##VIDEO ID:https://videoplayer.telvue.com/player/994DtmGEsi0VDYK3jJI2BJ72GfgNIpU2/media/922313?autostart=false&showtabssearch=true&fullscreen=false## <v Speaker 1>Playing board of December 18th, 2024.</v> Couple of notes this meeting is being recorded. This meeting is being broadcast on Pegasus. To comment or ask a question, use the raise your hand function. If you are on the phone, press star nine. An individual wishing to speak during public speak or during public hearing must display their first and last name on the screen before their microphone can be unmuted. To make changes in your name as it appears on the screen in zoom, click participants to open the participants menu. Hover your cursor over the your entry and click on more and click on rename and type in your first and last name. We will begin the meeting with public speak. Any individual may raise an issue that is not included on the agenda and it will be taken under advisement by the board. There will be no opportunity for debate during this portion of the meeting. This section of the agenda is limited to 15 minutes and any individual addressing the board during this section of the agenda shall be limited to five minutes. Anyone in the audience? No. And anyone? I'm again, please help me see. It's <v Speaker 2>So, just so you're aware, Glen did join the meeting</v> and then there's a person with the first name, Richard, no last name provided with their hand up. <v Speaker 1>And if that person, Richard, would be kind enough to</v> August to identify yourself. First and last name and your address. <v Speaker 3>My name is Richard Foster.</v> I live at 2 2 6 Pond Street, unit seven in Natick. Can you hear me? <v Speaker 1>Yes, we can.</v> <v Speaker 3>Oh, excellent. Okay.</v> Am I allowed to talk now? <v Speaker 1>Yes, you may. You may talk right now</v> with regard to public speak. <v Speaker 3>Well, I tried to raise my hand the entire last meeting</v> that you had and nobody ever recognized me and I was watching all the other people who were on the video who got a chance to talk and, you know, listening to what you all had to say. But I could never say anything, so I was a little bit concerned. <v Speaker 1>Must apologize for that sir.</v> We are usually quite on top of whomever is identified on the board with their hand up. And if we missed that, there's no reason why we should have. We we didn't intentionally certainly eliminate you, but by all means, if you're category does fit within public speak for tonight, then by all means you're on. <v Speaker 3>I I would like to address 79 Speed Street.</v> So you tell me when I can do that and how I can do it and that'd be great. <v Speaker 1>79.</v> <v Speaker 4>And that's going to be continued without testimony.</v> Just without discussion. <v Speaker 1>Oh yes. Right up there</v> <v Speaker 4>At the request of the applicant.</v> <v Speaker 1>Did you hear that Richard? It's gonna be continued at</v> request of the applicant. Do we have a continued date on it? Well, <v Speaker 5>When we get there,</v> <v Speaker 6>So</v> let's wait till we get there. When <v Speaker 5>We get to it, I, I think a member</v> of the public could speak particularly. They were shut out last time. Agreed. <v Speaker 1>Alright, fine. If we can't,</v> <v Speaker 5>We can't take your comments under open speak</v> because your item is on the agenda, but your item is the next thing after public speak. So if you just, <v Speaker 4>Amanda is, is if, is the applicant aware that</v> there may be conversation? Okay. Recognize? Oh, of course. <v Speaker 7>Andy, I don't think your microphone is working.</v> <v Speaker 6>Oh, you're right. It was off. Thank you Glen.</v> <v Speaker 1>Alright then if there's no one else on public speak</v> Yes, what I'd like I do. Oh, I'm sorry. Yes, <v Speaker 6>So thank you.</v> So there, as many of you might be aware, mass DOT held an informational meeting on the Route nine and Route 27 interchange project on November 21st. There was probably, I don't know, 150 more people on that meeting. And just to let you know, they promised to put up the presentation and a recording of that meeting and it now is, has now been posted as of yesterday. So if you wanna go to the mass DOT website, the Route nine, route 27 interchange website, it should be there, poke around it, you'll, you'll find it and you can watch it and see what it's all about. <v Speaker 1>Thank you. Now if I understand, we are continuing</v> the seven nine screen street, however, <v Speaker 7>Mr. Chair</v> <v Speaker 1>Richard,</v> <v Speaker 7>Why don't Mr. Chair,</v> <v Speaker 1>I'm sorry.</v> It's Glenn. It's Glenn. Glenn. Yes. Glenn. <v Speaker 7>Before we get started, I just wanna say</v> that I did watch the recording of the last meeting and have filed a Mullens rule document with the town clerk, which is not to say that I may not still recuse myself from the discussions as they come up in the future, but I did, I did watch the meeting. <v Speaker 1>Thank you. So noted.</v> Now we are going to have this Richard speak, even though this particular item is going to be continued. <v Speaker 2>So the applicant has requested a</v> continuance without testimony. So I think you might wanna check with the applicant. 'cause usually there's, if you're accepting the continuance without testimony, then no testimony can be made and the applicant's attorney is present Oh, with <v Speaker 1>The applicant. But</v> <v Speaker 6>That's our motion.</v> It, it is a request, but it's our motion. We, we can continue it with listening to a member of the public who was shut out last time. I mean, we can still end up continuing <v Speaker 1>In this particular case.</v> I think we're gonna look at the fact that this gentleman was shut off the, or didn't make it for the last meeting. By all means, why don't we start with Richard and let's hear from you. <v Speaker 2>He just needs to unmute.</v> <v Speaker 1>Just unmute if you would please.</v> <v Speaker 3>Notes. Can I ask if you were supposed to have a</v> decision from the town council regarding the, the parking, was, was any decision ever made on that? <v Speaker 2>The reason for the continuances without testimony was</v> because we had not had adequate time to get the letter due to other timelines and also illness. <v Speaker 1>Alright. You pick up on that</v> <v Speaker 7>Mr. Chair.</v> <v Speaker 1>Yes.</v> <v Speaker 7>I, I don't, I don't mean to be a nitpicker here,</v> but you read a very nice set of instructions on how people could edit their name on Zoom so that their first and last names appeared on Zoom appropriately. Could I ask Mr. Richard to please do follow those instructions and add his surname? <v Speaker 3>I'd be happy to, but I did not hear those</v> instructions. Oh, let <v Speaker 1>Me repeat, let me repeat</v> <v Speaker 3>Because I was signing on</v> and there is no place on my zoom screen for me to sign in. <v Speaker 1>Would</v> <v Speaker 2>You like me to rename them?</v> Yeah, if you can do that. Was it Foster? F-O-S-T-E-R. <v Speaker 3>F-O-S-T-E-R. Okay,</v> <v Speaker 2>Just hold on one second please.</v> <v Speaker 1>All right, we'll take</v> care of that for you then. All set spelling correct sir? F-O-S-T-E-R <v Speaker 3>Foster f Frank.</v> Oscar Sam? Yes, that's right. <v Speaker 1>Thank you. Alright, go ahead.</v> <v Speaker 3>So what I really wanted to say was that I, I live in the</v> small condo complex that faces where this building is gonna be built and I would be looking at the back of this building and the residents where I live have a lot of concern about the amount of light that will be admitted from this building. The height of this building, the amount of space that this is taking on the lot because right now we look out at two 60 or 70-year-old trees that are probably 50, 60 feet tall. They have birds, animals there. Those trees are gonna be cut down according to the plan as I understand it. And instead of just looking at a clapboard building, which is recessed probably 50 feet from the property line, we're gonna be looking at a big square concrete building that takes up twice as much space as the present building and goes to I think 20 feet from the property line. So it's gonna cut down on a lot of light. That's the direction that we look at where, you know, you can see the sun and the sky that'll be cut off. I wasn't sure whether or not we would be able to, we'd be looking at AC equipment on the top of the roof and I heard them talking about the fact they say this is a one story building, but it's taller than the building that's there, which is already two stories. So, you know, a 30 foot one story building that's technically three stories if 10, 10 feet per floor, not one story. So, you know, I I just wanted to raise these points for the people that live where I live because we have to live with this. And I've lived here for almost 13 years now and I realized that the corner is commercially zoned, but it's gotten denser and denser as time goes has gone on. And there was a very kind gentleman who spoke last week on your committee who was talking about the degradation of residential life in the area. And I would certainly second that because this kind of thing really erodes the quality of of life and increases the amount of traffic, which is already kind of crazy right now. The building that's there is aesthetically pleasing. I don't think this is potentially an ugly design, but it's certainly not anything similar to what, what has been there before. So, you know, I guess that's really all I I wanted to say. I wanted to talk about the lighting, whether or not you would be able to insist on very, you know, low level dark sky nighting lighting at night and you know, whether there was even any possibility that those trees could be saved as opposed to just chopping them down to fit a, a huge building on a small space. <v Speaker 1>Alright, Mr. Frost, Mr. Foster, thank you very much</v> for your input. Is that it by the way? I don't want to interrupt you, but I was that it? <v Speaker 3>Yes, I mean I I I would like to be able</v> to return in the future if, you know, there's something that I would want to address that the people who are trying to build this building are, are talking about. But I mean, they're not here now. So those are really the only things I wanted to express to you all and hope that, you know, you could hear it and try and keep our neighborhood, you know, as livable as possible. <v Speaker 1>Thank you very much, sir. Much appreciated for your input.</v> So note I would say that at this point, alright, but if I'm not mistaken, if this, correct me if I'm wrong, if this is gonna be continued, there is no discussion. No, we can at this, they've <v Speaker 6>Requested that they have requested</v> continuance without testimony. <v Speaker 1>So then it's up to us to make the motion right when we,</v> when and if if appropriate. And he will hold off on the appropriateness until we've heard from everyone here. Yes ma'am. <v Speaker 6>Like, like that gentleman speaking, he, he said</v> that he wasn't able to get through. Yep. And so, I mean it feels appropriate to me to not shut him out. <v Speaker 1>That's fine. And so done. Yes ma'am.</v> If you would be kind enough to come up to one of the just mics in the pull up a mic there, the chair wrong on the other side. It's, it's fine, it's safe, it really is. That microphone frightening. But <v Speaker 8>I'm Susan Adler.</v> I also live at 2 2 6 Pond Street. I was on the the Zoom meeting last time and also was not able to sign in. I think I was signed in under my work address, but I couldn't raise a hand or ask a question. I'm sorry, my concerns are the same as Richards. I recall at the meeting some of you addressed the concerns and why it was sent back because it seemed that there were too many parking spaces and there were questions about the size of the building. I think even you, Mr. Sson had said, you know, it's a nice building but maybe look at the design again. So I just am curious what the continuance is. All of it. I mean, is this just gonna be continued forever? What, what is, what is happening? When do we get to know, you know, they're gonna go ahead and build whatever they want or a new plan has been requested. I, I'm not well versed on the timing of how any of this goes, so I'm <v Speaker 1>Just curious.</v> Well, as far as tonight is concerned, the board will take a motion to continue except, and which will simply say that there will be a date determined and and advertised as to when this meeting will be con picked up again, this topic, this will be picked up again, in which case it's open again for it's public hearing and it's open again for participation. Certainly. We'll, it's now document what's what's been discussed tonight and is looking if there's anyone else, <v Speaker 6>I know it can be frustrating for neighbors,</v> particularly when you can't sign in on Zoom and the, the answer to your question will just go on forever. No, it will not. The, just in case you, you didn't hear it last time. There, there is a concern with the parking lot being located in a residential residency zoned area. The zoning board of appeals made a decision and there was some question on our board whether that decision addressed all of the things it needed to address. So we've turned it over to our town council. Well, Amanda's not our town council, but Amanda works with our town council who's been on vacation and we're expected to hear back from her what her opinion is with regard to the zoning board's decision. So assuming that we would probably continue this to a date where we feel that we would have that information in time that we could digest, we'll probably continue to that date and then we will at that night when we reconvene, review the, the town lawyer's suggestions and then we debate more public comments. Welcome. And I would say at this point, the issues that the gentleman raised on Zoom and, and you raised, they're, they're ongoing. You know, the, the many of the dimensions are within the right of a person to build. So we are, we are looking at what is genuine, you know, in terms of the building structure, something that's essentially compliant. It's different. The old one comes down, the new one goes up. We do have to deal with this parking issue. So it's not decided, it will not go on forever. We probably will take one more good crack at it the next time with the benefit of town council and then we'll, we'll debate it and we'll again, we will, we'll take public opinion an answer any questions that we can, but I don't see this as going on and on and on. <v Speaker 1>Thank you. Thank you for the clarity.</v> Amy, any further questions? <v Speaker 8>What happens? I'm curious what you're going to say.</v> <v Speaker 9>I'm not gonna say I was, I'm just taking notes if you have</v> any, I know the lighting issue from the zoning board when we did have a lighting plan. Again, if you had any other comments on the design itself, I was just gonna take notes on 'em and relay them back to my client. We were just here to get the continuance, but <v Speaker 1>Here and we, we, we will be calling on the council</v> for any participation in anything he has to say also. But if that's all yourself then thank you. Yeah, thank you. Thank you. And watch for the, it will be advertised again with what, two weeks notice? 10 20, I think it's gonna be January, two weeks. January 15th. Beg your pardon? January 15th. January 15th is the schedule right now, would you? <v Speaker 4>Yes, I'm happy when the time comes to make the motion</v> to continue it to January <v Speaker 1>15.