problem and the problem became apparent and it was a problem you know specifically for that homeowner that they then would have a beef to to go uh you know against the engineering firm and their you know their bonded insurer and and work it out I understand it's it's it's complicated by the fact it could have impact on a an adjacent um a butter or the town and I would think the same uh recourse could be sought through the the original uh engineering design um I mean there's just there isn't money in the town budget for and I'm under the impression that I mean peer revieww is very standard practice for this board and in general uh for other planning boards so um I believe is something and I I would welcome comments if I am incorrect on this um from the public who's here but peer review is generally anticipated and the kind of thing that's budgeted for to ahead of time is my understanding and so that factors in I don't think it's a surprise when we ask for peer review um I think that factors in early on as part of the grow overall budget and if that's incorrect um and often catches people off guard i' I'd value that info but I don't think that's the case um all right any other discussion on 70 Kilburn Street hearing none um I would look for a motion uh motion to approve uh with standard conditions uh approve as proposed with standard conditions CL what's that was the hearing closed yes yes yep fair question thank you we did close the hearing and uh we have a motion to approve for 70 Kilburn Street as proposed with standard conditions I will second moved and seconded all in favor all right okay um was that everybody I okay cool great rock and roll then we're all set thank you so much thank you very much for your time appreciate it woo three public hearings done um again 494 electric and 558 and 560 Goodrich are going to be continued to our next meeting we'll do the formality for that uh couple public hearings from now next up would be 171 Arbor Street um storm water management permit and special permit for a common driveway should have uncommon driveways that would be exciting I think by the definition here used that's just a regular driveway oh yeah no but see not driveways that are not common but uncommon driveways that would be I don't know paved with Jell-O or something ready rock and roll good good evening Brian maret Mardi engineering uh we were here before you back in December uh the plan was peer-reviewed by Graves engineering um we did receive a comment letter from them last week end of the week uh had a few comments and there were only two comments in particular that required a plan change uh or an addition to the plan um I don't know if the board if everybody's seen the comment letter was the comment letter in SharePoint and I missed it that could easily be the case I um but so I haven't seen the comment letter but I'm happy to hear just the I I'm personally happy to only hear the parts that are here's what needs so there were two I don't have to read through um there were seven comments um but five of the seven were just acknowledging that they they met the regulations so the two comments that he had made that required a plan change was uh he had asked for the earthwork information to be added to the plan so for the total development I added U just a note here on the bottom we've got a a total total cut of 81,7 cubic yards and a fill of about 800 cubic yards which is just down in the beginning of the entrance here um just changing the change in the driveway entrance like we discussed at the last meeting required a little bit of fill there CU I lessen the slope of the road so uh that was added to the plan and then he had asked for a construction entrance just to be shown so all that is is a a 4in r wrap stone for the first 50 ft of the driveway for erosion control uh practices to keep um the roadway clean to get the mud out of the tires of the trucks as they come and go from the site so so that's those are the two comments those were addressed I revised the plane stamped them sent them back to graves in in uh to the town um today okay so uh obviously being sent back today we didn't get anything back from graves but it was like I said two simple modifications to the plan and uh the detail for the construction entrance was at the detail sheet so if you have any questions if you Happ to answer them it may have uh already been addressed because I know the oh the comment is more recent okay um I saw there was a uh concern in the Board of Health review as well have you seen that no uh I'm this was on open go um yeah would I be able to just read it out or I don't I uh cuz any comments in open goov should go to the applicant anyway right okay cool was it was it about the well like a well being located yeah proximity to the Rain Garden yeah yeah yeah that and that's that's all basically the septic system see the lots are big enough they can be moved anywhere further away the only one that was impr proximity to the Rain Garden was this one and this well we can easily move it to the backyard and be you know well over 50 feet away um this would be reviewed and approved as part of the Board of Health and the showable Board of Health when we actually do the septic system designs in the future so we haven't designed the septic systems yet because the Lots haven't been cut and the earth work hasn't happened so once the Earth is removed these locations and we can do the test painting in the locations and elevations where the actual seic systems will be installed right because we're only really looking at storm water and uh the common driveway too yes okay cool got it that makes sense so it's worth knowing but we don't have to that doesn't really apply to our decisions today yeah great okay super and those are really the only details at the end that you know we're not going to go make those designs until we get these things approved first yeah so no that that makes sense I just I saw it I wanted to call it it out and then oh yeah no that's not yeah and there was a comment to offline just about the well um on 155 so this is the property that we've gone to zba now to um to work out the details of lot line reconfiguration so that was all done we did go to the Board of Health about the well set back to the lot line and uh they granted us the variance it reduced the well setback to this lot line by 2 feet um but we have a deed restriction on this full 50 ft and we gave the a butter uh this parcel on the back which basically adds an additional 50 ft of setback to that well so they they uh voted in favor to grant us that waiver great that's already been done and obtained for the relief special permit for the existing well so do we have an anr and approved anr for all of that we're going to as soon as this gets approved it's all done and ready to file we talked about okay okay um questions from the board or comments yeah some people are going to hate me for bringing this up but we have um in our regulations saying something about a maximum percentage of a frontage of a reduced Frontage lot I think being encumbered by um are you familiar with this being encumbered by easements is anybody familiar with that we ran into this oh I don't I don't know but I I have no idea no frankly we ran into this problem up by TR Town um but what easement uh so the I forget the number percentage but there was some specific percentage of the Frontage that could not be encumbered by an ement and I think I you said something about restriction right well we just put a deed restriction so that they wouldn't clear the trees in this first okay so that's not that's not an easement no there's no easement it's just a deed restriction on the property okay and they all have their own full Frontage and accesses through the common driveway excellent I do have another question though that great sorry you only get one today I'm going to move no go ahead so that gray area just beyond the fork the first Fork there what is that that's so I made a a 30X 40 just gravel area turn around for vehicles okay that is new then yeah so we added that and I added a um the regulation States 8 by 25 parking area here S turn around here as well beautiful love it so rather than using the individuals driveway for a turnaround you just created a separate area that's good yep super I'm going to turn to the public hey public this is 171 ARB Street if you've got comments on 171 Arbor Street raise that hand seeing none but if it takes you a moment that's okay um golly I like it when thing feels like things are going smoothly and if Graves doesn't have concerns that's I mean other concerns that's nice other comments questions from the board I will just remind us that this is our first executed common driveway permit under the new regulations is it the first oh maybe it is I feel like we did one we finished the one on Goodridge but that wasn't that was just a regular okay Goodridge Street was we've had an application for a different part of Goodridge street but I don't think they came to us with the common driveway yet okay oh they swear we didn't there but you may well be correct I I believe you so okay um now this is a public hearing for the storm water management permit and for the special permit for the common driveway is it still one public hearing or is it two public hearings like can we clo do can we still close both of them together and then you can close in one motion both public he and then we have separate votes for the two okay are do we have any other qu I mean questions or thoughts or comments before we look at closing i' just like to comment that this is this is proof in the pudding this is less than a year after we made the new bylaw that it's being taken advantage of and it's providing I want to say great relief to the owner of the property by allowing them to get three lots out of it whereas they came to us before for four lots and it went through a full sub division application so this is uh I'm not I'm not a big fan of it being on the corner but there's nothing we can do about that the driveway um but I think that this is this is proof in the pudding that we do good things when we come up with new bylaws in general and thank you to the town for approving that one um yeah no I'm I'm happy I like to see it working and just nice okay we uh hearing or seeing no real desire for more discussion we could have a motion to close the public hearings for 7 171 Arbor Street for the storm water management permit and for the special permit for a common driveway so moved second moved and seconded all in favor I hi hi okay public hearings uh public hearing is closed and now we can deliberate um to me it looks like everything's great looks like everything's lined up and nice and easy I don't want to any other thoughts or do we want to have a couple motions I see some thinking faces going on so I'm giving them a moment I'm good okay thank you great let's start with uh the storm water management permit uh do we want to I mean the motion could be to approve the storm water management permit for 171 Arbor Street with all standard conditions so moved second moved and seconded all in favor I I great now the next is a special permit as a reminder special permits do require a super majority vote so that would be four out of the five of us just general procedural thing um it's a common driveway it works um do we have stand do we have uh I'm sure we have standard conditions but is the approval of the special permit would just be to would it be to a motion to approve the special permit for the common driveway for 171 Arbor Street with all standard conditions would we need if you're asking me if if you speak of standard conditions that the board has adopted in each pering scenario I don't have them oh you don't and I can't find them so I need I would need all those standard conditions you in some way shape or form approved as a body previously either in the standard operating procedures or somewhere where there's a record of that CU I do not have that or I cannot find it okay that doesn't mean it isn't in there somewhere but I cannot find it we have them for storm water we have them for site plan I'm confident in that you have decision criteria and they should reflect that or um standard conditions are more operational things about what happens after permits are issued yes and that's I know we have that for storm water INF for site plan because we've had those and they're very um I mean the standard they what we do every time I yeah special that's something the board voted motioned and voted on and I can't I cannot confirm what they are for each okay the permits you issue so if you have a if you can go back if the board can go back and what you understand are those special conditions I would need them to draft a proper decision okay I can I can go back and do some research yeah on the prior docs on that because we have them um and I think I can take them up um but I don't think we have standard conditions for the special permit for common driveway I don't know what would be required for this is where my knowledge is lacking in that okay we here's the special permit for the common driveway and now they can I mean that gives them the permission to start building the common driveway cor yeah it would be very similar to the other standard convictions which are derived from construction standards okay so I would or recording standards so got to be recorded at the registry so there's a legal definition and record of it um and then certain things along the way before issuance of building permits and certificates of completion to reflect that it's consistent with what was what you approved because you have no way of knowing once off it goes y it starts under construction and those standard condition conditions sort of dictate how the project achieves compliance according to what you approved that's what they do so that's what you're looking for is post approval 10 or 15 they're usually 10 or 15 yep it does not vary between the size of the project because they're standard and then the special conditions above and beyond that specific to the project are things that you that the applicant in the town couldn't agree on in the permitting uh PR process or something like that but I just you know I want to make sure I have the right ones that you I can the last on you approved I can dig like I said I can dig I am 95% confident I can dig that out in Fairly short order I can make that the next couple days yeah okay um but if you don't have ones on C driveways um I what I the motion shouldn't be standard conditions it should probably be I was thinking the motion could be to include the standard conditions for site plan approval that would do it because we do have those recorded it's affec effectively the same um I think that works it should work there's another thing we need to ensure is taken care of is the the the maintenance of the common area we need some kind of a legal description I think don't we we will yes you're right because there's going to need uh this is a cuz sure enough out of three people somebody's not going to want to pay the plow bill right I mean when it comes right down to it y if it's a common driveway they shall all be equally sharing the expenses incurred by having a common driveway do we I think it's in our um so in our regulations we have U decision criteria approval criteria right I think that's one there's a reference to that I think that's one I think that's in there and again those are but those are sort of pre-approval you m you know it should be designed this way you must meet these standards do we have on record the uh did the applicant submit um hey here's how the common driveway is going to be handled uh in terms of a HOA or whatever I didn't see anything like that in the narrative okay so so let yeah I think um I'm going to prepare a draft decision let me take a stab at it if you have any thoughts or ideas that's a great one that having a you know because Town's not going to own it we've so we've we've done other the common drives in town too we can go back and see what those approvals look like and send them back to you yeah if you want to look at look at the decision or whatever how then then you can look at it when at the next meeting when You' go to sign it okay is that and it'll be in my staff report so you have a little time to say h all right so we're thinking we would still approve tonight but then have to approve the final decision or are you thinking we would do the vote next meeting I'm thinking you do the vote tonight okay because the only uh you know issues procedural one as to the standard conditions not the project itself would be so then you then you have still have all the authority at your disposal the next meeting before you sign the actual decision you can review it beforehand that's what I do okay so even though we've granted approval we have authority to revise the conditions