</v> Okay. But I think right now I think did Counsel did you have anything you wanted to I, <v Speaker 9>The only thing I was gonna say that I was happy to,</v> if you guys were gonna allow public speak, I was happy to hear notes and anything else, testimony, whatever it was gonna be. That's all. <v Speaker 10>I just want to point out that we did not willingly or</v> or try to ignore anybody last week we were kind of looking at the screen, we did not see any hands raised. So glad people were able to get through today. <v Speaker 1>We will look into that make to try to assure that</v> that doesn't happen again. Thank you. Any further questions, comments, look to the board then for a motion <v Speaker 4>Move to continue to January 15th.</v> <v Speaker 1>Secondly, any further discussion? Andy?</v> Aye Harry? <v Speaker 4>Aye we Oh we have to new names</v> because we're on Zoom too. Full <v Speaker 1>Board.</v> I'm going, I'm going around <v Speaker 4>Right but we, we have to say our names with it.</v> Oh because part of the board is on Zoom lens <v Speaker 1>Here.</v> Okay. I was going around and <v Speaker 4>So Evans,</v> <v Speaker 1>Aye all the names?</v> <v Speaker 4>Yep.</v> <v Speaker 1>Doug? Yes. Doug. Aye. Doug. Vote last.</v> I've gotta have a last name in here. Landry. Aye I'm not a vote. I can't vote on this. Okay, <v Speaker 4>I'd like that. Oh, I can't vote.</v> <v Speaker 1>And Glen glad. Aye Peter Notai.</v> So moved. Continued, <v Speaker 9>Thank you.</v> <v Speaker 1>Next on the agenda,</v> 2 16, 2 18 South Main Street. Amanda, can you bring us up to some kind of date on that? <v Speaker 2>Yeah, so we've got a couple things.</v> We do have Bill McDowell town engineer here 'cause there have been some conversations regarding the stormwater. This project does require not only planning boards review but a stormwater management permit due to topography and ground. There have been meetings with the conservation agent, town engineer and the assistant town engineer to help move that forward. A decision was drafted because the board did vote last week to approve the project. So they directed us to draft a decision. A decision was circulated, I think it was Friday or Saturday. We did receive comments. Those were incorporated. So what you do see in front of you in the printed and also was sent out via email would track changes of any changes I made. There was one comment from the town engineer, but I think It, it's, you know, it's not a straightforward project but there has been a lot of changes since we first saw this project a long time ago. One of the items that will get brought up is the deletion of the trail. The deletion of the trail would allow for more infiltration and better location of the stormwater management features. And I would let Bill, sorry, the town engineer talk on that. Since it is short, there is concern that there are two compromised areas where the topography would actually wash it out and create long-term maintenance. And so that would be something that you would want to talk about. Other than that, everything has been drafted and actually a town engineer, conservation agent and then building commissioner also received a copy just 'cause it is a big project. <v Speaker 1>Alright, thank you</v> Applicant. We're here <v Speaker 9>Essentially to make sure the decision's in order</v> and if there's any other questions on copy <v Speaker 2>Of the decision's right there</v> for you, just in case you needed <v Speaker 11>It.</v> Yeah, it's the same one from today. Yeah. <v Speaker 1>Yeah. So is this, have you had a chance to review it?</v> We did review it today. And do you have any comments? If so, please introduce yourselves and <v Speaker 9>No, I'm Peter Harran, I represent the applicant.</v> The decision has presented looked okay to us. So if it's, if it's okay with the board, we're happy to have it signed tonight. <v Speaker 1>Okay sir,</v> <v Speaker 11>I concur.</v> I'm Anthony Gagliardi, sorry, manager of 2 16 2 18 South Main Street, Natick. <v Speaker 1>Thank you. Board</v> a, Doug. <v Speaker 6>So Amanda, I feel it's kind of a big deal</v> getting rid of the trail and hearing it about it for the first time tonight when we have a decision we're gonna sign. I'm not saying I'm opposed to that idea, but that's a material change in the plan. I don't know if others feel the same way. It can maybe, but I'd like to hear Yeah, <v Speaker 1>Expand</v> <v Speaker 6>On why I'm getting there.</v> I, I would like to understand what the rationale is by what authority and what next are we gonna get an updated plan that we can look at. <v Speaker 2>So I would defer to Mr. McDowell if he's here.</v> <v Speaker 6>Okay.</v> <v Speaker 1>Looks as though he is</v> <v Speaker 12>I am. Can you hear me? Yes.</v> <v Speaker 1>Yes, bill.</v> <v Speaker 12>Thank you.</v> Members of the board, the reason we were looking at the trail, particularly the location of where it is, there is a proposed detention structure which really hasn't been defined yet, that exists along the easterly side of the project. Behind units nine, 10, and 11 that outflow would flow easterly and southerly and cross that trail. And the trail is, you know, several feet below the actual outfall or the proposed outfall of that pond. That pond is designed to, in times of, you know, extreme weather events to flow over a weir and float down the hill easterly, that would very likely wash out that trail. The trail is in a very vulnerable spot. The trail is also limiting the size of the pond. The one thing that I noted in a letter regarding the decision is that the number of units, the configuration of the roadway, those things have been looked at and decided by the planning board that was part of the decision. What hasn't been done yet is that we don't have a definitive drainage design yet. What we are asking for is the flexibility to be able to work within the parameters of the design that we have now. But we do feel that the trail is very limiting where it is and then where we to place the drainage structure where it's shown on the plan now that that would very likely put that trail at risk repeatedly, you know, for basically every rainfall event and certainly significant rainfall events. That was one reason. And the other reasons, basically the trail starts at a midpoint on the roadway on a private roadway goes, turns back on itself. It comes back a private roadway. I'm not sure what the purpose of the trail is and it just, it seemed to be an amenity that was basically it. It's to the detriment of the ability of the, the site to work. We would just like that removed as part of this. If someplace that that could be relocated, we would be perfectly willing to talk about that. We just feel that the location right now is very limiting to what we may need to do in order to make this drainage design work. <v Speaker 6>So I could appreciate those technical concerns. Right.</v> I, I appreciate that and I'd like to see a plan, I'd like to see an analysis, I'd like to see the plan. I think what you're describing says it's a portion of that trail that might be washed out. So why are we talking about the entire trail being eliminated, if I'm understanding that correctly. There are bridges, there are structural things you can do to overcome wash out. Yeah, it is an amenity, it's an important amenity and I am not comfortable here with this decision saying, well that's gonna be wishy-washy and we're gonna figure that out on a later time. We need to see that on a, <v Speaker 12>At this, at this particular point.</v> I don't have a drainage design of any kind to be able to recommend one way or the other. So Understood. I do absolutely understand that. Yep. But I'm just looking at being able to make sure that with this decision, I, I now have a number of units that can be put there. I have a configuration of roadway that can be put on that lot. And as yet, I don't know that that necessarily works. We just wanna make sure we are able to have that flexibility. <v Speaker 6>And I guess I as a, as</v> <v Speaker 12>Our recommendation and it's certainly up to the, it's,</v> it's certainly up to the board to, you know, discuss that and that is their decision. We absolutely respect that. Our recommendation was that the trail be removed. And <v Speaker 6>I, Mr. McDowell, I respect your, your,</v> your opinion and your input. I'm, I'm not doubting that. I'm just saying, and this is not anyone's fault here, but you know, we don't really have a great set of plenty of board rules and regs that I know of. And in the future to me, when you come before this board, not, this is not you guys too, but anyone else who comes before this board with a project of this scale, we need to have an engineered plan. We need to have the stormwater report done. We need to have all of that stuff done, not left to the point where we're talking about signing a decision and the town engineer has not reviewed or there hasn't been a stormwater management analysis submitted. Please. We need to have submission requirements. They have to be submitted as a complete package. If we're talking about changes to a plan in a public hearing, the applicant goes back to the planning, the drawing board, redoes the plan, redoes the analysis, resubmits it. We get a letter back from the tenant engineer saying everything's fine. That's the basis of the decision. I'm not comfortable looking at a draft decision and, and making significant changes like this. <v Speaker 11>We, Mr. Landry,</v> You can address me to Mr. Excuse me, Mr. Chair. It's alright. We did, we did submit calc and the stormwater plan on December 9th and we did meet with Claire and Bill and John and reviewed them. I, bill was not, he was, I guess he was out sick, but we did do the work. So it was a draft plan, but we did the calcs that showed that the calcs did work. And then I just, this the trail thing I just heard of at five o'clock last night. So that was the first I heard of it. Alright. <v Speaker 6>I mean I, sorry, really wanna approve this project.</v> I really do. Let's move on with life. But my god, <v Speaker 4>Could I just ask, what was the first</v> that you'd heard last night <v Speaker 11>About the trail?</v> About the trail being eliminated? I was, I I, when I saw the letter last night, that was the first I heard of it. Okay. It was like at five o'clock yesterday. <v Speaker 6>Well, I don't know who, who, I mean if,</v> if you look back at the history of this project, we talked about a hiking trail on night one. It's, it's a cluster development. It features open space, usable open space. What's the definition of usable open space? You can use it woods on top of ledge in a, you know, in a rocky what was a rocky New England forest is perfectly valid open space, but it's not usable. It's a cluster development. One of the features of it is usable open space. I can't believe that anybody w would not know the planning board well enough to know that we could suggest the day of to take out the hiking trail that, you know, every, all in favor. I mean, I'm not an engineer, I respect engineering. But in my stupid little p brain, I equate the, the, the, the water control management system to be as important as the hiking trail. I, bill might think I'm nuts, but that's not new. The, the the point is, you know, they're, they're both important and you know, I I, you know, I I don't know. We're kind of in limbo now 'cause we, I think, I think the protocol would be to a vote of reconsideration of the site plan and move it back instead of approved to undecided because we have more work to do. Yeah. If, if, if it needs to be relocated, if it, if it needs to, if there has to be a, a structural element like a bridge or a boardwalk or something, those are doable. I've seen them many times. Water bars. Yeah. So we're not, I I'm just speaking for myself. I have no interest in, in throwing out the, the, the hiking path or the, the so-called hiking path, the, the walking trail. Those are the types of amenities that make it nice on a summer night to go for a walk in your neighborhood or to walk your dog in the spring or whatever. I mean it's, I I'm not gonna defend the desire to have a walking path because it's been here since night one. It's a cluster. It has to be there. So let's just figure it out. <v Speaker 1>Given what I'm hearing here is that</v> there's something broken down in the communication. If at five o'clock this, whatever it was that you heard about this and that's when, and we are seeing it now for the first time that a major element in the project has been proposed to be eliminated. That's a rather dramatic change. The methodology that you might accommodate, whether it be a bridge or a whatever, is not our concern at the moment, except the fact that the trail is gone. <v Speaker 11>Go ahead. I'm, I'm not proposing to eliminate it.</v> I agree that it's an important part of this project. So, alright. And I agree that there's, we've discussed with Claire about sustainable trail designs and that was the protocol we were gonna follow with, with constructing this trail. 'cause there are, like you talked about bridges and things like that to keep this trail. So this was, I I I'm, I don't want to remove the trail as well, <v Speaker 6>But I'll just say one thing and for Mr.</v> Gagliardi, you know, you've been nothing but cooperative. Yeah. And collaborative here. Thank you. And you know, I know you want to get stuff done. You're gonna agree to what, so thank you for your patients in this. We're we're, we're almost there. We we're almost there. And what I would suggest, maybe we don't rescind anything, but we continue this one more time and this decision gets tightened up and you know, just on condition number two, right? Here's where for me as a, as a practicing planner and doing this for 35 years, to me a decision with the, with condition number two, that is where the rubber meets the road. Right there we are basing a decision on a, on a site plan prepared by a registered professional engineer dated such and such. I mean that's, that's it. That's the decision. That's the plan. That's what gets voted on. That's what gets recorded at the registry and that's what we expect to be built. I really don't want to read decisions that have 55, you know, whatever, to get to some conclusion. The conclusion should be that's the plan we agreed on. That's what we're gonna decide. So can I just add two things that I, I meant to say before, the first is one of the most nettlesome issues that this plane board deals with are decisions with hiking trails. I could think of a few. It seems like they get the least amount of attention and we have to fight the hardest to get them installed before the certificate, certificate of occupancy or whatever. So I don't know why. They just seem to be the thing that like the developers just don't want to deal with or they ignore or whatever. So we are approaching this from experience. The second thing is maybe locating it at the base of the retaining wall is not the best spot. Maybe, maybe if we're gonna be looking at it again, is there a way to re-root it up to the highland part of it that maybe joins in the back? I mean maybe now's the time to, you know, kind of use a new piece of scratch paper and look at it again, maybe a different location. 