well you're you're approving the project subject to the decision signing the decision okay review and signature of the decision you don't do that tonight right so um it's sort of understood that there will be review of a decision to be filed and you have the the option of the right as long as you don't depart completely from I was going to say if all of a sudden you impose all these conditions we never discussed right so I mean so we legally we can approve it and set conditions at another meeting yes okay okay so I think the motion would be to approve the special permit for the common driveway for 171 Arbor Street including all standard conditions we use for site plan approval and an additional and in addition condition that um the legal framework be set up for the shared for the HOA or similar shared maintenance of the common driveway to be recorded on their deeds right yeah that sound good that's right yep okay can that be so moved yes it can so move second phrased it that way on purpose so we didn't have to say it again moved and seconded all in favor I wonderful Bangarang thank you I'll get you a draft of that okay it goes out with my staff report so you see okay and I'll I'll email you tomorrow the old one that's great thank you okay um great excuse me we have too many two more uh public hearings tonight public it's amazing we could drop two public hearings and we're still chalk full of them tonight but we're moving at a really good clip everybody thank you um okay next up would be 230 flat hill road request for modification to site plan approval is that um this is going to be a new public hearing just that so we're going to have to open it um I have a couple questions about what this is procedurally um and I don't know if we want to do that before we open the hearing or after we open the hearing uh I guess I'll put out my my question is kind of I look at it and I see that um we are so where uh modification to plan approval for a almost 30-year-old site plan yes never done that before it's always been like oops we need to do this shortly thereafter I procedurally how does this work okay well uh so you have whether 30 or 50 years ago you've got a Cy plan or a special permit or both mhm in effect for that project or the property and so those conditions remain with the property they run with the land mhm and so if somebody wants to do something different from the approved plans that are recorded uh then you know we have a process for that obviously it's a modification request now you we have sort of criteria and um as to whether it's minor and then can be approved administratively or it should be a public hearing open to the public and notified to Butters so what has happened in this case is the applicant has willingly submitted themselves to the lad Y which is they were entitled to ask for the former um and so they've skipped the process of having you determine that it was a major modification requiring a public hearing and here they are they've filed okay so that's why it's before you as a public hearing request for modification it's changing the originally approved special permit and site plan that was approved uh coincidentally and um so that's a modification and and that's what they're seeking approval for what's your criteria it's same criteria as in the regulations as they stand a new request under the existing regulations all right I get it I'm left with like a million more questions but they don't need to be answered tonight just about when would it be a new plan versus a Irrelevant for tonight um yeah they're because they're requesting to modify the original 30-year-old plan they can do that no it's F and um they're not changing the you know use or the intent or or how was it why was approved originally we actually still have those regulations there only bylaws so neat just something a little different there we go now we know okay um M clerk would you like to read us to open the public hearing uh the lunenberg planning board will hold a public hearing on January 13th 2025 at 6:05 p.m. Town Hall 17 Main Street lunenberg Mass to hear and review an application for requests for modification to site plan approval pursuant to 25-8 point4 F of the code of the town of lunenberg by Trustees of The Village at flath Hill for addition of a 10x 12T shed to house a sampler unit required by the D for the wastewater treatment facility subject property information the location is 230 fla Hill Road assessors map 84 parcel number 30 owner is Trustees of The Village at flath Hill at 50 courland Circle you can view the materials online at lunenberg ma. portal. opengov domcom uh via an email request to the planning office Administrative Assistant l o c o n n l l at lunberg ma.gov and iners at the planning office at 960 Mass Avenue in lunberg great all right so do we have a representative of the applicant here tonight wonderful yes good evening Michael kenific I represent The Village at flat hill good evening everybody oh I'm gonna pause you for one second before we get going um do we have the ability to make it slightly louder no is a fine answer just it's this is just on the edge of my the volume coming from the television is right on the edge of my ability to hear clearly I'm going to defer to the sound booth want to hear the zoom out more yeah if we could please thank you all right let's give it another shot okay uh is it louder now yes it is okay good sorry about that um so as I mentioned I'm Michael keni I represent The Village at flat hill uh I have two of the trustees with me tonight Edward Pratt and and um Wayne garpy I think we have Roy wood as well he might be in a a waiting room uh he uh works for great blue heron management which is uh the company that's currently uh managing the Wastewater facility uh uh treatment plant for for the village of flat hill which is uh it's a 45 home Community um as you had discussed before uh you the hearing this is actually yes it's a 30-year-old development there was a um site plan approval and a special permit issued back in 1996 for a planned residential area uh it did not include um a separate building in the wastewater treatment area which is located off of Portland Circle um there was a shed uh that was put up um I believe it was sometime in 2016 uh not that important uh on some common area property be behind 10 all the way uh by the uh the prior owner of ten all theway uh the owner now is Ned Pratt who's the trustee sier hit uh tonight um there was a zoning complaint made about a year and a half ago maybe a year ago uh about that building uh it's a 10 x 12 shed the same kind of buildings that you see outside of Lowe's and Home Depot for sale out uh out on the sidewalks um there was a zoning complaint like I mentioned uh it kind of went through the appeals process uh during the appeals process the village of flat hill you know just wanted to work with the town decided Hey listen we'll take the shed again it's it's a portable shed easily moved uh and they put it in Ned Pratt's driveway which is where it is now uh with the permission and oversight of the building department um so what we want to do in the uh the application for tonight is a modification of the site plan uh we want to move that shed from NED driveway uh and put it back in the uh wastewater treatment facility area uh that area right now uh it's shown on the plan that U Helen Ward provided to you um it's B it's located off of Portland Circle uh there's a paved way paved access way that's been there for I think almost 30 years now uh there are photos in your package of the way uh there also photos of the uh the area where the shed would go uh the area right now is it stands has some collection tanks um it has a pumping station building um and it's uh you know it's kind of a opened up area in the woods uh quite quite away from anywhere anybody would ever see it um the closest building lot is the EST starleta property uh in the building as proposed would be 254 ft away from their property line um this is not a building anybody would see uh it's tucked away in a you know forested area with uh several Acres of forest surrounding it uh so it wouldn't be anything that would be you know an isore or anything like that um as far as your standards I take I took a look at those this morning um most of them don't really come into a play um there's already an existing road to the area um so we wouldn't have to build anything in addition to in addition to what's already on the ground uh that's been there for decades at this point um there would be no increase in traffic uh it's literally just Mr wood driving to the site every once in a while to do monitoring um there would be no atct parking as I mentioned uh absolutely no clearing of any kind of vegetation uh as I mentioned the are is already cleared out um the won't there won't be any additional exterior lighting to the shed um power power to the shed would be provided from the facility so there wouldn't be any more utilities running down that access road uh to the wastewater treatment area um and uh actually let me the shed itself um like I said it's 10 10 by 12 uh the plan is to put a sampler unit in it uh which is required required by mass d uh sampler is basically a refrigerator uh where they you know refrigerate samples um in addition to the refrigerator there would be some plastic containers uh and some paper files uh and literally nothing else in this building um it's it's a pretty straight and simple and um I we think relatively minor uh project that we're looking to um looking for approval for tonight and um we hope we get the approval uh as being mentioned it's it's vital uh for the operation of the Wastewater facility treatment system uh and it's also required by d uh we can't leave the sampler outside really it's a refrigerator and would be subject to the weather and that would be problematic so I don't think I have anything else to add I think I hope that describes everything that we're hoping to accomplish tonight but if anybody has any questions I'd be more than happy to answer those so to make sure I want to make sure I understand M this is about the addition of a shed yeah near The Pump Station Building looks to be about in the looks to be in the common area about 250 ft from the closest residence I I don't know what we call the thing that looks like a lot line but probably isn't because of something else I don't know how this gets classified here but um and then an easy 600ish feet from Courtland Circle more or less yeah and it's it's a 10x 12 shed am I am i m that's all we're talking about here right yeah yeah okay um yeah so I I believe in your package you do have a couple of pictures of the shed itself yes it's a yellow shed with black shutters it literally looks like something that you would buy from Home Depot or Lowe's or anything else no we have that in the images of the pump station as well MH yep okay nice and easy we we have some letters in our packet as well but this seems to me pretty straightforward um questions or comments from the board before we go to public comment seeing none all right um public comment you have um a comment go ahead and use that hand raised feature in Zoom I'm seeing none currently Logan just okay great um I have a question he mentioned somebody may be in the waiting room there's nobody in the waiting room right no no there was no waiting room right here great okay no public comment uh I'll turn back to the board um I guess my my my thought is this seems delightfully straightforward need a shed put a shed not going to disrupt anything um am I small too is uh 10 x 12 even require a building permit in this town 200 200 oh wow okay yeah so this is a real great okay um just again we are this is a modification of site plan approval so this is a straight majority vote when the time comes super just making sure I understanding everything I would add the term special permit oh there is orally approved and recorded as a special permit approval okay so does modifying a special permit require a super majority it does okay super um great if there's no other questions from the board we could close the hearing and move to deliberate uh motion to close the hearing for uh 2:30 flath Hill I will second moved and seconded all in favor I I okay hearing is closed and uh deliberate seems easy to me yeah yeah so we could have a would the motion just be to approve the request for modification to site plan approval and special permit for 230 flat hill road as proposed as proposed with standard conditions because again if a site plan modification is treated like the the actual initial application okay so we still need to okay so you just say with standard conditions even though they don't really matter here but okay I'm fine with I didn't know how I didn't know if the old ones carried over or not I'm fine with that uh okay so it sounds like the motion would be to approve the request for modification to site plan approval in special permit uh for 230 flut Hill Road as uh as proposed proposed thank you that's the word um with uh standard conditions I would check with the applicant attorney if that sounds right is that good with you coun yes that's fine yes okay so moved second moved and seconded all in favor I I I super duper thank you very much thank you we get it signed at the next meeting okay thank you have a good night and finally um 255 Sunny Hill Road storm water management permit no questions on this one I can I can read it yeah okay thanks uh the lunenberg planning board will hold a public hearing on January 13 2025 at 605m Town Hall 17 Main Street lunenberg Mass to hear and review an application for storm water management permit pursuant to 24-1 of the code of the town of lunenberg by mn12 main LLC for construction of a single family home and Associated site work subject property information the location is 255 Sunny Hill Road assessor map 92 parcel number 35 owner is m122 main LLC 76 noer Road in Westminster Mass 01473 you can view the materials online at lunenberg ma. portal. opengov docomo o n n l l lunenberg ma.gov and you can view it in person at the planning office at 960 Mass Avenue in lunenberg Mr chair if I may before we dive in please we have sort of a um of a status issue are you aware that the uh property has pass due taxes on it no nobody told you okay no I hate to do that to you but uh so we can proceed but any motion I think would be um you know prior to issuance of any permit any additional permits any property taxes and rear must be PID and full kind of thing all right good Treasurer left a note in open go I just have to make mention of it okay great and that gets checked on every application that we get right yes okay okay all right great Ryan maret macate engineering um as you mentioned here on behalf of MN 122 Main LLC um you're all familiar with this parcel uh we were here before with a bigger development we were permitting multiple Lots under one stor on a permit and were denied back in September uh so we're here to develop one lot at this point in time um it's up off of Sunny Hill the lot's high and dry we're outside of any buffer zones to the wetlands um so our plan here is to get a storm on of permit and start developing one lot uh this particular parcel we've been in discussions with Public Works uh there's a drainage outfall from the roadway here at the um I guess the the Western most corner of of the property where catch basin Sunny Hill discharge excuse me um they've caused some erosion and as it flows downhill it's been running to the north up into other uh ab's backyards so uh in discussions with DPW we've agreed to pick up where the stor watered discharges uh and we're going to convey it through a a rip wrap Channel back to the rear of the property keep it on the property uh control it with with a stone water basein slow it down and let it uh discharge um as it does eventually you know it always got to this big weton system in the back uh but we're going to collect it now and control it so uh the the lot is about 2.2 Acres uh meets all the zoning requirements for lotw through the house uh lot size for the Zone there's an existing access driveway here uh on the property we're maintaining the same location of the driveway uh to access the house um this particular um this particular location was one of the the Lots we had been looking at before um so we do have septic testing on the properties and again we'll do all that septic testing and uh the revised designs with uh Board of Health uh After we receive hopefully our approval here with the planning board for stone water permit uh the intent here is col the storm water through roof leaders from the roof um and then the lot is graded right now to collect the driveway and routed to the Swale uh so both the rooftop and that is going to be routed to the Swale and the Basin in the back of the lot has been size to exceed uh the 1in water quality volume which meets your