'cause you know, I don't think anybody was ever crazy about having it, you know, below the retaining wall and obviously signs of things being washed out. It could make for kind of a soggy, unhappy trail. So maybe there's a chance to look at rerouting it potentially while we're looking at it again to just, I, I just under advisement <v Speaker 4>Are using some of the tools that had been discussed</v> to make it, to make it viable. But yes, when we talked about this being an an open space residential development, that comes with an assumption that the open space offers to some degree access to the residents. So <v Speaker 1>Do you have any</v> <v Speaker 9>I was based on the conversation,</v> I'm not sure there's much to it. I didn't know if there was a way to say as long as the plan is not materially altered after discussions with Bill, like if we were to put things on there that keeps the trail where it is now with protections. Again, I'm not an engineer myself either, but you know, certain things in place on the trail as it sits on these plans that don't necessarily alter the plans themselves. That there could be something from that as opposed to a new set that comes in. Maybe if bill signs off on whatever we can propose, obviously prior to building permits issued or work started you, the protection of the board of not protection per se, but the concern the board has that all of a sudden the trail's gonna be gone would go away because we'd have to still comply with this decision. Which would say if there's any changes materially and we could obviously carve out something very specific for the path, then we certainly would've to come back in and the board would have another look at it and see where we located or whatever else. But if it is just a question of, I don't wanna say simple again because I'm not an engineer, but things that we could construct within what we have on the plan now, it may save, save everyone some time coming back. Well that's my only, and the plans did <v Speaker 1>Have prepared to accept the fact that it's a simple,</v> <v Speaker 9>Again, I don't mean simple,</v> I just mean non-material perhaps <v Speaker 1>Whatever the mechanism is</v> or the design feature, the design mechanism is that brings about an approval of the path regardless of where it is <v Speaker 4>And of a path that's of kind of viably.</v> <v Speaker 1>Well I mean I would suggest too</v> that it's not saying it's gonna be viably and engineered and vi and usable path. I don't know. It could be as far as the document, as far as the labor on the drawing might be just something that is working wherever the path is located to wherever there's a drainage problem, show a couple of lines and label it as something else. Or if it's a total relocation to the path, fine. But the point I think that's being made, it is made, has been made is that it's, at this moment it's questionable certainly as to its viability where it is. And as far as alternatives, locations, I think we ought to, we want to see it on the document that we are going to give approval to. If, if nothing else in the document there, very little else to be touched, terrific. But it's the path, <v Speaker 6>Well we can't sign this</v> 'cause they, no, they actually included the language. It was determined and was recommended that the creation of such a trail, this says trial, but trail is not practical. <v Speaker 1>That's</v> <v Speaker 6>So that's in our decision right now. So yeah,</v> <v Speaker 1>That, that's not acceptable.</v> Never. That's not acceptable. So I think it's, it's clear it's, it's, it's frustrating maybe, and it is to all of us, but the focus of attention right now seems to be just the trail, how you rectify it. I don't know. And I don't think it's up to this group to make too many recommendations. We're not as said, we're not engineers, we're not, we're not designers for this. So if you would be looking at it from that respect. Yes, Amanda. <v Speaker 2>So is there any way, since this was kind</v> of already in the decision, but that's why we did the track changes. Is there a way to get the appeal period started because you've agreed on everything except for the trail. Can we, showing the decision right now, reject the changes and it says the project includes a natural trail which is shown on the site plan. That's the finding. All of this gets deleted and one second the trail get rid of that. <v Speaker 6>Oh, well I'm just, for me, I've just seen too many</v> of these, you know, left at, you know, fill in the details later. And I'm not gonna name projects, but we can, you know, we find out after the places occupied that the trail's not done. So, you know, I I just, I I, if my experience was different and we had a hundred percent compliance and there was a piece of cake, I'm all in favor of just, you know, letting it go. But I feel like I need to know where it's gonna be, you know, how, how it's gonna be incorporated in the, in the, in the program here. So the idea of just like, yeah, to be determined, dot, dot, dot see you later. That has not worked for us. <v Speaker 4>But I mean then there seems to be a case where</v> both the applicants and members of this board are kind of in, in, in strong agreement. If <v Speaker 2>You just put this language back to what it was</v> and it says the project includes a natural trail, which is shown on the site plans <v Speaker 4>Because that, that stands the risk</v> of someone down the line. 'cause I've see, I've seen it happen. I think to your point, and then somewhere down the line it's like, oh, you know what we discovered this isn't really gonna work. <v Speaker 2>So so wouldn't they have</v> to come back to the planning board? Yeah, <v Speaker 1>That, that</v> <v Speaker 4>I would rather see</v> it done right the first time. <v Speaker 1>If it's, in my opinion with plans, if it's on the plan,</v> it's the same as putting it in words. And yet we've got, we we, and we're putting it in words and showing it on the plan and then saying it might not be as it's shown on the plan. I, I don't, I don't, I don't think that's acceptable, <v Speaker 2>But it's shown on the plan,</v> <v Speaker 1>But it's not at this point the well you say the verbiage</v> is gonna change, but what you're saying, if I heard it correctly, is that it's shown on the plan. Correct. Yeah. The current plan shows a show the trail, but the town engineer has issued an a concern <v Speaker 4>That what's proposed on the plan,</v> <v Speaker 1>That what's proposed on the plan is not practical.</v> Is not, yeah, that's enough right there to be con it's, it's saying what's on the plan is forget it, what's on the plan. It's not practical. It's something that's missing. I don't know what, don't know how practical, but it's not there. So I, I think what we're doing is we're going back to what the town engineer has said about the plan and that's what we're approving and we are writing a decision based on that plan. Okay. And so I think that to allow these gentlemen to un unfortunately, but go back and come back with sit, having, having <v Speaker 4>Sit downtown engineer,</v> <v Speaker 1>Having put some time into re</v> study town engineer would be a excellent source. <v Speaker 11>We've, we've met with engineering</v> on several occasions on this. We provided calculations that calculate, this is like a, as Bill said, it's, it's a like a hundred year storm overflow issue. We have provisions on the plans that you approve that show locations of stormwater management. They've just been furthered in the design as until we had what was gonna work here. Design we didn't, if we had done stormwater designs for the three iterations we did before, it's, I mean it's just money, but whatever. But we did provide them with calculations. We did, I believe even Bill wrote in his comment letter that he was comfortable with the calculations. He did wanna study them more. If I'm speaking for Bill, you wanna chime in, please feel free. I don't wanna put words in your mouth by any means, but I, I feel like we did do what we needed to do and it's just the opinion of Bill that this is gonna wash out in a hundred year storms. But I don't share that same concern obviously. But I think there's a way to build this. I think we can build the portrayal the way it's shown on the plans. <v Speaker 1>Well then what seems to be, again, what I'm hearing</v> or just seeing in the words is what Bill said, it's not, what was the word he used? Practical. Practical. I now that that makes lay people, that's what we are, relatively speaking, concerned a profess professional engineer. I'm sorry, bill, go ahead. <v Speaker 12>No, I'm sorry if I mind Mr. Chair, I'm not in disagreement</v> with what Dagley already said. I totally understand the board's position regarding the trail. I think what I was looking for was more looking for this idea and I, I understand that this is not really palatable to the board at this point, was the flexibility to be able to shape that trail in relation to the actual drainage structures? I I do agree with Mr. Gagliardi and their design engineers, myself, the conservation agent, the board of health director and the assistant town engineer have been through the assessment that was given to us regarding the drainage, regarding the amount of water that we anticipate will be directed both to this structure and to the lower structure down by South Main Street. We were in agreement, we asked them to split the flow up so that we didn't have all of the flow going down to the south main street infiltration site. This structure in the rear of the site was added. What we don't have is the actual design of the pond, how much freeboard is available, the pipe structures that would be evacuating the pond. The pond, the pipe structures are being directed to the pond. So we have the concept, we have the assessment of the drainage, but I don't have the design of the drainage in this particular case where we were looking at the location of the trail and the idea that in extreme events, this might be a, we flow over the side of the, the pond pond toward the wetland that would be directed in the direction of where the loop in the trail was. And what we said was it would give us more flexibility if that was not there, I would rescind that statement. I would do that happily if you, the the trail you know is to remain, that's fine. I do understand that it is going to be in the natural and that's in quote parts of, you know, the, the site and it will be among the untouched portion of the site towards the southern and eastern border. And that the trail as shown on the plan is, you know, to be a natural trail. Therefore it's going to meander through the trees. It won't necessarily be in the exact configuration that is shown on this plan. None of this plant is meted out with meets and bounds of where the road is, things like that. There is no geometry associated with that. That being said, we thought it would be okay to request that that trail not be located in that location. We recommended to lose the trail understanding, or at this point not understanding the board's connection to that trail. I would rescind that statement and just say when the drainage design is done, the trail will be an amenity that will fit in with the rest of the site. But what we were saying in our letter is that we cannot approve the site, you know, as a design with the information that I have right now, that de the drainage needs to be designed. That trail is limiting some of the flexibility that we have of where they wanna put that pond behind units nine, 10, and 11. <v Speaker 9>Thank you Bill. Yes sir.</v> I, I essentially what I was saying before, it sounds like if we can continue to keep the trail in the general area, it is as shown on the plans and once we begin that the storm water management allows for it in that area, I think that serves everyone's purposes. And if, again, whether it's zoning planning, wherever, if there's changes to the site plan, we're compelled to come back in and get those reapproved and I, I would think that the removal of the trail would potentially be considered a material change. So if we, it ends up that we just simply can't, we, we would have to come back in and I understand not wanting to kick the can down the road. And I understand, you know, cer, certificates of CCCU occupancy going to be signed and all the things haven't been done. I deal with developers all the time. I, I certainly understand that. I just, this seems to be some, not a catch 22 per se, but we don't know exactly where in that general area the path may be just because we haven't been able to complete everything yet. Because we have to have an approval before we can start finishing up all the design. So again, I think what Mr. McDowell was saying was that the trail can stay in that, in that area. We would just have to make sure that whatever we design around it doesn't allows for it, essentially. Okay, well I'll, I'll just, should <v Speaker 10>We just a minute, I,</v> I just was thinking in general if we could put in a requirement or something in there that the trail can't be shortened. I think that's the biggest concern is both of course being eliminated but also suddenly it's half the link that we thought it was gonna be. I mean whether it's shifted over a little bit, I don't think that's so much the issue, but we don't want half the trail that we were promised. <v Speaker 6>Well, I I think we can follow our standard protocol here,</v> which is it, what I'm hearing is given that there are no meets and bounds, there is a question about the, the pond and that affects the water flow and that affects the trail. So to me I'd say, well one more meeting, vet out the water issue, the pond issue, the trail issue, propose us a trail that will, you know, that everybody agrees will most likely work. Then when we proceed, if something comes up, if ledge is discovered in an un you know, some strange location, which happens all the time, then part of the process is to come back and seek a, a minor modification of the site plan. That's, that's just proforma. We do that all the time. No, no big deal. But I I think we can get to the point that we can approve a trail that you proposed to us, which is more than likely to be the design and we just leave, you know, that that small percentage that it might need to change in the future as part of the process where you come back to us and we approve a minor modification. I I think that gives us the best coverage that we more than likely know that it will work and where it'll be located, we can vote on that as part of a revised site plan and then we have recourse if, if things need to change in the future. <v Speaker 1>Would you say that in conjunction with that though,</v> that we'd need a little restructuring of the verbiage that yes there is a description, the town engineer will say that's this location, however certain things have to be considered, but the ultimate goal will be a walking path that is in fact usable? <v Speaker 6>Yeah, I mean the fact that Mr.</v> Gag hasn't seen the request to remove the hiking trail until yester last night or today tells me that they're kind of caught flatfooted too and they, you know, these <v Speaker 11>Guys yeah, by no means wanna remove the</v> <v Speaker 6>Trail.</v> Yeah, no, you guys have been wonderful. You, you, you've been very patient with us and we really, it's not unnoticed. We really appreciate it. So I have a feeling, one more meeting now that all the cards are on the table. This thing can be solved. I don't see any reason why we wouldn't <v Speaker 1>And I would emphasize as the obvious is</v> get in touch with Bill again. We're, see if you can the, the words and maybe a notation or two on the drawing in particular areas of concern. I don't know what right? <v Speaker 11>No, we're in, we're in, we've been in touch with Bill,</v> we've been going to the storm water meetings at three o'clock on Mondays for the last few weeks. So yeah, <v Speaker 4>It's not even the language as much as the strategy</v> that the language captures. So that whatever that they, they, they can demonstrate what they're, how they're proposing to ensure that the trail is not going to be constructed <v Speaker 1>Well, certainly in</v> <v Speaker 4>Such a way that it,</v> it would be likely to <v Speaker 1>Walk out the strategy.</v> Yes, that says a number of different things, but I believe that what we're looking for is that final statement which says, and ultimately the trail will be usable it on the plan. It will be a, it'll <v Speaker 6>Be on the plan.</v> <v Speaker 1>It'll be, yeah, I don't think you're gonna get a</v> <v Speaker 6>Lot of resistance from us. No.</v> <v Speaker 4>And constructed as</v> <v Speaker 1>Proposed,</v> <v Speaker 6>Shown on the plan.</v> Yeah, <v Speaker 1>I think we're it's on the plan.</v> It's on, it's not going away. Okay. Is there anyone, Glen did you have any thoughts on this that you'd like to share? No, I don't. And is there anyone here in the audience? I thought we, no. Then how about a motion to continue? <v Speaker 4>Is this going to be to the 15th? So moved</v> <v Speaker 1>Second.