regulations for both 90% TSS and 60% phosphorus um so really that's it uh if there's any particular questions I'd be happy to to answer them for you okay and again we do understand this will all be reviewed by Grace moving forward you it still has to be reviewed okay great um we still being requested ired to request that review do we need to vote to request that the review from graves or has it already had where are we on he's been sent the plans I just procedurally I'd always ask for the board to make a motion and vote can we do that in the middle of the public hearing just to get that out of the way sure it's your pleasure yep sure uh let's just get that squared away so there's no issue uh motion to I don't this is newer so I don't know the exact wording to use motion to motion to require submission of $2,000 for purposes of peer review by the applicant um to be assigned to uh Graves engineering so moved second moves and seconded all in favor I I okay great making sure that's that paperwork is taken care of um otherwise this uh well questions or comments from the board I'm okay so I'm trying to kind of process the contour lines here a little bit just for my own understanding of what I'm looking at um do I do I see it just in terms of envisioning this in my head it looks is this a pretty steep slope the whole way yeah okay it's a steep slope so it's coming down the driveway um it's it's a basically a walk out so you driving up top it's a walk out basement out the back so we're catches some grade with with uh with the house um we've got a I know 20 30t backyard we've got a two and slope to get us down to where the septic system is located and then with the septic we're at grade and then it's a three to1 slope to meet Title 5 beyond the septic system uh to catch grade further down the back so okay got it we kept the house kind of up close as as close to the street as we could uh just outside the building setback line required setback line uh it's only about you know I'd say probably five or so feet inside that front set back requirement um to try to minimize you know length of driveway steepness of driveway and um the grading in the back no makes sense I was just trying I'm looking at going the seems like it must be pretty steep and that that's F it's it's hard to catch grade when you have a steep slope in the backyard yeah so yeah no understood and that's not a that was just me trying to interpret the visual makes sense great um okay questions comments from the board and if there's n all I have a question go so is does does this does this limit of clearing go over the property line that was on the anr that you guys did already it does into this this so are you going to revise the anr or is that going to be a grading easement or well it's it's it's we're we're starting to look at this next slot so it'll either be a Revis anr or we'll put an easement on the back okay there's there's plenty of lot area to play with to make it work if we had to move a lot line um all right oh I have a question on that actually are you able to put drainage structures in a in a grading EAS I guess you could call it a utility easement as well right yeah okay yeah and I believe the anr plan is the the lot line configurations are different now than what we had previously got improved oh okay I was just assuming that that that line that's got the Double Dash in it was the a anr lot line this now this is a it's it's revised kind of moving forward with trying to fit lots on this this property the build the owner needs to get one lot going sell the lot to kind of recoup some cost for the permitting that we've done so far and then we're going to you know do the same thing carve off a couple more eventually haven't really decided how to move forward with it yet but once this plan's approved if anything does get revised right now the plan is that keep it as it is we'll put a drainage easement on it that'll recorded with it um and if the lot line configuration changes or works with the lot next store we we'll just Encompass that with the next anr all right uh I'll turn to the public we have members of the public here if you uh have public comment about 255 Sunny Hill Road raise that hand oh we do have a hand up so okay I see we have two hands I'm going to start I saw uh Mr Oh either way Logan who are we going to take first because you may have already be here one Raymond lejoy okay great good evening everybody uh Raymond lejoy um for 245 lemoner road so I was trying to look at that map and I really can't see it but the project that you have in mind that is for the physical address of 255 Sunny Hill it's it's lot one the physical address I believe is the whole parcel okay cuz previously that there was an application in process um they called the 255 um Sunny Hill but it was actually being built on lemona road that was part of a bigger development I'm sorry that was part of the previous development the overall where we had the five okay so that has that has collapsed yes okay well that that's good news because I didn't want that to happen so the the cons Pro uh the construction uh grading and all that for the drainage um is that all designed so that it is going to go down the hill into the wetlands below it yes okay so um is that going to create any type of um adversive impact towards uh uh any type of uh excessive groundwater uh towards that area and or um impact to Wildlife there I mean the clearing of the land it's development I'm sure there'll be impacts um on the property but the project is being designed to meet the requirements of both the town and the state for storm water okay um I guess that's all the questions I have uh thank you very much thank you Mr lejoy and I see we have a second uh set of towns people as well who'd like to speak yes um Mr lejoy asked the same question that we were going to ask if this was part of that original project where a driveway to the I'm going to pause interrupt you for a second I apologize I do just need you to share your name and your address uh Mike Chapan 208 lemonster Road great and so Mr chaplain please you can finish as we have to have everything you know for the record right like I said Mr Le Joy asked the same question that we were going to ask um that this is not the piece of property that was going to have a driveway that came out on Lemer Road it is actually physically going to be up on Sunny Hill Road yes okay perfect thank you thank you any other public comment for 255 Sunny Hill seeing none if you are struggling to get that hand up go ahead and use the hand wve feature or or hand raise feature or wave at us both work um okay I will turn to the oh turn it back to the board uh we still have to wait on on the report from graves but any comments or questions or anything so far I have a question yeah is this something that conservation would look at have they looked at no we're not required a file of conservation because we're not in their buffer zone okay cuz I know there's a brook that runs I think behind the it is it's it's it's well outside of our um the the repairing Zone which is200 foot as well outside of our liit okay okay okay great um I do have one so is that the is that the 200t outer repairing that shown there no this is the 100 foot buffer the repairing zones it's it's much further up the line does not come anywhere near this piece here good thank you it's offmap all right great so Graves is going to check this out and get back to us and to me it sounds um unless there's anything else you want us to know tonight no that's great that's the project um if we don't have any other questions we could look to continue this do we have an idea on when Graves thinks the turnaround might be well he's through all the other ones so have you been in any discussion with I did he knows it's coming I talked to him basically it's when we had the other lot designed up here it's the exact same layout the same design so you know he he said it would be pretty quick but do your continuing to the 27th and you'll have your response yep in time for certainly and it's up to him if he doesn't have it ready by then then we'll continue okay all right so if we're comfy with it we could move to uh continue the public hearing for the storm water management permit for 255 Sunny Hill Road to um our meeting on um January 27th at 605 5 p.m. so moved second moved and seconded any other discussion all in favor I I I great all right thank you see you in a couple weeks great um now we do just housekeeping now so those are all the public hearings for tonight we have two public hearings that we're going to be continuing as we discussed earlier in the meeting so I'll be moving us on from them um and then we'll go on to the rest of the meeting so uh we have to vote to continue does 494 electric want to continue to the 27th they do okay and email and does 558 and 560 Goodrich also want to continue we also have an email to confirm can we handle that with one motion yes okay do we have a motion to continue the public hearings for 494 electric AV and um 558 and 560 Goodridge Street to our meeting on January 27th at 6:05 p.m. so moved second moved and seconded all in favor hi okay great that finally closes public here ings woo um board discussions we don't have any specific topics there tonight um yeah un so I'm AB budding Community notices uh Logan I saw there's a couple there in the drive uh could you give us the dim store version of if there's anything you think we really need to know um I to date I haven't seen anything that really sparked my eyes that said oh this is going to directly impact lunenberg um super there's um a ground mounted solar array that the Lancaster planning board's having a special hear a special permit hearing on tonight um and the Townsen planning board um looked at accessory dwelling units uh zoning amendments on the 9th so if there's a recording of that floating around and we end up needing some inspiration or something maybe that could be of interest but I mean we're a pretty far shake from towns and I guess okay fair enough thank you and thank you for bringing that up because it will be worthwhile to look at what they're doing locally um great committee reports master plan steering committee um there hasn't been a master plan steering committee meeting uh for January um hopefully things will be back on track February and we can move forward with the committee there okay open space commit oh I have a question on that how does how does the lack of ability to keep Quorum and have meetings how is that affecting our contract with the uh folks handling that um I mean so the answer is so far they keep pushing ahead um because there are there are points where the master plan steering committee if they had Quorum could be giving additional input but the um both through Consulting with um me as the chair Consulting with Chris as well as just um really following the previous instructions of the committee they can keep pushing forward by and large in the direction that was indicated um eventually they're going to have a draft to present and that draft is going to need to be looked at by the steering committee so um we are going to need them more up and running or if that can't be the case and we'd have to consider what other options are I I hope that's not the case I hope we can get a quorum there and renewed Vigor this may be better addressed in the uh board comments at the end of the meeting but I I'd like to hear if there is an update or any motion on how the discussion we had about reducing the charge reducing the Corum size right um I know from the discussion we've had there's been at least one resignation or uh two resignations both the chair and the um I forgot what position it was um but because of that it is going to be easier to make Quorum no at the next meeting no I'm sorry that doesn't it it would be nice if it did work that way but the charge of that committee is a 15 member group and the Quorum Still Remains at eight we were given specific information that if we don't have filled seats they don't count towards forum who who I don't remember who gave me that information I I um Chris can you can you confirm or deny or comment on that at all I I don't know about we created a standing committee of 15 members I've never seen the um contract I've asked for but never seen the contract the charge or any any background documents on so let's um Tim why don't we go the Town Clerk could answer this for sir okay should be able to so let's make make a point of getting together and heading over to the town clerk and see if we can have that conversation in the next week or so yeah and get that really the sooner the better and get that really solidified okay um and if you're not available during the day we can find it and I can head over and we'll get a definitive answer on that cuz I think it would impact things well I can tell you from experience we had we had three person assessors and all three of them quit or at least two of them and they could not meet because they had a minimum of two corn mhm and if two people left the the the filling of the seats does not change the Quorum requirement of the group in my understanding then what I think I would like to do is I would tentatively like to put um I would like like to put um I don't know what we call it it's not a reorg as a specific thing but us looking at the composition of the master plan steering committee and if we need to trim seats I'd like to put that on our next meeting I'd like yeah so that that being on the agenda we can act on it in vote if needed and we'll have answers before that excellent we do also need a reorganization though you do but that's that is what the master plan steering committee itself has to do we don't assign those yeah no they need a reorg that's why I was careful to not say reorg because that's a a different thing um but we can look at the composition and just saying my intent out loud my intent would not be to trim any seats that are actively filled right sure um I won't speak for the board on that obviously but saying that out loud also in case people hear this and worry oh God I'm on that committee are they going to cut my seat and uh I'll tell you what we'd be pretty see they don't keep not showing up I don't think they're too concerned but that's my own grievance um okay yeah just for if I may Mr chair information for the board what we need at this point in the project is the next Milestone is a final full draft that includes priority action items and an implementation chapter they've done the existing conditions that's been public knowledge for some while we need to wrap this up and but I don't want to shortcut any public involvement or boards or committees or any input but practically speaking we will need the steering committee to do one essential task left and that is review the final draft with the action priority items in the implementation chapter and then they can make a recommendation we can move forward with that you are the certifying board it is your Authority it's always best practice to go to town meeting give a report and hopefully get their blessing but you are the Authority Under the statute you probably not now that you've mentioned that I will add another alternative suggestion is that if they continue to have difficulty making Quorum is it possible that we could include that group with this group and have our Quorum constitute a meeting for that group they are our charge and it is our responsibility so to speak I'm just I'm just trying to make sure that if if if if if the the contracted people are able to be here and they're coming and they're not being able to present or stuff's not getting done because we don't have a quorum it really is this group's obligation in the first place I've seen that done and I think you can do that yes I think that is options are goodable yeah thank you okay um all right good questions good thoughts thank you open space committee yes we did meet the other night uh discussed 100 towns in Harbor Road they're coming out of chapter uh everybody liked that piece of property would love to see it not developed however it doesn't meet the established criteria so no no formal vote was taken but there was no intent to to try to acquire it um and subsequently focus is still on streamlining the process uh regarded regarding um open space being notified of properties coming out of chapter and then speaking with Logan it's clearly it's on the radar and I think between the open space having a new open space plan created in the near future as well as the um the master plan I think we'll be able to Hash it out and come up with a a um a good process uh in fact watching the Conservation Commission they even mentioned that they working on creating a box in open gov so I don't know if they can if that can cause a trigger that we'll send out an email to whoever essentially whoever would want one so there's it's it's