</v> And all those in favor Andy? Aye a Aye. Peter. Aye Alan. Aye. Aye. Doug? Yes. Aye Glen excited to finally. Aye. Thank you. Thank you gentlemen, thank you very much again for your patience and very welcome. Thank you. We'll get it, we'll get, we all want it. Really do. Thank you. Happy holidays every thank you like happy, happy New Year. See you in the new year, <v Speaker 6>Right at the goal line five yard penalty back.</v> You gotta replay four patriots. You gotta replay third down stupid <v Speaker 1>Holding penalty.</v> It's not a hold. Not a hold. It's five yard. If it's a Patriots it's a hold. Yeah, <v Speaker 6>Not loss of down. Alright,</v> <v Speaker 1>Thanks again.</v> Okay, thank you. Five Auburn Street project review for recommendation five Auburn Street. We have someone here on Amanda, <v Speaker 2>Caitlin.</v> Is Jennifer Gilbert your attorney? <v Speaker 13>She is, yes. Great. And Dana Ello is our civil engineer.</v> He should also be in the waiting room. Yep. <v Speaker 2>They both are promoted.</v> Just waiting for them to come on over. <v Speaker 13>Great. Thank you. I think</v> <v Speaker 14>Thank you Amanda.</v> <v Speaker 2>Dana mighta. Ha. Oh nope. Okay. All set.</v> <v Speaker 14>Okay great. My name is Jennifer Deo Gilbert</v> and I'm the permitting council for the Met Metro West Collaborative. And here with me this evening is Dana Ello, our engineer for the development team along with Kaitlyn Madden from Metro West and other members of her team I believe are listening in. We're really glad that the planning board has taken the time to hear about this case. Dana is going to share if she's able to Amanda his screen and has a brief presentation. This is a comprehensive permit application that's actually pending before the zoning board and we've had a couple of meetings with them. Amanda will go over the pretty lengthy process that the project has been through already because it's a 40 B, it's before the zoning board as the one body that has jurisdiction over the project, but it is in collabor collaborative effort with the town. And so we would like to present before the planning board to get an advisory advisory feedback and comments on the plan in order to discuss with the team incorporating some of your feedback and taking of course the planning board's advisory feedback into consideration. It is a hundred percent affordable project and Metro West is a nonprofit. And Dana, if you can pull up the screen, I believe Kaitlyn's gonna go over a little bit of the background for the planning board to bring them up to speed as far as the process. <v Speaker 15>And this is thank</v> <v Speaker 14>You. Thank you.</v> Board members, can everybody see the screen? <v Speaker 15>Yes. Excellent.</v> <v Speaker 13>Okay, thanks Dana and thanks Jennifer</v> and good evening members of the board. Thank you for having us here tonight. I'm going to briefly walk through the process process to date for the project before passing it to Dana, our civil engineer, to talk through the site plan for the project. There has been a lot of process to date dating back to the fall of 2022 when the town of Natick issued a request for proposals for the five Auburn Street site. At that time, Metro West CD submitted a response that included the preservation of the historic Elliot school building and a new construction building. And in the spring of 2023, the Metro West CD proposal was selected as the most advantageous by the select board in the summer of 2023, a development agreement was signed. Then throughout the winter of 2023 and spring of 24, we performed due diligence and completed a traffic study. In addition to a number of additional exploratory studies and surveys, we participated in a number of development review team meetings with the staff from various town departments, including the fire department, police, DPW, board of Health, sustainability and Conservation Commission. And we advanced our preliminary design. We also completed an abbreviated notice of resource area delineation or arad through the Conservation Commission to establish the boundaries of the riverfront area, which has been the basis of our design advancement. In September, 2024, we received our project eligibility letter from the Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities, which allowed us to move into the 40 B process with the zoning board of appeals. Since then, we've been in front of the ZBA three times. We've also been in front of the Natick Historic District Commission several times and they serve in an advisory role in the 40 B process. And tonight as requested, we are in front of you the planning board. We have a couple of upcoming meetings as well. Our next zoning board hearing is scheduled for January 13th and we expect to be back in front of the Natick Historic District Commission with updated designs on January 30th. So as you can see, there has been a significant public process to date and we look forward to the planning board's comments tonight so they can be taken into account as we move through the zoning board process. I'm gonna briefly cover the proposed program for five Auburn Street. So as Jennifer mentioned, our proposal creates 100% affordable housing, 32 units of afford affordable family rental housing available to households, making up to 60% of area median income. Our proposal also preserves the Historic Elliot School, a treasured community resource in accordance with the Department of Interior Standards for the Rehabilitation of Historic Properties. Our proposal also includes open space and maintains the lawn at the corner of Elliot and Auburn Streets, which makes up a significant portion of the site in terms of sustainability, our proposal provides energy efficiency improvements for the existing building and we plan to pursue passive house certification for the new construction building. Our proposal also provides significant improvement of site storm water management to benefit the Charles River, which Dana will talk more about in a few minutes. And finally, on accessibility, we plan to provide accessibility upgrades at the historic building and the new construction building will be fully accessible. So with that I will pass it to Dana to walk through our site plan. <v Speaker 15>Thank you, Kaylin. Good evening.</v> My name is Dana Alto Beo with Merrill Engineers and land surveyors. As, as Caitlin mentioned, we haven't gotten very, you know, extremely far into the process. We haven't started the, the peer review process yet, but we've, we've covered a lot of initial groundwork. We just wanted to give the board an overview of our approach and to the, the site design and the site design and the development to this point. Number five, Auburn Street is located at the intersection of Auburn Street and Elliot Street. It's, it does have the Charles River located to the southeast of the property. The site consists of approximately 2.84 acres and contains the historic Elliot School is, as Caitlyn mentioned, the location of the parcel is within the residential general zoning district. The existing topography on the lot is relatively flat with the highest point along Elliot Street at elevation, approximately 1 24 sloping gently down towards the Charles River and at existing fence line to the rear of the property where the elevation is approximately elevation one 20. From there, there's a steep slope that goes down to the Charles River, which sits at approximately Elevation 1 0 5. As I mentioned, there's a, a steep slope with the fence at the top of it. Basically everything on the inside of the fence line is, is entirely cleared within the site. The wetland resource areas were delineated by Brad Holmes and Environmental Consulting and Restoration. And as Caitlin mentioned, there was an order of resource area donation issued by the Conservation Commission this past April of 2024. The bordering vegetated wetlands associated with the Charles River are shown in blue as well as the 100 foot buffer zone in green here. The 100 foot riverfront area and the 200 foot riverfront area are both shown in magenta. And the FEMA flood hazard area limit is in orange at the bottom of the slope or towards the bottom of the slope. The existing site currently, as Caitlin also mentioned, provides no stormwater treatment or recharge of runoff on the property. The majority of the runoff from both the school building and the paved parking area flow is untreated towards the Charles River. Currently, the proposed project, excuse me, includes the renovation of the historic Elliot School to create nine new residential units within the school building itself, as well as the construction of a new 23 unit residential building within approximate footprint of about 9,000 square feet. There's also a new driveway associated parking areas and site rating with utility connections also proposed as part of the project. These utility connections include the construction of a new stormwater management system, which will comply with both the Natick stormwater management and the erosion control regulations, as well as the DEP stormwater handbook. The new driveway has been configured in a U-shape, as you can see around, it'll surround the existing Elliot school to provide fire department and emergency vehicle access on all four sides, where currently it's really only on two sides and along Auburn Street. So for a third side, the new otherly access to the site will be two-way up to the proposed turnaround, which will be expanded from what's currently out there beyond the turnaround. In an effort to reduce the overall impervious coverage on the site, we reduce this to a one-way access to reduce the driveway width and maintain a one-way access throughout the, the remainder of the site to the exit only access to Auburn Street. On the southerly side of the, the site itself, 45 new parking spaces are proposed throughout the site, including three a DA spaces, which are in line with both of the main entrances to both buildings. In order to further reduce the impervious area on site, we have proposed nine compact spaces, which will also be ev ready. After meeting with the select board and the towns design review team, it became clear that we wanted to maintain a, a similar feel to the existing building to the extent possible. With that in mind, we wanted to make sure that the, the grading kind of matched what was currently out there. In order to do that, we've kept our, our tributary areas small for our, our drainage system just to ensure that we only need to, you know, modify grades as necessary just to ensure that, that that stormwater is flowing where, where it's supposed to be flowing. We're essentially keeping the, the grades as close to what's out there as possible. We are proposing new utility connections to both buildings. All utilities will be subsurface. These include new fire and water connections to both buildings, along with new sewer services, and there was actually no gas proposed to either building. Both buildings will be entirely serviced by underground electricity. Stormwater from all impervious areas will be managed and treated for both stormwater quality and quantity. As I previously mentioned, the existing site has no stormwater controls, roof runoff and the runoff from the existing parking area just flow untreated overland towards the the Charles River. There's also no recharge systems provided anywhere on site for the current impervious areas. Runoff from the proposed stormwater system, we'll treat runoff from, I'm sorry, we'll treat runoff or total suspended solids to keep the, the minimum 80% removal as required by the the stormwater handbook. Soils testing was performed this past May and revealed really good pervious sand and gravel with a relatively deep estimated seasonal high groundwater depth. The proposed stormwater management system will utilize low impact development techniques, including bio retention areas, which will pretreat stormwater from the impervious areas prior to directing it to one of the three subsurface infiltration systems that are located throughout the site. Excuse me, runoff from the proposed turnaround area will be treated according to the low impact DESI site design credit number three, which will take advantage of the qualifying pervious area. Runoff from this turnaround will be directed towards the 15 15,000 square foot grass area on the corner of Elliot Street and Auburn Street. Again, good soils testing was performed here revealing good pervious soil and a relatively deep estimated seasonal high groundwater level. In this area. The, the green or, or the grass area in this area is relatively flat. Also with a, a slope far less than 5% as as required for a a qualifying per base area. Runoff from both roof areas will be directed to the two larger subsurface infiltration systems one and two. The site has been designed to meet the requirements of the current aquifer protection district regulation, and we will have to file a notice of intent with the Conservation Commission in the near future work within the wetland resource areas where their buffers has been minimized and previously alter. It's been basically, essentially set to previously altered areas, which is kind of set by an existing fence line over this area. We have re reviewed this repo, excuse me. We have reviewed this approach with Claire Relli, the conservation agent, and she has not had any, any major concerns that we are aware of. We have proposed a contiguous line of silt sock along the limit of work down grad and of all proposed work to ensure that there's no sedimentation of it, any resource areas during construction. Currently, we are looking at modifications to the proposed buildings to try to address some of the comments that were received at the historic meeting and the recent CBA meeting. We're also looking at different options for parking configurations and minimum parking space sizing, as well as looking at the minimum radius at the entrance and exit openings onto Auburn Street. We'll be preparing updated plans that will be submitted to the ZBA for their next hearing, which is on January 13th, 2025. That basically covers the site design and layout. I can kind of go through a brief overview of the landscape design as well. The first slide. As, as previously mentioned, the site plan has been designed to complement the existing landscape features and and buildings on the site. We're maintaining lawn and street trees to the extent possible and a granite and chain fence along both Elliot Street and Auburn Street. We're also enhancing screening for the offsite properties using existing trees as well as new evergreen trees and shrubs. The existing fence will only be a adjusted as necessary for safe site access and sight lines leaving the, the site itself. The existing vegetation and trees and shrubs shown in this lighter olive color are, are shown throughout the site in both circles and star configurations. The more vibrant, darker trees are are what's proposed to accent the, the existing trees on site. As I mentioned, the existing lawn will be, will be remaining as a, a qualifying pervious area. There'll be no permanent structures proposed on this lawn area. We have proposed, or I should say Rebecca from RBLA landscape design, has proposed beds of low shrubs perennials and ground cover along the existing foundations to ensure that the visual sight lines from Elliot Street and Auburn Street remain the same of the existing building on site. We have also proposed street trees along Auburn Street and the existing building contains a a community building which has a, a plaza area, which is kind of located centrally be between the two main entrances from the buildings. This is an area that we would expect the residents of this development to congregate and socialize for the most part. We have also proposed a fence to screen out adjacent U utilities