still on the radar and it's it's it's working well like Open Space Chair learned of this property coming out of chapter through um the Conservation Commission so things are things are improving but the focus is is still on it it would be nice is either one of those projects came up with a you know the the list of U properties that are in chap CH and can kind of do a pre-assessment on them possibly to identify any High priorities before they actually ever even be you know come up and just get ahead of it uh we had a initial discussion with a letter we received with many boards or departments have received from the United States Department of Agriculture regarding um identifying uh farming Farmland eligible for federal preservation funding um so it's it's it's a pretty a pretty straightforward program that at face value doesn't seem to have any downside no cost to the town no impact on taxes so it's just an ongoing uh discussion that we'll we'll be having or various boards will be having um and again that one was just tabled as we learn more that's it for open space great thank you but so two things from me one thank you to the open space committee before actively looking at the streamlining and everything that once that gets figured out for the town that will be a godsend yeah uh for this process um secondly for my own planning as board chair it sounds like there there is a property coming out of chapter and even if open space is not did not vote on it that means we're still going to be asked by the select board upcoming about it most likely correct do want great okay so good to know that is coming on the radar as well because it's also good to know that o people on open space thought it was worth preserving even if it didn't meet their strict their guidelines because we are not I mean those guidelines I don't I don't say this to imply we would willy-nilly circumvent the open space committee but if they're saying this is good but doesn't fall within our purview as open space I appreciate that feedback as well and would inform some of my decisions so and that was my comment moving forward where we actually you know hadn't technically been notified we just learned of it that you know we wouldn't preclude anybody else's opinions by us stepping out of the gun and just saying no that we could it this was my thoughts that if some other board wanted to um you know pursue it that we could in turn decide to support them faulty logic or not I don't know but that's what I said okay no if I me Mr chair if you become aware of as you have funding sources there's a lot of money for uh open space acquisition so by all means if you want to reach out to me having done a lot of the applications and so forth I can help you move that forward if you identify a project just let me know and I'll okay come to your meeting good to know and I'm sorry no please so and and from from past experience of of my being on that group um there was there was a a excuse me an expressed interest in a joint meeting with the U with that open space and this group when when does come up to uh first riter refusals and that was right that that that was presented to this group right about the time that we lost Adam so I the paperwork might have been chuffed but there was there was a discussion and and I'm pretty sure that this group thought it was a good idea when it was brought up mhm um and that group did then as well so and I don't want to speak for anybody right now but that was that was the recommendation yeah uh Glenn say the word from that committee that they want to be that they want to have a joint meeting with us and we will at the very least be able to put it merge it into one of our existing meetings without batting an eye and I'd be very happy to do that as chair to get that on the agenda pretty much no questions asked because I like it when boards and committees talk to each other it's a lovely thing um all right Municipal Building design committee all right our meetings uh have picked up uh we're we're doing about 3-hour meetings now and and uh our next meeting uh will be interrupted well our schedule is interrupted by the holiday so we're going to meet next mon next Wednesday um the the uh The Firm that we've gotten to help us with that has been very very responsive from one meeting to the other um they came back with a quite highly revised plans um to what they had initially done and they they they in my opinion had hit every single comment that we made in in positive direction um my understanding is that the chair of that group uh met with the school committee met with historical society met with a couple of other stakeholders um and um those discussions will be discussed at our next meeting on Wednesday um great so nice to see that committee chugging along again that's real Pleasant Capital planning committee we have we have met and submitted um the capital rankings for uh this budget cycle that all happened before the new year as required that's squared away uh we we don't have our next meeting on the books yet because I think everyone was taking a moment to breathe there's very heavy overlap uh between that committee and the town manager screening committee so it was a very busy late fall into early winter and I think everyone's taking a moment to breathe and then we're going to get back together um to work on the really on the five and 10e plan or some very I don't want to commit us to exactly one thing but to be working on the actual planning part of capital planning as opposed to ranking um and uh people are looking forward to that Economic Development Committee uh so we've been struggling to have have a meeting but we still there is that one hanging chad that um relative to trying to streamline the process of making you know lunberg a little more attractive to to new businesses and it's that you know revolves around that that change of change of use designation that we saw with the um former Puppet Theater and now gift shop um and it just seems like that's an an an area of of of concern that's you know to me without without really knowing a whole lot about it it seems like an easy for step even if it was just a minor step forward if we were able to you know whe whether it takes giving the authority to the the uh the um building the building man the building inspector or what in order to determine that's you know the use of a property is pretty consistent with previous use and uh just leave it up to have the um building inspector have or whoever it is have the authority to okay it okay so I have a question about that um is the economic development committee looking to come to us with a concrete set of recommen recommendations well that's that's kind of the struggle without having actually had the you know productive meetings in okay in recent but that's just kind of my own interpretation of what I've what I've had you know from that the initial meeting that I had been to as well as just individual comments with various people not necessarily limited to the the um the committee but it's just it seems like that's that's a a ripe area of um or or maybe the first step or one of the first steps is easy turnoff to a business trying to move into town so whether it's as simple and I'm not saying that it is but if is as simple as giving somebody The Authority the land use director The Building Commissioner to be able to determine that you know a Puppet Theater going into a or evolving into a gift shop is pretty straightforward it's not turning it into like a you know a 50 seat restaurant with you know grease traps and fril lators whatnot that it's it seems like my impression is that maybe some some businesses are forced to do a you know a change of use when it really is not it may not be necessary so that that needs to all be vetted and I'm not suggesting it's easy as a a vote of the board but might be you know you know it seems to me it would be a nice thing to focus on you know even if it's a much more complex issue if as opposed to like taking on the whole water district bylaw like a million issues over once if we just each town meeting just picked away so we actually have some forward momentum it may not solve the problem but we're at least making the moving in right direction as opposed to stalled or moving backwards I would I would personally um I mean in an Ideal World I would love it if the EDC could propose a bylaw I don't know that there's enough bylaw writing experience on that committee for that to be super feasible it may or may not be I don't know but it would and this is just me speaking personally but even then set of concrete recommendations would be super helpful um also I know previously that committee expressed um frustration this is from when I was on it with a lot of the when you're doing permits there's a lot of go here now go here now go here I believe the work that's happened in opengov does that get rid of some of that um not in its current state and not outright right it is a thing that can be implemented um there there's a projects feature that from the applicants perspective they have a section on their dashboard that is projects and say if you're applying for a restaurant rather than um being manually directed by someone like myself or whoever else file you know this permit this permit this permit there would be a questionnaire that we designed um with questions that flag whether or not a permit is required like based on if you're serving alcohol at said restaurant right um and that sort of thing but that would have to be designed from the ground up it doesn't exist right now but the capability is there it's not implemented neat that's good to know too and I did have I stopped in the office the other day and had an impromptu conversation with the you Mr Riley and you know I I think we have the uh you know the benefit now of having his expertise to to guide us the EDC and um it's just like I just wanted to bring it up again just in in in in light of the fact we haven't had much you know productivity or productive meetings with the with the EDC I don't want to you know I don't think anybody wants to lose sight of the you know the making progress excellent all right thank you storm water task force uh we've not had a meeting since the last uh planning board meeting Fair monachus Regional Planning Commission uh we met last week not too much to report um there was like an informational meeting a big chunk of it for nooba Valley uh Medical Center basically the same stuff we've heard since it closed people writing letters you know throwing out ideas of what they could do with the space but not too much movement from what I understand okay massachusett joint Transportation committee uh we also met last week uh it was a great meeting we had a representative from Mart there uh who spoke on their increased safety measures I don't know if everyone knows there was a pretty bad accident in Fitchburg um at the I forget what it's called the bus stop that's right in town um and then as well as uh Mount wus Community College in Garder there was another accident there um and so he came and spoke about the things that they're doing physically to the properties to to make them safer we asked about training and it was kind of you know we train our drivers and it's like okay we'll see so there was a there's a lot of people at the previous meeting who who had a lot of issues with um Mark dri drivers in general but he he kind of laid uh a lot of fears to rest after his little deal uh and then the other thing that I wanted to talk about is we don't often talk about the montus Metropolitan planning organization so the MMO I I don't know if anybody from lunberg goes to that attends those meetings select board select board does Okay cool so they already know about it that cuz there's a caucus coming up so I wasn't I was like I don't know anything about the MMO so select board if you're hearing this the caucus information is online okay thank you if I may just give you a little background on that that is a tremendous resource for a whole Gambit of Transportation related projects yes I mean inter modal by Transportation I mean the full scope and that is the official mechanism that funnels Federal money Federal Highway Act money down to uh municipalities What's called the tip Transportation Improvement program it's there it's a big program a lot of money long Horizon so to my knowledge I don't when I look at the there's a programming list I don't see anything from lunenberg we should have a couple projects on that yeah every every year we haven't had we haven't gotten tip money in a bit so I think we're yeah I'm talking everything from rail trail money to it covers a lot MH it's big money and it's you do need to put some local resources into it in the way of design money to get it to 25% or some effort but that is the major pool of Transportation funds available to municipality for particularly for State related projects but also local projects so we I I I can track that more and but that is a big opportunity and we should be I guess more engaged in it I mean if the select board is the the one that handles it I I don't know I yeah I guess that it's covered but I I would encourage us to do our due diligence on that because um I don't know maybe this board is on top of it but I don't think we have anyone really looking at tip money directly in town and that would be good like I said it's been a few years since we've had any projects in the tip rotation and it's a downtown uh pedestrian or circulation Improvement plan some kind of something like that I've come across the last thing we had was Summer Street Summer Street was the last tip project I believe I be I don't remember I know we might have some applications in now but but um mjtc also deals with tip y I'm going to go to those meetings and just see because I have a lot of experience in this part of planning nice so we'll see what I can find out great thank you thank you appreciated and town manager screening committee well after this meeting we can take that off our list hopefully for the next several years um uh yeah the St Town manager screening committee we conducted interviews with several candidates and passed three on to the select board and the select board will be interviewing them next week I believe and um yeah it was another committee that was kind of a lot of Rapid Fire work because we and we wanted it to be quicker but I will also say that um in in my opinion working with a uh consultant in was I have trouble imagining it will not have been worth the money uh given the comparatively small amount the town had to spend versus I you you can't know for sure what would have been right right but um we got a lot of expertise we got in front of a lot of eyes and we had people there to help us interpret the the data that existed even in terms of well why might there be a certain number of applications and other such things um but no overall that process went very well uh in my opinion and I think the select board uh hopefully can make a can identify the best person to be managing our town all right that's all of our committee reports minutes approval we have minutes for October 28th and November 25th as a reminder there's been that shift where public hearing minutes are now included within that meeting's minutes not as a separate set um I did want to say that these are more thorough than our old minutes were um I really like it I like the level of detail it makes it easier for me to follow at least if we've had once we've had a chance to review I would look for a motion on the minutes for the October 25th 202 sorry October 28th 2024 in November 25th 2024 meetings does anybody need additional time or can I motion thank you're good uh motion to approve um minutes from October 28th 2024 meeting and November 25th 2024 uh planning board meeting minutes I will second moves and seconded all in favor I I all right minutes approved meeting schedule as as a reminder the planning board meets at 6:00 p.m. at Town Hall unless we State otherwise and our upcoming meetings include uh January 27th and the following meeting would be February 10th um and then so we don't miss a meeting for PR we don't President's Day is not a meeting day for us then so we don't miss a meeting in February right think we're good February 17th which I believe is one of the Mondays that we don't do um let's see well I see the 10th yep so it wouldn't be the 17th it' be the 24th then oh oh you're saying the yes we we God I'm slow okay look you get what you pay for and I get nice big zero on my imaginary paycheck all right public comment seeing none um board comment concerns hearing none I would entertain a motion to adjourn so moved seconded moved and seconded all in favor I I I thank you everyone that concludes our January 13th meeting I hope you have a one I hope you had a wonderful New Year and we'll see you in two weeks take care everybody