from this area. Likewise, there's a trash management area to the southwest of the proposed building. This will also be surrounded by evergreen trees and fencing to ensure that the site lines are, are, are blocked of the, of the dumpsters and any other features in there. The remaining open space throughout the site will be left as lawn area. Davis Square, as I mentioned, is currently working on some building modifications based on Carmen heard at the Historic District Commission recently, as well as the ZVA. Based on early feedback. We've been considering an overlook area, which will be at the end of Auburn Street. There is an existing flagpole here and we have recently learned at the ZBA hearing that the DPW uses some of this area for, for snow storage for the, the snow along Auburn Street and the neighbor at the end of Auburn Street also uses this for a turnaround. We've also discussed the opportunity to remove existing invasive plants along the, the steep slope adjacent to the river with the Conservation Commission. We'll be working with the Conservation commission and the the DPW to determine appropriate treatments for this area and if desired, the sidewalk along street can be extended down to this flagpole area. These next two slides show a suggested plant palette, which focuses on native and drought tolerant plants, trees, shrubs, and ground covers as shown in these slides, which will complement the existing vegetation on site. The largest tree species shown in this area will be planted along Auburn Street, as we mentioned, as as as street trees. We also have a proposed tree removal plan. We we're trying to maintain as many trees as possible. Several trees will be smaller. Trees and shrubs will be re removed, which are shown in this later, or, or or brighter green color here as needed to provide the emergency vehicle access around the Elliot School. We have proposed the replacement of some of these trees with, as I mentioned, the, the five trees along Auburn Street, as well as seven additional trees throughout the site and two shrub masses, which will also be planted. We, we will be reviewing the potential to change the inlet, the, the ingress and egress into the site. Both of these exits as, as requested by the the ZBA to allow maybe a little bit easier emergency vehicle access to and from some of these areas of Auburn Street if necessary. The existing granted and and chain fence will be adjusted as necessary. Site lighting has been carefully studied to eliminate clear at the property lines while maintaining safe light levels for the pedestrians in the, the site itself, this will be done by integrating several full lights during or throughout the property. That will be approximately 15 to 16 feet high building mounted lamps, which are approximately eight to 12 feet high building canopy lights and Ballard lights, which will be approximately 3.25 feet high as indicated on this plan, the average light level throughout the site will be 0.49 foot candles. The, the, the photometric plan is, is kind of software to follow. So the the lighting design are also proposed a, an isometric design plan, which shows the lights in this, this red area, which is the brightest light area. As we work away from there with the gradations each, each stepping down in, in light level to the light blue, which is the lowest light level away from the proposed lights for referenced twilight is rated at one foot candle and deep twilight or really dark portions of the night is 0.1 foot candle. As you can see on this page, we're keeping any spillover onto adjacent properties at zero or or just above zero At 0.1, which is deep twilight, all of the proposed fixtures will be dark sky compliant. They'll, they'll have full cutoffs. This means that there will be no upward light, light spill from these structures. The temperature of the the lighting will be warm so that it'll be perceived as less bright by the human eye. We're also maintaining the visual impact of a large historic light fixture on the existing main entrance to the Elliot school building. Based on feedback from the historic preservation consultant. This light will likely go unlit and it's really just for, you know, historical appearance. The existing lights proposed throughout the site will maintain safe passage along the sidewalk and stairs. I think that covers most of the site design. If you have any questions, we'd be happy to answer them for you. <v Speaker 1>Still a</v> <v Speaker 10>Okay, I got a few questions.</v> Some of 'em might be pretty straightforward, but so you have, there's 45 parking spaces for the 32 units, right? <v Speaker 15>That's correct.</v> <v Speaker 10>So is this gonna be actively marketed</v> for people that only have one vehicle? 'cause it's pretty short. There's not a whole lot that's about 1.4 parking spaces per unit. I was just kind of wondering how that's gonna be managed since most of my concern is if if there is more than that, suddenly there's gonna be a lot of people parking on Auburn Street. You know, it's not like in the middle of nowhere where they would have no place to park. So I was just kind of wondering is there any particular way that's gonna be managed or marketed? <v Speaker 15>Sure. Caitlyn can probably speak to it in, in more detail,</v> but I know in the, in the past on, on different developments that are similar, we've, we found that to be, it's actually above what's, you know, typically found on these sites. They're usually, I think Caitlyn can correct, correct me if I'm wrong, but I think it's more like 1.2 spaces per unit, something along those lines. So we have a few extra spaces to spare, believe it or not, and it has kind of played out with different properties that they, that they own in their, their, <v Speaker 10>Yeah, and I don't necessarily want a whole bunch</v> of unneeded parking either, you know, if this is closer to to transit or something like that, it would be a moot point anyways. But I, I can just kind of go through the other questions I have. 'cause some might be for you too. Why do we even have the turnaround, I guess, is that gonna be Amazon delivery or, or I know why it's there now, but what's gonna be happening with that turnaround? <v Speaker 15>The, the idea was for, you know, visitor drop off.</v> It could be, you know, deliveries, things like that. It kind of keeps it so people can easily get in and out of the site without having to drive all the way through the site, you know, if they're making a, a quick stop or dropping something off. <v Speaker 10>Okay. And if say Amazon's making delivery are,</v> there's two buildings, so are they, is everything gonna be dropped off at one? Are people gonna be going between the two anyways? You know, if I was gonna be dropped off at the new building, I would, you know, tell my person, don't drop me off here, go to the other side. I mean, I'm kind of tr in a way looking at, can I save you some impervious area too? <v Speaker 15>Sure. I, I think one of the items was we, you know,</v> we wanted to maintain the existing view from from from Elliot Street, which has a, an existing light pole there. <v Speaker 10>Okay.</v> <v Speaker 15>So we're trying to maintain</v> that existing light pole and then it, excuse me, team two, it seemed to work well keeping, you know, a drop off area there. But you know, we will have throughout, in, in various spots, different maintenance spaces or, you know, Amazon delivery spaces for, for both buildings. This just happens to work well for the existing school and then, you know, maybe for the exist for the, the proposed building, it might be something over in this area. <v Speaker 10>Okay. The other question I have that new roadway I guess</v> between the turnaround area and the back, well not that's new asphalt there, that's pretty close to that abutter is, are they okay with this? Have they, have you guys had any discussions with that Abutter? Do you know what I'm talking about? It's right on the left side of your plan and I'm not Yeah, I think, yeah, right there just comes off of close to their property and their building. <v Speaker 15>I'm not aware of it. I don't know if Caitlyn has</v> had any discussions. <v Speaker 13>So we have been generally in communication with the owner</v> of, of the building and they have provided a letter of support for the project and they have not raised any concerns with us around the proximity of that, of that pathway to their building. <v Speaker 10>Okay, thanks. And very last one.</v> What's gonna be inside the old building? Can you kind of just walk me through that a little bit? I, I think the new one's pretty straightforward, but what's the old one gonna look like inside? Is it all gonna be units, is there gonna be any common space? <v Speaker 13>Right. And maybe Dana, if you can kind of point to</v> the building as I describe it, that would be cool. <v Speaker 15>Sure. I think we actually have some architectural</v> plans if I remember correctly. Oh, I might have gone a little too fast there. <v Speaker 13>So this right, so go ahead Dana.</v> <v Speaker 15>Sure. So on the, on the first floor we will have a,</v> a community room, which is kind of the existing auditorium. I think you could see the pages over in this area. We'll also have some management office and conference room, bike storage area. They're out there and this lines up with that, that plaza area, which we expect to be open for the, the residents for gatherings. Then on the first floor we'll have, it looks like four units on the first floor and the second floor, same thing. And then we will actually have three units on the lower level as well. <v Speaker 13>Yeah, I think it's actually three units on each floors</v> for a total of, of nine. <v Speaker 15>Oh, I'm sorry. You're correct.</v> <v Speaker 10>That's all I have for questions, Doug.</v> <v Speaker 6>Yeah, thank you. Thanks for the presentation. Sure.</v> Will, will we talk about architecture or we gonna fold those into those comments now question? <v Speaker 1>I'd say go for whatever we've been presented</v> <v Speaker 6>Question.</v> Okay. So all right then I'll just, alright, so on the, on the site plan, if we could go up to sort of the colored version of the site plan. Just walk me through the, the rationale for the trash management area. That seems like an awful lot of pavement kind of tucked in the building, that corner of the building, there's a lot going on at that corner where it's right up against the, and what is the, the dimension there? One feet, one foot two feet, <v Speaker 15>Right in this one? Yeah,</v> <v Speaker 6>Right there.</v> You've got a roof drain line, you've got a drain line going there. It looks like you might need a manhole for that kink in the drain line. There's a lot going on there and I don't know, do you really have to have that length of a trash management area? I feel, it seems like you wanna pull that up to the front and come up with some design treatment to screen it o otherwise that thing's like pushed back there and I don't know, it just creates a lot of pavement and I'm just, I don't, that, that corner of the building does not look comfortable for me. Snow plowing, hitting it with a truck, I don't know. I just doesn't look like a great solution. <v Speaker 15>Sure. The, so the, the long, the, the length</v> of the access actually comes from the, the fire department. They've actually requested access on three sides of the building. So it is so you're <v Speaker 6>Just using that to, okay, so that's,</v> <v Speaker 15>Yeah, so we're, it, it just made sense, you know, we,</v> we have to have it anyways for the fire department, so it seemed, it seemed to make sense to put the, the trash area kind of outta the way over here. So it's not in any of the, you know, the residents eyelines or anything like that. It's kind of hidden out of the way as best we can. <v Speaker 6>How is that corner of the building protected</v> <v Speaker 15>This corner?</v> Yeah, I would envision some ballards. We're still kind of, you know, somewhat early in the process, but we do have 21 feet from the corner of the building to the sideline here. Wow. There's 16 feet of pavement, so it, it, there should be, you know, plenty of room for the trash truck to get down here. Oh yeah. Easily and comfortably. That's <v Speaker 6>Plenty of room.</v> I agree. It's probably more than you need. <v Speaker 15>Sure.</v> <v Speaker 6>Okay.</v> What's the purpose of that little pass through between that little island and the front of the building near that corner? What is that? Yeah, what is that? <v Speaker 15>This is actually a tricky, you know, from a, a grading and</v> and stonewater standpoint. I, I wanna keep as much of it going to the two larger subsurface infiltration systems, but it, at some point I I'm fighting myself a little bit too much without high point in this area. Yeah. So I just needed to get, I was, it was a little too flat to go all the way around here, so I needed to break through here. So that's really all that is. Okay. <v Speaker 6>Yep.</v> <v Speaker 15>That way I don't have</v> to make this deeper than it used to be. And it gives, we've actually maintained four feet of separation from all the infiltration systems to the estimated seasonal high groundwater so we can avoid any issues with mounting, et cetera. Yeah, <v Speaker 6>Okay.</v> I know it's, you know, recognizing the abutters at four pleasant, six pleasant, those are commercial properties. <v Speaker 15>That's</v> <v Speaker 6>Correct. What what's the, what's the screening</v> strategy there for planting along that very, very thin strip of land between those, those properties and the site? <v Speaker 15>So I, I went a little too far. Yeah.</v> So we are proposing a fence along there, but that'll kind of cover as, you know, the, the tighter areas. Then we'll, we'll have some evergreens along this property line that'll be supplemented as well as over by the trash area to kind of shield the views from the, the river itself. Yeah. <v Speaker 6>Okay. Okay.</v> And just my last comment, I know you didn't have a sort of architectural presentation here, but I, you know, I did, I have, I've seen these plans before. I've seen them tonight in the slide deck that was, you know, prepared for this and probably not gonna be the first time you've heard this. I, I just, I'm really disappointed in the design of that building as it relates to the Elliot School. That's a historic building. You've said it a number of times, it's brick and what you're showing is, i I mean, I would love to, I would love, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. I would love to hear the architectural rationale for the design of that building in response to its context in a historic area. <v Speaker 7>There's a view, if you scroll all the way to the top</v> of this presentation that the title page, <v Speaker 15>And I I think I i I, I kind of touched on it</v> during the, the presentation as well. The, the architects Davis Square, they're actually working on a, a different layout. They've heard some comments on this, I think initially could probably speak to it better. <v Speaker 6>Just, I mean, let's face it, that does not, to me,</v> that does not respond to the context of of, of this site whatsoever. It's an entirely new introduction of a three story garden style flat building that you would see in, you know, not Dedham or Needham, I don't know, but something I would love to see a new design on that building. <v Speaker 15>And, and that's one of the</v> things that, that they're working on. They, they've heard those comments and I, I think they, they're, they're trying to address all of those comments with, you know, something a a little bit different. <v Speaker 6>What's that? Thank you.</v> <v Speaker 15>Sure. Terry,</v> <v Speaker 4>Thank you.</v> And actually I'll dovetail off of Doug's comments. I, i for one, would be very, very interested in seeing what the different concepts that are kind of now being discussed are going to look like. Before we certainly, before I could go ahead and say, yes, this looks good to me. I'll come back to that in a second. I, I did have a couple of questions in terms of the lighting. I assume that it's, it is going to be reasonably sympathetic to the residential neighborhood around it. <v Speaker 15>That's correct. Yes. It'll be dark sky compliant, shielded</v> and downward facing to make sure that we, you know, keep those late levels low off the property line. <v Speaker 4>And, and you mentioned that the</v> Historic District Commission and I think design review had had certain comments that you were going to be responding to, and I'd be interested in understanding what those were. <v Speaker 15>I think we actually have Cliff Ballmer from DSA,</v> I think they're on the call as well. They might be able to speak to that a little in a little more depth. <v Speaker 1>Do we have that matter? Yes, that person.</v> Well, why don't we go ahead. I'll, I'll, <v Speaker 16>I'm here if, can you hear me?</v> <v Speaker 1>Yes, we can hear you.</v> <v Speaker 16>Hi, I'm Cliff Bomer.</v> I'm a principal at Davis Square Architects and, and love getting feedback from you. I think the question was what feedback did we get from the historic District Commission? I'll quickly summarize that. The, there certainly was universal support for the adaptive reuse of the historic building. And our intention is, is as I think Caitlin mentioned in her introduction, we're restoring the building to the National Park Service standards. So it's going to really look fantastic. The, you might have had a question about some of the programming in the building. We we're limited in what we can do in the large auditorium space because it's critical to maintain the, the stature of that space. So we're limiting it to kind of temporary removable construction, really maintaining the feel of the large space. So universal approval of that concept. And I, you're echoing some of the other comments we heard. I would say that the second, there were seven members who, who all of whom provided generous comment. Certainly there was a shared feeling that the new building doesn't really sufficiently tie into the architecture of the school and the neighborhood. The, both the scale of it and the language of the building. I think generally speaking, there was a feeling that the building, the massing of the building is presented as is too large at the street end of the building for sure. And which we're sensitive to and have been working on. And I think that the last kind of going in order of, of the comments that we received, the frequency of the comments, there were also questions about what would be the view of the new building from the public realm. So various places where the building would be visible. I think they want to be very sure of what, you know, what our answer is to that. We're working on all of those. I think from a massing perspective and connection perspective, there was concern both about the vernacular of this building kind of departing from the vernacular, but also what are, what elements are we taking from the historic building to inform the design of the new building. And we're working very hard. We intend to be, to appear with the historic district commission at the end of January. And as you've already heard earlier than earlier than that, I think it's 13th, the zoning board of appeals will see the, the new work that we've been doing on the building floor plans have changed a little bit. What we've done is redistributed the massing of the, of the new building. The reaction we were getting is it was too massive, particularly on the street end of the building. So dealing with that, the perception of the scale of the building is critical to us. I can answer other questions if you, if you'd like. <v Speaker 4>Thank you. I know, I actually, many</v> of the things you said are, are things that I would concur with about that the historic district commission had had put forward. You know, if, if you look right across Elliot Street at the River Band School, I like to point that out to folks as this a terrific example of an historic building. The the more tavern that sits in the middle of it, and then the construction of the various, the campus of the River Bend School that surrounds it. And it was done in such a way that it is stunningly sympathetic. It makes very clear when you, when you go to that site, you know where the historic building is and the other buildings that include a gymnasium, things of a substantial scale still manage to kind of fi find a way to pay tribute or acknowledge the, the original building. And I find that so utterly lacking here. And to take a Perry Shaw Hepburn building, they were the architects of Colonial Williamsburg, the, the reconstruction for John Rockefeller. And this is their own, I, not surprisingly, their only work in Natick, but you know, to have something next to it that feels like it has absolutely nothing in common with, with the historic building or, or the surrounding rhythm of the, the, the kind of the streetscape. It concerns me not just as an aesthetic, but when I'm talking with people about under kind of understanding architecture, I will talk about how if, if two buildings can't carry on a conversation with each other, the people inside the buildings can't carry on a conversation that if, if a building feels to a passerby like it is out of place, they kind of take that as the people who live there are out of place. And, and it, it, it just, it concerns me because I think this is a, an an important affordable housing project. I think it could, it could be a, a model of kind of sympathetic communication between the two buildings rather than what I feel we have here. Where there is nothing from the window patterns to the massing that call out anything that relates to, not just to the Elliot school but to, to the surrounding character of the community. And I, I get concerned because whether people do it consciously or not, if, if they see something that feels like it doesn't fit in, they kind of, that that is rubs off on how they take the building and the people who are in it. And I think that is so important that we find a way to connect them kind of in in character. One last point is, I understand that in the, in the Elliot school building, there is some, is it a stained glass window or there's some fairly distinctive glasswork? <v Speaker 16>I don't think there's any stained glass there.</v> The, there are some pretty extreme divided lights, particularly on the, the view that you see where you see the two buildings that the facade that faces the new building is very heavily fenestrated with some pretty amazing windows. They're huge. I know they're like 12 over 12 or something. They're, they're spectacular. <v Speaker 4>So, so that kind of picks up,</v> it picks up the kind of the colonial, the rhythm of the, of the building. As somebody who went to college in Colonial Williamsburg, I always feel like I'm seeing a friend when I, when I see the Elliot school. But I think, I think that's, it's just, it's important. It's important that how people perceive a building carries a lot of weight with how they, how it does or doesn't become part of a neighborhood. I think this has a huge opportunity to do that. And I fear at least as things stand now, that it's a long way away from that. So I'm eager to, I think would love to see us meet again when there are revised plans that we can consider. 'cause I think that is extraordinarily important. Thank you. <v Speaker 6>Thank you Andy.</v> Well picking up on that, I was sorry to see this on our agenda tonight because when this came up, I know we're advisory. I was hoping that we would see this after the architecture has been addressed. Sometimes with projects like this, we only literally get one bite at the apple. And, and I know and I fully acknowledge we're advisory. So my first question to the team is, would you be willing to come back once the architecture is settled and the, the building has progressed more. <v Speaker 14>When, when would that be?</v> So we're, we're trying to stick to a tight schedule, but the thought on our side was to submit the plans revised that are going for consideration to the zoning board on January 13th and to submit that set to the planning board. And then at the end of January, there's a meeting again with the historic, if you could fit us in in January, I'm sure that Cliff's team at and the team could come back. But that was the plan to submit the revised plan to you to show you the revisions and which take into account really much of the comments and feedback we've already heard from you this evening. But <v Speaker 6>I, I think I, for party of one, I'd like</v> to take you up on your offer and I would like to make it work even if it's a special meeting. To be totally frank, I think one of the best things that this board does is site plan review, which takes into consideration architecture, lighting, traffic in traffic out. And I don't think our friends on the ZBA, to be totally honest, do as nearly as good of a job. I, it's just not, it's just not part of what they have to do. They will look at compliance issues, zoning, appropriateness. I think we do a better job of site plan and this is an important one. So I would like to see if we could possibly have you back. The fact is your presentation is very good. You've shown great sensitivity to so many elements here, including I believe the gentleman referred to the grading to make it so that the two buildings are graded properly so that they sort of mirror each other. So you've addressed lighting concerns, there's been a lot of sensitivity to this project. You've had very good answers to our questions. The, the, the sore thumb issue here is that the building looks like an institution, maybe one that you can't come and go as you please. I mean it looks like a scary flat roof building. And, and Terry said it better than I will about the concerns of the building not fitting in and therefore, hopefully not. But you know, the sense being that the people don't fit in because they live in the building. So I, my desire was to have this come in front of our board after this building has been addressed as, as you guys have said tonight, that it is being addressed in terms of architecture. So, so if, <v Speaker 14>If you, if you could fit us in</v> because you know, the, because this is a hundred percent affordable, there's a very tight schedule for funding and funding applications. But of course this team has really wants to work collaboratively. You're an advisory board. That's right. But of course we'd love a positive report to the ZBA. If you have any comments on the actual site plan stuff that Dana went over, then per then we'd love to hear that tonight. And then if you can fit us in sometime shortly after the January 13th meeting to see those revised architectural plans and then we could focus on the architect architectural items, that would be fantastic. But if there are site plan comments this evening, we would love to hear those. <v Speaker 6>I do have a couple, have you guys been in touch</v> with the M-W-R-T-A? <v Speaker 15>Excuse me,</v> <v Speaker 6>Do you know what that is?</v> <v Speaker 15>The, the, the the sewer commission or the Oh no, I'm</v> <v Speaker 6>Sorry. It's</v> <v Speaker 14>No, yeah, Scott.</v> Scott, our Scott from VHB, our traffic and parking engineer was in touch with them. The metro was transit oh authority. Scott Thornton, who was our traffic engineer who did a report to the ZBA, did get in touch with them. <v Speaker 6>Good. This is miles</v> from any public transit. I do not know where you would walk to go get a gallon of milk or some eggs or something. You, you will absolutely have to have a car or access to a car somehow. I think it is vital that the M-W-R-T-A I'm praying, they're great people, they're flexible enough, maybe they can design a route that will come through the site plan even, even then. Oh my, you know, on a, on a bad night of traffic, if you're trying to get to the, a grocery store from here, it could be a 45 minute round trip, easily plus waiting for the bus. But without the M-W-R-T-A, I think life could be very difficult for somebody living here without a car. I would be very curious to know if, if, when you've spoken to them, if they are proposing to provide service here, I think it's essential that they do. Would it be advisable to have some sort of a shelter? I realize people don't have to walk too far from the building outside, but maybe in the circle there could be a little overhang or a shelter if people are, if the bus does come and people can wait for it. If you, if you wouldn't mind giving that some thought. But I think, I think that, you know, given this location, I think the MWRT is the only public transportation that, that I can think of. And they're flexible enough to make a, to add a route here. But I think it would be nicer for the people that live here if there was maybe a little shelter on the front circle on a rainy day or something instead of trying, you know, if you live in the back of the building and can't see the bus coming, you're just gonna be waiting outside. So there used to be a little portico overhang. I don't know if that's gonna survive or not, but I'd like to just ask more information about a bus route and a possible shelter there. And I, I think, right, <v Speaker 13>And I, I, sorry, this is Caitlyn.</v> I can jump in with just a little bit more information on, on what we've done so far. So we, we have been in touch with the M-W-R-T-A, it sounds like there was a route that went through South Natick that was discontinued during covid. They don't currently have plans to extend service to South Natick, but they have indicated that they would consider doing so if there was enough public interest and if it was operationally feasible. So that's certainly a conversation that we could reopen. But there's also a, a school bus stop that is, I believe 0.1 miles from the property. So with in very close proximity of the site. And our traffic and parking engineer did do some analysis around pedestrian access and South Natick, the surrounding area is fairly walkable. There's a number of amenities within walking distance at the site. So I think that there's a, a little bit more pedestrian ease of access than, than folks expect. So I just wanted to add those, those couple of things. <v Speaker 6>Yeah, I'm with you. I, I agree.</v> I mean there, there's, it's a lovely place to walk and, and there's lots of walkability, but if you just needed to get some, you know, staple grocery items without a car I, or unless somebody comes, picks you up or you borrow a car or something like that. But I, I just think that we need to plan for successful livability of people there and you know, walking's fine, but if there's no place to walk to, it's, so I, I think that really does have to be another layer to this package that has to give some considerations. One thing to get it built, but people are gonna live there for an awfully long time and now is the time to address those, I think very important decisions. So I appreciate, and you know, any comments that we make to the ZBA, I'd like to, you know, have, have some of those thoughts included. But I do hope we get to see you again after the architecture has been updated for especially building number two. 'cause I just, I just think that you know all in the name of making this a good project. You have a very good board here that's good at site plan review. And if you're willing and if you trust us that we're not gonna be overbearing or you know, waste your time, I think we'll be as efficient as possible 'cause we're all invested in this and we really wanna make this a good project. So we are, we're happy to Speaking for myself, I think I can speak for the board, we're happy to put the time in to help review your updated architectural plans, which I hope we'll have a chance to see. <v Speaker 1>Thank you Wendy. Glenn,</v> <v Speaker 7>Thank you.</v> I have a couple of comments. So first of all, I echo what other people have said. I'm not gonna repeat any of that stuff. The lighting, I heard a throwaway that no light was going to leave the site except for maybe a little, so it would be really awesome if that little bit that was gonna leave the site didn't, it would be really awesome if some of these lights didn't need to be on all of the time. So other projects have put lights on motion detectors so that if somebody was moving around a certain place and needed it to be lit, then they would come on, they would stay on for some period of time and in the absence of further motion they would go off. I think that there's some creative things acknowledging that this is a very dark residential community. Very few places in Natick that are dark, my neighborhood glows from the mall and I don't even live near the mall. So it would be really, really nice if the residence down there can maintain the area as dark as possible so they can see whatever stars are visible. You showed what you called the landscape plan, but it doesn't look like a landscape plan to me. None of the trees on the plan are identified. None of the trees to be removed are identified. None of the trees that exist on the property currently are identified. And I did see the pages that listed the proposed plant pallets and those look spectacular. I'm a little bit concerned about your use of elm, not because I don't want everybody or in the entire town to use elm. I think it's great, but of course Dutch elm disease is still around and I know that I have a neighbor who planted an elm tree and, and it died and then they planted a second elm tree and it is thriving. So I just wanna make sure that there is some plan in place for the trees that might be slightly more susceptible to some of the blights that, that were out there. I'm not a huge fan of red maples anymore. They're very pretty, they are very over planted in Natick. So if you think of something other than a red maple that could be used instead, that would be spectacular. I'm looking, I I cannot identify trees by sight. It is not a skill that I have, but I am looking at the Google, Google Maps pictures of the site that it says were taken in July of 2022. So I don't know how up to date these plantings are. I see things that look like very old used cedar trees. There's a bunch of trees that have bark that makes them look like either sycamore or plain trees. So I, I would like, i I personally in an advisory nature would love to know what you're planning on taking down and what you're planning on replacing it with. I know that there was another site in South Natick that had hickory trees planted around it and they were gonna cut them all down and put up red maples and I suggested that maybe they could cut them all down and put up hickory trees instead that, you know, suited location better and and such. So I, I personally would love to see a, a plan so that I can understand. So I mean you're, you're, you're showing the darker shaded ones or the ones that you're going to replace as the one the, I'm looking at the image that you're displaying currently. There's that cluster of what you referred to as evergreens, but I don't know, I mean if I look at the proposed plant pallet, I see 1, 2, 3, 4, perhaps five that I would consider to be evergreens. So I'm not exactly sure what you're planning on putting where and what you're planning on taking down. So I, I do compliment you on your choice of, of plant palette. I think it's gonna be very pretty, whatever it is that you do down there, it looks like you've got mountain laurel going in is, I mean it's just really nice, nice stuff. But I think some of it's gonna be a challenge to maintain. I hope that you're gonna have some sort of maintenance plan for the landscaping so that if stuff goes south it can be replaced with fresh, fresh but like plants. And I think that's all I had, the lighting and the fact that I don't really understand where everything is going and what's being removed. <v Speaker 1>Thank you. Thank you Glenn. I have a couple of thoughts.</v> One are, do you have access, handicap access in the old building, the existing building to the, what's referred to, I believe as the second floor, the third level? Is that a requirement? Because I don't see how you're getting any handicap access up there. That's a question for <v Speaker 16>You.</v> Yeah, I'm, I'm, I'm back. Hi. No, it's not a requirement. What we're doing in the, in the historic building, the entry level of the historic building is up I think a couple of feet and we're providing a, a lift in the kind of entryway there's, which you won't see from the outside, that brings you up to the main entry level. There are three one bedroom units on that level and they will all meet group one requirements. The, the second floor will not be group one. The, the historic building is exempt from group one as an adaptive reuse. The new building will have an elevator and all 23 units in that building will be accessible by the elevator. Three of them will be group two units, which exceed the architectural access board requirements. And they'll also be a sensory unit, a fourth unit that meets the sensory requirements of the access board. There's an accessible path between the buildings and accessible path to the public way and accessible path to the dumpster facility and a sufficient number of accessible parking spaces as well. <v Speaker 1>I, yeah, thank you.</v> I I did see the lift shown on the plan. I realized that the accessibility, handicap accessibility to the units on the, in the existing building on the top level and the lowest level may not be required. <v Speaker 16>Correct.</v> <v Speaker 1>But from a practical point of view,</v> I mean when that building was built, it didn't require anything to do with handicap accessibility. But now functionally it really does. And I have seen, have seen older buildings that have become compliant and in an aesthetically, architecturally, aesthetically very admirable way. I'm, I I feel it's rather shortsighted not to do that, be only because it's not required. There may be a lot of things in that category, but I don't think any accessibility should be one of them. However, going on from that, I have always, in my work as an architect, I've hesitated to comment to criticize especially and other architect's work or any other, any other work, anybody. Usually the design of a a, it's like a painting. What is acceptable to one is not acceptable necessarily to another, like another world. However, I am rather, well I guess I'll just say you were shocked to see the illustration that shows the existing and the proposed side by side. I, I am questioning how that proposal ever even got on the drawing with, with Terry said it all and I'll end it. Oh and the criticism of the design. But keep in mind that I did hear something about a site plan. Can we do the site plan and not think about the building at the moment or do it in piecemeal. I think I heard that and I can't agree with looking at this site, especially this site in that way, what is coming up in three, the third dimension from the site is a part of the site and not looking at the site with the structure itself, I think is very shortsighted. You will, you, you will get, as I think I said, if you'll, any design you get, you ask for half a dozen appoint opinions on the design and you'll get at least eight or 10 or more. Everyone's gonna have something to say about the design. But this situation, this existing proposal as it's right on the screen right now, I don't even, frankly, I don't even think it's worth looking at. I'm shocked that it's there. I've, I've overstepped my typical architectural bounds. I, but I had to make had to say it. Is there anyone I anyone else? Anyone else? Any, anything to say? Nothing? I agree completely. Oh, if, if you have something to say, I'd be delighted to hear it. But I'd like you to step up to microphone if you wouldn't mind and introduce yourself. And by all means, that's what it's a public hearing. <v Speaker 17>My name is Carol Joseph.</v> I'm at 12 Leach Lane down in that neighborhood. And we appreciate the fact that I feel as though this board is hearing what the community down there has been saying all along that it really doesn't fit into that neighborhood. We are all for affordable housing. We all agree it needs, there needs to be much more, but we feel like this is just being rammed down the neighborhood's throat. And there is, as you pointed out, there's a coffee shop that's pretty much where you can go to get any kind of food. It is a two mile walk either up to Natick Center or to Wellesley Center to find any kind of grocery store, things like that. We, we know the constraints of this area, but if you don't have a car, it really is a difficult thing. And if there are 42 spaces allocated, if those are all being used and you have visitors, you, you could not park on Auburn Street that is a very, very small road like two, it's very hard for two cars to pass down there. But then are people gonna start parking on Water Street and Lincoln Street and kind of invading that neighborhood with constantly having cars parked out front. So it's just, and the traffic situation down there is really bad too. But we do appreciate your comments and this is kind of what our neighborhood has been trying to say. <v Speaker 1>Thank you very much. Thank you. Is there anyone else,</v> <v Speaker 7>It would be awesome if we could not use words like</v> invading the neighborhood 'cause nobody is under invasion. <v Speaker 1>Can you sir?</v> <v Speaker 18>Hi,</v> George Rec eight Leach Lane. Just a couple of points for consideration. This isn't even gonna be completed till 2031 if I understand that correctly. And it's also $32 million. That's $1 million per unit if my math is right. Just seems like there could be a better use of that money to get more people into affordable housing sooner than change the entire landscape of the neighborhood. So I did note that there's gonna be a lot of activity for ride shares probably in there that I don't think anybody's accounted for yet. So those are my two points. Thank you again for your time. <v Speaker 1>Thank you very much. Yes ma'am.</v> <v Speaker 19>Hi, I am Terry O'Toole. I live on Leach Lane, number 35.</v> Just listening to this and listening to the other night as well. I only wanted to make a couple of comments. There may be questions. I know there are no answers to them, but in regards to the, the lights and the, the headlights where the two driveways exit onto Auburn Street, they point right into homes on Auburn Street and shine across onto Water Street. So at any point where there are gonna be headlights, which is not just residents, but all these delivery trucks and whatnot, I mean those headlights hitting, hitting your home, it can be, can, can be really grading. And I, I don't know if there's a solution there or not. Another part is the sort of making the driveway around the building kind of cramming everything into such a tiny small space for the purpose of emergency vehicles being able to navigate easily in, in and around the complex. And, and on Auburn Street, these, these delivery trucks, you know, the, all the FedEx trucks, UPS trucks, the mail trucks, all all, all sorts of work vehicles that are on the streets all the time, you know, they can only just stop while they jump out and deliver what they're delivering. And that one tiny driveway, I guess they're calling it, is going to be constantly have activity in it. It's not really like it's gonna be an open access for emergency vehicles all the time. I suppose they can move them in the case of an emergency, but there's just an awful lot going on in a very small space. And I, I live on Leach Lane, there are cars parked on Leach Lane all the time. You really have a hard time navigating to get in and out. That's where the school bus is. This, the bus stop is at the bottom of Leach Lane. So there are parents waiting with their kids to either get on the bus or to come home from the bus. You know, it's really, it, it's really a, a busy place and to have cars parked all over the place is, is really unsafe. And then finally, this is just an observation. I have no skill level at all. I'm not a civil engineer. I, I I'm not, I I don't have great skill in conservation issues, but this the fence line, if you actually are behind the existing Elliot school and you see where the fence is and you picture a driveway in a parking lot and this 9,000 square foot building all within the line of that fence where the grade drops off and goes down, I just find it amazing that we could even consider putting such such a sized building on that spot. I I can't imagine that at some point it's not just gonna fall. I mean, I, I see the, I see the pines along the brook, you know, from in, in, along, along the farm and whatnot and, and they can't survive, you know, being along the brook. I just don't understand how, how this will work in a way that there's not going to be a catastrophe at some point. Now those are only observations. Maybe some questions. I know there are no answers to them, but that's my input for tonight. Thank you very much. Okay. <v Speaker 6>I throw one more question out. Can I throw one more</v> question out there just to the team? It, it, these will all be rental units. So is there one company that will be the management company for this? <v Speaker 14>Yes, Caitlin. Yep.</v> <v Speaker 13>Yeah. And Dana, we can still see your screen.</v> I'm not sure if you wanna close your screen, but yes, there is a, we have a third party professional management company, Maloney properties that manages, you know, tens of thousands of, of units in, in the region and it's highly respected. So we would have a, a professional third party management company. <v Speaker 6>I, I know their name. So like if a tree died,</v> there would be a management company that would be responsible for maintaining the grounds, et cetera. It's not like a homeowner's association, it would be the management company. <v Speaker 13>That's</v> <v Speaker 6>Correct. Okay, thank you.</v> <v Speaker 14>And Kaitlyn, do you wanna speak to the timeline that</v> a public comment was made on? <v Speaker 13>Yeah, a a a couple of quick things.</v> I think a gentleman mentioned that this project wouldn't be until 2031. I just wanna clarify that, you know, based on our funding timeline that we would plan to start in 2026 or 2027. So it's much, much sooner than than 2031. And also our, our, our budget is not $30 million. It's closer to, to $20 million, which is a reasonable cost per unit. But any, you know, the costs are really driven by the, the costs to bring the site up to compliance with modern standards and to provide that storm water management to protect the Charles. And also driven by the careful historic preservation work that's required to preserve the Elliot school. You know, both causes which we think are, are worthy of, of the cost. So I just wanted to add that as well. <v Speaker 16>Thank you.</v> <v Speaker 6>Can I make one more</v> surely bite at the apple. I don't mean to prolong this, but just going back to my previous comment about the, the trash area and the length of that and the rationale that it's accommodating a firetruck or maybe Mr. Al can answer this, I mean, is is that truly a code issue? Or is that a want to have issue? <v Speaker 15>I'm not sure if you can hear me.</v> <v Speaker 6>Yep, I can hear you.</v> <v Speaker 15>Oh geez.</v> <v Speaker 6>You gotta mute one of your, one of yourselves.</v> You're showing up twice. Twice. <v Speaker 15>It's funny, it says it's, I'll just close it.</v> Sorry about that. So yes, it is a code requirement. We had met initially early on with the fire department and that was one of the items that they had, they had requested just to gain access on at least three sides of the building. Obviously the, the backside where it being so close to the river, it's, it's not possible there. But they were comfortable as long as they could access from Auburn Street, from the, the main driveway. And then if we provided that third access, they, they indicated that they would be comfortable with that. <v Speaker 6>I mean, I, let me ask it again.</v> Is it a request or is it a code requirement that you have that side of the building accessible by a firetruck? <v Speaker 16>D Dana? I think I might be able to answer that.</v> <v Speaker 15>Sure. I I apologize. I'm having</v> some terrible difficulties here. Okay. <v Speaker 16>Yeah. I, it's a code requirement in the sense</v> that the authority having jurisdiction often can dictate what, what works best in their community. It is not a code requirement as far as the area height and construction type that's in the building code. It's a fully sprinkler building. Yeah, <v Speaker 6>It's a fully, okay.</v> Because, you know, just my comment, I'd like you to go back and maybe revisit that because you know, okay, it's, you're showing a paved area, it's to accommodate a ladder truck. But practically speaking, I can't imagine a ladder truck backing down that close to a burning building and parking there trying to lift a, it's just from a practical point of view, I don't think they'll ever do that, ever. Believe me, I deal with this all the time. I'm in the, I'm in the business too in terms of site plan and, you know, land use. You could do, you could do pervious pavement or something, you know, if they really wanted to have hard access where they need to put down footers for the, or outriggers for the, for the firetruck. But I really would really strongly encourage you to, to, to take another crack at that. It just, it, it, to me it's needless, it's fully sprinkled a building. You're trying to accommodate a firetruck that's probably never gonna park there, ever in an emergency situation. And they'll find ways to get around that building and you can pull that, that whole area, you know, out of, out of that side of the building. So I'll, I'll stop. Thank you. Thank <v Speaker 1>You.</v> If there are no other, oh, I'm sorry. <v Speaker 10>Yeah, no, this is, I kind</v> of touched upon this earlier, that turnaround. If, while you're looking at the other stuff, if you could take another look at that turnaround, for instance, that very first parking space you come to. I don't know how somebody's necessarily getting into or out of that one because it's, you know, about a, you know, a very acute angle on that. So if you could just re-look at some of that. <v Speaker 1>Thank you again.</v> If, see I don't see any hands up on the board and no one here looks like we're going to wanna continue this and take a motion to continue, <v Speaker 6>Come back, invite him back.</v> <v Speaker 4>No, we, we are meeting on, it's not a hearing.</v> <v Speaker 6>So</v> <v Speaker 1>It's not a</v> <v Speaker 4>Hearing.</v> And we're meeting on January 15th. Right. Two days after the ZBA meets conveniently. So it would, that would be a good opportunity for us to follow up on what has been presented to the ZBA. Right On the heels of it <v Speaker 6>Or the, or the 29th.</v> <v Speaker 4>Or the 29th with a little, but yeah,</v> <v Speaker 6>I'm just saying maybe I'm suggesting maybe there isn't a</v> whole lot of progress made in a day, you know, from the 13th to the 15th and maybe showing up a little bit later in the month might be a little more <v Speaker 4>Yeah, it's more, it's more the progress from now</v> to the 13th probably. That is, yeah. Okay. What we're waiting for. Yeah. But I'm easy. <v Speaker 6>15th. Alright.</v> <v Speaker 1>Not emotional.</v> <v Speaker 6>We're not gonna get three bites.</v> I don't think we're gonna get three bites of the apple, I think. I think we're, <v Speaker 14>No.</v> So the 15th works better for our team if that is a possibility on your agenda. <v Speaker 6>It is. It is. It is. Yeah.</v> I'm just hoping that we have something sub substantive to, to talk about for that, for that proposed new building. 'cause if if, yeah, what if we see this, <v Speaker 14>What we'll do, yeah,</v> what we will do is submit the revised plans and I, trust me when I say the architects are diligently working on revi revisions that I think will address most or all of your concerns. And we'll have answers to some of your other questions and we will, when we submit those revised plans to Amanda will ask her to share them with you as well so that you've had some time to take a peek at them and then we'll focus on architectural at the 15th. On the 15th. <v Speaker 6>Well, I'll just say in my few years on the board it,</v> that's been the most receptive reply that I think we've ever received. A lot of times we were told, you know, sorry, one, your advisory one meeting. Goodnight. We're moving on. So I do understood. I do, I do really appreciate that you're kind of in that area where you could say yes or no. So thank you for saying yes. <v Speaker 14>Absolutely. Thank you for your time this evening</v> and we look forward to meeting with you again on the 15th. <v Speaker 1>Thank you all. Thank you very much.</v> <v Speaker 14>Thank you very much. Have a</v> <v Speaker 1>Good night.</v> Good night. Good night. Thank you. Alright, <v Speaker 7>Mr. Chair.</v> <v Speaker 1>Yes.</v> <v Speaker 7>I'm gonna drop off the meeting at this point.</v> <v Speaker 1>Alright. Since we're between items, can I just ask</v> for the board, how are you feeling? <v Speaker 7>Oh, I'm, I'm doing well. I'm doing well.</v> Relatively pain free, but, but this has been a long time for me to sit here staring at a computer screen, so I'm, I'm just gonna drift away 'cause I think the rest of this stuff I don't, I'm not really needed for anyway. Okay. <v Speaker 1>Thank you.</v> <v Speaker 7>Thank you.</v> Thank you for all of the expressions of, of, of get well that you've provided. Thank you. <v Speaker 1>Alright. All right. Compliance review, north Main Street.</v> Is there anyone who is, I see someone, Amanda <v Speaker 20>Heard of the applicant.</v> Yes. I'm here. Julie DeSilva, <v Speaker 1>I think, let's see, there's been notification about</v> the site and <v Speaker 6>Yeah, I, I just drove by the other day and,</v> and the cars were parked everywhere and that there was, it was chaos. I even saw that there were cars parked kind of in the back corner where they're not shown on the site plan. So I took a picture, I sent it to the board, I sent it to Amanda and I'm sure that's why you're here tonight. So thank you for coming, I <v Speaker 20>Appreciate it. Yes, no, of course.</v> <v Speaker 6>As you know, we, we took your application very seriously.</v> We worked, I think very collaboratively together and it was just really disappointing to see a major part that we'd agreed to being totally, I'll say flagrantly disregarded. So, you know, what should we do about that? <v Speaker 20>Yeah, I apologize for that.</v> I handed this off to Elio once it was done through the permitting, as you know, he started this whole process with the trees being taken down and everything. And I don't know what's more frustrating, whether it's a, a marriage or if it's being in business with an ex-husband. That's a good question. Exactly. So I, after <v Speaker 6>That email,</v> <v Speaker 20>Yeah, I, it's, I I would say both.</v> But yeah, I put it back on my plate. I, I said Elio, you know, listen, this is a very serious thing. Like we've, we've been very amicable with the town in the meetings. You need to take this seriously. I was on him about everything. I said, okay, we have to do the retain wall. This is what you have to do. Unfortunately, he didn't do it, but that's also my fault. I am his business partner. So I put it back onto my plate. I met with Claire this morning for the pre-construction site. Like she just had to look at the site to see, and I needed to do that before being able to meet with David Gini on the retaining wall and putting that permit in. So I've already started that process and I've also let all of the employees know that it's those seven spaces out back. We cleared some of the cars on the side of the building that you mentioned, and we have an offsite parking area. And I, we moved all of those over the course of two days. So now their spaces open for the rest of the employees at the side of the building in the, in the lined parking spaces. So there is the seven cars out back facing the rear of the building and the rest of the cars are now on the side in the mark spots. <v Speaker 6>And, and you, you right now it's sort of a, a,</v> a slope from the building down to that parking back parking. So that will be a retaining wall and then that's <v Speaker 20>Gonna be a retaining wall. Yes.</v> <v Speaker 6>Alright. And any guess as to,</v> I know you just got it back on your plate. Any guess as to what your timeframe is on? <v Speaker 20>I have to re, so Elio conveniently flew overseas yesterday</v> for, to Brazil to visit his family for five weeks. So I'm going to have to figure out, I am not, I know nothing about construction. My side of the business is really just paperwork and bureaucratic. So I am going to have to touch base with him to see, I know his plan was, it's on our plan it blocks or something. I, I have to talk to Terry. He's the, the surveyor that made it for us. So I do have all of these things set up. I need the permit with David first and then I'm gonna have to just have my guys, he, I know we have to have a permitted contractor license. Excuse me. Yes. A licensed contractor, I think, to build that retaining wall. So it's, I'm gonna get it done before he's back because it's, it's five weeks is, I know a long time to ask for you guys when it's already been going on for a year now, but I can relay by email if you guys want me to stay in contact of the progress and what's going on. <v Speaker 6>You know, that, that really satisfies</v> all the questions I had. It sounds like you're on top of it. There is no deadline, although I think everybody appreciate getting it taken care of as soon as you can. And if you want to keep us updated Yeah, I, I would appreciate that. You know, of course you, you're right in downtown. We drive by it all the time. So, you know, we'll certainly take you at your word and, and we'll also be able to see, you know, how the progress is going. So I appreciate you coming in. I know you take it seriously. That site plan that's approved is really detailed and you stick to that plan and you won't hear boo from us. So thank you for paying attention to that. <v Speaker 20>Yeah, no, I appreciate your guys' time and understanding</v> and I like, again, I apologize because we're business partners, so it's both of us together. I accept the responsibility and blame as well. <v Speaker 6>Thank you.</v> <v Speaker 1>Thank you. Thank you.</v> <v Speaker 20>Thank you. Thanks John.</v> <v Speaker 1>Okay, next on the agenda, calendar review,</v> 2025, calendar review, planning board calendar, meeting <v Speaker 2>Calendar.</v> Calendar was circulated. So it just needs your vote. <v Speaker 6>It looked good to me. Yep. Mm. Questions.</v> I know you, Alan had raised an issue about school vacation week. Are we showing one here? We're showing one on the 23rd of April. What did we, where did we end up with that? Are we gonna meet during that week? And when is town meeting by the way? <v Speaker 4>Town meeting?</v> <v Speaker 2>It's that week.</v> <v Speaker 4>No, they don't do it during school. Vacation week. They're</v> <v Speaker 2>Gonna open it and then they're gonna continue it.</v> <v Speaker 4>Okay. But I mean, so for all intents and purposes. Hmm.</v> <v Speaker 1>Any other, any,</v> <v Speaker 6>Well, I mean are we, is</v> that a, are we gonna meet then? Is that, what do we do? And I don't recall meeting during school vacation weeks in the past. Maybe we have, <v Speaker 4>I mean kind of by the same principle of</v> not conducting town meeting o opened but not acted it, if it poses a problem that can be addressed by shifting it a week, that would be fine with me. As long as we have a place to meet because we obviously are dancing around the select board schedule when it comes to that. As attractive as this room is <v Speaker 10>On, I mean the, the June 25th one,</v> I'd probably have a conflict 'cause I have a feeling I'm gonna be on vacation that week. But I don't know how that's usually handled anyway. They always kind of doing this always, you know, <v Speaker 4>There'll always be things that will clash for somebody.</v> Okay. But school vacation, that's kind of a more <v Speaker 10>Big fixed Yeah, exactly.</v> Well big. Not just for us but also other people who might wanna attend a meeting. Yeah. <v Speaker 6>Yeah. What's going on the 16th of April?</v> The week before <v Speaker 4>Amanda, do you have anything?</v> You don't have anything that it would conflict with? <v Speaker 6>Because we got, well, just</v> <v Speaker 2>The select boards,</v> <v Speaker 6>It'll be two weeks in a row.</v> It'll be the ninth and 16th if we, if we do that or then we're the 30th and seventh. So I mean <v Speaker 5>For I'll go, I'll vote for anything.</v> <v Speaker 21>No kids in school, you know. Yeah, okay.</v> <v Speaker 6>Yeah. Yeah. I'd rather not</v> to be honest with you on the 23rd. <v Speaker 21>Alright, so we move.</v> <v Speaker 10>I agree with that. Not just necessarily I have no clue</v> what my calendar might be, but also again, if anybody else is, wants to attend a meeting up <v Speaker 5>Or back a week, which</v> <v Speaker 6>Probably up so that the 16th</v> <v Speaker 4>To the 16th?</v> <v Speaker 6>Yeah.</v> <v Speaker 21>Why about me?</v> <v Speaker 6>Yeah. Okay. And then</v> three weeks in a row in December 3rd, 10th, and 17th. That's a pretty, <v Speaker 4>When is that</v> <v Speaker 6>End of the year.</v> Third, 10th and 17th. Three weeks in <v Speaker 5>A row.</v> Which I thought maybe one of those would, we'd end up canceling or something. Yeah. I can't remember meeting three times in a row. <v Speaker 4>Amanda, is there a reason that,</v> that we're, you're trying to do? <v Speaker 2>'cause the board was concerned about conflicting</v> with the select board and they had jumped meetings. So you're gonna conflict or not, like we don't really need all those meetings. <v Speaker 4>So why? Why do we have them?</v> <v Speaker 2>Because the board needs to decide.</v> Do you want to conflict with the select board or not? <v Speaker 4>Ah, okay. So it just to have a choice of two</v> of the three. Yeah. Got it. <v Speaker 21>Because</v> <v Speaker 2>You conflict the two Novembers</v> and we can't really remove the other Novembers because of Thanksgiving. So December was the challenge. <v Speaker 4>Okay.</v> <v Speaker 6>I say we ditched the 10th. Yeah.</v> Okay. Three. Three and 17th. So April 16th and eliminate the December 10th meeting. Can I make that motion again? <v Speaker 1>Fine. Oh</v> <v Speaker 21>Did you wanna make</v> <v Speaker 1>Make a motion?</v> <v Speaker 6>Well, no, just, that's all we'll do, I guess.</v> We'll consensus, we'll do it that way. <v Speaker 1>Consensus. We got it.</v> <v Speaker 21>Do we</v> <v Speaker 1>Need a vote lens out?</v> <v Speaker 4>No. Well we're just, if we adopt</v> the calendar with those changes. Yeah. <v Speaker 21>Yeah.</v> <v Speaker 4>Boom.</v> <v Speaker 21>Okay. Alright. Good by me. Alright.</v> <v Speaker 1>Alright. That's it on the calendar. Review any? No.</v> Alright. Annual town meeting, zoning articles. <v Speaker 2>I think we'll defer to that.</v> We'll defer that to a different <v Speaker 1>Meeting.</v> Alright, discussion 2025, spring and fall. Annual town meeting. Zoning articles. Same, same, same thing. Plenty. Board meeting, committee assignment reports? Any? No. Nope. Alright. Any other motions please? Motion to adjourn. Second. All those in favor? Aye. Aye. Aye. Thank you all. Happy holiday season to everybody.